Where did teams concede shots from?

All the shooting location analysis work I have done so far has concentrated on the attacking sides, so I thought it about time that I looked at the other side of the coin; how teams defended.  In my previous article I concluded that headers are a lot less dangerous to concede than shots.
With that in mind, and for the purposes of this article, I thought I would strip out headers (as well as penalties), and thus we are left with just non-headed attempts on goal.

As before, in order to aid analysis, I have divided the shots conceded by each team into four different areas which are colour coded as per the legend below.


Here is the summary of shots conceded by each team in the 2012/13 Premier League season:


I have listed the number of shots that each team conceded, and then showed the percentage of shots that each team allowed in each of the four areas.  The last two columns show the combined proportion and number of shots that each team allowed in the two best areas for shooting, the Prime and Secondary areas.
The table has been sorted by Prime and Secondary Percentage in ascending order.


The team that sits atop of this table is Liverpool.  They permitted less than 55% of the shots they conceded to be struck from the Prime and Secondary areas, and they were the only team in the league to allow less than 20% of their shots conceded to come from the Prime area (18%).
There is no getting away from the fact that Liverpool put in a tremendous defensive performance during the season just ended. For this they should receive a lot of credit.


The appearance of Stoke or “PulisBall” as described by MarkTaylor in second position will come as no surprise to analytics aficionados.  Pulis puts (or should that be “put”) great store on his team taking shots from good locations and preventing the opposition from doing likewise.


QPR are interesting.  For a team that struggled so badly I was surprised to see them sitting as high as 5th in this table with just over 62% of shots conceded from the Prime and Secondary areas.  Of course, the quantity of shots they allowed at 489 would somewhat counteract that last statement.


Although Tottenham appear towards the bottom of this table with a relatively poor 66% of shots permitted to be taken from the Prime & Secondary positions the fact that they conceded a league low 297 shots resulted in them conceding the fewest number of shots from the two most attractive shooting areas.


From a defensive viewpoint Reading stank the place out.  At 591 they conceded the highest number of shots and the positions they allowed those shots to be taken from were just as horrendous.

Hopefully the above table will serve as a useful point of reference for anyone that wants to see how a particular team did in terms of the number, or more importantly, location of shots they permitted last season.
I’m also that sure this won’t be the last time that I look at the type of shots that teams permitted.


7 thoughts on “Where did teams concede shots from?

  1. Pingback: Conceding Shots – A brief expansion | thepowerof11

  2. What percentages of these shots became goals? It would be interesting to see from where each team concedes goals.
    My guess is goals from marginal or very poor areas will fluctuate from season to season and is probably more related to luck/bad luck from year to year. A high number of goals conceded from M and VP areas should decrease in the following season (regression to the mean).
    Would also be interesting to compare these numbers with previous years numbers to find trends.

  3. Interesting!

    Could you do a similar comparison for the teams showing the areas from where they have conceded goals?

    Chelsea seem to be really bad at conceding shots from prime positions, while on the other hand we are third in goals conceded.

    Thanks! and fantastic work!!

    • Glad you enjoyed the article Sid.

      I’ll have a think and see if I can provide the info that you have asked whilst sticking to the core principle as stated in the About section of this site;
      “Providing I don’t think my edge will be eroded I will share some of the data that I have spent many hours collecting in the hope that it will spark some debate within the growing football analytics community.”

      • Heh! Trust me, i will totally understand if you chose to not share the data!! I understand that building a database is tough and incredibly painstaking. So i am completely okay with that.

        Although, can i use the images that you have used on these posts to make my points on internet forums, while giving full credit to you and posting a link to your original article?

      • Thanks for understanding, although I haven’t said “no” just yet 🙂

        Sure, be my guest with images, and I’d apreciate a full link to the article in question.


  4. Pingback: Lucas the Lynchpin?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s