Corners

[richards30]

Shows how shite our corners are when the opposition would rather give us a corner than a throw in!

 

[Henkeman]

I do find it amusing how the brilliant, amazing, pundits have only just now noticed the corners aren't very good.

 

[kenzie115]

Funny to see so many frothing at the mouth about this.

Has scoring from corners like Stoke become the be all and end all?

Some of the finest players in the world playing for us that can cut sides open at will yet some not happy unless we are on the end of a set piece pmsl.

We have the most corners of any side in the league. For us not to be dangerous from corners is like Mayweather having the best jab in the world and not working something from it. Just jabbing jabbing jabbing all fight with no right hook to do some damage. For us to get the amount of corners we do and not be dangerous from them is a fucking joke. So I don't know what one you're laghing at, was it the Stoke quip? Jesus!

We struggled to really break Chelsea down yesterday. Three good chances and the odd half chancs from all that dominance. Imagine what a goal from all those corners we had (was it double figures?) would have done for us...

What makes it even worse is that we were dangerous from them last year. You'd have expected with the additions of Mangala and Sagna we'd have improved too.

 

[01cravend]

It's who takes them that baffles me

Why does Navas get so many? When others are better at them namely Kolarov, Milner, Lampard took them the whole time he was at Chelsea, Nasri. Id say Silva but he's not great at them either.

With Navas, Silva and sometimes Nasri if they attempt to hit them with pace they hit the first man, if put them where they want them to go they are basically floated in.

Also I'd rather have Navas outside the box to quell any counter attacks like he did once against I think Hazard yesterday.

Needs to be taken into account with any future recruitment. Over half of Fabregas' assist haul have come from his delivery from set pieces

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Thia was taken from an article about data analysis in football in 2013...

Manchester City’s data department analysed about 400 corners in several national leagues over seasons, and concluded that the most dangerous corner is the inswinger: the ball that swings in towards goal.

The data team took this finding to City’s manager Roberto Mancini, who had played football for many years, and his gut told him that the most dangerous corner was the outswinger. But City’s outswingers kept on not producing goals. Mancini’s assistant David Platt came to chat to the data analysts, and they noticed that City had begun taking inswinging corners. Last season City scored 15 goals from corners, the most in the English Premier League. Vincent Kompany’s headed goal against Manchester United, which effectively clinched the championship for City, came from an inswinging corner.

I don't need a data analyst to tell me an inswinger is more dangerous; it's blatantly obvious. At a corner, attacking players are facing the goal and defenders have their backs to it. If the ball swings in, the attackers are on the front foot, attacking the ball, and the defenders are either static or back-peddling, plus they're trying to watch the ball and the attacking players. So the odds must favour the attacking players, particularly if the corner taker can put the ball where it's expected.

If it swings out, the defenders are on the front foot and the attackers are static. But even that assumes you put the ball in the right place. I sit in 109 so am level with the 6-yard box and far too often you see an outswinging corner go beyond most of our players, so they're not going to get it anyway. There was a good example of this against Boro, where the ball arrived between the penalty spot and the edge of the 18-yard box and there were 5 of our players between the penalty spot and 6-yard box. That's utter rubbish.

And then yesterday was at least the second time we've been at the arse-end if a game, with seconds to go and we've pissed around with a short corner. I didn't have a problem with Navas giving it to Milner but he should have crossed right away, rather than give it back. Milner's supposed to be a bright guy but that was utterly fucking brainless.

 

[zandvoort blue]

Another 8 corners today with fuck all to show for them, anyone know how many corners it is since we last scored from one?

Knocking on for 170 I think.

It`s 158 now (not including the UAE friendly)

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

Thia was taken from an article about data analysis in football in 2013...

Manchester City’s data department analysed about 400 corners in several national leagues over seasons, and concluded that the most dangerous corner is the inswinger: the ball that swings in towards goal.

