Passing Backwards and Going the Same Way (1 Viewer)

The Philosopher

Well-Known Member
It might just be me but England under Southgate became boring with constantly passing backwards. No one wanted to lose the ball or try anything daring.

Since the various spreadsheet analysis team came in to CCFC a year or so ago we seem to have become a lot more constrained and likely to pass backwards, even late on in the game when we need to have a hail-Mary go at it.

Do the players get taken through their performances after matches and scored on their “passes completed”, “retained possession”, “progression opportunity outcome move” or whatever and is that impacting the style of play?

Eg.

I think Sheaf is a great player. I bet his stats are amazing in terms of completed passes. I bet he gets good stats for “passes completed in attacking areas such as outside penalty box”, he would do, because he doesn’t shoot as often as he should and prefers to lay off.

I bet O’Hare had relatively poor stats, he was more likely to try and run and get a foul in a dangerous area. This might have led to a high stat for “possession lost”

Is over analysis of player statistics reducing creativity?

Were things like stats a factor in not breaking the bank to keep O’Hare? Did DK get presented with “stats” and feel that O’Hare flattered to deceive? Would we have been better to spend and extra £4m on O’Hare’s wages and have him as an asset on the pitch and on the books rather than EMC?

We seem to try to complete loads of little passes around our own defence more and more as time goes on.

The attacking, free flowing game that used to play has become more and more restricted.

Some of our recruiting seems totally bizarre, it wouldn’t surprise me if Kitching had great “stats” at Barnsley - I can’t see a £4m defender there, personally. Do the scouting team spend as much time actually watching players as they should?

I can’t see Ady and Big Dennis will have been big fans of the DK methods of scouting by spreadsheet or selection by stats. I had them down as old fashioned football guys. MR seemed to have less input as time went on into recruiting.

It was interesting to hear the DK interview about the “deck”. It’s almost as though he sees players as football top-trump cards; “possession 88, passing completed 75, zonal adherence 91, age-to-potential profit rating, £6m”. Etc.

I do agree that some decent analysis is worthwhile.

Have we become a club of over-analysis though or is that just tin-foil-hat deduction?

Any ITK have any feedback from players / staff, present / past who have suggested this?

Genuinely curious.
 

M3rcian

Well-Known Member
It's an interesting point and I do hope the only stat that matters is WDL, but I am reminded of this;
 

andrew.roberts

Well-Known Member
Good post. Whether it's all gone a bit "moneyball" is definitely a possibility but the players seem to be at a loss as to what to do when we eventually reach the final third after alot of fannying around at the back and in midfield.
O'Hare had that ability to unsettle defences by running into pockets of space and not being afraid to take a man on although he often lost the ball. We no longer have anyone capable of doing that so we tend to stutter when we reach that area of the pitch which in turn gives the opposition the time to reorganise.
Playing Torp as an AM could possibly help unlock defences because he often sees and executes that early ball very well but then we'd need the movement of the front runners to be on his wavelength.
Simms's control is poor at times but his movement I feel is underestimated and he has a very good first touch lay off which might be put to good use if Norman could learn how to play off him.
Just my tuppence worth.
 

napolimp

Well-Known Member
It might just be me but England under Southgate became boring with constantly passing backwards. No one wanted to lose the ball or try anything daring.

Since the various spreadsheet analysis team came in to CCFC a year or so ago we seem to have become a lot more constrained and likely to pass backwards, even late on in the game when we need to have a hail-Mary go at it.

Do the players get taken through their performances after matches and scored on their “passes completed”, “retained possession”, “progression opportunity outcome move” or whatever and is that impacting the style of play?

Eg.

I think Sheaf is a great player. I bet his stats are amazing in terms of completed passes. I bet he gets good stats for “passes completed in attacking areas such as outside penalty box”, he would do, because he doesn’t shoot as often as he should and prefers to lay off.

I bet O’Hare had relatively poor stats, he was more likely to try and run and get a foul in a dangerous area. This might have led to a high stat for “possession lost”

Is over analysis of player statistics reducing creativity?

Were things like stats a factor in not breaking the bank to keep O’Hare? Did DK get presented with “stats” and feel that O’Hare flattered to deceive? Would we have been better to spend and extra £4m on O’Hare’s wages and have him as an asset on the pitch and on the books rather than EMC?

We seem to try to complete loads of little passes around our own defence more and more as time goes on.

The attacking, free flowing game that used to play has become more and more restricted.

Some of our recruiting seems totally bizarre, it wouldn’t surprise me if Kitching had great “stats” at Barnsley - I can’t see a £4m defender there, personally. Do the scouting team spend as much time actually watching players as they should?

I can’t see Ady and Big Dennis will have been big fans of the DK methods of scouting by spreadsheet or selection by stats. I had them down as old fashioned football guys. MR seemed to have less input as time went on into recruiting.

It was interesting to hear the DK interview about the “deck”. It’s almost as though he sees players as football top-trump cards; “possession 88, passing completed 75, zonal adherence 91, age-to-potential profit rating, £6m”. Etc.

I do agree that some decent analysis is worthwhile.

Have we become a club of over-analysis though or is that just tin-foil-hat deduction?

