Topic: Team Analysis: Jürgen Klopp’s Liverpool Tactics (*)

[PhaseOfPlay]

You sure about the receiving player getting a score in packing? I thought it was just the player who made the pass (or dribble). I realise that off the ball work is important in football, but it seems a bit excessive to give the receiver getting equally weighted credit to the player who made the pass.

On the other hand, it rewards players who make penetrating runs.

Penetration is the first principle of attack. It doesn't get recorded enough. Most penetration is off-ball runs and positioning, so it makes sense to reward receivers as much as passers, if their position or run allows for penetration.

[Djozer]

On the other hand, it rewards players who make penetrating runs.

Penetration is the first principle of attack. It doesn't get recorded enough. Most penetration is off-ball runs and positioning, so it makes sense to reward receivers as much as passers, if their position or run allows for penetration.

I get all that, it just seems to me that in many cases the pass is better than the run, although I guess that's purely my subjective opinion and in almost all cases the I suppose the pass would not be completed without the movement of the receiver. Swings and roundabouts maybe, and as Poetry says, no analytics system is perfect.

Still not all swings and roundabouts are created equal. My favourite pass this season was this Pavard thing of beauty.

https://twitter.com/kevymac77/status/783039519629115392?lang=en

It seems bizarre to me that the receiver in this situation receives the same packing score as Pavard, but them's the breaks I guess.

[BabuYagu]

Yes, the receiver also gets credit here. I agree it's not a perfect system, there's no single perfect system in football analytics yet. All we can do is use a combination of systems to come to a coherent understanding that enhances our idea on a particular aspect we're measuring.

However, they're going with the concept that if there's no receiver, there's no pass however weighted it is. If the receiver can't get to it, it means the opposition has stopped it, so it's also important that the receiver places himself in a position or moves accordingly as to receive the ball as intended.

It's like American Football. The quarterback and the receiver both get credited with yardage for the pass.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I get all that, it just seems to me that in many cases the pass is better than the run, although I guess that's purely my subjective opinion and in almost all cases the I suppose the pass would not be completed without the movement of the receiver. Swings and roundabouts maybe, and as Poetry says, no analytics system is perfect.

Still not all swings and roundabouts are created equal. My favourite pass this season was this Pavard thing of beauty.

https://twitter.com/kevymac77/status/783039519629115392?lang=en

It seems bizarre to me that the receiver in this situation receives the same packing score as Pavard, but them's the breaks I guess.

Runs dictate passes, though. Without the penetrating run in that clip, there is no pass. So you have to credit both. Other players might not have saw the gap and made eye contact with the passer in order to create that play.

People forget that passing needs receiving, and the receiver is as important (if not more) than the passer. That's why we spend a lot of time teaching players how to use their body shape, foot position, runs, dummy runs and start positions in order to make passing easier and/or better.

It absolutely makes sense to me to give equal credit to the runner as to the passer in the packing metric. I really like the idea, although it obviously needs more work to fine-tune details. But it's a good 'un!

[Djozer]

Runs dictate passes, though. Without the penetrating run in that clip, there is no pass. So you have to credit both. Other players might not have saw the gap and made eye contact with the passer in order to create that play.

People forget that passing needs receiving, and the receiver is as important (if not more) than the passer. That's why we spend a lot of time teaching players how to use their body shape, foot position, runs, dummy runs and start positions in order to make passing easier and/or better.

It absolutely makes sense to me to give equal credit to the runner as to the passer in the packing metric. I really like the idea, although it obviously needs more work to fine-tune details. But it's a good 'un!

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm not saying I think that the receiver should get no credit, but it seems to me that in a situation like the pass in that clip, the lion's share of credit should go to Pavard for the pass. If they both receive a packing score of +4, or however many defenders were taken out, it doesn't sit right with me, and I reckon there should be some further form of weighting the statistic. In other situations maybe the receiver should get a higher score than the passer.

Just my opinion though, and I suppose the current model would be far easier and less time consuming to work out than my rather subjective and not at all well-formed musings.

[Chris~]

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm not saying I think that the receiver should get no credit, but it seems to me that in a situation like the pass in that clip, the lion's share of credit should go to Pavard for the pass. If they both receive a packing score of +4, or however many defenders were taken out, it doesn't sit right with me, and I reckon there should be some further form of weighting the statistic. In other situations maybe the receiver should get a higher score than the passer.

