“Direct football” or “long ball football” has mostly
negative connotations in the modern era. It has become associated with a time
in English football when pitches were more mud than grass, and the dominant
attacking tactic was to launch high balls into lumbering center forwards to
knock down in a 4-4-2 system. Indeed, it was England’s refusal to, until
recently, replace direct play with the more fluid, short passing-based systems
that were being used in continental Europe as early as the 1930s that has largely
been blamed for its lack of success in international tournaments. Long ball
football, so the reasoning goes, requires less individual technique and less
sophisticated team movement off the ball. Simply whack a ball into a big center
forward and hope he knocks it down into the path of a teammate close by or hit
it over the top of the defense and hope a speedy forward can get on the end of
it. It’s thought to be predictable and generally not the most effective way to
use the ball.
In truth however, any assertion that direct play is
unquestionably inferior to short passing because it requires less individual
technique than dribbling by a defender or using a series of 15 tidy one touch
passes to advance the ball 40 yards up the pitch is an incorrect one. Indeed,
even in the modern game long passes have often proven to be an effective way to
quickly break down an opposition defense. Long balls aren’t a problem in and of
themselves. They can be used to stretch a defense and create valuable space
between an opponents midfield and back four. Likewise a team can use them to
exploit the speed or height and strength advantage an attacker has over
opposition center backs. The problem with direct play is when it is overused
and becomes the only method a side relies on to advance the ball. Only then
does it become predictable and easy to defend. But the same thing can be said
of Barcelona’s tiki taka. Relying too heavily on long spells of possession and
quick short passes can allow the opposition to restrict the space the attacking
side has to play in and deny the time on the ball creative players need to open
up a defense.
Of course the most effective team tactics for any given side
have to do with the strengths of its players and the players and tactics used
by the opposition in any given game. This post will focus on how direct the 20
Barclay’s Premier League teams have been in the first two weeks of the season,
the reasons some of them have had for playing direct (or indirect), and the
results that different styles of play have produced for different clubs.
When I set out to judge how direct individual Premier League
teams are, I first use the average number of long balls each team
played per game as a measure of directness and rank teams based on that measure. Stoke City are nearly
unanimously considered the most direct team in the Premier League. They’re big
and strong, lacking in creative midfield players capable of clever short
passing, and in Peter Crouch have a giant of a forward favored to win aerial
challenges over just about anyone. However, the data show that after two games
Stoke average the 12th most long balls in the league, a curious
result given Stoke are considered the most direct team. Should we assume then
that Stoke have drastically altered their playing style over the summer and
become less reliant on the long ball?
As it turns out, we should not. The long balls per game statistic doesn’t tell the whole story of how much a team relies on long passes, as it doesn’t take into account possession and the number of long balls a team plays relative to short passes. For example, team A may have 80% of possession against their opponent team B resulting in them playing 60 long balls and 600 short passes. Team B has 20% of possession while hitting 50 long balls and playing 200 short passes. In this example, team A plays 10 more long passes than team B. They are not the more direct team, however. Their advantage in number of long balls played is attributable to them dominating possession and playing more of every kind of pass. Relative to the number of short passes they play, team A is far less direct. They have a ratio of 10 short passes for every one long ball (600/60=10) whereas team B plays only 4 short passes for every long ball (200/50=4). We can use this same short passes to long ball ratio with data on Premier League teams to rank them in terms of directness. This measurement is shown in the table below. Teams at the top of the table have a higher ratio of short passes to long balls and are therefore less direct than those at the bottom.
As it turns out, we should not. The long balls per game statistic doesn’t tell the whole story of how much a team relies on long passes, as it doesn’t take into account possession and the number of long balls a team plays relative to short passes. For example, team A may have 80% of possession against their opponent team B resulting in them playing 60 long balls and 600 short passes. Team B has 20% of possession while hitting 50 long balls and playing 200 short passes. In this example, team A plays 10 more long passes than team B. They are not the more direct team, however. Their advantage in number of long balls played is attributable to them dominating possession and playing more of every kind of pass. Relative to the number of short passes they play, team A is far less direct. They have a ratio of 10 short passes for every one long ball (600/60=10) whereas team B plays only 4 short passes for every long ball (200/50=4). We can use this same short passes to long ball ratio with data on Premier League teams to rank them in terms of directness. This measurement is shown in the table below. Teams at the top of the table have a higher ratio of short passes to long balls and are therefore less direct than those at the bottom.
