By Daragh O'Leary
One of the biggest challenges economists and other researchers face when conducting research is trying to measure theoretical concepts. Economists must come up with ways of measuring things which don’t have a natural numerical value. Innovation is a good example of this. Innovation is a well-researched topic in economics, but there is no natural way to measure innovation, so economists come up with ways to proxy it.
For example, they may survey businesses and ask them whether they have introduced a new product in the last year or not. They then use these responses to create a binary variable which is coded as 1 if the firm introduced a new product and 0 if not. This measure allows the economist to operationalise a certain kind of innovation where new products are introduced, but unfortunately, the same variable doesn’t permit the measurement of other facets of innovation where no new product is introduced e.g., improvements to production processes. Furthermore, the binary measure also makes no distinction between radical and incremental innovations which may differ significantly in terms of their impact.
Sports economists often encounter this same issue. A recent analysis on Monday Night Football by Jamie Carragher got me thinking about this. Carragher was analysing an Arsenal set piece routine which resulted in a goal against Newcastle. Usually when fans talk about goals being scored from corners, they generally mean goals which involved an uncontested cross coming into the box where players ambush the space around the keeper and defenders which allows them to head the ball into the net. Obviously, this is not the most exciting type of goal to watch, but as Carragher points out in his analysis, the goal Arsenal scored from this corner wasn’t like most other goals scored from corners.
One of the biggest challenges economists and other researchers face when conducting research is trying to measure theoretical concepts. Economists must come up with ways of measuring things which don’t have a natural numerical value. Innovation is a good example of this. Innovation is a well-researched topic in economics, but there is no natural way to measure innovation, so economists come up with ways to proxy it.
For example, they may survey businesses and ask them whether they have introduced a new product in the last year or not. They then use these responses to create a binary variable which is coded as 1 if the firm introduced a new product and 0 if not. This measure allows the economist to operationalise a certain kind of innovation where new products are introduced, but unfortunately, the same variable doesn’t permit the measurement of other facets of innovation where no new product is introduced e.g., improvements to production processes. Furthermore, the binary measure also makes no distinction between radical and incremental innovations which may differ significantly in terms of their impact.
Sports economists often encounter this same issue. A recent analysis on Monday Night Football by Jamie Carragher got me thinking about this. Carragher was analysing an Arsenal set piece routine which resulted in a goal against Newcastle. Usually when fans talk about goals being scored from corners, they generally mean goals which involved an uncontested cross coming into the box where players ambush the space around the keeper and defenders which allows them to head the ball into the net. Obviously, this is not the most exciting type of goal to watch, but as Carragher points out in his analysis, the goal Arsenal scored from this corner wasn’t like most other goals scored from corners.
The corner routine involved Noni Madueke passing the ball to Kai Havertz who was in Newcastle’s penalty box. Havertz then takes two touches and passes the ball to his left to find Eberechi Eze waiting outside the penalty box. Eze then strikes the ball into the top left corner of the goal putting the Gunners ahead. I assume most fans would agree, that Eze’s goal is far better to watch than most of the goals Arsenal score from corners. Such was the discrepancy in style between this goal and most other goals scored from corners, it made me question whether or not it should even count as a goal scored from a corner.
If one was to try and come up with a way of measuring how many goals a team scores from corners, they would first have to come up with a binary definition which allowed them to indicate not only when a goal was scored from a corner, but also when a goal has not been scored form a corner. This may seem easy, but it is quite challenging in practice.
Should the definition be: any goal which is assisted by the corner taker? If so, Eze’s goal wouldn’t count.
Should the definition be: any goal which is scored from a cross played in by a corner taker? Again, this means Eze’s goal wouldn’t count.
Perhaps the definition could be: any goal which is scored after a corner is taken, but before the ball goes out of play. This would mean that Eze’s goal qualifies, but many would argue that this definition would result in a series of false positives.
Let’s say that the ball gets crossed into the box from a corner and the keeper punches it clear. Then the ball is recovered by an attacking player who passes back to their keeper, who subsequently launches the ball up to one of their wingers, who then makes their way into the box and lays the ball off to their teammate who scores.
At some point in the above situation the phase of play occurring ceases being a corner routine and resumes being open play. Accordingly, most spectators would accept that the goal which was described above was not scored from a corner. However, our definition would measure this as a 1, so our subsequent analysis would consider it a goal scored form a corner the same way it would a direct header resulting from a cross.
Properly defining when goals have and haven’t been scored from set pieces is an important task for football analysts moving forward. Set pieces seem to be playing an increasingly important role in football now. To learn from them, when must be able to measure them.
If one was to try and come up with a way of measuring how many goals a team scores from corners, they would first have to come up with a binary definition which allowed them to indicate not only when a goal was scored from a corner, but also when a goal has not been scored form a corner. This may seem easy, but it is quite challenging in practice.
Should the definition be: any goal which is assisted by the corner taker? If so, Eze’s goal wouldn’t count.
Should the definition be: any goal which is scored from a cross played in by a corner taker? Again, this means Eze’s goal wouldn’t count.
Perhaps the definition could be: any goal which is scored after a corner is taken, but before the ball goes out of play. This would mean that Eze’s goal qualifies, but many would argue that this definition would result in a series of false positives.
Let’s say that the ball gets crossed into the box from a corner and the keeper punches it clear. Then the ball is recovered by an attacking player who passes back to their keeper, who subsequently launches the ball up to one of their wingers, who then makes their way into the box and lays the ball off to their teammate who scores.
At some point in the above situation the phase of play occurring ceases being a corner routine and resumes being open play. Accordingly, most spectators would accept that the goal which was described above was not scored from a corner. However, our definition would measure this as a 1, so our subsequent analysis would consider it a goal scored form a corner the same way it would a direct header resulting from a cross.
Properly defining when goals have and haven’t been scored from set pieces is an important task for football analysts moving forward. Set pieces seem to be playing an increasingly important role in football now. To learn from them, when must be able to measure them.
RSS Feed
