- This topic has 12 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well, apparently not according to the BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33757354
Myth: Possession equals success
When a team that had the majority of possession loses, they are often called unlucky.
But while it is true that over a whole Premier League season the top sides enjoy more possession than those lower down the table, in individual games last season the side with more of the ball won only slightly more often than they lost.
In fact, if you looked at all 380 top-flight games last season, the team that had more possession won 155, drew 93 and lost 132. Divide that by 10 to get a 38-game season and Possession FC would have won 57 points – leaving them eighth in the table.
Stats showing possession
Crystal Palace have had the lowest possession level of any top-flight team in each of the last two seasons and yet finished comfortably in mid-table both times, while West Brom won 1-0 at Old Trafford last term with only 20% of the ball.
Possession is an indicator of a side’s style and strategy rather than its success.What you’re talking about there Egg is known as direct football, it works, it’s effective. It’s what took us through the leagues under Jewell and was continued by Steve Bruce.
When Martinez came along he played a different way, which was largely ineffective and boring.For some reason our preferred way of playing has become the Martinez way, when the way we played under Jewell is proven to get you out of these leagues and at times, though reasonably direct we played some fantastic stuff, at pace, keeping possession and scoring goals.
I didn’t see much possession football being played last night and we were just as ineffective.
Lack of fire power is one thing but both last night and at Coventry we were equally poor in defence. I’ve not seen anything in Morgan or O’Donnell yet that suggests we have that makings of any kind of solid defence and if we are relying on McCann and Barnett on a regular basis then we really are going to struggle.
Well, apparently not according to the BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33757354Myth: Possession equals success
……….In fact, if you looked at all 380 top-flight games last season, the team that had more possession won 155, drew 93 and lost 132. Divide that by 10 to get a 38-game season and Possession FC would have won 57 points – leaving them eighth in the table………Egg, Nice post. The only flaw is with the extrapoloated stats. You’ve just taken the flat average of a team who has more possession. You could obviously take the opposite view that shows the team with least possession only getting 49 points by comparison. So what. All we’ve doen there is show that on average, teams who have more possession will get more points than those who don’t.
As you rightly say, some teams will sometimes win games with only 20% possession. The key thing though is that they probably won’t do that all of the time.
how times change here i was thinking it was goals that was the key oh well we live and learn
onwards and downwardsWell, apparently not according to the BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33757354
Myth: Possession equals success
……….In fact, if you looked at all 380 top-flight games last season, the team that had more possession won 155, drew 93 and lost 132. Divide that by 10 to get a 38-game season and Possession FC would have won 57 points – leaving them eighth in the table………Egg, Nice post. The only flaw is with the extrapoloated stats. You’ve just taken the flat average of a team who has more possession. You could obviously take the opposite view that shows the team with least possession only getting 49 points by comparison. So what. All we’ve doen there is show that on average, teams who have more possession will get more points than those who don’t.
As you rightly say, some teams will sometimes win games with only 20% possession. The key thing though is that they probably won’t do that all of the time.[/quote]
I’ve not done anything aside from copy and paste from the BBC.
how times change here i was thinking it was goals that was the key oh well we live and learn
onwards and downwardsThe article pretty much tells you that
I’ve not done anything aside from copy and paste from the BBC.OK Egg, point taken. However, the point I raised is still valid …….. it’s just that it’s the report which misrepresents the stats, not you.
As it happens, I fully agree that we should be aiming to score more goals than we do (obviously !), but it’s still a fair argument to say that the opposition can’t score if they don’t have the ball.
I must admit that we were far from just a tippy tappy possesion type team last night. It was far from a slow build up type game at all. At times we moved forward really well it was simply some performances let the side down. Perkins played a great role and if others showed the movement of Flores and Jacobs and if there was a little more out wide putting in crosses then we won’t be far off mid table by Christmas but it could be easier if we played with two strikers or when the game is winnable get another on to push for a win. It certainly looked like we will see more than the slow horrible build ups from the back. Flores run in the first half was Ricky Villa like and Jacobs run looked George Best like and a breath of fresh air compared to what we saw last year, all such a shame that substituting Grigg cost us the game.
Weak spots guess who?funnyly enough the two that Bolton didn’t want.I’ve not done anything aside from copy and paste from the BBC.
OK Egg, point taken. However, the point I raised is still valid …….. it’s just that it’s the report which misrepresents the stats, not you.
As it happens, I fully agree that we should be aiming to score more goals than we do (obviously !), but it’s still a fair argument to say that the opposition can’t score if they don’t have the ball.[/quote]
Depends if they do with it what we generally do with it!
Teams been happy to let us have all the possession we want for quite some time.
Loads of possession in our own half just gives the opposition a better chance of dispossessing us in potentially dangerous areas and thus cuts out the proverbial middleman of all the build up play!
I must admit that we were far from just a tippy tappy possesion type team last night. It was far from a slow build up type game at all. At times we moved forward really wellWhich was one of the positives I mentioned.
The problem then I thought was we declined to shoot or create the chance and decided to take that extra 1 or 2 passes and then we end up trying to score a Worldie from the edge of the box. Grigg looked the best bet to take a shot and really impressed me TBH.
I think Odelusi could be a good signing as well if we play the ball to his feet and let him run at defenders like Jacobs was. We seemed to be pumping long high balls to him from the back which he is never going to win.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
