The FIFA Strategy of High Volume Shooting: Does It Work in the World Cup?

So called "video game strategies" revolve around high octane offenses that are designed to generate scoring. Applying these strategies to real life has been demonstrated in both football and basketball, including whether teams go for it on 4th down enough in the NFL, and utilizing efficient scoring in the NBA (shooting threes and layups).

Ultimately my question was whether my "shoot enough times and eventually you'll score" FIFA strategy holds up at the highest level: the World Cup. I analyzed all games from 2002, 2006, and 2010, and then generated a TOBIT censored regression model (with standard errors clustered by year) that uses Shots and Shots on Goal to predict the number of goals scored by each team. The model was as follows:

Goals = -.6120012 + -.0535694*Shots + .3903682*Shots_on_Goal

Both effects were statistically significant, and these coefficients indicate that shots on goal has the larger impact on how many goals are scored. This makes sense since shots on goal are higher quality chances.

The average number of shots on goal for a team in these three World Cups was 5.3, and ranged from 0 to 15. So, I was interested in looking at only the upper end of this range: teams that took 9 or more shots on goal. 

In the 192 games played involving 384 teams, only 49 teams attempted 9+ shots on goal. Within this group, only 12 of them had a positive residual: i.e. they scored more than would be expected by the above model. The other 37 teams scored less than expected, and on average, teams that had 9+ shots on goal scored 0.09 goals less per match than the model predicts. 

This offers the conclusion that high volume shooting does not generate more goals; rather, quality chances are more indicative of success, and teams that "park the bus" and are defensive-oriented (like Italy) have more success than their high-shooting counterparts.