Ultimate Football (Soccer) Thread (2011-2012)

[Nadkor]

Btw, I don't quite understand this whole fetishisation of passing accuracy, especially when we're talking about the defensive players. In Germany nobody is going crazy when Papadopoulos or Hummels are completing nearly (or exactly) 100% of their passes.

It's a cause-and-effect thing. People see Barca kicking the shit out of the rest of Europe and see they have a high pass completion rate. Ergo, to them, these two are linked. Of course, this is an extremely opportune time to wheel out my two favourite sayings:



1. Correlation does not imply causation!
2. People are stupid.

Eh, no. Not at all.

If you have a midfielder whose job it is, once they've got the ball, to either
a) move the ball on to a more advanced player in order to build an attack, or
b) move the ball to his midfield partner and other nearby players in order to retain possession
Then, ideally, you want a neat, accurate, and reliable passer of the ball. Passing statistics are a relevant indicator of such a player. This should not be confused with being the only requirement, or the only relevant indicator, but it is one of the requirements and one of the relevant indicators.

So an "fetishisation" with passing statistics (and it is not fetishisation at all - that would imply unhealthily focusing on pass completion at the expense of other stats which, if you read my previous posts on Carrick, you will see is certainly not the case. In fact, I think I've made it pretty clear that relying on one statistic to show anything is fundamentally flawed and can lead to false conclusions, but that if you see a pattern emerging where all of the relevant statistics show the player in a favourable light then there are fairly reliable conclusions to be drawn. If anything the problem lies in people noting passing statistics alone when they're listed with other relevant stats and claiming that they can't prove anything on their own) is nothing more than highlighting when a player is doing a good job of fulfilling one of the requirements of his role.

[Miasto Lodz]

Here is Alonso's positional heatmap from Real's 4-1 defeat of Atheltico in towards the end of the last calendar year:
(Image)

Here is Carrick's positional heatmap from the game last night:
(Image)

Compare this and the first chart above (tackles, interceptions, and passes). The two players are clearly operating in similar areas - primarily in and around the centre circle.

As for the "fifth defender": Carrick compared to generic wingbacks.

[Miasto Lodz]

Apparently someone was editing or something. I couldn't see some of the images in Nadkor's post.

[I V Stalin]

It's a cause-and-effect thing. People see Barca kicking the shit out of the rest of Europe and see they have a high pass completion rate. Ergo, to them, these two are linked. Of course, this is an extremely opportune time to wheel out my two favourite sayings:



1. Correlation does not imply causation!
2. People are stupid.

Eh, no. Not at all.

If you have a midfielder whose job it is, once they've got the ball, to either
a) move the ball on to a more advanced player in order to build an attack, or
b) move the ball to his midfield partner and other nearby players in order to retain possession
Then, ideally, you want a neat, accurate, and reliable passer of the ball. Passing statistics are a relevant indicator of such a player. This should not be confused with being the only requirement, or the only relevant indicator, but it is one of the requirements and one of the relevant indicators.

So an "fetishisation" with passing statistics (and it is not fetishisation at all - that would imply unhealthily focusing on pass completion at the expense of other stats which, if you read my previous posts on Carrick, you will see is certainly not the case. In fact, I think I've made it pretty clear that relying on one statistic to show anything is fundamentally flawed and can lead to false conclusions, but that if you see a pattern emerging where all of the relevant statistics show the player in a favourable light then there are fairly reliable conclusions to be drawn. If anything the problem lies in people noting passing statistics alone when they're listed with other relevant stats and claiming that they can't prove anything on their own) is nothing more than highlighting when a player is doing a good job of fulfilling one of the requirements of his role.

I believe Miasto Lodz was speaking generally, not just taking your post into account. I know I certainly was. As Jonathan Wilson noted in a column today, "...it has become common to look at pass-completion rates and nod approvingly as they stretch beyond 90%". I can appreciate that Carrick is one of those players for whom passing accuracy is actually a useful statistic, far more so than, say, David Silva, who is far more inclined (and more likely to be in a position) to play through-balls into the box. My point was that it seems to have become de rigueur to claim that Barca's superiority is due to their high passing accuracy, when that is only part of the story.

