PSG and Bayern served a Champions League tie to savour with lessons to digest

Now that was what I call a Champions League tie. Paris Saint-Germain knocked out Bayern Munich. Last season in the final PSG lost to Bayern 1-0. This season in the quarter-finals over two legs they drew 3-3 and went through on away goals.

The first leg, in particular, fascinated me. It was at Bayern.

PSG scored in the third minute. Neymar set up Mbappe. In the 28th minute PSG scored again. Neymar set up Marquinhos. Almost every time PSG got the ball they scored. In football parlance they were clinical.

But they did not get the ball very often. Bayern had long attacks and lots of shots. PSG keeper Navas made several saves. In football parlance, Bayern were wasteful.

As the game wore on, though, I wondered whether this narrative told the whole story.

Mbappe and Neymar are top players. They are capable of making a lot out of a little. But would they always do as well with so few opportunities? Bayern were without the injured Lewandowski, another top player. Even so, were they unlucky not to have scored at all? Navas was making good saves from close range.

Then Bayern did score. In the 37th minute Choupo-Moting headed in a Pavard cross. On the hour Bayern equalised. Muller headed home a Kimmich free kick.

When it looked as though only one team could go on to win, the other team did. Di Maria, in the 68th minute, sent away Mbappe. PSG won 3-2.

Bayern had 31 shots, PSG six. Admittedly, most of PSG’s shots were from good positions and many of Bayern’s were not. Nonetheless, expected goals stats for Bayern were more than three and for PSG less than two. Perhaps a fairer representation of the play would have been 3-2 to Bayern.

Bayern had more than 80 per cent of the shots, nearly 70 per cent of the expected goals but only 40 per cent of the actual goals.

The second leg, at PSG, was different. Bayern won 1-0. Another Choupo-Moting header. Bayern had 15 shots, PSG ten. Expected goals stats, though, put PSG ahead. They gave PSG just over two and Bayern just over one. Perhaps a fairer representation of the second leg would have been a one-goal win for PSG. Maybe a draw on aggregate was the right result, but with the goals coming in a strange order.

“Would Mbappe and Neymar always do as well with so few opportunities?” I asked during the first leg. In the second leg PSG had more shots and higher expected goals but did not score at all. Neymar hit the bar, the post – and came as close as Gazza at Euro 96 to getting a toe on a ball rolling across an open goal.

How unusual was all of this? I decided to check.

I went through goals and shots data for every Champions League game played in the last 17 completed seasons, 2003-04 to 2019-20 – those are all the seasons completed since the present format was introduced.

For each game I calculated shots percentages and goals percentages. If a team won 3-1 from 20 shots for and five shots against I said they scored 75 per cent of the goals and took 80 per cent of the shots. (Three out of four goals is 75 per cent, and 20 out of 25 shots is 80 per cent).

Then I made the graph below.

You will see that as shots percentages rose so did goals percentages. The more shots a team took in relation to their opponents the more goals they were likely to score. Not certain, but more likely. We have already acknowledged that point: PSG won at Bayern.

Overall, teams who took between 51 and 60 per cent of the shots in a game scored between 51 and 60 per cent of the goals. Teams who took between 61 and 70 per cent of the shots in a game scored between 61 and 70 per cent of the goals. Thus far goals percentages rose in step with shots percentages.

As shots percentages soared even higher goals percentages continued to increase, but not as quickly. I suspect that teams who took a huge number of shots did fire off proportionately more from poorer positions.

Teams who took between 71 and 80 per cent of the shots in a game scored about 70 per cent of the goals. Teams who took between 81 and 90 per cent of the shots in a game scored about 80 per cent of the goals. And teams who took between 91 and 100 per cent of the shots in a game scored about 90 per cent of the goals.

For these teams goals percentages were lower than shots percentages – but still high. They won a lot more often than they lost. The key takeaway from the graph is that as shots percentages rose so did goals percentages, and so therefore did win percentages.

If a team take fewer shots than their opponents they cannot win unless their shots are more accurate. Stands to reason. They will have to get more goals with fewer shots. Attempts on a breakaway can be from better positions than attempts against a bedded-in defence. Even so, teams who take most shots still score most goals more often.

In the Champions League over those 17 previous seasons, teams who took between 81 and 90 per cent of the shots in a game – as Bayern did this season at home to PSG – won 65 per cent of the time, drew 27 per cent and lost eight per cent.

Not got a bet365 account? Sign up today and get up to £100 in bet credits

Up to £100 in Bet Credits for new customers at bet365. Min deposit £5. Bet Credits available for use upon settlement of bets to value of qualifying deposit. Min odds, bet and payment method exclusions apply. Returns exclude Bet Credits stake. Time limits and T&Cs apply.

CLAIM OFFER HERE

MORE FREE BETS

Today's top sports betting stories

Follow us on Twitter @racingpostsport