Using this method, Stoke are indeed the most direct team in
the Premier League after two weeks, playing just 3.48 short passes per long
ball. By contrast, Arsenal have been the least direct team, playing 11.08 short
passes for every one long ball. Neither of these facts are particularly
surprising. While Tony Pulis has always focused on physicality and territory at
Stoke, Arsene Wenger has molded a side of mostly creative, technical
players who are often small in stature. Interestingly, both
teams have struggled to find the net in their first two games. Arsenal have yet
to score, registering two goalless draws, one of which was to Stoke last
Sunday. Stoke have scored just once in their opening two games.
The sample size is too small to enable us to predict whether
either team will struggle to score all season and there are obviously other
factors besides how direct a team is that influence number of goals scored. In
the case of Arsenal, one big factor may be the loss of Robin Van Persie and the
lack chemistry between Arsenal’s three big attacking summer signings Olivier
Giroud, Santi Cazorla, and Lukas Podolski.
The data produce some other interesting findings. Both
Liverpool and Tottenham brought in new managers this summer. Brendan Rodgers
and Andre Villas-Boas were expected to bring new styles of play to their
respective teams. Rodgers likes to build the attack from the back with patient
buildup play and linking a number of shorts passes. At Swansea last season, his
team had the third highest average possession percentage behind the two
Manchester clubs. Villas-Boas prefers a pressing game where players expend
energy high up the field to win the ball back and then get their rest while
patiently knocking the ball around in possession. Neither system relies heavily
on the long ball. However, both teams are in the bottom half of the table in
terms of short passes per long ball, suggesting they’ve relied on direct play
more than most teams. Liverpool have played 5.96 short passes per long ball, while Tottenham have played 5.67.
The data also show that Everton and Newcastle, two teams
that finished in the top 7 of the Premier League last season, are among the
most direct teams thus far. Newcastle have played 5.07 short passes per long
ball and Everton have played just 4.7. These numbers make sense when we
consider the strengths of each team and who they’ve played in their opening
fixtures. Everton started the season with a home game to Manchester United. United
had three injured center backs in Chris Smalling, Johnny Evans, and Rio
Ferdinand and were forced to play Michael Carrick out of position in the center
of defense alongside Nemanja Vidic. In Marouane Fellaini, Everton had a tall,
strong midfielder able to dominate Carrick in the air and knock balls down for
his teammates. Everton tried to exploit this mismatch all evening, continually
sending long balls towards the towering Belgian. The direct style worked as
Everton emerged 1-0 winners. Newcastle’s frequent use of the long pass early in
the season likely has to do with the fact that its forward pairing of Demba Ba and
Papiss Cisse are full of pace and able to use their powerful running to get in
behind the opposition back four. The Magpies have creative midfielders in
Johann Cabaye and Hatem Ben-Arfa capable of getting the ball on the floor and
playing, but the direct threat of the two Senegalese forwards gives their attack
another dimension and they’ll likely continue to look long over the top for
them this season.
Again, a sample size of two games doesn’t necessarily
reflect how a team will play throughout an entire season, but if we look at data
from last season we can get a good idea of how direct we’d expect teams to be
in 2012-2013 (at least those teams that have kept the same managers). The
figure below shows the same short passes per long ball statistic. Notice Stoke
were also the most direct team last season. They also scored the fewest goals in
the league with just 36. Another point of interest is that four of the teams
that finished in the top six of the table last season--Manchester City (1),
Arsenal (3), Chelsea (6) and Manchester United (2)--were among the five
least direct teams. This isn’t terribly surprising since these are among the
biggest, wealthiest clubs in the league and can afford to bring in the most
technically gifted players suited to play in a short passing system. The only
top six finisher among the league’s 10 most direct teams was Newcastle. Three of the bottom four finishers were among
the four most direct teams--Blackburn, Bolton, and QPR. This almost certainly
has to do with the inability of smaller clubs to purchase the most technically
gifted players capable of playing a short passing game.
The table may lead us to conclude that relying on short
passes produces superior results to playing direct football. This is somewhat misleading. Clubs like Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, and
Arsenal play less direct football in the Premier League because they have
technically gifted players, and they gain a competitive advantage over most of
their opponents by keeping the ball moving along the ground. It wouldn’t make
any sense for Arsenal to set out launching long balls forward against Stoke
City--they lose their competitive advantage doing that. But, it also doesn’t
make sense for Stoke to try to tiki tika their way up the pitch against
Arsenal--they don’t have the quality of players to do that. Their advantage
over Arsenal is in their superior size and strength, so they play direct. In
short, teams adopt styles that best utilize the strengths of their players and
attack the weaknesses of their opposition. Not every team can have the quality
of Europe’s top clubs and where there is a gap in talent between two sides,
direct play will remain a tactic teams employ.