However, if, like you say, one focuses on passing accuracy while ignoring (staying on the Carrick topic here) interceptions, it could be possible to draw incorrect conclusions. By the way, I think only one player - Stiliyan Petrov - has a significantly higher interceptions per game figure than Carrick this season. That is, unfortunately, taken from the stats in the Yahoo! fantasy football game, so make of that what you will.

-heatmaps 'n' that, snippety snip-

Can I ask where you got all those nifty heatmaps 'n' shit from?

[Serrland]

Shearer is talking up Hoddle again. I mean, he was a good enough manager of the national team, but would he be accepted by the ever-so-vicious sports tabloid media again? I mean, it was effectively the tabloids that forced his resignation back in 1999. That being said, he said a stupid, repulsive thing and he should never have even come close to saying it.

Thoughts on Hoddle?

I can't see it happening.

I'd rather see 'Arry (because I love him so much. Not really as a manager, though...), Hodgson, or if they decide it's okay to go with a non-Englishman, Martin O'Neill as a sleeper (not sure he'd take the job if offered, though).

[Osarius]

By the way, I think only one player - Stiliyan Petrov - has a significantly higher interceptions per game figure than Carrick this season.

That's probably because Petrov's supporting cast at Villa this season has typically included inexperienced players (Herd, Delph) and/or more attack-minded players (Ireland, Bannan), leaving him to shoulder more of the defensive duties, and thus, the burden of breaking up opposition play.

I made a similar point about Lucas and Carrick, iirc.

Carrick's stats are impressive, and he is a very good player (the passing range and vision alone make that true for me) ... but I honestly believe that his stats wouldn't be so impressive if he were still at Tottenham (for example) or if Man Utd played a different system. Carrick's performances for England are seldom anywhere near as effective as they are for Man Utd, for example. It's the difference in supporting cast and tactical system, I'm certain of it. Man Utd make Carrick look better than he actually is. That doesn't make him "not a good player", obviously... but if a team bought him on the grounds that "he was integral to Utd's title win, so he can do something similar for us" they'd likely be disappointed.

This whole comparison of central midfielders is something that I've taken a different view on in recent months, though. I noticed recently that the team I coach has six central midfielders... with wildly varying different strengths and attributes, different values to the team in different systems. I used to have that simplistic "central midfielders need to be able to pass well, run a fair bit, and put in a decent tackle (just in case)" but its not that simple. Playing the kid who loves to dribble at opponents and shoot from distance alongside the playmaker leaves us too open. Playing my deep-lying playmaker and defensive midfielder leaves us short up front. And so on... You need a balance, of sorts, to get the best out of everyone (or sometimes just one or two key players). And that's what Sir Alex is doing with Carrick, I think.

[Nadkor]

Here is Alonso's positional heatmap from Real's 4-1 defeat of Atheltico in towards the end of the last calendar year:
(Image)

Here is Carrick's positional heatmap from the game last night:
(Image)

Compare this and the first chart above (tackles, interceptions, and passes). The two players are clearly operating in similar areas - primarily in and around the centre circle.

Except that your comparison of on specific part on each rather than the overall similarities is inaccurate.

The heatmap on the left (Alonso) shows his average positions during a game. The heatmap on the right (Carrick) shows where he's making his tackles, interceptions, and passes. The other Carrick heatmaps show that he makes the largest number of his tackles and interceptions in the middle-left square in front of the penalty box. This somewhat skews that particular map, which is to be expected as it focuses mainly on Carrick's defensive work and therefore shows pretty much only his defensive positioning. As a result, there should be little surprise that it shows primarily defensive positioning. So we need a more useful map for a direct comparison.

Coming up is a compilation showing Carrick's average positions for all Premier League games this season (with the exceptions of Blackburn(h) and Wigan(h) where he was playing specifically as a centre back). Compare this with the following compilation of Alonso's average positions for his last 10 La Liga games (because I couldn't be bothered doing all of them, frankly).



