On reading Matt Dickinson's column a few weeks ago, also posted on here, about Arsene Wenger's usage of statistical data, I decided to investigate more into the scientific approach by some managers. (Yes, I have nothing to do 
)
Firstly, this is another column written by Matt Dickinson following up on the first column he wrote about Wenger.
Here is another article written by a specialist football science website http://www.amandavandervort.com/
Another website to consider to look upon more statistics on players is: http://www.thefootballreview.co.uk/default.aspx
) Firstly, this is another column written by Matt Dickinson following up on the first column he wrote about Wenger.
Is the number up for statistics in football?
The game of baseball was altered a few years ago by a book. That book was Moneyball and it opened up the wider baseballing world to a way of thinking that, pre-publication, had been known only to an enlightened few.
Michael Lewis's bestseller (which is a lot more enthralling than I am about to make it sound) explained how for years, baseball followers and coaches had been concentrating on the wrong data. Certain plays were shown to be far more important than people thought (the walk) and some much less important (the steal). Relief pitchers were found to be overhyped. Decades of orthodoxy were thrown out of the window.
The game itself was not turned on its head. A top slugger was still a top slugger, a pitcher with a 100mph fastball was still going to throw a lot of strikeouts. But Moneyball demonstrated how applying objective analysis rather than relying on scouting judgments could make a team far more efficient. In focusing on the overachievement of Oakland Athletics, and Billy Beane, their far-sighted general manager, the book spawned copycats across America.
And the relevance to English sport is what, exactly? A couple of weeks ago, this column picked up an interview given by Arsène Wenger in which he revealed his reliance on - and obsession with - data. He uses the numbers in various ways, but specifically to judge the speed with which his players receive the ball and lay it off. We always knew that Wenger choreographed Arsenal's mesmerising one-touch passing, but never before had we realised that he has been doing it to the decimal point. The Frenchman will go to his computer the day after a game to check whether his hunches are supported by the statistics.
The column sparked a flurry of interest (there is a first time for everything) and a grateful e-mail from Total Youth Football magazine, a coaching resource, saying that its Wenger edition had sold faster than a Harry Potter novel. None of this puts the piece alongside Moneyball for influence or sales, but there were clearly a lot of people out there eager to see how Wenger's methods might be duplicated.
With the subject out there for debate, it raised the question of whether we have explored the limits of statistics in football. After all, the game has been developing for decades but it is only in the past ten years that the detail provided by a company such as ProZone has been available.
“Technical superiority can be measured,” Wenger said. His readouts tell him as much. But has even the professor of the Emirates Stadium taken the statistics as far as they can go? Is he reading the right numbers? Is something being missed?
The thought recurred talking to Sam Allardyce last week when he discussed his frustration at the reluctance of the Newcastle United players to embrace science. Allardyce explained how, during his time at Bolton Wanderers, he had worked out exactly the output he needed from, say, his left midfield player, including the number of forward runs and the quota of crosses. He knew the physical characteristics required from any player he signed in that position.
The science has become such an important part of his methodology that Allardyce is seeking a greater understanding. And he is not alone. Adrian Boothroyd, a devotee of Moneyball, has staff at Watford working to see how a more objective approach could be applied to football. It might be as simplistic as dividing how a striker scores his 20 goals a season. How many were self-created, how many were tap-ins? Is there a system that can mark him differently? Can we start to rank players scientifically rather than arguing the toss about it?
Of course, you cannot mention Boothroyd and Allardyce in the same sentence without someone saying that all statistics produce is robotic football. Both are familiar with the accusation and the news that Steve McClaren is a big fan of the statistical approach may not do much to recommend it in this country. As England head coach, he used to send a file of data to each player after an international. Yet no one would accuse Wenger's Arsenal of playing formulaic football.
There is also the old-school argument that Bill Shankly, Brian Clough and Sir Alf Ramsey did not need computer statistics to tell them who was a decent footballer. They knew just by watching. Which is true but, equally, we can never know whether, had ProZone been available in 1966, Ramsey might have used it to back up his judgment of going with Geoff Hurst ahead of Jimmy Greaves. The best managers are innovators or at the very least are able to move with the times.
Perhaps Ramsey would have understood that the data can be empowering. As Allardyce said: “You might tell a player, ‘You aren't making the runs.' And they'll say, 'Yes I am.'
“These days, a manager can come back and say, 'No you're not. And here's the evidence.'” Whether the analysis can be advanced in football is complicated by a number of factors, not least that, unlike baseball, ours is not a game of set-pieces. You can measure a batter's output with great accuracy but if you are truly to judge the success of Cesc Fàbregas's passing, you have to measure what the other ten players are doing around him.
For many clubs, there is a natural limit to what can be gained from ProZone. The numbers might be able to tell Sir Alex Ferguson how far his players have run and how well they retained the ball, but no one at Old Trafford pretends that, when it comes to winning matches, the science has a comparable influence to the manager's powers of motivation.
Interestingly, Ferguson was one of the top-flight managers in the audience last year when Beane came to London to talk about Moneyball and about how he took on the prevailing wisdom in baseball. A few took notes, but most were unpersuaded. As one Premier League manager said: “If there was anything in it, do you not think we'd have thought of it already?” He might have been right. Perhaps there is not a holy grail hidden in the statistics, waiting to be discovered. Maybe we already know everything there is to know. But imagine that there is something, an advantage to be gained simply by applying the brain. You would want your manager to be the one out there looking for it.
The game of baseball was altered a few years ago by a book. That book was Moneyball and it opened up the wider baseballing world to a way of thinking that, pre-publication, had been known only to an enlightened few.
