There is a very simple barometer to judge the quality of a major international tournament.
More goals typically means more entertainment, and the early stages of this expanded World Cup have treated us to more of them than we are accustomed to.
A return of three goals per game is currently the highest rate observed since the 1958 edition of the tournament, and although there is still plenty of football to be played, it is worth digging deeper into why this summer has been so quick out of the blocks.
It poses a key question. Goals are the currency of football, but are we getting an inflated return on our investment? To answer this, we turn to our old friend — expected goals.
For those who are yet to be acquainted, this metric measures the quality of each chance before a player shoots, accounting for many contextual factors, including the angle and distance of the shot, or the body part that was used to shoot.
From the many factors fed into the statistical model, the value is always presented as a number between zero (no chance of a goal) and 0.99 (an all-but-certain goal).
Get free access to the most comprehensive World Cup coverage in The Athletic app
Aggregating all the chances to this point, we can calculate the total number of goals expected to occur based on the quality of those opportunities. Comparing that with the actual number of goals scored can tell us whether we are getting more bang for our buck.
So far, there have been 109 goals scored from an xG tally of 90, meaning we have seen 19 goals more than the quality of chances would suggest.
Comparing goals and xG with such a small sample of games is not advisable. Even a full season’s worth of domestic club football data can still ride the wave of variance for some teams.
Therefore, we can all be grown-ups and treat those findings with caution, but the headline conclusion suggests that an unprecedented number of goals are being scored above expectation.
Given the quality of global stars like Lionel Messi, Kylian Mbappe and Harry Kane, might that difference be down to some elite finishing? Maybe. Could it be down to some poor goalkeeping? Possibly. Even after removing own goals from the dataset, it is hard to pinpoint where that discrepancy is coming from.
The World Cup is famed for bringing together nations of notably different abilities, meaning there might be qualitative factors at play when looking at such a high conversion rate.
Germany put seven goals past Curacao on matchday one with a squad packed with league and Champions League winners. By contrast, goalkeeper Eloy Room plys his trade for Miami FC in the second tier of American soccer.
Elsewhere, such an overperformance cannot be attributed to a disproportionate volume of efforts being thundered in from distance — with 37 per cent of shots outside the box being the same rate as 2022 and a lower rate than the 2018 edition of the tournament.
One hypothesis might be the impact of some excellent headed finishes already this tournament — with 15 goals and counting across the group stage. Headers typically have a lower xG value within the statistical models, owing to the fact it is a non-footed, first-time shot.
However, the rate of total goals scored via headers stands at 17 per cent this summer — barely different from 2022 (16 per cent) or 2018 (19 per cent).
Then there is the official World Cup match ball, known as the Adidas Trionda.
Adapting the physical characteristics of a tournament ball was previously discussed by The Athletic during Euro 2024, but former England goalkeeper Joe Hart has suggested that it might be playing a role with a certain type of shot.
“I honestly feel as though this ball is coming onto the goalkeeper quicker than they feel it is off the foot,” Hart said during his analysis for the BBC.
The suggestion was that these subtle differences in trajectory might affect the split-second decisions that goalkeepers typically make — disrupting their typically laser-sharp hand-eye coordination.
Messi’s opening goal against Algeria was cited as one example, with Hart also suggesting that England’s Jordan Pickford could have done better with Martin Baturina’s arrowed effort in their opening encounter with Croatia.
Another was Mbappe’s long-range finish against Senegal. Take nothing away from the quality of the effort, but replays suggested that goalkeeper Edouard Mendy got close enough to the ball despite being unable to adjust his body in time to palm it away.
“As it leaves his foot, it’s a decent strike of course, but Mendy is a Champions League winner. He just doesn’t time getting his hands up correctly. I’m noticing it more and more with the higher balls.”
Whatever the reason for such an overperformance in front of goal, there is something happening this summer that is like no other tournament that has come before it.
When adjusting for the volume of games played across previous editions, the rate of overperformance (goals versus xG) that we are seeing is unparalleled — with 21 per cent more goals than we could have expected, comfortably more than any other year.
The obvious caveat here is that we are less than halfway through the tournament, meaning that rate is almost guaranteed to subside by the time we reach the knockout stage.
Still, it is worth highlighting just how unlikely this outcome has been so far.
When simulating all 889 shots from the tournament 100,000 times using the individual xG, the likelihood of this 102-goal tally (which excludes own goals) is just two per cent. According to the model, we were equally as likely to see 80 goals (10 goals below their xG tally) as we have been for the current tally of 102 (1.9 per cent).
Thankfully, things have fallen on the fun side of variance — giving us more goals to gorge on during our glutonous summer of football.
If the co-host United States wanted to grow football — or soccer — then it cannot hurt to give the audience a heightened package of entertainment during this summer’s sales pitch.
Yes, it is premature to suggest that this rate of goalscoring will continue over the next few weeks, but in international tournament football — where statistical patterns and trends are hard to come by with so few games — we can lean into this quirk for now.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.nytimes.com ’
