Do Leeds have a problem defending corners?

Zonal defending of corners has been around for some time, but it is more common than ever now for teams to employ this method.

Supporters of the method point to the lack of space for opposition players, the individual responsibilities for each area, and the freedom for defenders to attack the ball. Detractors of the system inevitably point to the benefits of the attacking team getting run on defence and allowing them to therefore generate greater jumping height. Susceptibility to lateral runs is another potential negative to the zonal method.

Under Daniel Farke, Leeds have employed the zonal marking system and after concession from corners to Norwich and Bristol City in recent games the perception, certainly amongst their own support is that Leeds are vulnerable in this area.

The first interesting point to note when delving further into this is that Leeds are currently the team who have both the lowest XG against (1.02) and conceded least corners in the championship (52) - if you have a vulnerability to conceding from corners, stopping conceding corners in the first instance looks like a sound preventative measure!

In 12 games Leeds have conceded just 13 goals with 3 coming from corners, although only 2 from contact with the initial delivery - the Norwich opener on Sunday, and the City equaliser on the stroke of half time at the start of the month.

Therefore at this albeit early stage of the season, goals conceded from corners only accounts for around 15% of the goals Leeds concede which suggests that although visually they look soft goals, there are other scenarios which cause Leeds more concerns with regards to conceding goals.

Of course the goals conceded stat may be deceiving, but analysis of set play goals conceded and expected goals conceded suggests it is actually quite accurate. Although set play stats obviously include long throws and free kicks, it is a fair reflection of a teams ability to defend from set play balls into the box.

In terms of set play goals conceded, Leeds sit on 3 after 12 games (the deflected West Brom opener counts as a set piece goal). This places them 8th overall but only Ipswich have conceded less than 2 set piece goals this season while Stoke have already shipped 7. Interestingly Leeds have allowed 30 set play shots so far this term, the lowest in the league.

Expected goals conceded from set plays sees Leeds record a figure of 2.53, bettered by only 4 other teams.

So to summarise Leeds have the third best defence in terms of goals conceded, bettered only by Leicester and Birmingham, although in terms of expected goals they are classed as the best. They concede the least number of corners, the least number of shots from set plays and compare favourably to others in terms of expected goals conceded from set plays and actual goals conceded from set plays.

There is no escaping the fact though that two of the last three goals Leeds have conceded have been from corners. So is there a change which may indicate a trend that could lead to regular corner concessions?

Leeds line up in a 6/4 zonal split with a line of six - usually your strongest aerial players - and a second zone of four blockers. Although the team has changed frequently through the season, the set up has been fairly consistent. Rutter and his striker partner, latterly Piroe but previously Gelhardt have occupied Zone 1, followed by Rodon at 2, Ampadu at 3 and Struijk at 4. Earlier on in the season Luke Ayling occupied Zone 5. This is a strong base with Zones 2-5 all occupied by string headers of the ball and Rutter capable of fulfilling a role on Zone 1. This also left the likes of Sam Byram & Archie Gray, physically capable players in the blocking zone preventing effective runs from the attackers and allowing smaller players like James, Summerville or Gnonto to take up the secondary roles in that zone.

The recent changes to the team have reduced the size and strength of the team with Ayling on the bench, Byram has dropped into Zone 5 and Kamara has become a blocker.

Analysis of the Bristol City goal shows that Kamara failed to effectively block the run of Naismith. Ampadu inexplicably failed to attack a ball landing directly in his zone and was the ultimate reason for the concession but Kamara was outmuscled to allow Naismith into that area initially.

Analysis of the Duffy goal from Saturday highlights two factors. The first being the susceptibility of the zonal system to lateral runs. Duffy starts inside the six yard box and makes a lateral run beyond the far post meaning he is away from the blockers and is therefore able to run freely. The direction of the run makes him difficult to pick up for the players in the front zones as he comes from behind them. This is the second potential factor as Leeds use their two strikers in Zone 1 who lack the defensive instinct of their team mates and make them even more at risk from the lateral runs. One thing to note on this goal though is the quality of the delivery, slightly lower and it’s cleared by Rutter in zone 1, slightly closer to goal brings Meslier into play, slightly deeper and it enters the zones of the best headers of the ball in the Leeds team. There are clearly ways Leeds could have defended it better but the quality of the delivery was a big contributory factor.

Despite the frustrations of the Leeds fans at conceding goals from corners, the statistics show that this is not a huge issue at present. However, the recent concessions following alterations to the team and the impact on its aerial strength mean it’s an area that should be watched with interest