As can be clearly seen, there are a few similarities between Alonso's positioning and Carrick's, particularly in where they play in what can fairly be assumed to be defensive phases. But what's most surprising is that, if anything, Carrick seems to operate more regularly further up the pitch than Alonso. This is a surprise to me, actually. So it seems I was wrong: Carrick is not that much like Xabi Alonso. Not because he sits deeper, the opposite: because while he plays deep like Alonso in defensive phases, he also operates further up the pitch than Alonso.

Basically, in a defensive phase both operate where you would expect the space between the opposition's forward line and their midfield to be. If the opposition is playing a number 10 or an attacking midfielder this helps reduce their influence, with clever positioning they can cut out passes from the midfield looking for further forward players (see the number of interceptions good players in this position tend to make), and a good player here will help force the attack out to the flanks where the full-back and either a back-tracking winger or the centre-back can cut their space out and reduce their effectiveness, hopefully leading to the attacking move breaking down (an outcome that includes conceding a corner). Both seek to retain possession in this area using the other midfielders or the centre-backs.

The difference between the two, from what I can see, is that when their team moves into an attacking phase, Alonso doesn't generally stray much further than the half-way line, while Carrick moves forward to take up position up against the other team's midfield - essentially between the opposition team's forwards and their midfield. The positioning map shows a very distinct break roughly along the half-way line between Carrick's positioning when the team is in a defensive phase and when the team is in an attacking phase. In an attacking phase he seeks to do a number of things - primarily he seeks to win possession back through tackling and intercepting (and we can see from other charts that he tends to intercept more, which is the more helpful of the two when in the opposition's half) and closing the other team down - helping peg them back into their own half. Then we could say that he was two secondary roles of equal priority. His first secondary role, not to denote priority between the two secondary roles, is to help retain possession in this area by using his midfield partner, or Rooney dropping deeper. His second secondary role, if you will, is to directly support attacking moves in the final third, playing balls out to the wingers, attempting balls through the opposition's midfield to Rooney, if he's playing, or slightly further forward to the other striker (if we're playing with one). Once he gives possession forward he steps forward ready to attempt to win the ball back if possession is lost again.

If Carrick is a "fifth defender", what is Alonso? A libero? Clearly neither of these things are true.

As for the "fifth defender": Carrick compared to generic wingbacks.
(Image)

You're comparing completely different areas of the pitch. If you were comparing Carrick with a set of centre backs that showed a strong overlap in positioning you might have the beginnings of a point. However, Carrick clearly operates in a position ahead of the defence, and very definitely in the midfield. He is a defensively minded midfield, but he is not an extra defender.

[Nadkor]

This whole comparison of central midfielders is something that I've taken a different view on in recent months, though. I noticed recently that the team I coach has six central midfielders... with wildly varying different strengths and attributes, different values to the team in different systems. I used to have that simplistic "central midfielders need to be able to pass well, run a fair bit, and put in a decent tackle (just in case)" but its not that simple.

So...what you're saying is that you've realised that not every midfielder should be Scott Parker...

Playing the kid who loves to dribble at opponents and shoot from distance alongside the playmaker leaves us too open. Playing my deep-lying playmaker and defensive midfielder leaves us short up front. And so on... You need a balance, of sorts, to get the best out of everyone (or sometimes just one or two key players). And that's what Sir Alex is doing with Carrick, I think.

...and that a well balanced midfield will generally be much better than one involving your two most skillful players, or your two most creative players, or whatever.

This is like Football Tactics 101, though

[Nadkor]

-heatmaps 'n' that, snippety snip-

Can I ask where you got all those nifty heatmaps 'n' shit from?

The Guardian used to have a Chalkboard section, where you could get all this kind of info. They've closed it (although you can look in their archives for heatmaps and other chalkboards people saved before the section was closed). The other ones showing a pitch and a stadium and that come from the ESPN Soccernet website.

The Alonso and Carrick compilations from two posts ago I put together in Photoshop by combining heatmaps from the ESPN website

[Osarius]

So...what you're saying is that you've realised that not every midfielder should be Scott Parker...

...and that a well balanced midfield will generally be much better than one involving your two most skillful players, or your two most creative players, or whatever.

