|
Season Review 2019/20 |
|
Welcome
Welcome to Stats Perform’s English Women’s Super League season review for the curtailed 2019/20 league season.
Interactive and showcasing a host of detailed performance metrics, this report provides insight into the league’s standout performers, applying innovative frameworks produced by our team of AI scientists.
Within this review, we share a comprehensive breakdown of performance at the key ends of the pitch, as well as sharing detailed insight on team style, both in and out of possession. Detailed player analysis also features, with key metrics ranked across different positions.
Notable additions to our reviews this summer include details on the teams most effective at generating opportunities from high turnovers, together with insights into how each team approached the changes to the goal kick rule. We also apply metrics to highlight the ball carrying players who were effective at generating goalscoring opportunities through running with the ball.
These new features reflect Stats Perform’s ongoing commitment to further explore how performance data can inform a club’s decision-making across performance analysis, recruitment and long-term strategic planning.
We hope you find some interesting insights from this review.
Team
Expected Goals (For)
Overview
Key Points:
Ranked by league position, this table outlines teams’ performances in front of goal, from both open play and set piece situations.
Champions Chelsea’s ability to generate high quality chances from open play was demonstrated by them amassing an xG output of 31.1 from 228 shots, which they outperformed by six clear goals.
Emma Hayes’ side also generated the highest xG from set pieces, however they scored three fewer set piece goals than Reading, who generated 33% of their xG from set play situations.
At the other end of the table, Bristol City recorded the fewest shots from both open play and set pieces. They were also the league’s lowest scorers from set pieces, scoring just once during the campaign.
Aside from Reading, no team outperformed or underperformed on their set piece xG by two clear goals, with teams performing roughly in line with what we would expect based on the quality of their opportunities.
| Team | xG Ratio | Shots | xG | Goals | SP Shots | SP xG | SP Goals | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chelsea Women | 0.20 | 228 | 31.1 | 37 | 83 | 8.2 | 9 | |
| Manchester City Women | 0.21 | 208 | 25.7 | 30 | 54 | 7.1 | 9 | |
| Arsenal Women | 0.10 | 183 | 29.7 | 36 | 38 | 3.5 | 3 | |
| Manchester United Women | 0.17 | 147 | 17.4 | 16 | 46 | 4.1 | 2 | |
| Reading Women | 0.33 | 145 | 13.7 | 7 | 49 | 7.8 | 12 | |
| Everton Women | 0.28 | 127 | 10.8 | 12 | 45 | 4.6 | 5 | |
| Tottenham Hotspur Women | 0.19 | 139 | 10.7 | 6 | 43 | 3.2 | 5 | |
| West Ham United Women | 0.27 | 93 | 10.4 | 12 | 46 | 4.2 | 6 | |
| Brighton and Hove Albion Women | 0.28 | 126 | 11.5 | 5 | 30 | 5.1 | 5 | |
| Bristol City Women | 0.19 | 73 | 6.0 | 8 | 21 | 1.8 | 1 | |
| Birmingham City Women | 0.27 | 106 | 5.1 | 3 | 31 | 1.9 | 2 | |
| Liverpool Women | 0.23 | 114 | 8.4 | 4 | 43 | 3.0 | 3 |
Graphic
Definitions
| Metric | Definition |
|---|---|
| Set Play | Chances occuring as a result of a corner, direct free kick, indirect free kick or throw-in. |
| Set Play : Total xG Ratio | The proportion of a team’s total xG that resulted from set plays. |
| Expected Goals (xG) | Expected Goals (xG) measures the quality of a shot based on several variables such as assist type, shot angle and distance from goal, whether it was a headed shot and whether it was defined as a big chance. Adding up a player or team’s expected goals can give us an indication of how many goals a player or team should have scored on average, given the shots they have taken. |
Expected Goals (Against)
Overview
Key Points:
In their debut WSL season, Manchester United conceded the joint-lowest number of open play shots, as well as conceding the second lowest xG conceded output behind Chelsea.
West Ham United conceded more than double the number of set piece goals (13) than the next highest team, which was nearly 50% more than their xG. Chelsea conceded the lowest number of shots and xG from set play situations, demonstrating their strength defensively across both open play and set plays.
Relegated Liverpool ranked seventh for xG conceded from open play and third from set pieces. The Reds conceded roughly in line with their xG projections, reinforcing how a lack of cutting edge when going forward played a key part in their relegation to the Championship.
| Team | xG Ratio | Shots | xG | Goals | SP Shots | SP xG | SP Goals | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chelsea Women | 0.20 | 89 | 7.1 | 8 | 26 | 2.0 | 3 | |
| Manchester City Women | 0.29 | 115 | 9.5 | 4 | 47 | 4.2 | 3 | |
| Arsenal Women | 0.20 | 104 | 8.4 | 10 | 27 | 2.3 | 3 | |
| Manchester United Women | 0.25 | 89 | 7.6 | 5 | 42 | 3.4 | 5 | |
| Reading Women | 0.19 | 109 | 14.4 | 17 | 40 | 3.6 | 6 | |
| Everton Women | 0.22 | 154 | 14.4 | 12 | 36 | 4.8 | 6 | |
| Tottenham Hotspur Women | 0.21 | 202 | 20.1 | 17 | 55 | 5.7 | 4 | |
| West Ham United Women | 0.25 | 171 | 21.0 | 21 | 65 | 7.3 | 13 | |
| Brighton and Hove Albion Women | 0.21 | 153 | 19.1 | 19 | 51 | 5.9 | 6 | |
| Bristol City Women | 0.18 | 237 | 27.3 | 34 | 53 | 6.4 | 3 | |
| Birmingham City Women | 0.23 | 117 | 17.1 | 16 | 43 | 5.4 | 5 | |
| Liverpool Women | 0.17 | 149 | 14.5 | 13 | 44 | 3.4 | 5 |
Graphic
Definitions
| Metric | Definition |
|---|---|
| Set Play | Chances occuring as a result of a corner, direct free kick, indirect free kick or throw-in. |
| Set Play : Total xG Ratio | The proportion of a team’s total xG that resulted from set plays. |
| Expected Goals (xG) | Expected Goals (xG) measures the quality of a shot based on several variables such as assist type, shot angle and distance from goal, whether it was a headed shot and whether it was defined as a big chance. Adding up a player or team’s expected goals can give us an indication of how many goals a player or team should have scored on average, given the shots they have taken. |
Team Sequences (Style)
Overview
Key Points:
In this section we explore team style using the Stats Perform sequence framework. Using sequence time and passes per sequence, we can assess a team’s approach in terms of how they move the ball. Using direct speed, we are able to identify who progresses the ball quickly.
Arsenal ranked first for the longest sequence time and the most passes per sequence. They also recorded a league low direct speed, moving the ball forwards on average 1.16 metres per second. This patient, possession-based approach, also resulted in Arsenal having more 10+ passing sequences than any other team.
WSL runners-up Manchester City recorded a similar sequence time and average number of sequence passes to Arsenal, however they looked to move the ball forward at a faster tempo. Despite this approach, City also completed the most attacks from direct sequences in the competition.
Of the teams to finish in the top five, Reading were successful by adopting a less possession-orientated approach, with the lowest average sequence time and second lowest passes per sequence in the competition.
| Team | Sequence Time | Passes Per Sequence | Direct Speed (m/s) | 10+ Pass OP Sequences | Build Up Attacks | Direct Attacks | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chelsea Women | 8.60 | 3.23 | 1.47 | 106 | 22 | 26 | |
| Manchester City Women | 9.93 | 3.65 | 1.34 | 198 | 45 | 29 | |