So, how much importance should be placed upon stats when assessing a new player? The reason why football is so popular is because of it's fluidity, it is free flowing, it is transient and the slightest bounce of the ball, or missed pass, can change the flow of the game. It is probably the most unpredictable sport on the planet, with so much complex interaction of players, coupled with the tactics and interactions of the opposing team. Naturally the more technically skilled, or organized teams will have the percentage chance of winning, but bad luck, a minute of lack of concentration, a bad refereeing decision etc. is what makes it the most beautiful and unpredictable game there is. When a manager sits down and chooses his particular philosophy, or style of play, he has to think which player will compliment each other player on the pitch. It is no good having 10 Lionel Messis and Manuel Neuer, in goal, and thinking that will be enough to win a football match.
Let's look at statistics. Take a midfielder for example. He may have a 90% pass completion ratio, but does that mean he is the best passer in the team, in terms of effectiveness? Maybe the majority of his passes are short passes to team mates, rather than defence- splitting through balls, Maybe, he is playing in front of the back four, where the opposition are not pressing him when he is on the ball. Or take, a goalkeeper. Behind a well organized back four, he is likely to face more long range shots, and therefore may have a high save percentage. Whereas, a goalkeeper playing behind a defence like Fulham's, of last season, will be more exposed, and therefore have a lower save percentage. It would not necessarily make him a worse goalkeeper. A winger or creative midfielder is likely to have a higher assist record than a defender, but does that make him more important? And let's face it, if Sergio Aguero scores a wonder goal, the player who made the previous assist will still be credited, even if Aguero did all the skilled work, by himself.
When it comes to stats in American sports, we are talking about sports that are much less interactive. Baseball is like cricket, and a good run scorer will always be a good run scorer because he is effectively doing it without any team interaction. If Kline had any clue or culture of football, he would know that whilst stats may help in Baseball, or Grid iron, they are not the same cultures as football.
The main considerations when signing a footballer, after a manager has identified him as a target, should be those of a fitness and medical nature. Every professional club has physios, and doctors to assess the fitness and injury proneness of a player, and his medical history is the only stat worth looking at, in this respect. The running machines, heart rate monitors etc, in the club gym can tell all that is needed to be known about his stamina and current fitness status.
Stats are all very well, and interesting, when reading the Sunday papers on the day after the match, and the statto nerds will pour over them for ages. Last season Middlesborough won the Championship with a top scorer of 8 goals. If we took the stat that an 8 goal top scorer would surely never be good enough for a team to win a Championship, then Boro' must have been guilty of match fixing.
Sorry, Kline, but you should stick to US sports if you want to have a veto on who a coach signs, or better still, talk to some real football (soccer to you) coaches who will tell you "Sorry mate, it just don't work like that".
I, for one, would trust Slavisa all day long over some wet behind the ears yank, who only got the job through Shahid Khan's nepotism.
IN SLAVISA WE TRUST.
COYWs
© Nic Smith
No comments:
Post a Comment