Haha, I already sort of knew this though. Years of playing football games and watching lazy punditry on TV and so on kinda just told me its what I need to do. I think I just understand it better now, rather than on some base, instinctive level. You know how every kid can tell that its good to have an attacking and a defending guy in the middle? But he can't explain why? I knew I should do it a certain way but I was never really sure why. Experimenting with various combinations of my 6 players has made it all a bit clearer.

I still think every player on the team should be a capable passer with decent stamina and the ability to put in a solid tackle if necessary, though. This is why I've been able to play my backup goalkeeper in centre midfield, a centre back at right wingback, and a left back up front this season. Basic technique and athletic requirements, right? They don't have to excel at these things, just understand why they need them.

The change in my own perspective means I can now explain my decisions better to frustrated thirteen year olds, though. Instead of asking square pegs to fit into round holes because that's all we had (and being confused when they can't adapt), I can tell the square peg "you're on the bench today because..." and so on. They appreciate that. They even accept it sometimes, like "fair point, but if we need someone to [do what I'm good at] can I come on?" haha.

Man, I tell everyone that coaching football is making me a better player and they get confused. It's hard to explain if you're not really familiar with tactics.

[Nadkor]

So...what you're saying is that you've realised that not every midfielder should be Scott Parker...

...and that a well balanced midfield will generally be much better than one involving your two most skillful players, or your two most creative players, or whatever.

Haha, I already sort of knew this though. Years of playing football games and watching lazy punditry on TV and so on kinda just told me its what I need to do. I think I just understand it better now, rather than on some base, instinctive level. You know how every kid can tell that its good to have an attacking and a defending guy in the middle? But he can't explain why? I knew I should do it a certain way but I was never really sure why. Experimenting with various combinations of my 6 players has made it all a bit clearer.

I still think every player on the team should be a capable passer with decent stamina and the ability to put in a solid tackle if necessary, though. This is why I've been able to play my backup goalkeeper in centre midfield, a centre back at right wingback, and a left back up front this season. Basic technique and athletic requirements, right? They don't have to excel at these things, just understand why they need them.

The change in my own perspective means I can now explain my decisions better to frustrated thirteen year olds, though. Instead of asking square pegs to fit into round holes because that's all we had (and being confused when they can't adapt), I can tell the square peg "you're on the bench today because..." and so on. They appreciate that. They even accept it sometimes, like "fair point, but if we need someone to [do what I'm good at] can I come on?" haha.

Man, I tell everyone that coaching football is making me a better player and they get confused. It's hard to explain if you're not really familiar with tactics.

If you're genuinely interested in tactics, and you'll need to be because it's probably a very dull read otherwise, I wholeheartedly recommend Jonathan Wilson's excellent book Inverting The Pyramid: A History Of Football Tactics. It's really very good. Also his column in the Guardian/Observer is well worth a read.

[Nadkor]

Actually, for an example of how using one statistic (and specifically pass completion) can lead you astray: Leon Britton had, as of the middle of January, completed 93.3% of his passes this season, more than Xavi Hernandez. Yet I can say with a pretty high degree of confidence that there aren't many people who would pick Britton over Xavi should they be given the choice.

[Osarius]

If you're genuinely interested in tactics, and you'll need to be because it's probably a very dull read otherwise, I wholeheartedly recommend Jonathan Wilson's excellent book Inverting The Pyramid: A History Of Football Tactics. It's really very good. Also his column in the Guardian/Observer is well worth a read.

One step ahead on that one. I finished reading that recently. Picked up some other stuff too. Been slowly trying to accumulate more knowledge over the past couple years. Reading is one thing, though... seeing is another, you know?

Either way, I figure its all helpful reading material. I intend to advance up the coaching ladder over the next few years. Already done level one.
And let's face it... England needs all the help it can get at grass roots level >_>

[Hossaim]

Yes, but we don't need xabi alonso. We need fuckinG iniesta, we need ozil. We need Silva. WE NEED SOMEONE THAT CAN BRING IN GOALS FORM THE MIDFIELD. CARRICK CAN'T, SO FUCK CARRICK.

[Utopia FTW]

Yes, but we don't need xabi alonso. We need fuckinG iniesta, we need ozil. We need Silva. WE NEED SOMEONE THAT CAN BRING IN GOALS FORM THE MIDFIELD. CARRICK CAN'T, SO FUCK CARRICK.

