30 Jun The Average Forward Does Not Exist: Why Goals Follow Different Physical Pathways
Introduction
There is a simple question behind this analysis:
Do forwards change their physical behaviour in the matches where they score?
At first, the answer seems easy to look for. We can separate matches into two groups: those in which the forward scored and those in which he did not. Then we compare physical metrics and see what changes.
But in football, simple comparisons often hide the most important part of the story.
When we analysed forwards in LALIGA EA Sports 2025/26, the aggregated result was modest. On average, the physical difference between scoring and non-scoring matches was small.
That could lead to a quick conclusion: scoring is not strongly related to physical output.
But that would be incomplete.
Because when we stopped looking only at the average and started analysing each player individually, the picture changed. The average was not wrong. It was just hiding the player.
Some forwards scored in matches where their high-speed running clearly increased. Others showed their biggest change without team possession. Others increased their high-intensity work mainly when their team had the ball. And some scored with almost no physical change at all.
Same outcome. Different physical pathways.
This is where the analysis becomes useful for coaches.
The question is not whether forwards, as a group, run more when they score. The better question is: what changes in this specific forward when he scores?
That question can lead to better training decisions.
Why the Average Was Not Enough
The first part of the analysis was deliberately simple. Each row in the dataset represented one player in one match. We classified each match according to whether the forward scored or did not score, and then compared the physical metrics between both situations.
This type of analysis is useful as a starting point because it gives a general picture. It tells us whether, across all forwards, scoring matches tend to be physically different from non-scoring matches.
However, football is not played by a generic forward.
A centre forward who lives in the box, a wide forward who attacks open spaces, and a second striker who connects between lines may all appear under the same broad attacking role. But their physical relationship with the goal can be completely different.
One player may score after repeated efforts to attack depth. Another may score through timing inside the box. Another may depend heavily on pressing, recovering high, and attacking immediately after regain. Another may score because his team created a high-quality chance and his main contribution was to arrive and finish efficiently.
If all these players are mixed into one average, the result can become statistically clean but practically limited. The average may suggest that the effect is small, not because nothing is happening, but because different patterns are cancelling each other out.
That is exactly why the individual analysis mattered.
The aggregated analysis answered a broad question:
Do forwards, on average, change physically when they score?
The individual analysis answered a better coaching question:
Does this player change physically when he scores, and in what way?
Methodological Approach
To make the comparison more stable, we first applied minimum inclusion criteria.
Only player-match observations with at least 30 minutes played were included. This was important because very short appearances can distort per-minute values. A forward who plays 8 or 10 minutes may produce extreme values that do not represent a stable match profile.
Then, we only included forwards who had enough scoring and non-scoring observations to allow a basic comparison. Specifically, each player needed at least two matches with a goal and at least four matches without a goal, always after applying the 30-minute filter.
This left us with a final sample of 51 forwards and 1,175 player-match observations: 343 matches with a goal and 832 matches without a goal.
The logic was simple. Because scoring is a low-frequency event, we wanted to avoid building player profiles from a single scoring match. One goal game is not enough to describe a pattern. Two is still modest, but it gives a minimum base. Four non-scoring matches provide a basic reference for what that player usually does when he does not score.
For each forward, we compared his physical performance in scoring matches against his own non-scoring matches. This is an important distinction. We were not asking whether one forward runs more than another. We were asking whether the same forward behaves differently in matches where he scores.
The key physical variables were expressed per minute of play, including total distance, high-speed running, high-speed running with team possession, and high-speed running without team possession.
Using per-minute values matters because match exposure is not equal. A player who plays 90 minutes will naturally accumulate more distance than a player who plays 45. Normalising by minutes makes the comparison more meaningful.
We also considered the size of the effect, not only whether the direction of the difference was positive or negative. This is essential in applied football analysis. A difference can exist numerically but still be too small to matter for training. Coaches need to know whether a change is meaningful, not only whether it is detectable.
The Most Interesting Signal: High-Speed Running Without Possession
One of the most interesting findings was that the clearest physical signal was not simply total distance.
It was high-speed running, especially high-speed running without team possession.
This is important because it changes the interpretation.
A simplistic reading would be: forwards score more when they defend more. But that is not what the result means.
