Set‑piece goals have shifted from being a side dish of Premier League attacking to a primary weapon, with a record share of league goals now coming from corners and free‑kicks. Identifying which teams lead the set‑piece tables shows who can manufacture goals even when open play stalls, a crucial edge in a tightly contested league.
Why set‑piece excellence has become so valuable
Across recent seasons, the proportion of Premier League goals from non‑penalty set pieces has climbed toward and beyond 20%, with corners alone accounting for 19% of all goals at one stage—the highest share in competition history. When nearly a quarter of scoring comes from dead‑ball situations, a strong set‑piece unit can transform draws into wins and narrow losses into points over a full campaign.
For sides that struggle to break packed defences, well‑rehearsed routines from corners, wide free‑kicks and long throws provide repeatable ways to create high‑xG chances without needing to dismantle a block in open play. That makes set‑piece output not just a stylistic quirk but a central part of a club’s expected goal profile and league position.
Which teams currently top the Premier League for set‑piece goals?
Latest published rankings for the 2025/26 season list Liverpool with 20 set‑piece goals, Wolves with 19, Nottingham Forest with 18, Burnley with 17, Everton with 16 and Manchester City with 15, followed closely by Fulham on 14. Over a previous 2024/25 frame, Aston Villa were highlighted for scoring 14 set‑piece goals, underlining how Unai Emery’s side sustained dead‑ball threat across multiple seasons.
These numbers place those sides clearly above the league average in dead‑ball productivity. In practice, that means their opponents carry a persistent risk at every corner or wide free‑kick, even when open play feels under control—something that becomes especially evident late in matches when fatigue makes set‑piece defending harder.
How set‑piece scoring leaders differ in style
Even among the top set‑piece teams, there are distinct stylistic profiles. Liverpool’s high volume of corners plus aerial presence in centre‑backs and forwards drive their return, despite some reports noting relatively low xG per individual corner in specific seasons, suggesting they rely on repetition and variety more than single “killer” routines.
Brentford, by contrast, have become synonymous with set‑piece innovation over several campaigns, leveraging long throws, blocked runs and crowded goalkeeper zones to extract value far above their open‑play talent budget. Forest and Burnley, also high on the 2025/26 set‑piece list, show how teams outside the traditional elite can close the scoring gap with creative work around dead‑ball situations.
Mechanism: from design to consistent set‑piece scoring
The mechanism behind sustained set‑piece success runs through four linked stages. First, teams prioritise specialist takers whose delivery quality—pace, trajectory and accuracy—maximises the chance of clean contact for attackers. Second, they script routines that engineer free headers or shots by using blocks, decoy runs and late surges to the near or far post, as seen in corner‑xG studies where Arsenal were shown to lead the league in shots and xG from corners.
Third, squads are built with aerial targets—centre‑backs, strikers or powerful midfielders—who can convert those deliveries, allowing the team to repeatedly exploit mismatches against weaker markers. Finally, analytical feedback loops track which patterns produce chances, refining or discarding routines based on actual xG and goals, ensuring that set‑piece threat is maintained over seasons rather than just flashes of form.
Comparing leading Premier League set‑piece teams
Public lists outlining 2025/26 non‑penalty set‑piece goals help frame how the best units stack up. A simplified view looks like this:
| Team | Set‑piece goals 2025/26* | Notable characteristics |
| Liverpool | 20 | High volume of corners; strong centre‑back and forward targets. |
| Wolves | 19 | Heavy reliance on rehearsed routines to supplement open play. |
| Nottingham Forest | 18 | Significant share of total goals via set pieces. |
| Burnley | 17 | Dead‑ball focus to offset limited open‑play firepower. |
| Everton | 16 | Direct style with emphasis on aerial dominance. |
| Manchester City | 15 | Mix of short and traditional corners; variety of takers. |
*2025/26 figures from current set‑piece goal tables, excluding penalties.
Reading this table, the most important point is not just who leads in absolute goals but how big a share of each club’s scoring comes from these situations. For Forest or Burnley, dead‑balls may represent a disproportionately large chunk of total output, whereas for City and Liverpool they add a powerful extra layer on top of already strong open‑play attacks.
When strong set‑piece records fail to translate into overall dominance
Set‑piece strength has obvious benefits, but it does not automatically guarantee high league position. A mid‑table team can rank among the top three for dead‑ball goals yet still concede heavily in open play or lack creativity between the lines, leaving them reliant on corners and free‑kicks to stay competitive.
There are also cases of set‑piece “over‑performance” relative to underlying xG from dead‑balls. Sides like Leicester or newly promoted clubs have been highlighted for scoring more from corners than their relatively modest corner xG would predict, suggesting a mix of sharp execution and small‑sample variance; without sustained underlying chance quality, that level of conversion can drift downward in subsequent months.
Reading set‑piece leaders through an odds interpretation lens
Adopting an odds‑interpretation perspective means translating set‑piece rankings into adjusted expectations for match prices rather than just admiring routines. In fixtures involving Liverpool, Wolves or Forest, markets for total goals, both teams to score, and anytime scorer can justifiably shade upward when opponents concede many corners or struggle aerially, because dead‑ball threat boosts scoring probability beyond what open‑play xG alone suggests.
However, bookmakers increasingly incorporate set‑piece data into their models, especially for high‑profile clubs. The key question becomes whether the implied probability embedded in odds already fully reflects these edges; when public narratives lag actual numbers—for instance, underrating mid‑table experts like Brentford or Burnley in dead‑ball situations—there can still be room for mispricing that attentive analysts can exploit.
Situational use of set‑piece analysis when betting through UFABET
In matches where set‑pieces are likely to be decisive—say, a Liverpool or Forest game against a side that concedes many corners and struggles in the air—the next step is converting that edge into concrete positions. When a bettor operates via a ติดต่อ ufabet168 betting interface, the main analytical question is whether the available markets are granular enough to mirror set‑piece‑focused views: corner counts, specific goalscorer options for aerial threats, or alternative goal lines that recognise the added scoring routes on dead‑balls. If the interface only offers generic main‑line totals and 1X2 outcomes without supporting props, the ability to capitalise on nuanced set‑piece insight is dulled, forcing the bettor either to compress a targeted edge into blunt bets or to pass on what is, in theory, a favourable scenario.
Managing set‑piece-driven expectations alongside casino online exposure
There is also a psychological angle when specific, repeatable edges meet more random forms of gambling. When a bettor studies data showing that corners now account for 19% of Premier League goals and that certain teams produce double‑digit set‑piece strikes, but does so within a casino online website that also promotes slots or high‑variance table games, the risk is a gradual drift from evidence‑based decisions toward impulse‑driven stakes. Over time, this can mean that carefully identified edges—such as favouring set‑piece‑strong sides in tight matches or valuing aerial scorers in big‑game contexts—are overshadowed by unplanned exposure in games with little or no informational advantage, flattening the long‑term benefit of set‑piece analysis. Keeping football‑specific bankroll and decision rules clearly separated from other gaming activity is essential if the structural value of dead‑ball expertise is to be preserved rather than lost in overall volatility.
Summary
Recent seasons have turned the Premier League into a genuine set‑piece era, with a record proportion of goals arriving from corners and free‑kicks and teams like Liverpool, Wolves, Nottingham Forest, Burnley, Everton and Manchester City leading the current rankings for dead‑ball strikes. Understanding how those clubs design, staff and execute their routines—and when that strength matters more than open‑play patterns—provides a sharper framework for evaluating matches and interpreting odds than goal totals alone, especially in tight or tactically cautious fixtures where a single set‑piece can decide everything.