Outswinging corners

[Brett Angell Delight]

I don’t recall us ever looking so unlikely to score from what was quite a large number of corners. I usually hate short corners, but was actually hoping we’d take one so we’d at least change the angle of delivery and give their defenders something more to think about.

 

[sageyefc]

Thought they were alright, it's the fact leaned got a 50 p head that's the issue

 

[Connor]

Don’t think it matters if it’s an inswinger or an outswinger as long as the delivery is decent.

We had a couple yesterday where we’d have scored if big Yerry was on the pitch.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Think a big problem for us is the size of our starting XI yesterday. Apart from the two centre halves I wouldn't really fancy any of our players to win a header. It's also going to be an issue defending corners as well.

Then you plan accordingly don't you? If we have a short(ish) team, and Palace have a load of big grocks, rather than constantly pump balls into the box, could we have tried short corners or something to mix it up? We had 10 corners and all of them were the same (with largely the same result). I wonder if the players couldn't have taken a bit more initiative and decided to do things differently now and then.

 

[ArtetaMoney]

Clip a floated ball to the back post and let Keane nod it back across, teams always put their smallest players on the back posts and Keane wins most headers; he's got a proper biscuit tin head though, so he never gets them on target.

 

[chrismpw]

I mean I’m no striker but if a ball is coming towards me head instead of going away then I’m gonna head it harder. Maybe a striker like @Eggs will know more.

I'm no eggs, but it's down to physics, specifically timing.

If the ball is coming towards you you have to change its direction. To do this you have to inevitably deform the ball (storing energy in elastic form) which is 'work'. The longer this takes the more energy you impart and store which then translates back into kinetic energy as the ball springs back to shape. Work x time = power so the more you have to deform the ball AND the longer it takes, the more power.

Another way if looking at it is impulse - a force acting for a time, (Ft=mv-mu). Here, mv-mu is basically the change in momentum which you can think of as the change in speed you'll see in the ball. F is the force applied by your noggin and t is the time your head is in contact with the ball. The longer t is (and it will be longer if you're changing the ball's direction as you have to slow and stop it first) the more speed change you'll see. This is where timing comes in and is why we're told to stroke a golf ball, or cricket ball etc rather than just hit it as hard as we can.

So in summary - if you have to hit a ball back in the direction it came, you'll end up moving it harder. Basically you're adding your own power to the rebound from its deformation.

 

[ToffeeTim]

Nothing wrong with outswingers but it became far too predictable. We really needed to mix it up a bit.

 

[PhilM]

That's the point, you don't have to head it harder if it's swinging in so you can focus more on directing it.

From my own experience, if you're directly running onto a ball then I don't feel that it makes that much of a difference if it is an in-swinger or an out-swinger.

On the other hand, if you're stationary or do not have a clean approach to the ball (not facing goal), then an in-swinger is much easier to flick towards goal.

 

[Kantareller]

Rather outswingers than short corners I think

 

[toffeeblue9]

Usually, the outswinger is employed if the keeper is good at coming for corners.

We have changed this at times this season, so can only assume this was something we decided on against Palace specifically

 

[BlueIsTheColour]

surely with 10 corners we could have tried, inners, outters and a couple of shorts instead of the same thing over again that didn't work, at least give their defence something to think about. How about a cheeky low pass to the edge of the area for siggi to smash

 

[jinkyali]

I just don’t get it. Martinez was obsessed with them and it seems it’s Silva’s tactic of choice too. To me they just never ever look dangerous, if you’re set up correctly they’re the easiest thing in the world to defend. Defender only needs to get half a head on it and it’s out the box, help it on its way and that’s it, you’re away. Is there any evidence out there that suggests they have ever been beneficial compared to inswingers or even short corners?

Pretty sure we won every header at them yesterday.

 

[Zezti]

We made plenty of contact on them, Keane just couldn't make better use of his big fron.

 

[MikeH72]

Pretty sure we won every header at them yesterday.

No we didn’t at all.

 

[degsy]

I suppose outswinging corners takes the keeper out of the equation more than an inswinging. Keeper always a favourite with inswinging.

That and initially clearing that imfamous 'firstman'
Also;
Keane (maybe Zouma) seem to the only one actually attacking the ball, he comes from a bit deep so the outswinger is coming in to his head...theoretically.