Just my opinion though, and I suppose the current model would be far easier and less time consuming to work out than my rather subjective and not at all well-formed musings.

You can fix this sort of issue by just having two categories, or lists. One for the creator and one for the player receiving the pass.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm not saying I think that the receiver should get no credit, but it seems to me that in a situation like the pass in that clip, the lion's share of credit should go to Pavard for the pass. If they both receive a packing score of +4, or however many defenders were taken out, it doesn't sit right with me, and I reckon there should be some further form of weighting the statistic. In other situations maybe the receiver should get a higher score than the passer.

Just my opinion though, and I suppose the current model would be far easier and less time consuming to work out than my rather subjective and not at all well-formed musings.

I think perhaps you're looking more at the quality of the pass, perhaps, rather than the point of the packing metric?

The pass in that clip was astounding. But it doesn't happen without the run. So regardless of the quality of the pass, they both get a packing score because they both created a play that allowed for penetration (on a large scale), which resulted in a goal (the ultimate penetration).

However, if the passer just launched it over everyone's heads, with the same outcome, the packing score would still be the same, but the quality of the pass wouldn't. It's not a metric to describe the quality of the pass, but a metric to describe how penetrative the overall play is.

[Djozer]

I think perhaps you're looking more at the quality of the pass, perhaps, rather than the point of the packing metric?

The pass in that clip was astounding. But it doesn't happen without the run. So regardless of the quality of the pass, they both get a packing score because they both created a play that allowed for penetration (on a large scale), which resulted in a goal (the ultimate penetration).

However, if the passer just launched it over everyone's heads, with the same outcome, the packing score would still be the same, but the quality of the pass wouldn't. It's not a metric to describe the quality of the pass, but a metric to describe how penetrative the overall play is.

I suppose I am. But at the same time, Carlos Mane could make that run 20 times and would be unlikely to receive the pass - while the run was integral to the completion of that play, it's Pavard's pass that makes it, in my opinion. I'm not even sure what I'm even arguing any more - probably that, whilst packing is a measure of penetrative play, the fact that it's apportioned on an individual basis means that (in my head) certain individuals contribute more value to certain plays than others and so should receive more credit. How you'd work that out though I'm not sure and it might be pretty subjective, which would fly in the face of statistical analysis to an extent.

Fuck it - I'm wrong, and you're all right!

Although I've just remembered that you chose Bodo Illgner as your first pick in an all time footy draft, which makes me doubt your credibility somewhat. So I'm back to thinking I've got the right of it here and all of yous are misguided simpletons.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I suppose I am. But at the same time, Carlos Mane could make that run 20 times and would be unlikely to receive the pass - while the run was integral to the completion of that play, it's Pavard's pass that makes it, in my opinion. I'm not even sure what I'm even arguing any more - probably that, whilst packing is a measure of penetrative play, the fact that it's apportioned on an individual basis means that (in my head) certain individuals contribute more value to certain plays than others and so should receive more credit. How you'd work that out though I'm not sure and it might be pretty subjective, which would fly in the face of statistical analysis to an extent.

Fuck it - I'm wrong, and you're all right!

I think you have a point, but when it comes to passing, there's ALWAYS two parts to the equation. You can't have a pass without a receiver. So it makes sense for the receiver to get some credit (maybe not equal points) for the packing metric, because without them, there's no pass. But then you start to get into the area of dummy runs as well, which complicates the packing metric.

In short, there will never be a perfect metric.

Except shots on target

[Djozer]

I think you have a point, but when it comes to passing, there's ALWAYS two parts to the equation. You can't have a pass without a receiver. So it makes sense for the receiver to get some credit (maybe not equal points) for the packing metric, because without them, there's no pass. But then you start to get into the area of dummy runs as well, which complicates the packing metric.

In short, there will never be a perfect metric.

Except shots on target

Agree completely with this, and I think this is what I was trying to say, though I probably worded it appallingly. It could get ridiculously complex and time-consuming to work out though, so maybe it's best to leave well enough alone.

