3 ms·

> the problem is that time of possession is a decent proxy for better team Decent, but by no means perfect. In Atletico's La Liga winning season of 2013-2014,

> the problem is that time of possession is a decent proxy for better team Decent, but by no means perfect. In Atletico's La Liga winning season of 2013-2014, they enjoyed exactly 50% possession. The following year they actually had 45%, despite finishing 3rd. Leicester City won the league with 46% possession. The problem is not just the presentation of statistics, it's the assumption that if you do the same things title winning teams do, you will enjoy the same success. It may well have been that hoofing down the field worked for some teams (it did for Leicester), but that is no guarantee of success if you don't happen to have a fast center forward and a holding midfielder who runs like crazy. On the other hand, Spain won Euro 2012 without a proper center forward (Torres won the golden boot with only 3 goals, but don't let that fool you, Spain's goals were widely spread out and Torres scored one in the final long after the game was won) by playing possession football.

gerdesj 10y ago
Going into a discussion related to statistics with a couple of anecdotes - tut. Reep only seems to have followed one team - albeit playing against many others. If he'd got other like minded people to do the same for their teams (ideally all teams in all leagues!) as well then that would help to control one or two of the huge number of variables. Then as the article alludes, if he'd looked at the sequences that lead to a score, rather than working back from a score to the sequence that lead to it, something really useful might have emerged. One thing is certain however: whatever the English national (soccer) team decides is a good idea - it isn't. It's a bit embarrassing to be honest.