Attacking players and goal scoring

This paper investigates optimal coaching strategies in the combination of players football managers should have on the field. It does so by examining how goal scoring and conceding respond to changes in the number of attacking players on the field in European football matches. The paper tests the hypotheses that more attacking players raise both the rates at which the team scores and concedes goals. The paper shows that managers play more defenders when their team is an underdog and it tests whether this strategy is successful. The estimates show that teams are nearly always better off including more attacking players on the field. In the typical match, teams score at a greater rate and (surprisingly) concede at a lower rate when they have more attacking players on the field. The gain in net goals from playing more attacking players is larger the more a team is favoured over its opponent. Teams that are heavy underdogs playing away from home are the only ones that may be better off playing more defensive players. Coaching strategies should shift toward being less defensive in most cases.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Human Sport and Exercise
Published
2025-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.55860/tq1a3v39
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Attacking players and goal scoring

Christopher Magee
Journal of Human Sport and Exercise
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

Attacking players and goal scoring

Christopher Magee
article en

Abstract

This paper investigates optimal coaching strategies in the combination of players football managers should have on the field. It does so by examining how goal scoring and conceding respond to changes in the number of attacking players on the field in European football matches. The paper tests the hypotheses that more attacking players raise both the rates at which the team scores and concedes goals. The paper shows that managers play more defenders when their team is an underdog and it tests whether this strategy is successful. The estimates show that teams are nearly always better off including more attacking players on the field. In the typical match, teams score at a greater rate and (surprisingly) concede at a lower rate when they have more attacking players on the field. The gain in net goals from playing more attacking players is larger the more a team is favoured over its opponent. Teams that are heavy underdogs playing away from home are the only ones that may be better off playing more defensive players. Coaching strategies should shift toward being less defensive in most cases.

Journal of Human Sport and ExerciseVol. 20(2)
Bucknell University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Attacking players and goal scoring — Christopher Magee · Journal of Human Sport and Exercise (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS