In Search of the Greatest World Cup Goal Scorer – Part V: Goals in Knock-Out Games

So, one more thing, I think, to consider in our search of the greatest goal scorer: goals scored in decisive games. In most of the formats used at previous World Cups that means goals scored in the knockout phase of the tournament. Clearly, a great goal scorer should not score most of his goals at the beginning of the tournament, when the opponents are weaker, but in the decisive stages of the game.

It may be a very extreme example, but compare Gabriel Batistuta to Andreas Brehme: both are great players, but no one would consider Brehme a greater goal scorer than Batistuta who stands at 10 goals. Well, let me make the case for Brehme (a defender!!!): He has scored only four goals while playing in three World Cups. But when Brehme scored it usually counted for a lot: his first goal was the game winner in the 1986 semi-final against France, the second one the game winner in an epic 1990 second round game against the Dutch, the third the go-ahead goal in the 1990 semi-final against England (yes, it was deflected). If that wasn’t impressive enough, his last goal was BTW the World Cup winning goal in the 1990 final, albeit scored from the penalty spot. I urge you to find me a more impressive scoring streak! Compare that to Batistuta: As we already saw, most of Batistuta’s goals (8 to be precise) came in the group stage including two hat tricks against truly weak opponents (Greece and Jamaica). And the two knock-out round goals were scored from penalties in the second round – none of which were game winners. As much as I loved Batistuta and loathed Brehme in their time, credit were credit is due! In terms of stepping up when it counts, Brehme is as good as it gets!

Now, that was a lengthy excursion, but should illustrate my point that goals in the latter stages should count more than goals in the preliminary rounds. Many ways to do so, but I think the easiest would be to double the IF of a goal if it was scored in the knock-out stages. Let’s call this multiplier the KOM (Knock-Out Stage Multiplier).

But before applying the KOM to each goal, we need to address a minor issue: What about the four tournaments (1950, 1974, 1978 and 1982) where there was a second group stage? While we could let these games also count fully, I think this is not entirely fair as there are also meaningless matches in there and also in a group of four, the first two rounds usually only set things up. To me, it would make more sense to use in these games a KOM somewhere between 1.0 and 2.0. So, how about KOM = 1.5? Sounds good, but we also have to examine the games tournament by tournament and one by one:

  • 1950
    Goals in the first four games of the final round should have KOM = 1.5, but the last two games where a quasi-final and quasi-third place play-off and I feel more comfortable using KOM = 2.0 there.
  • 1974
    Similar situation as in 1950. Both groups had de-facto semi finals which should count as such (double score) and the first four games in each group should use KOM = 1.5. But the two games (Sweden-Yugoslavia and Argentina-GDR) held in parallel to the semi-finals should not get any boost as they were meaningless at the time they were played.
  • 1978
    This one is “easy” as there were no real final or meaningless games. When they were played, every game involved at least one team that could progress to the final or third place play-off. So, all goals there are multiplied by 1.5.
  • 1982
    Groups of three are a bit more straightforward as there is only one way to have a truly meaningless game (one teams wins the first two and the losers play the last one), which fortunately did not happen. So all goals use KOM = 1.5 except for three games: Brazil-Italy (epic quasi-quarterfinal), Poland-USSR (goalless) and France-Northern Ireland (a Northern Ireland win would have seen them through).  These three games were essentially quarter-finals with the winner going through to the next round, while a draw would have benefit one of the two teams involved, and all goals from these games will have KOM = 2.0.

So, with that let’s adjust the previous IWV value with the appropriate multiplier for each goal. I will call the resulting value the GV4 (goal value based on 4 components – goal value, importance factor, game winning goal, elimination goal). In the table below, I also display the sum of (KOM*IF), which can be seen as an intermediary step between IWV and GV4:

Name Goals IWV KOM*IF GV4
1 GER Gerd Müller 14 14.615 14.75 19.972
2 BRA Ronaldo 15 13.539 14.50 19.518
3 GER Miroslav Klose 16 14.687 13.50 19.130
4 POL Grzegorz Lato 10 14.358 10.50 17.815
5 ITA Roberto Baggio 9 11.361 13.00 17.389
6 ITA Salvatore Schillaci 9 10.901 10.00 17.082
7 ITA Paolo Rossi 9 11.031 14.50 16.952
8 ENG Gary Lineker 10 9.862 11.50 16.194
9 ESP David Villa 9 11.141 10.00 15.574
10 GER Jürgen Klinsmann 11 11.849 11.00 15.551

Now, we are getting somewhere! To be fair, both Klose and Ronaldo still are probably a tad too high on this list for my liking and I am not very fond of the fact that it features only players that have played in 1970 or after, but I cannot really argue with most of these names. Every single one of them were impactful, feared and great goal scorers (at the very least at the World Cup). As a bonus of my fiddling, the top spot is occupied by the player who I truly regard as the greatest goal scorer AND Brehme is also ahead of Batistuta (in case you were wondering). BUT, I want to make sure that in preparing for this series of posts, I considered a priori the factors in which we rate the goal scorers and not try to fiddle until I get a result to my liking.  And if I am nitpicky, there are not only issues with Klose and potentially Ronaldo, but also with Schillaci. He may have had the single most impressive goal scoring performance at a World Cup, but unlike all the other players featured here, he only played at one World Cup. In that sense, Schillaci was more of an outlier, while the other nine were consistently great performers who made at least two World Cup squads. So, longevity in a way should also be part of the equation and this is why the ranking of the average 4-component goal value (GA4) does not really work for me:

Name GA IWA KOA GA4
1 ITA Salvatore Schillaci 0.857 1.750 1.429 2.440
2 BRA Leônidas 1.600 1.144 2.600 1.889
3 POR Eusébio 1.500 1.214 1.583 1.854
4 ENG Geoff Hurst 0.833 1.210 1.333 1.771
5 CZE Oldřich Nejedlý 1.167 1.082 1.833 1.664
6 ITA Silvio Piola 1.250 1.073 2.000 1.645
7 GER Gerd Müller 1.077 1.147 1.135 1.536
8 FRA Just Fontaine 2.167 1.156 1.833 1.527
9 CZE Tomáš Skuhravý 1.000 0.925 1.000 1.408
10 URU Luis Suárez 0.625 1.067 0.875 1.362

Although there is really only one player on this list that I do have a slight problem with (Skuhravý) and most of the names on there deserve to be in consideration when talking about the greatest World Cup goal scorer, the ranking just doesn’t strike the same chord with me as the one above. A player playing in only one tournament and performing well there is at an advantage here. I really do like the mix of players from all periods of the World Cup, but the order is a bit off. If I had to choose between the two lists, I would go with the former (non-averaged) one. Yes, you have a better chance to be high in the ratings if you play more games, but then this is also a clear sign that you are a vital part of your team. The statistician in me slightly cringes, but in this case the sum is superior to the average!

So, what is the conclusion here? I used a lot of words but not sure how much got through. 😉 Well, I am more than happy to crown Gerd Müller as the greatest World Cup goal scorer of all time! There are not many players that like him have scored goals at every possible stage including the game winner in a World Cup final. That this final was won in his home ground in Munich adds a really nice touch to Müller’s story. Full disclosure here: my favorite enemies are Germany and Bayern München. But putting aside personal preferences, there really is no equal to the Bomber and his top spot is well deserved! The spots below him, I am somewhere between surprise and disappointment. But both Ronaldo and Klose were linchpins of their team’s attack for at least three tournaments and thus they deserve that ranking, too.

 

In Search of the Greatest World Cup Goal Scorer – Part II: Adjusting for Word Cup Goal Average

As mentioned in the previous post, goals scored are not entirely comparable. While today’s players get more games, the games played in the early years of the World Cup had more goals. So, in a way it was easier for Just Fontaine to rack up 13 goals in just 6 games, when in 1958 there was an average of 3.6 goals/game. Here is a quick visualization of the World Cup Goal Average (WGA) over the years:

Wordl Cup Goal Average

As we can see from that graph, there were a lot of goals before 1960 and since there is a small but steady decline. Maybe things are pointing up again after Brazil 2014, but I doubt it. The solid line is a LOESS trend-line which should take out all random variation. As we can see, the huge outlier 1954 is taken as such, while most values are scattered closely around the line. Of note is also that this way, the 1990 World Cup is really seen as an abnormality. Whether this is actually the case is a good point for discussion: prior to 1992 a goalie could handle a back pass from his own players, which allowed a defense to manage a lead much better. But also, the weather in 1994 was a lot more demanding which often leads to more goals. So, let’s see which is better, the raw data or the smoothed line.

So, how do we adjust now? Well, first of all we need a reference point to compare the value of a goal of say 1950 to say 2010. To me it makes most sense to put everything in reference to the current (i.e. most recent) standing and that would be the 2014 World Cup. Let’s stick with raw data at first and we have a reference WGA of 2,67 goals/game. Now goals scored in tournaments with a higher WGA should count less, while goals scored in tournaments with lower WGA should count more. To achieve this, we divide the reference WGA, WGAref, by the individual tournament WGAs, WGAt, and compute the tournament goal values as

GVt = WGAref/WGAt.

Here is the full list of these goal values (based on raw data as well as LOESS smoothing) with reference 2014 (i.e. a goal at the 2014 World Cup has value 1.00):

Year Raw Avg Raw GV LOESS LOESS GV
1930 3.889 0.687 4.049 0.618
1934 4.118 0.649 4.118 0.608
1938 4.667 0.573 4.156 0.602
1950 4.000 0.668 3.999 0.626
1954 5.385 0.496 3.724 0.672
1958 3.600 0.742 3.400 0.736
1962 2.781 0.961 3.107 0.806
1966 2.781 0.961 2.895 0.865
1970 2.969 0.900 2.768 0.904
1974 2.553 1.047 2.741 0.913
1978 2.684 0.995 2.695 0.929
1982 2.808 0.952 2.626 0.953
1986 2.538 1.053 2.565 0.976
1990 2.212 1.208 2.545 0.984
1994 2.712 0.985 2.547 0.983
1998 2.672 1.000 2.566 0.976
2002 2.516 1.062 2.494 1.004
2006 2.297 1.163 2.421 1.034
2010 2.266 1.179 2.454 1.020
2014 2.672 1.000 2.503 1.000

Now, how do we use these GVs? Well, let’s look at Miroslav Klose as an example. In 2002 and 2006 he scored 5 goals each, in 2010 it was 4 goals and an in 2014 2 more goals. So, his time adjusted goal tally using raw data is

Gadj= 5*1.062 + 5*1.163 + 4*1.179 + 2*1.000 = 17.844.

So, his 16 goals in 4 tournaments from 2002 to 2014 are the equivalent of 17.844 goals in 2014. Given that Klose scored most of his goals in tournaments with low WGA, it was obvious that his score would get slightly inflated. We can of course do the same for the smoothed WGAs and arrive at an time adjusted smoothed goal tally of 16.268 for Klose. With this method it is of course hard to see how Klose could be unseeded from his top spot in the overall scorer standings:

Name Goals Gadj Gadj,LOESS Rank LOESS
1 GER Miroslav Klose 16 17.844 16.268 1
2 BRA Ronaldo 15 15.987 15.033 2
3 GER Gerd Müller 14 13.187 12.698 3
4 GER Jürgen Klinsmann 11 11.551 10.791 4
5 ENG Gary Lineker 10 11.148 9.790 7
6 GER Thomas Müller 10 10.897 10.100 5
7 ESP David Villa 9 10.386 9.202 11
8 POL Grzegorz Lato 10 10.269 9.205 10
9 ARG Gabriel Batistuta 10 10.004 9.812 6
10 BRA Pelé 12 9.974 9.706 8
11 FRA Just Fontaine 13 9.648 9.571 9

OK, that surely did not improve things compared to the unadjusted table. Adjusting for goal value demotes the players from yesteryear and promotes players that played more recently – especially in 1990. Fontaine’s incredible 13 goal tally is now worth a lot less, while Lineker and Klinsmann get quite the boost. If we use the smoothed version, the Top 4 remain the same, but Pelé and Fontaine do not drop as much. Kudos to Gerd Müller who as a more senior player steadfastly remains in the Top 3.

So, how about adjusting for games played in addition which gives us the players adjusted goal average, GAadj.

Name GA GAadj GAadj,LOESS Rank LOESS
1 RUS Oleg Salenko 2.000 1.971 1.965 1
2 FRA Just Fontaine 2.167 1.608 1.595 2
3 POR Eusébio 1.500 1.441 1.297 5
4 ARG Guillermo Stábile 2.000 1.374 1.236 6
5 CZE Tomáš Skuhravý 1.000 1.208 0.984 9
6 COL James Rodriguez 1.200 1.200 1.200 7
7 HUN Sándor Kocsis 2.200 1.092 1.479 3
8 ITA Salvatore Schillaci 0.857 1.036 0.843 12
9 ITA Christian Vieri 1.000 1.028 0.988 8
10 GER Gerd Müller 1.077 1.014 0.977 10
11 SUI Josef Hügi 2.000 0.992 1.344 4
12 BRA Leônidas 1.600 0.931 0.965 5

Hmmmmmmmm … There are elements of this list that I like (Fontaine, Eusebio and Stábile high up, good mixture between older and newer players) , but two things totally discredit it to me: the Bomber is only in 10th place for both rankings. If it comes to pure goal scoring ability, I think one would be hard pressed to find any better player. So, a #10 ranking just does not look right. And then of course the player on top! Thinking about it, it was obvious that Oleg Salenko would rank very high: a high GA in only a single World Cup, which also has a relatively high GV. And while I could see an argument for Salenko having the best single game goal scoring achievement in his 5 goal game against Cameroon (if we forget the shambolic defense and poor motivation of the Africans), I truly have a hard time crowning Salenko as the best World Cup goal scorer of all time. In addition to running up the score on an inferior opponent, these goals also came in a game with nothing to play for.

There are also smaller things, that I do not like. In particular, Skuhravý is ranked higher than Schillaci. Both played in the same tournament (Italia 1990), but Skuhravý’s goals came in tow games: 2 in a 5-1 rout of the USA and 3 in a 4-1 rout of Costa Rica in the second round. Compare that to Schillaci, who scored in 6 different games and 4 of these were game winners and 1 the go-ahead goal in the semi-final! In every regard, Schillaci’s performance was more impressive.

Now, comparing the GAs based on raw data and LOESS smoothing, I do like the raw data better as is mixes the different World Cup periods slightly better. But again, I think that overall both adjusted lists do not satisfy me.

Also, the problem with some players racking up goals against weak opponents, while others consistently score important goals is also present in the previous ranking of adjusted total goals. And while it is easy to knock on Salenko, the same argument can be applied to certified super striker: Gabriel Batistuta. 10 goals surely look impressive, but 3 of these came against a weak Greece team in 1994 and 3 more were add-on goals against a similarly out of sorts Jamaica. That leaves 4 more goals, two of which were penalties in the second round. Batigol was one of my favorite players of the late 90s, but this is not very impressive. Compare this to Eusébio’s 9 goals, where Portugal had to play in the group of death with Brazil, Hungary and Bulgaria, Eusébio had to bring back his team from 0-3 deficit against the pesky North Koreans and then lead Portugal to a third place finish with 2 more goals …

So, while I still think that adjusting for tournament GV is a good and necessary step, there is still some way to go to find a satisfying list taking care of the problems inherent in both of the above. So, to improve the listing, I come to three conclusions:

  1. We have to consider not only the fact that a goal was scored, but also how important that goal was. Scoring the third to fifth goals in a 5-0 rout is a nice feat, but all these goals were not important in securing the win. Conversely, scoring three game winning goals in three consecutive games is a highly impressive streak. Also, scoring the game winner in the World Cup final is more important/valuable than doing so in the group stage.
  2. Relative performance is a nice measure, but I do start to prefer the absolute performance. While on a very small scale, the Skuhravý vs. Schillaci comparison highlights the shortcomings of relative performance. If we also take importance into account, I think a player scoring many important goals over a larger number of games should be considered a greater goal scorer than one scoring two game winners in two games.
  3. The smoothed curve was a nice idea, but the raw data so far led to more satisfying results. I will keep comparing the two adjustments methods, but as of now advantage raw data

Well, the journey has just begun and I hope to get you deeper into World Cup goal scoring history and some statistics in the next post.