The Value of Possession - The Swansea Example

[Rosco]

I think Modo said in a thread today that he didn't have to tell anybody the importance of possession, especially in an away game.

I'm in the its not how much you've got, it's what you do with it that counts (in all aspects of life for that matter) and here's a great example of why:

Top of the possession and pass accuracy tables.

13th in the league.

 

[cloggypop]

Where do they stand in wages paid?

 

[Rosco]

Where do they stand in wages paid?

Probably in the bottom 5 I'd guess

 

[cloggypop]

Overachieving while playing decent footy then.

 

[Rosco]

Overachieving while playing decent footy then.

I don't see it lasting -

It looks like they struck gold with players they came up with and they're struggling to replicate it with more money spend

 

[Dreambeliever]

Pace and movement will beat it everyday.

 

[Modo]

Of course what you do with it is more important, but you need to have the ball to do something with it right?
Where are the other teams?

Here's the top ten list:

1 Swansea 59.7
2 Southampton 57.5
3 Manchester City 56.4
4 Tottenham 56.4
5 Arsenal 56.2
6 Everton 55.8
7 Liverpool 55.1
8 Chelsea 54.9
9 Manchester United 54.7
10 Newcastle United 48.5

 

[King Binny]

It would also be a fairer indication if its with a fit starting XI? Michu and Hernandez have missed closed to 10 league games each whereas Worm and Dyer about 5-7.

 

[StevieM]

I don't see it lasting -

It looks like they struck gold with players they came up with and they're struggling to replicate it with more money spend

Maybe it's to do with the manager who brought them up.

You know.... if one were to believe that managers made any sort of difference.

 

[Red Mullet]

A single statistic isn't very telling. There are all sorts of reasons why having so much possession hasn't yielded a greater points tally for Swansea, some of them touch by other posters. Modo had the correct idea and looked at the top ten teams but he didn't go far enough. Let's look at the bottom teams and check their possession percentage. Odds are they are low and they match their position in the league.

Considering Swansea are 13th, essentially mid table and where hard and fast rules such as possession percentage becomes more grey than black and white then choosing Swansea as an example is only done by someone that doesn't know anything about statistics.










Or just a troll.

 

[juniormember]

Of course what you do with it is more important, but you need to have the ball to do something with it right?
Where are the other teams?

Here's the top ten list:

1 Swansea 59.7
2 Southampton 57.5
3 Manchester City 56.4
4 Tottenham 56.4
5 Arsenal 56.2
6 Everton 55.8
7 Liverpool 55.1
8 Chelsea 54.9
9 Manchester United 54.7
10 Newcastle United 48.5

Ha. So the one of the smallest spenders in the league go and stick by the possession philosophy, topping all other teams in those stats, and manages to stay in mid table and that's used as a criticism against them. OP clutching at straws here.
Here are the bottom teams in the possession stats. See a pattern?

14 Sunderland
15 Norwich
16 Cardiff
17 West Ham
18 Hull
19 Aston Villa
20 Crystal Palace

 

[Rosco]

Good teams look to have possession.
But having possession does not make you a good team is how I read it.

 

[Modo]

I don't think its that simple.

 

[Fabio]

I honestly believe this thread would have got different replies if it was someone else making the point.

I agree with Ross

Possession is important, but ultimately not the most important thing

 

[DHSC]

Keeping possession is the foundation to having a successful team. Definition of success depends on how much resources you have; but keeping possession would be a good start to achieving success.

 

[Modo]

I honestly believe this thread would have got different replies if it was someone else making the point.

I agree with Ross

Possession is important, but ultimately not the most important thing

But no one was claiming that it was the most important thing.
All I said in a separate thread was "I don't have to tell you how important possession is, especially away from home".

 

[mark1975]

Of course what you do with it is more important, but you need to have the ball to do something with it right?
Where are the other teams?