High-speed running without possession can represent many football behaviours. It can be a pressing action, a counter-pressing reaction, a sprint to close a passing option, a recovery movement, or an immediate run after the team regains the ball. It can also capture the physical readiness of a forward who is already moving before the attacking action fully begins.
In many goals, the decisive technical action is easy to see: the shot, the assist, the final pass. But the physical action that made the goal possible may have occurred earlier. A sprint to press the centre-back. A reaction after losing the ball. A movement to attack space the moment possession is recovered. A run that creates separation before the pass is played.
The goal appears in the attacking phase, but part of its origin may belong to the previous defensive or transitional phase.
That is why this metric is so interesting for coaches. It reminds us that goal-scoring is not only about what the forward does when the ball arrives. It is also about what he does before the ball arrives.
The goal is scored with the ball, but very often it is prepared without it.
Four Physical Pathways to Scoring
When we moved from the average to the player-level analysis, four broad profiles emerged. These profiles should not be understood as fixed player identities. They are practical descriptions of how physical output changed in matches where each forward scored.
They are not labels for the player forever. They are patterns observed in this dataset.
1. Global Intensifiers
The first profile included forwards whose scoring matches were associated with a broader increase in high-speed running. These players did not show a change in only one phase of the game. Their high-intensity activity tended to rise across different contexts.
Examples from the sample included Griezmann, Sørloth, Oyarzabal, and Hugo Duro.
For this type of forward, scoring appears to be linked to a more general increase in physical activation. The player may be pressing more, attacking space more, arriving more often, or simply being involved in more intense sequences throughout the match.
From a coaching perspective, this profile suggests that the player’s route to goal may depend on connecting intensity with repeated attacking and defensive behaviours. Training for this type of player should not isolate running from the game. The useful stimulus is not just high-speed distance. It is high-speed running connected to pressing, transition, attacking depth, box arrival, and finishing.
The question for the staff is not: how can we make this player run more?
The better question is: how can we create training tasks where his high-intensity actions are linked to the situations that make him dangerous?
2. Out-of-Possession Intensifiers
The second profile was the most counterintuitive and perhaps the most interesting. These forwards showed their strongest physical change without team possession.
Examples from the sample included Lewandowski, Mbappé, Budimir, and Guruzeta.
At first glance, this may seem surprising. If we are analysing goals, we might expect the main physical difference to appear when the team has the ball. But for this group, the strongest signal was found in out-of-possession high-speed running.
This does not mean that these players score because they defend more. It means that their scoring matches are associated with more intense behaviour in moments without the ball.
That can have several tactical meanings. A forward may press more aggressively and help the team recover higher. He may react faster after losing possession. He may force rushed opponent decisions. He may attack space immediately after a regain. He may be physically engaged before the attacking action becomes visible.
For teams that want to attack quickly after recovery, this is highly relevant. The forward’s out-of-possession behaviour can influence the quality of the next possession. If the recovery happens higher, the distance to goal is shorter. If the opponent is disorganised, the chance may be better. If the forward is already moving, the attack can start faster.
In this profile, the road to goal may begin before possession is secured.
That is a valuable coaching idea. It connects defensive behaviour, transition, and finishing into one sequence. The forward is not only waiting for the attack. He may be helping to create the conditions for it.
3. In-Possession Intensifiers
The third profile included forwards whose scoring matches were more linked to high-intensity actions when their team had the ball.
Examples from the sample included Ferran, Bakambu, and Ibrahim.
This was a smaller group, so the interpretation should be cautious. Still, the profile makes football sense.
These forwards may be more dependent on explosive attacking involvement during possession phases. Their goals may be associated with runs behind the defensive line, diagonal movements, accelerations to receive, support runs in transition, or high-speed actions that help turn possession into penetration.
For these players, the key may be not the amount of possession, but the quality and timing of their movements within possession.
A coaching staff working with this profile may look closely at the relationship between the passer and the forward. When does the forward start the run? What triggers the movement? Is he attacking the blind side? Is he arriving too early or too late? Is the team able to find him when he accelerates?
Here, physical data becomes useful when it is connected to tactical timing.
The relevant message is not: this player needs more high-speed running with possession.