The data team took this finding to City’s manager Roberto Mancini, who had played football for many years, and his gut told him that the most dangerous corner was the outswinger. But City’s outswingers kept on not producing goals. Mancini’s assistant David Platt came to chat to the data analysts, and they noticed that City had begun taking inswinging corners. Last season City scored 15 goals from corners, the most in the English Premier League. Vincent Kompany’s headed goal against Manchester United, which effectively clinched the championship for City, came from an inswinging corner.

I don't need a data analyst to tell me an inswinger is more dangerous; it's blatantly obvious. At a corner, attacking players are facing the goal and defenders have their backs to it. If the ball swings in, the attackers are on the front foot, attacking the ball, and the defenders are either static or back-peddling, plus they're trying to watch the ball and the attacking players. So the odds must favour the attacking players, particularly if the corner taker can put the ball where it's expected.

If it swings out, the defenders are on the front foot and the attackers are static. But even that assumes you put the ball in the right place. I sit in 109 so am level with the 6-yard box and far too often you see an outswinging corner go beyond most of our players, so they're not going to get it anyway. There was a good example of this against Boro, where the ball arrived between the penalty spot and the edge of the 18-yard box and there were 5 of our players between the penalty spot and 6-yard box. That's utter rubbish.

And then yesterday was at least the second time we've been at the arse-end if a game, with seconds to go and we've pissed around with a short corner. I didn't have a problem with Navas giving it to Milner but he should have crossed right away, rather than give it back. Milner's supposed to be a bright guy but that was utterly fucking brainless.

Nasri did a similar thing before half time against Bayern Munich at the ETIHAD.

I keep reading that City had the best set piece record last season, but nobody ever quotes the source, or what criteria is used.
For example do penalties count as set pieces? Would you class Fernandinho’s strike at Swansea as a goal from a corner? Adam Johnson’s at Blackburn in 2011-12?

 

[lasereyes]

Thia was taken from an article about data analysis in football in 2013...

Manchester City’s data department analysed about 400 corners in several national leagues over seasons, and concluded that the most dangerous corner is the inswinger: the ball that swings in towards goal.

The data team took this finding to City’s manager Roberto Mancini, who had played football for many years, and his gut told him that the most dangerous corner was the outswinger. But City’s outswingers kept on not producing goals. Mancini’s assistant David Platt came to chat to the data analysts, and they noticed that City had begun taking inswinging corners. Last season City scored 15 goals from corners, the most in the English Premier League. Vincent Kompany’s headed goal against Manchester United, which effectively clinched the championship for City, came from an inswinging corner.

I don't need a data analyst to tell me an inswinger is more dangerous; it's blatantly obvious. At a corner, attacking players are facing the goal and defenders have their backs to it. If the ball swings in, the attackers are on the front foot, attacking the ball, and the defenders are either static or back-peddling, plus they're trying to watch the ball and the attacking players. So the odds must favour the attacking players, particularly if the corner taker can put the ball where it's expected.

If it swings out, the defenders are on the front foot and the attackers are static. But even that assumes you put the ball in the right place. I sit in 109 so am level with the 6-yard box and far too often you see an outswinging corner go beyond most of our players, so they're not going to get it anyway. There was a good example of this against Boro, where the ball arrived between the penalty spot and the edge of the 18-yard box and there were 5 of our players between the penalty spot and 6-yard box. That's utter rubbish.

And then yesterday was at least the second time we've been at the arse-end if a game, with seconds to go and we've pissed around with a short corner. I didn't have a problem with Navas giving it to Milner but he should have crossed right away, rather than give it back. Milner's supposed to be a bright guy but that was utterly fucking brainless.

We've been as futile with inswinging corners also. They generally end up in the arms of the goalie.

 

[lasereyes]

Our few effective corners this year have been to the near post with a flick-on from a Centre Back (Mangala on a few occasions). We seem to have stopped trying this tactic for some strange reason.

 

[coleridge]

We should just give up, bash the ball back to the halfway line and start again.

Alternatively, they may as well be short corners and just give it to Navas to run at the penalty area.