Here's the top ten list:

1 Swansea 59.7
2 Southampton 57.5
3 Manchester City 56.4
4 Tottenham 56.4
5 Arsenal 56.2
6 Everton 55.8
7 Liverpool 55.1
8 Chelsea 54.9
9 Manchester United 54.7
10 Newcastle United 48.5

To compound the point, us and City have blew everyone else out of the water in terms of goals scored, yet we lie 3rd & 7th respectively. And for all the possession counts, Swansea have conceded 30, that's someway above what even Newcastle and United have let in.

It's important but the quality it's associated with is more important. There's only two major factors why we have the second highest goals scored stat, and the worst goals conceded stat out of the top 7. We've got a brilliant strike force and a dodgy defense, we knew that already and don't need possession stats to weigh to make any particular difference.

 

[doctor_mac]

I honestly believe this thread would have got different replies if it was someone else making the point.

I agree with Ross

Possession is important, but ultimately not the most important thing

Yeah, and I think we kinda exemplify that. When BR came in and he was applying the full blown tiki-taka bellend philosophy, we were claiming 60% plus possession in lots of games that we drew or lost. After Christmas last year BR seemed to relax on the tiki-taka and we started mixing our play up, sometimes taking riskier and more direct passes rather than slavish adhering to the short passing game. Almost immediately we started to look more dangerous and scoring goals became easier.

 

[mark1975]

Yeah, and I think we kinda exemplify that. When BR came in and he was applying the full blown tiki-taka bellend philosophy, we were claiming 60% plus possession in lots of games that we drew or lost. After Christmas last year BR seemed to relax on the tiki-taka and we started mixing our play up, sometimes taking riskier and more direct passes rather than slavish adhering to the short passing game. Almost immediately we started to look more dangerous and scoring goals became easier.

Aye, the Enrique to Suarez = amazing goal against Newcastle, case in point.

 

[Rosco]

It would also be a fairer indication if its with a fit starting XI? Michu and Hernandez have missed closed to 10 league games each whereas Worm and Dyer about 5-7.

But only if you can do the same for every team in the league

 

[mark1975]

But only if you can do the same for every team in the league

Yeah, how many games did Gerrard, Sturridge and Suarez miss between them?

 

[Rosco]

But no one was claiming that it was the most important thing.
All I said in a separate thread was "I don't have to tell you how important possession is, especially away from home".

The point is you do have to tell me how important is.

 

[keniget]

Tata Martino has tried to loosen the tiki-taka grip on the Barca team since his arrival having supposedly said that they can be a little too predictable.

I think they're worse off for it however as most of the team is geared up towards playing that kind of football and now they're in some awkward inbetween where they're not quite getting the most out of their tiki-taka ability nor the benefits of being a more direct, 'normal' team.

Personally, I like to see teams maintain possession and control the game. There was a period under Rafa where we were fantastic at this. It might not have been the most delightful to watch in terms of pure entertainment but I used to love watching us squeeze the life out of teams.

But yeah, there are different ways in which a team can control the game I suppose. I would say that under Ferguson Utd dominated a lot of games but they did so in a very different way to the Barca model that many take inspiration from these days - they were incisive and very to the point in how they set up most of the time. Arguably however, that is what let them down in Europe a lot because you have to exhibit a bit more subtlety against the top sides.

 

[mark1975]

Football is cyclic though, there always comes a point where whichever style you adopt, hits a brick wall. Bayern at the turn of the century we're a dominant, direct, physical side, Barca brought us tika-taka. There's been a series of dominance by different approaches that has seen the likes of France, Arsenal, Bayern, Barca, Greece, Italy and us win major trophies.

Barca's style is embedded into their psyche, that's why it looks so poor now, that and the fact that a couple of players are past the peak of their powers, which coincided with Barca's best spell, which again shows that form and player quality is as or even more important than possession.

As for Rafa's side, it was still quite industrious, we weren't blowing teams away by dominating possession, we knew how to press and we're a strong group of lads with a fair mix of guile and pace. The spell that let us down that season saw us face the likes of Stoke at home passing the ball around without any real ability to carve an opening.

