Aston Villa News 24/7
I hate to sound like a broken record, but a consistent theme I’ve stressed in the Statshack series is the need to look at match statistics as a whole and to be suspicious of anyone attempting to leverage a point with the use of a single metric. Passing for example.
Last season, I read many times that the number of complete passes was an indication that our brand of football was dour and failing to improve, except when the statistics didn’t back that assertion up and were conveniently ignored.
Well, if it was passing you were crying out for, it’s passing you’ve got lately. Lots and lots of passing. And losses, several losses.
Take the 2-0 loss at Blackburn. We dominated the game, we really did, totally deserved to come away with three points, but instead headed home with nothing. Villa completed 360 passes at Ewood Park, there were only two matches with more in the previous four seasons; 361 in the 1-1 draw with Wigan in September ’07 and 373 in the 2-0 win over Charlton in September ’06.
The next league game was the 4-2 loss at Villa Park to Arsenal and the home side completed 329 passes, only six games rank higher since 2006/07. It’s fair to say that the performance received close to universal condemnation.
And then there’s the last league game, the 3-0 loss at Anfield. As far as I can tell, the overwhelming opinion about Villa’s performance doesn’t venture far from disgust and anger. Guess what, Houllier’s Villa side strung together no less than 457 passes, a staggering 22.5% improvement over the previous record; that aforementioned 2-0 win over Charlton in 2006.
So, to summarise, the recent 2-2 draw against Man Utd; brilliant, thrilling, superb, etc., etc. and just 156 complete passes. The 3-0 loss against Liverpool; disgraceful, terrible, unacceptable, etc., etc. and 457 complete passes.
Evolution
Clearly, there’s an evolution in style at work here and it’s starting from the back. The trouble is, it’s not really moving to the front often enough. During 2007/08, the average number of complete passes per league game was 199. In 2008/09 it was 206, in 2009/10 it was 239 and so far in 2010/11 it’s 258.
Under Houllier, over 11 league games, the average number of passes completed is 264 and in the last three games alone the average has been an astonishing 382. But just the two wins. And five losses. Five.
It has to be said, besides the injury crisis, we’ve had an extraordinary run of poor luck and that should be remembered next time some smartarse claims that Villa is just a “lucky team”, but I can’t help wondering whether Houllier is trying to get this side to run before it can walk and right at the worst of times.
I’m assuming that he must feel supremely confident about two things; firstly, that his approach is the right one and will yield results in the long run, and, secondly, he’ll get that long run to prove it. Villa fans are not famed for their patience, those hugely scientific internet polls are already being cranked out and I shudder to think what the forums look like.
Only time will tell whether he’s right on both counts.
You might also like...
9 Comments to “Brummie Tiki-taka failing to yield results so far”
Leave a Reply
errmm…. errmm… i dont know what to say to that game.
wanted MON out but not HOU in.
I have/had started to like the changes that HOU is making in getting us to pass it about abit more and to get the players to feel more confident on the ball. a loss (or a few of them) is education. i can take that as it should be good in the long run.
BUT
After seeing HOU’s post match interview and the support he had from the anfield faithful, and his appreciation and love for it it showed me the lack of respect he has for his current employers, players and the fans.
He was brought in to help our club but is he really living up to his job description?
sad, but true. i don’t think ‘PR gaff’ would do it justice tbh. he’s obviously got a big affection for liverpool, but he’d have been well advised not to be so visible about it and to at least have acknowledged the travelling support in the same manner.
Dan,
I noticed the same thing. It is clear that the back four have been instructed to pass the ball around and move forward on the ground. Unfortunately it looks like a massive game of “keep away” with no discernable purpose. We pass and pass and pass until we try to move into the opponents half and then give it away. Clearly the system has yet been mastered or the players aren’t able to play this type of passing game.
I’ve seen this here in America where it can usually be chalked up to a lack of foot skills, but I don’t think the answer with Aston Villa is so simple. Question:
Is it poor coaching (system doesn’t work or GH can’t “teach” the system properly)? Is it a back line that was brought in by MON to be a prototypical defender but not particularly skilled with the ball? Or is it that the midfielders are not moving to get open for forward passes, leaving few options for the back four?
I’m not a coach so I really can’t discern the answer to the above but I’d love to hear others opinions. Last night was thoroughly frustrating. We looked completely lost.
like most things, i suspect it’s a combination of all those things and more.
for me, without too much analysis, it looks like the back line are frequently torn between what their instincts are telling them to do and the instructions they must have from the gaffer and they end up doing neither one thing or the other.
but it’s not just them. as one example; arsenal nearly got off to a flyer inside the first minute thanks to latching on to a silly loose pass from warnock, but the truth is that he wasn’t done any favours by the pass clark had delivered to him and it started before that with bannan shifting the ball to clark when it wasn’t sensible to do so.
the sad thing is, i think we have the players to play the way houllier wants, it’s just being implemented at a bad time and probably a little too quickly.
Awful. They are not motivated. There is undoubtedly unrest in the dressing room. The problem, I believe, the back four are facing is that the midfield either don’t want the ball or when they are forced to have it they simply give it back. In fairness, Bannan is the exception to this among the CM’s and it is on his shoulders that all hope (and the OAP temporary manager’s job) rests.
On your statistical point, I would like to see a broader correlation (including other teams) between passes completed and game results. There seems to be an implicit assumption that completed passes are a good thing (which, as opposed to intercepted passes, they certainly are); which overlooks the obvious point that completed pass total is partly a function of passes attempted; and the number of passes attempted is partly a function of passes needed, which is a function of, among other things, uncertainty, defensiveness, and preceding bad (though completed) passes. The pass from Clark to Warnock against Arsenal certainly counts as a completed pass, and it helped to set up a great scoring chance for Arsenal.
In other interesting statistical indicators, ESPN had Villa with 51% of the possession time yesterday – while being utterly dominated. So what does that statistic tell us, besides the fact that completed passes take a lot of time?
I think the passing statistics are misleading at best. Possession really means little unless you can use the possession to either a) score or b) keep the other team from having the chance to score.
Where possession is important is not in scoring per-se but in controlling the flow and rhythm of the game. In previous seasons we have run non-stop and gave up late goals — a possession team can put their foot on the ball and take a breather without worry. This is a level of organization and skill well beyond just “passing”. A level that we clearly are a long way away from achieving.
If you ask me the most important statistic is goal differential, pure and simple. Granted it is simplistic but you can either outscore your opponents or keep clean sheets and there are many ways to achieve either — all are reflected in one simple number. Right now we are 17th in this statistic.
can’t disagree with that. all i want to see is goals and points on the board. 2 passes, 20 passes, all the same to me.
i just throw odd markers like this down to mess with the folk who like to claim that we weren’t cracking the top four in previous years because we didn’t pass the ball around a bit more.
guess what, it’s not that simple!
mmm, i might do a larger comparison at some point, but i’ll tell you that just on number of passes, the top 5 in the prem is:-
1 chelsea
2 arsenal
3 man utd
4 man city
5 fulham
yes, fulham (hence why i went top 5!)
in terms of efficiency though, i.e. number of passes per goal & the lower the better, it’s a little different:-
1) bolton
2) stoke
3) blackburn
4) man utd
5) west brom
successful sides do tend to pass the ball around more, but then their opponents tend to sit deep, 10 men behind the ball more.
that’s part of the evolution in villa over the past several seasons where counter attacking based football worked well for a while until it didn’t because teams put men behind the ball.
and you’re right, the devil is always in the detail. clark to warnock was a “successful” pass, but it wasn’t particularly useful.