[JCB]

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm not saying I think that the receiver should get no credit, but it seems to me that in a situation like the pass in that clip, the lion's share of credit should go to Pavard for the pass. If they both receive a packing score of +4, or however many defenders were taken out, it doesn't sit right with me, and I reckon there should be some further form of weighting the statistic. In other situations maybe the receiver should get a higher score than the passer.

Just my opinion though, and I suppose the current model would be far easier and less time consuming to work out than my rather subjective and not at all well-formed musings.

How many times have you seen the forwards making the run and the player with the ball just reacting? I've seen these moments in games and often thought to myself it was the run that made the pass. Conversely how many times have we criticised a forward lineup for being stagnant and as a result it was impossible for a player to pass it into dangerous situations. They inevitably end up passing it sideways/backwards instead?

You're right in your assessment however... sometimes it can be all about the:
a) passer
b) the recipient
c) or both.

So how do we determine which one? It would be, as you say, too much effort to assess and quantify this for each pass.

The simplest way would be to credit both players equally and then collect as many passes as possible. The larger the sample size you can collect the more confident you are that those players who contribute regularly will rise to the top of the pack. Then it would be a simple case of looking at the data and spotting those that are recipients and passers simply by looking at their position, skillsets or simply with further scouting.

[clinical]

Watching Napoli Juve. Juve just defending. In this instance you can certainly see why Klopp wants Jorginho/Nevea type. Napoli looking for Jorginho all the time to make something happen.

[PoetryInMotion]

I think you have a point, but when it comes to passing, there's ALWAYS two parts to the equation. You can't have a pass without a receiver. So it makes sense for the receiver to get some credit (maybe not equal points) for the packing metric, because without them, there's no pass. But then you start to get into the area of dummy runs as well, which complicates the packing metric.

In short, there will never be a perfect metric.

Except shots on target

 

[PoetryInMotion]

Agree completely with this, and I think this is what I was trying to say, though I probably worded it appallingly. It could get ridiculously complex and time-consuming to work out though, so maybe it's best to leave well enough alone.

Yeah, I understand your point. As someone said, they currently solve this by segregating the passing score and the receiving score lists for comparison. However, a usage of a multiplier to separate the two would be ideal, as you say.

Also, JCB's question is valid. The value of a pass/reception differs in each scenario. How can they be handled is a thought to be pondered.

[PoetryInMotion]

Watching Napoli Juve. Juve just defending. In this instance you can certainly see why Klopp wants Jorginho/Nevea type. Napoli looking for Jorginho all the time to make something happen.

Yes, he's the one who dictates their tempo and decides where they should focus on by spreading the ball, or locating runs. Napoli also focus on the 2nd ball more than winning the the ball outright in an aerial duel, and they press with organization so that Jorginho can nick the ball when needed. They're a well drilled side in defense and in build-up patterns.

He'll lift our build-up play if he comes.

[afc tukrish]

On the other hand, it rewards players who make penetrating runs.

Penetration is the first principle of attack. It doesn't get recorded enough. Most penetration is off-ball runs and positioning, so it makes sense to reward receivers as much as passers, if their position or run allows for penetration.

Bodo Illgner is the first principle of attack..,.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Bodo Illgner is the first principle of attack..,. everything

Fixed that for you

[Giono]

Packing is the number of opposition players taken out by a pass or dribble. It gives an account of which players are actually progressing the play.

For example, you have Ox dribbling past a couple of opposition midfielders, he gets a measure of 2 because he has beaten them to advance the play and if he makes a pass to Salah with three midfielders in between, the move adds a measure of 3 to both Ox and to Salah for receiving the pass. Ox in total gets 5 for the move, and Salah gets 3.

If you're just dribbling but not really advancing the play, then it doesn't get counted. The stat was actually founded by a couple of German defensive midfielders (Reinartz is one if I remember correctly) who were constantly criticized of side and back passes (a thing that actually happens to our midfielders), to calculate the value of passes instead of plain number of passes for comparison. The results were contrary to general opinion (incorrect) on some players. Also, a lot of games that seemed to have a massive scoreline difference did not reflect by possession stats or shots on target, or corners etc. (they could all disguise it into closer games), but this was actually reflected in the packing numbers - the actual difference between the two sides.