 

[Glen C]

Tata Martino has tried to loosen the tiki-taka grip on the Barca team since his arrival having supposedly said that they can be a little too predictable.

I think they're worse off for it however as most of the team is geared up towards playing that kind of football and now they're in some awkward inbetween where they're not quite getting the most out of their tiki-taka ability nor the benefits of being a more direct, 'normal' team.

Personally, I like to see teams maintain possession and control the game. There was a period under Rafa where we were fantastic at this. It might not have been the most delightful to watch in terms of pure entertainment but I used to love watching us squeeze the life out of teams.

But yeah, there are different ways in which a team can control the game I suppose. I would say that under Ferguson Utd dominated a lot of games but they did so in a very different way to the Barca model that many take inspiration from these days - they were incisive and very to the point in how they set up most of the time. Arguably however, that is what let them down in Europe a lot because you have to exhibit a bit more subtlety against the top sides.

Yeah I watched barca against athletico on the weekend and was surprised by how many long balls they played. Which is no good with a team full of midgets. They've definitely gone backwards. City definitely have a chance against them if they play like how they did on Saturday.

 

[doctor_mac]

Football is cyclic though, there always comes a point where whichever style you adopt, hits a brick wall. Bayern at the turn of the century we're a dominant, direct, physical side, Barca brought us tika-taka. There's been a series of dominance by different approaches that has seen the likes of France, Arsenal, Bayern, Barca, Greece, Italy and us win major trophies.

Barca's style is embedded into their psyche, that's why it looks so poor now, that and the fact that a couple of players are past the peak of their powers, which coincided with Barca's best spell, which again shows that form and player quality is as or even more important than possession.

As for Rafa's side, it was still quite industrious, we weren't blowing teams away by dominating possession, we knew how to press and we're a strong group of lads with a fair mix of guile and pace. The spell that let us down that season saw us face the likes of Stoke at home passing the ball around without any real ability to carve an opening.

Quite, and much of our threat under Rafa was based on playing directly. Early balls to Torres were one of our greatest sources of goals. One of Torres' problems in adapting to Chelsea was that their more deliberate build-up play didn't play to his strengths.

 

[keniget]

I was actually thinking before we got Torres.

We were ridiculously strong in the middle of the park but blunt up front so teams (mostly visiting Anfield) knew that their best bet was to defend deep against us and take their chances because they'd almost certainly lose any battle in which they try and take us on.

Interestingly these days (and perhaps this is more a testament to the strength of the league at the moment, not sure!) but teams try it on with us a lot more because we actually can be got at but we have Suarez and a couple others to cut them down to size most of the time.

 

[Modo]

But having possession is a way of defending as well is it not?
We didn't concede many goals during Rafa's time here.
My reference to possession and how important it is away from home was with regards to defending and Gerrard's habitual Hollywood passes. It's simple really, by keeping possession of the ball, playing it simple and not gifting it to them we wouldn't have invited that pressure they had on us towards the end of the game.

 

[mark1975]

It's interesting how dominant United have been, it's difficult to pigeon hole their style, they can play good possession football, but they're also very direct and don't over-play the ball like Arsenal have been guilty of in the past, they've also always had very physical players to compliment it.

 

[mark1975]

But having possession is a way of defending as well is it not?
We didn't concede many goals during Rafa's time here.
My reference to possession and how important it is away from home was with regards to defending and Gerrard's habitual Hollywood passes. It's simple really, by keeping possession of the ball, playing it simple and not gifting it to them we wouldn't have invited that pressure they had on us towards the end of the game.

People say this, we've tried to play the possession game but our downfall is that we've got a couple of players who are sloppy in possession and we're also shite at winning it back. As soon as a team wins it in the final third, you just feel we're going to concede. Attack is the best form of defense at the minute for us, because we've got such a great strike force. If we didn't have that, our possession game would be falling flat on its face.