World Cup: Group C Passing and Shooting Stats
Group C had slightly less passing than the World Cup as a whole has had, and about five fewer goals:
| Passes/G | Weighted | Avg | Shots/G | Goals/G | Shot% | |
| Group C | 330 | 70.18 | 21.3 | 10.50 | 0.75 | 7.14 |
| Overall | 350 | 74.95 | 21.4 | 10.71 | 1.04 | 9.71 |
There isn't much to differentiate the play of the US, Slovenia and Algeria, while England clearly played better than the rest of the group:
| Passes | For | Weighted | Vs | Weighted | % of Pass |
| USA | 881 | 195.1 | 953 | 210.1 | 48.0 |
| England | 1200 | 265 | 811 | 177.5 | 59.7 |
| Slovenia | 886 | 185.4 | 1032 | 210.5 | 46.2 |
| Algeria | 993 | 196.7 | 1164 | 244.1 | 46.0 |
In terms of shooting, the US played a very high-tempo game, particularly against Algeria:
| Shots F | Goals | Sh% | Shots A | Goals | Sh% | |
| USA | 41 | 4 | 9.76 | 35 | 3 | 8.57 |
| England | 36 | 2 | 5.56 | 23 | 1 | 4.35 |
| Slovenia | 18 | 3 | 16.67 | 33 | 3 | 9.09 |
| Algeria | 31 | 0 | 0.00 | 35 | 2 | 5.71 |
Slovenia, on the other hand, barely sniffed the net, and were extremely lucky to come away with a point against the US.
The game-by-game passing totals follow:
| Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals | Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals |
| USA | 344 | 78.5 | 22.8 | 19 | 1 | Algeria | 300 | 65 | 21.7 | 16 | 0 |
| USA | 288 | 57.3 | 19.9 | 12 | 2 | Slovenia | 282 | 64 | 22.7 | 6 | 2 |
| USA | 249 | 59.3 | 23.8 | 10 | 1 | England | 371 | 81.1 | 21.9 | 13 | 1 |
| Total | 881 | 195.1 | 22.1 | 41 | 4 | Total | 953 | 210.1 | 22.0 | 35 | 3 |
| Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals | Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals |
| England | 433 | 92.9 | 21.5 | 11 | 0 | Algeria | 345 | 69.5 | 20.1 | 6 | 0 |
| England | 396 | 91 | 23.0 | 12 | 1 | Slovenia | 217 | 48.7 | 22.4 | 7 | 0 |
| England | 371 | 81.1 | 21.9 | 13 | 1 | USA | 249 | 59.3 | 23.8 | 10 | 1 |
| Total | 1200 | 265 | 22.1 | 36 | 2 | Total | 811 | 177.5 | 21.9 | 23 | 1 |
| Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals | Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals |
| Slovenia | 282 | 64 | 22.7 | 6 | 2 | USA | 288 | 57.3 | 19.9 | 12 | 2 |
| Slovenia | 217 | 48.7 | 22.4 | 7 | 0 | England | 396 | 91 | 23.0 | 12 | 1 |
| Slovenia | 387 | 72.7 | 18.8 | 5 | 1 | Algeria | 348 | 62.2 | 17.9 | 9 | 0 |
| Total | 886 | 185.4 | 20.9 | 18 | 3 | Total | 1032 | 210.5 | 20.4 | 33 | 3 |
| Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals | Team | Passes | Weighted | Avg | Shots | Goals |
| Algeria | 300 | 65 | 21.7 | 16 | 0 | USA | 344 | 78.5 | 22.8 | 19 | 1 |
| Algeria | 345 | 69.5 | 20.1 | 6 | 0 | England | 433 | 92.9 | 21.5 | 11 | 0 |
| Algeria | 348 | 62.2 | 17.9 | 9 | 0 | Slovenia | 387 | 72.7 | 18.8 | 5 | 1 |
| Total | 993 | 196.7 | 19.8 | 31 | 0 | Total | 1164 | 244.1 | 21.0 | 35 | 2 |
7 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Checking I understand this
Weighted = sum over completed passes of (probability of not completing pass) ?
= number of complete passes – number of those passes you’d expect to be completed
Avg = Weighted/Passes * 100
= average “difficulty” of passes completed?
It would seem (to me, anyway) that if you use average chance of not completing each pass as a reference, you’d also want to include actual number of passes not completed in there somewhere.
It would be more informative — for me, at least! — to have columns that are something like Completed passes — Expected complete passes (sum of completion probs for both complete and incomplete passes) — Difference.
Thanks for the work!
hi – I put incomplete passes into the regression machine a few posts ago and I found that they didn’t improve the model. That’s not to say that it isn’t useful to know about them – they just don’t appear to give us more information about winning percentage than complete passes. It may be a recording issue.
“Shots” is not “Shots on goal”?
I’d like to see the difference between Shots and Shots on Goal for most of these games.

by 
