Thanks for that info. That’s interesting about how it was DMs that spured on the creation of this stat. Somehow this thread makes its way back to DMs

Are these stats readily available? I’d love to see the packing numbers for various midfielders. All I’ve been able to gather from the internet is that Naby Keita’s packing numbers are off the charts.

[clinical]

Klopp prefers keepers who close down space quick with good distribution right?

So why is the twitter world going crazy at the minute over Butland, it's like the Butland deal is done?

Selling Migs to buy another.

Karius deserves another season imo. We won't be paying what Stoke want for a no.2

[BabuYagu]

Klopp prefers keepers who close down space quick with good distribution right?

So why is the twitter world going crazy at the minute over Butland, it's like the Butland deal is done?

Selling Migs to buy another.

Karius deserves another season imo. We won't be paying what Stoke want for a no.2

I doubt we have any interest in Butland, regardless of price. Would be an awful match up. He faces the most shots of any keeper in the league and the most in his six yard box. This means he will make a high number of saves - which can create the tag of being a good shot stopper as it did with Migs & Pickford - but is also a good indicator of a keeper who doesn't reduce shots by being proactive.

Karius on the other hand faces the lowest number of shots in the league and hasn't faced a single shot yet in his 6 yard box. Ederson & Dubravka are very similar in numbers - two famous sweeper keepers in entirely different teams. Newcastle now face almost half as many shots per game and the number of shots faced in the 6 yard box has fallen from 1 every 3 games to 1 every 7 games.

Then there is the myth that Karius is poor on crosses and Butland is good on them. Butland has dropped the ball 4 times as much when dealing with crosses this season. Even allowing for the fact he has played twice as many minutes, that is still a worrying amount. In terms of average number of crosses their teams face per game, Karius sits on 14 per game, Butland 22 per game. However, Karius comes office his line for 15,6% of the crosses into the box he faces. Butland just 5,8% of them. He also catches more crosses per 90 than him at 0,53 vs 0,39 per game - which hopefully kills the myth that he punches the ball too much also. It won't of course. But we can but hope.

I looked at Alisson out of curiosity. His numbers are 0 drops from crosses, but he only comes off his line for 6% of them. Which indicates he is reluctant to come off his line for crosses but when he does, he nails it. He makes 0,44 catches per 90. Better than Butland, not as high as Karius though.

[CraigDS]

So why is the twitter world going crazy at the minute over Butland, it's like the Butland deal is done?

Because Twitter is full of fucking idiots and you should take everything you read on there with a whole mountain, or 8, of salt.

[clinical]

I doubt we have any interest in Butland, regardless of price. Would be an awful match up. He faces the most shots of any keeper in the league and the most in his six yard box. This means he will make a high number of saves - which can create the tag of being a good shot stopper as it did with Migs & Pickford - but is also a good indicator of a keeper who doesn't reduce shots by being proactive.

Karius on the other hand faces the lowest number of shots in the league and hasn't faced a single shot yet in his 6 yard box. Ederson & Dubravka are very similar in numbers - two famous sweeper keepers in entirely different teams. Newcastle now face almost half as many shots per game and the number of shots faced in the 6 yard box has fallen from 1 every 3 games to 1 every 7 games.

Then there is the myth that Karius is poor on crosses and Butland is good on them. Butland has dropped the ball 4 times as much when dealing with crosses this season. Even allowing for the fact he has played twice as many minutes, that is still a worrying amount. In terms of average number of crosses their teams face per game, Karius sits on 14 per game, Butland 22 per game. However, Karius comes office his line for 14.3% of the crosses into the box he faces. Butland just 5,8% of them. He also catches more crosses per 90 than him at 0,53 vs 0,39 per game - which hopefully kills the myth that he punches the ball too much also. It won't of course. But we can but hope.

I looked at Alisson out of curiosity. His numbers are 0 drops from crosses, but he only comes off his line for 6% of them. Which indicates he is reluctant to come off his line for crosses but when he does, he nails it. He makes 0,44 catches per 90. Better than Butland, not as high as Karius though.

I agree, would be interesting to compare him and Mignolet whilst Mignolet was still at Sunderland. If we don't go world class then stick with Karius and Ward.

Because Twitter is full of fucking idiots and you should take everything you read on there with a whole mountain, or 8, of salt.

True but Graeme Kelly is usually right isn't he. Saying the deal is very likely.

[thekitkatshuffler]

It's hilarious how Garth Crooks uses his Team of The Week column to slag Jürgen off every week.

He generally picks one or two of our players, says almost nothing about their performance and then just harps on about what Klopp's done wrong this week.

This week he even managed to sneak in a 3rd dig at our manager via his comments on Rondon.  It's pathological.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43860258

[LallanaInPyjamas]

True but Graeme Kelly is usually right isn't he. Saying the deal is very likely.

Is he?

[sms1986]

True but Graeme Kelly is usually right isn't he. Saying the deal is very likely.

Isn't Kelly usually wrong rather than right? I'm sure he got something wrong not too long ago that you thought he was right about.

I would wait for someone more reliable to say something, I can't see us being interested in Butland,

[thekitkatshuffler]

Is he?

Is he bollocks.

[clinical]

Isn't Kelly usually wrong rather than right? I'm sure he got something wrong not too long ago that you thought he was right about.

I would wait for someone more reliable to say something, I can't see us being interested in Butland,

Hope so,

Although with Sturridge likely going and Lallana and Milner getting on maybe we are concerned with the home grown quota. 

[Qston]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43860388

Some statements of be the bleedin obvious but a former player talking some sense

[clinical]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43860388

Some statements of be the bleedin obvious but a former player talking some sense

As Klopp said we are a lot less predictable now. We used to give Coutinho the ball and expect him to do something. Which tbf he did a lot of the time. Now the others have taken more responsibility. Also means we are more solid in midfield. 

[BabuYagu]

Then there is the myth that Karius is poor on crosses and Butland is good on them. Butland has dropped the ball 4 times as much when dealing with crosses this season. Even allowing for the fact he has played twice as many minutes, that is still a worrying amount. In terms of average number of crosses their teams face per game, Karius sits on 14 per game, Butland 22 per game. However, Karius comes office his line for 14.3% of the crosses into the box he faces. Butland just 5,8% of them. He also catches more crosses per 90 than him at 0,53 vs 0,39 per game - which hopefully kills the myth that he punches the ball too much also. It won't of course. But we can but hope.

I looked at Alisson out of curiosity. His numbers are 0 drops from crosses, but he only comes off his line for 6% of them. Which indicates he is reluctant to come off his line for crosses but when he does, he nails it. He makes 0,44 catches per 90. Better than Butland, not as high as Karius though.

Thought I would look at a few other Premier League keepers.

De Gea comes for 4,5% of the crosses he faces. Has dropped the ball 4 times, missed it completely twice, and catches the ball 0,36 times per game. But he is a great shot stopper, so that's ignored. As well as the fact that maybe he wouldn't need to save so many close range shots if he actually could come off his line to deal with crosses.

Ederson comes for 13,5% of the crosses he faces. Has dropped the ball 4 times also, missed it completely once. Catches the ball 0,43 times per game.

Cech comes for 12,76% of the crosses he faces. Has dropped the ball twice, missed is completely 3 times. Catches the ball 0,91 times per game.

Courtois comes for 7,41% of the crosses faced. Has dropped twice and missed the ball once. Catches 0,71 times per 90.

Pickford comes for 8,8% of the crosses faced. Has dropped the ball 10 (FUCKING TEN!) times. Catches 0,47 per 90.

Begovic comes for 9% of the crosses faced. Dropped the ball 4 times. Missed it 4 times. Catches 0,82 times per 90.

Lloris comes for 0,95% of the crosses faced. Hasn't dropped any but has missed it 3 times. Catches 0,51 times per 90.

[groove]

It assumes though that Klopp wouldn't have made the correct adjustments to improve us even further with the extra talent that Coutinho provided. It's a lot of words to try and prove system trumps talent everytime. But I just can't swallow that. Klopp has been improving us slowly over the course of nearly 3 seasons. Coutinho was a part of that improvement for 80% of it and all of a sudden we hit a plateau where we needed release our biggest talent to realise our full potential? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[BabuYagu]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43860388

Some statements of be the bleedin obvious but a former player talking some sense

Motherfucker. I was actually compiling a lot of stats the last week to show how (and why) we have been and will continue to be better off without Coutinho.