Any ITK have any feedback from players / staff, present / past who have suggested this?

Genuinely curious.

If this is true, then Bobby Thomas has definitely not got the message.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Good post. Whether it's all gone a bit "moneyball" is definitely a possibility but the players seem to be at a loss as to what to do when we eventually reach the final third after alot of fannying around at the back and in midfield.
O'Hare had that ability to unsettle defences by running into pockets of space and not being afraid to take a man on although he often lost the ball. We no longer have anyone capable of doing that so we tend to stutter when we reach that area of the pitch which in turn gives the opposition the time to reorganise.
Playing Torp as an AM could possibly help unlock defences because he often sees and executes that early ball very well but then we'd need the movement of the front runners to be on his wavelength.
Simms's control is poor at times but his movement I feel is underestimated and he has a very good first touch lay off which might be put to good use if Norman could learn how to play off him.
Just my tuppence worth.

Some of Torps 1 touch passing was decent when ge came on and it definitely made us look like we were going about things with a bit more purpose.
 

Major Tom

Well-Known Member
I blame Pep, he's killed off attractive football in this country with his passing across the back and tippy tappy football :ROFLMAO:
 

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
Should have kept Palmer

Let's see if anyone's going to close him down this Saturday, at every opportunity he will have a shot from long range.
 

LilleSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
I see so many goals conceded - and hairy situations generated - from trying to bring the ball out from the back under a strong opposition press. Not only Cov either. It seems to be just what you do nowadays.

Maybe managers and coaches reckon the benefits overall outweigh the odd glaring mistake?

Anyway, I don't hold with it.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
If this is true, then Bobby Thomas has definitely not got the message.
I'm your biased opinion perhaps. Maybe look at his stats?
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
It might just be me but England under Southgate became boring with constantly passing backwards. No one wanted to lose the ball or try anything daring.

Since the various spreadsheet analysis team came in to CCFC a year or so ago we seem to have become a lot more constrained and likely to pass backwards, even late on in the game when we need to have a hail-Mary go at it.

Do the players get taken through their performances after matches and scored on their “passes completed”, “retained possession”, “progression opportunity outcome move” or whatever and is that impacting the style of play?

Eg.

I think Sheaf is a great player. I bet his stats are amazing in terms of completed passes. I bet he gets good stats for “passes completed in attacking areas such as outside penalty box”, he would do, because he doesn’t shoot as often as he should and prefers to lay off.

I bet O’Hare had relatively poor stats, he was more likely to try and run and get a foul in a dangerous area. This might have led to a high stat for “possession lost”

Is over analysis of player statistics reducing creativity?

Were things like stats a factor in not breaking the bank to keep O’Hare? Did DK get presented with “stats” and feel that O’Hare flattered to deceive? Would we have been better to spend and extra £4m on O’Hare’s wages and have him as an asset on the pitch and on the books rather than EMC?

We seem to try to complete loads of little passes around our own defence more and more as time goes on.

The attacking, free flowing game that used to play has become more and more restricted.

Some of our recruiting seems totally bizarre, it wouldn’t surprise me if Kitching had great “stats” at Barnsley - I can’t see a £4m defender there, personally. Do the scouting team spend as much time actually watching players as they should?

I can’t see Ady and Big Dennis will have been big fans of the DK methods of scouting by spreadsheet or selection by stats. I had them down as old fashioned football guys. MR seemed to have less input as time went on into recruiting.

It was interesting to hear the DK interview about the “deck”. It’s almost as though he sees players as football top-trump cards; “possession 88, passing completed 75, zonal adherence 91, age-to-potential profit rating, £6m”. Etc.

I do agree that some decent analysis is worthwhile.

Have we become a club of over-analysis though or is that just tin-foil-hat deduction?

Any ITK have any feedback from players / staff, present / past who have suggested this?

Genuinely curious.
Brentford and Brighton prove the stats based models do work. Our fragile confidence, negative xg and inability to do basic defending are more contributory factors. I have faith it will turn, but pray it's not too late.

We create enough chances so I don't see it a negative, I just wish we'd do it a bit crisper/quicker. The idea is built around drawing the opposition out of their basic shape and get them to press. A quick two pass around the press opens space, but we then seem intent on going back around allowing them to reset rather than getting a quick ball into the middle.
 

The Philosopher

Well-Known Member
Brentford and Brighton prove the stats based models do work. Our fragile confidence, negative xg and inability to do basic defending are more contributory factors. I have faith it will turn, but pray it's not too late.

We create enough chances so I don't see it a negative, I just wish we'd do it a bit crisper/quicker. The idea is built around drawing the opposition out of their basic shape and get them to press. A quick two pass around the press opens space, but we then seem intent on going back around allowing them to reset rather than getting a quick ball into the middle.
Yes, that’s the point I’m trying to make.

Kinda,

The “crisp two pass around the press” is great but then the third pass…..

Player has a choice:

Incisive ball with risk that has 70% chance of being “a successful pass” in their individual score card on their “deck”

or

Easy ball sidewards / backwards that has a 95% chance of being a “successful pass” and the player “stats” improve.

Do you see what I’m saying?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top