Who would have thought it... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ces-saving-free-kick-really-reduced-wall.html It would be interesting if a club decided to try this out. I have thought this before. If an opposition player shoots 25 yards out you back your keeper as during a match they usually have plenty to save. You hardly give away free kicks in dangerous position but from the same 25 yards you put people in front of the keeper, which the goalie is less used to.
Seems a very flawed experiment to me. Less likely for the keeper to save it yes, but that doesn't necessarily translate to more likely to score, does it? A wall makes the player more likely to miss the target and there's always the chance of it hitting the wall.
I'd still have a wall for those times on the edge of the area where having a wall means the kicker will put it over the bar (the trouble of getting it up and over) whereby without a wall it would be blasted full power like an arrow without needing to dip.
Without any evidence I've always thought that once you get to around 30yds the wall is actually helping the attacking team. Gives the taker something to aim by & hinders the goalkeepers view of the kick being taken. Unless you are a top top player (CR etc.) seems unlikely to me that you could beat a goalkeeper with an unhindered view from that distance.
I've always thought that a one player should lay down horizontally behind the wall with his back to the ball, as free kicks sometimes go under the wall if it jumps. Also, I believe another idea would be to split the wall in the middle, so that both posts are covered, but the goalkeeper still has a clear view. PS: I'm not a football coach.
As pointed out already it certainly makes the kicker have to think if faced by a wall especially if on edge of the box - I'd fancy my chances with a clear shot but was never skilled enough to get it up and over a wall and make it dip enough
Logic suggests that the wall in place cuts down the view of the goal the free kick taker has. How many free kicks hits the wall or go over the bar because the wall is there in the first place. Logically speaking, an impeded view of the goal increases the likelihood that the shot will be on target, thereby statistically more likely to score a goal. It suggests more actual "real life" examples need doing in this area, rather than researching
The one thing I would do in a free kick situation, is to have a defender on each post stood about 3 ft from the posts , therefore being able to cover 6 ft each which between two covers half the goal & leaving the keeper to cover the other half from a central position . I actually attended a goalkeeping coaching session in the seventies taken by Phil Parkes the QPR keeper & this was one of the things he demonstrated , as well as free kicks he used to employ this for corners , I was a player manager at the time & took my goalies along , it was real eye opener & very beneficial .
Makes forward team able to line up in front of your keeper without being offside. Daft idea, which is why nobody does it. Not prepared to go to Daily Heil website, but I'd be interested in seeing the evidence. Not sure what's being compared here to reach this comvlusion. Numbers of goals scored from similar distances from open play, for example, would not include pressure on the ball as a mitigating factor. A free kick allows you to tee up the ball and run up unimpeded. Except for us at the start of last season, that rarely happens in a match.
They quite often help against us! I've been watching a bit of Premier League football this month, which is something I haven't done for years, and I'm fairly sure I've actually seen this twice. Can't remember which games though!
Not going to happen these days, don't know why, makes absolute sense to me, particularly for corners. I've lost count of the number of goals conceded at the back post from a corner. Preston springs to mind, even Woodrow's goal against the massives would have been much harder to score with a man on the back post to challenge for it. Mind you a man on the posts for a 30 yard free kick negates offside, allowing opposition players to get round the 'keeper.
Sorry for telling my opinion , I am pleased some expert has told me it was a daft idea , Phil Parkes obviously didn"t have a clue