The relevant message is: this player may need more situations where high-speed attacking movements are created, recognised, and rewarded.
4. Low-Change Scorers
The fourth profile included forwards who scored without a clear increase in physical output.
Examples from the sample included Vini Jr., Muriqi, Ayoze, and Lucas Boyé.
This group is essential because it prevents a common mistake. If we find that high-speed running is associated with scoring for some forwards, we might be tempted to turn that into a general rule. But this profile shows that the rule does not apply to everyone.
Some forwards score without a major physical change between scoring and non-scoring matches. Their route to goal may depend more on other factors: positioning, timing, finishing quality, decision-making, body orientation, occupation of the box, opponent behaviour, service quality, or tactical role.
For these players, asking for more physical output may not be the best intervention. The key may be helping them arrive in better positions, receive better passes, attack the right spaces, or make better decisions in the final action.
A forward can be decisive without increasing his physical load. In fact, some of the best attacking actions are efficient precisely because the player does not need to do more. He needs to do the right thing earlier, cleaner, or with better timing.
For coaches, this is a crucial reminder. Physical data should not push every player toward the same solution. It should help identify which solution fits each player.
What This Means for Training
The main practical message is that forwards should not all be trained or evaluated through the same physical lens.
Average demands are useful. They help us understand the competition, the level, and the general physical requirements of the role. But averages do not explain how each player reaches performance.
For a coach, the most useful question is not whether forwards run more when they score. The useful question is what changes in a specific forward when he scores, and whether that change is something we can train.
If a forward belongs to a global intensifier profile, the staff may design tasks that combine repeated high-intensity efforts with attacking the box, pressing, and finishing. The aim would be to reproduce the kind of intense sequences that seem to appear in his scoring matches.
If a forward belongs to an out-of-possession intensifier profile, training may focus on pressing, counter-pressing, recovery moments, and attacking immediately after the regain. The objective would be to connect defensive activation with attacking opportunity.
If a forward belongs to an in-possession intensifier profile, training may emphasise runs behind the line, diagonal movements, attacking depth, and synchronisation with passers. The focus would be on creating the conditions for explosive attacking movements when the team has the ball.
If a forward belongs to a low-change profile, the intervention may be less physical and more tactical or technical. The staff may work on positioning, box occupation, timing, finishing, scanning, or the quality of the support around him.
This is where data becomes useful. Not by giving one universal answer, but by helping coaches choose better questions.
Why Context Matters
Physical metrics can describe movement, but they do not automatically explain football.
A sprint is not just a sprint. It matters whether it happens with possession or without possession. It matters whether it is part of a press, a counter-press, a recovery run, a depth run, or a movement to create space. It matters whether the team is winning or losing, attacking quickly or building slowly, pressing high or defending deeper.
Without context, physical data can become a list of outputs.
With context, it can become information for decision-making.
This is especially important when analysing forwards. The role is strongly influenced by team style, opponent behaviour, match state, and the player’s tactical function. Two forwards can have similar physical values but completely different meanings behind those values.
That is why the phase of play matters. High-speed running with possession and high-speed running without possession are not interchangeable. They may reveal different behaviours and different routes to performance.
The same metric can tell a different story depending on when and why it occurs.
Final Reflection
The average forward does not exist.
In this analysis of LALIGA EA Sports 2025/26, the aggregated result suggested that physical differences between scoring and non-scoring matches were small. But the player-level analysis revealed a more useful picture.
Some forwards scored in matches where they increased high-speed running globally. Some showed their strongest change without possession. Some were more linked to high-intensity actions with possession. Others scored without clear physical changes.
This does not give us a single rule for goal-scoring.
It gives us something better: a framework for asking better questions.
For coaches, the key is not to ask whether forwards should simply run more. The key is to understand which physical behaviours are connected to each player’s way of becoming dangerous.
The goal is the final event. But the pathway to the goal can be very different from one forward to another.
Sometimes it is built through repeated intensity.
Sometimes through pressing and transition.
Sometimes through explosive attacking movements.
Sometimes through timing, efficiency, and tactical intelligence.
Same outcome. Different physical pathways.
And very often, the goal that is scored with the ball has already been prepared without it.