Effectively Salah has replaced Coutinho in the front 3 this season. The shot output of both players is similar (4,47 per game from Salah vs 4,25 from Coutinho) but their locations tells the biggest story.

Their shot locations and conversion rates are as follows:-

Code: [Select]

Locations:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 6,1% 72,0% 22,0%
Coutinho 2,8% 37,7% 59,5%

Conversion Rate:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 75,2% 25,2% 10,4%
Coutinho 0,0% 17,5% 9,5%
   

[Agent99]

It's hilarious how Garth Crooks uses his Team of The Week column to slag Jürgen off every week.

He generally picks one or two of our players, says almost nothing about their performance and then just harps on about what Klopp's done wrong this week.

This week he even managed to sneak in a 3rd dig at our manager via his comments on Rondon.  It's pathological.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/43860258

Can't stand Garth Crooks but his Herrera comments are bang on.

I find Ander Herrera the most irritating player in the Premier League. He looks like butter wouldn't melt in his mouth. But if he's not pulling your shirt, he's leaving his foot in on his opposite number and if anyone touches him he goes down as if he's been poleaxed. Against Spurs in the FA Cup semi-final, Herrera did all of those things and much more. For your performance to be so infectious and yet somehow remain on the field takes some doing. I suppose that's what Jose Mourinho calls a winning mentality.

[vagabond]

Motherfucker. I was actually compiling a lot of stats the last week to show how (and why) we have been and will continue to be better off without Coutinho.

Effectively Salah has replaced Coutinho in the front 3 this season. The shot output of both players is similar (4,47 per game from Salah vs 4,25 from Coutinho) but their locations tells the biggest story.

Their shot locations and conversion rates are as follows:-

Code: [Select]

Locations:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 22,0% 72,0% 6,1%
Coutinho 59,5% 37,7% 2,8%

Conversion Rate:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 75,2% 25,2% 10,4%
Coutinho 0,0% 17,5% 9,5%
   

If I'm reading this right, Coutinho took nearly 60% of his shots in the 6yd box and converted none of them?

[CraigDS]

Only 2.8% of Coutinho's shots were outside the area? This can't be correct can it? 

[BabuYagu]

If I'm reading this right, Coutinho took nearly 60% of his shots in the 6yd box and converted none of them?

I fucked up the headings. Switch them

[BabuYagu]

Only 2.8% of Coutinho's shots were outside the area? This can't be correct can it? 

It's not. I am a twat trying to do things in a rush. This is better

Code: [Select]

Locations:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 6,1% 72,0% 22,0%
Coutinho 2,8% 37,7% 59,5%

Conversion Rate:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 75,2% 25,2% 10,4%
Coutinho 0,0% 17,5% 9,5%
   

[CraigDS]

What an idiot 

[LovelyCushionedHeader]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but our high line defending free kicks is unbelievably effective which the whole team deserves credit for because it takes proper guts. It relies on every single player refusing to drop any deeper before the ball is played but we have managed to master it. I can’t remember such a situation not resulting in an offside over the last 10 matches.

How did I know that Lovren would screw things up in the next match after posting this

[BabuYagu]

It's not. I am a twat trying to do things in a rush. This is better

Code: [Select]

Locations:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 6,1% 72,0% 22,0%
Coutinho 2,8% 37,7% 59,5%

Conversion Rate:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Salah 75,2% 25,2% 10,4%
Coutinho 0,0% 17,5% 9,5%


Btw, Coutinho's numbers for 13/14 by comparison. Ignore the 6 yard box conversion numbers as he converted 1 in 13/14, 0 in 16/17 which creates a big difference. Look at how poor his conversion rate was in the penalty box (16-18% seems the average). Plus look how much his conversion rate improved since Klopp arrived.

Code: [Select]

Shots Per 90:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside Goals
Coutinho 13/14 0,12 1,46 2,04 0,19
Coutinho 16/17 0,12 1,60 2,53 0,52

Locations:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Coutinho 13/14 3,2% 40,4% 56,4%
Coutinho 16/17 2,8% 37,7% 59,5%

Conversion Rate:- 6yd Box Pen Box Outside
Coutinho 13/14 32,08% 5,27% 3,77%
Coutinho 16/17 0% 17,54% 9,51%