Carrick is a solid squad player. We should get Ozil, Sneijder and Kaka.

[Cromarty]

Yes, but we don't need xabi alonso. We need fuckinG iniesta, we need ozil. We need Silva. WE NEED SOMEONE THAT CAN BRING IN GOALS FORM THE MIDFIELD. CARRICK CAN'T, SO FUCK CARRICK.

Carrick is a solid squad player. We should get Ozil, Sneijder and Kaka.

Clearly we can afford to get all of those 3.

Edit: and by solid squad player you mean consistently one of our better players in midfield?

[Utopia FTW]

Carrick is a solid squad player. We should get Ozil, Sneijder and Kaka.

Clearly we can afford to get all of those 3.

Edit: and by solid squad player you mean consistently one of our better players in midfield?

Aye, he's fairly dependable and productive at times. But the problem is that we have a weak midfield. So he is one of the better ones.

[Gravonia]

Spurs are on their way to Wembley.

I however, might have to watch it on TV as, although I've been to quite a few games at White Hart Lane this season, a lot of those have been on my friends parents season tickets so I might not have enough points on my own membership card

So anyway, If we win the FA cup but finish 4th behind Arsenal, who gets North London bragging rights? I say Spurs but only if we win the qualifying games to get into the competition proper.

[Nadkor]

Yes, but we don't need xabi alonso. We need fuckinG iniesta, we need ozil. We need Silva. WE NEED SOMEONE THAT CAN BRING IN GOALS FORM THE MIDFIELD. CARRICK CAN'T, SO FUCK CARRICK.

No, no, we need Michael Carrick, or a player similar to him. But we also need someone who can bring goals from midfield. As Osarius correctly notes, a midfield needs a balanced variety of abilities and roles. In Carrick we have someone who fulfills one particular and necessary (for our style of play, at least) role. If we didn't have Carrick then, yes, we would need Xabi Alonso. The fact that we have Carrick means that we don't need Alonso.

We very definitely need a midfielder that has goals in him to go alongside Carrick, but we also need to keep a balanced midfield in order for it to, you know, work.

Carrick's biggest problem, at the minute, is that people don't understand what he does and demand that we get an Iniesta, Ozil, or Silva instead of him. I'm trying to show, for the sake of people understanding the basics of how to put together a good football team, that we don't need someone like that instead of Carrick, we need someone like that to go with Carrick.

[Central Lothian]

You don't see this every day: Five players - three from Bradford and two from Crawley - getting sent off *in* the dressing room *after* the final whistle had been blown.

It must have been bad - to quote Bradford's manager: "I can't believe this has happened. I have never been in a situation before where a ref has come into the dressing room, pulled players on one side and sent them off. He wouldn't allow me in there."

[Acivica]

Old Firm...

I think one of my bar buddies put it best. That official didn't deserve to be fired. He deserved to be hung drawn and quartered.

I think one of my bar buddies put it best. That official didn't deserve to be fired. He deserved to be hung drawn and quartered.

Careful now. We mustn't speak ill of SPL officials, lest they go on strike again...

Sunderland!

[Hossaim]

Fact is, carrick has little to no skill, he takes at least 3 seconds on the ball, and most of his passes are short sideways shitty ones that accopmlish nothing besides getting the ball to someone who can do fuck all with it. One of your best midfeilders? Maybey, but our midfeild is shit. One of the best in the league?

[Cromarty]

Fact is, carrick has little to no skill, he takes at least 3 seconds on the ball, and most of his passes are short sideways shitty ones that accopmlish nothing besides getting the ball to someone who can do fuck all with it. One of your best midfeilders? Maybey, but our midfeild is shit. One of the best in the league?

[Serrland]

After Chelsea's nice CL away win, is it time to start thinking that Di Matteo should get the job beyond a caretaker role?

[Forsher]

Fact is, carrick has little to no skill, he takes at least 3 seconds on the ball, and most of his passes are short sideways shitty ones that accopmlish nothing besides getting the ball to someone who can do fuck all with it. One of your best midfeilders? Maybey, but our midfeild is shit. One of the best in the league?

Make a good netballer then...

Seriously, he sounds pretty good.