Michael Lewis's bestseller (which is a lot more enthralling than I am about to make it sound) explained how for years, baseball followers and coaches had been concentrating on the wrong data. Certain plays were shown to be far more important than people thought (the walk) and some much less important (the steal). Relief pitchers were found to be overhyped. Decades of orthodoxy were thrown out of the window.
The game itself was not turned on its head. A top slugger was still a top slugger, a pitcher with a 100mph fastball was still going to throw a lot of strikeouts. But Moneyball demonstrated how applying objective analysis rather than relying on scouting judgments could make a team far more efficient. In focusing on the overachievement of Oakland Athletics, and Billy Beane, their far-sighted general manager, the book spawned copycats across America.
And the relevance to English sport is what, exactly? A couple of weeks ago, this column picked up an interview given by Arsène Wenger in which he revealed his reliance on - and obsession with - data. He uses the numbers in various ways, but specifically to judge the speed with which his players receive the ball and lay it off. We always knew that Wenger choreographed Arsenal's mesmerising one-touch passing, but never before had we realised that he has been doing it to the decimal point. The Frenchman will go to his computer the day after a game to check whether his hunches are supported by the statistics.
The column sparked a flurry of interest (there is a first time for everything) and a grateful e-mail from Total Youth Football magazine, a coaching resource, saying that its Wenger edition had sold faster than a Harry Potter novel. None of this puts the piece alongside Moneyball for influence or sales, but there were clearly a lot of people out there eager to see how Wenger's methods might be duplicated.
With the subject out there for debate, it raised the question of whether we have explored the limits of statistics in football. After all, the game has been developing for decades but it is only in the past ten years that the detail provided by a company such as ProZone has been available.
“Technical superiority can be measured,” Wenger said. His readouts tell him as much. But has even the professor of the Emirates Stadium taken the statistics as far as they can go? Is he reading the right numbers? Is something being missed?
The thought recurred talking to Sam Allardyce last week when he discussed his frustration at the reluctance of the Newcastle United players to embrace science. Allardyce explained how, during his time at Bolton Wanderers, he had worked out exactly the output he needed from, say, his left midfield player, including the number of forward runs and the quota of crosses. He knew the physical characteristics required from any player he signed in that position.
The science has become such an important part of his methodology that Allardyce is seeking a greater understanding. And he is not alone. Adrian Boothroyd, a devotee of Moneyball, has staff at Watford working to see how a more objective approach could be applied to football. It might be as simplistic as dividing how a striker scores his 20 goals a season. How many were self-created, how many were tap-ins? Is there a system that can mark him differently? Can we start to rank players scientifically rather than arguing the toss about it?
Of course, you cannot mention Boothroyd and Allardyce in the same sentence without someone saying that all statistics produce is robotic football. Both are familiar with the accusation and the news that Steve McClaren is a big fan of the statistical approach may not do much to recommend it in this country. As England head coach, he used to send a file of data to each player after an international. Yet no one would accuse Wenger's Arsenal of playing formulaic football.
There is also the old-school argument that Bill Shankly, Brian Clough and Sir Alf Ramsey did not need computer statistics to tell them who was a decent footballer. They knew just by watching. Which is true but, equally, we can never know whether, had ProZone been available in 1966, Ramsey might have used it to back up his judgment of going with Geoff Hurst ahead of Jimmy Greaves. The best managers are innovators or at the very least are able to move with the times.
Perhaps Ramsey would have understood that the data can be empowering. As Allardyce said: “You might tell a player, ‘You aren't making the runs.' And they'll say, 'Yes I am.'
“These days, a manager can come back and say, 'No you're not. And here's the evidence.'” Whether the analysis can be advanced in football is complicated by a number of factors, not least that, unlike baseball, ours is not a game of set-pieces. You can measure a batter's output with great accuracy but if you are truly to judge the success of Cesc Fàbregas's passing, you have to measure what the other ten players are doing around him.
For many clubs, there is a natural limit to what can be gained from ProZone. The numbers might be able to tell Sir Alex Ferguson how far his players have run and how well they retained the ball, but no one at Old Trafford pretends that, when it comes to winning matches, the science has a comparable influence to the manager's powers of motivation.
Interestingly, Ferguson was one of the top-flight managers in the audience last year when Beane came to London to talk about Moneyball and about how he took on the prevailing wisdom in baseball. A few took notes, but most were unpersuaded. As one Premier League manager said: “If there was anything in it, do you not think we'd have thought of it already?” He might have been right. Perhaps there is not a holy grail hidden in the statistics, waiting to be discovered. Maybe we already know everything there is to know. But imagine that there is something, an advantage to be gained simply by applying the brain. You would want your manager to be the one out there looking for it.
How New Soccer Software is Changing the Face of Coaching
The program is called ProZone, and the guys over at Arsenal Football Club are some if its biggest proponents.
“In the past, it was just about feelings, opinions,” Arsenal’s Arsene Wenger explains at www.tribalfootball.com. “So I thought, ‘That’s not good enough,’ and I wanted to know a little bit more. I am always in the situation where I have to judge people, and the more concrete objective numbers you have the better you can achieve that.” Wenger has become addicted to the statistical analyses, and in fact says, “after a match I am like a guy who is after his doses! He needs to inject!.”
FC Business Magazine asks Arsene Wenger, “What is the importance of such a system when coaching a highly successful team?” Wenger’s response: “It is critical because the game is played by 11 players and you have only two eyes to observe everything on the pitch. The more concrete data you can have, the happier you are in terms of making the right judgement. Sometimes you are guided too much by the result and can misjudge performances. Data like this helps rate players who maybe you have neglected too much and helps everyone take a more objective view. It benefits the game enormously by allowing fans to take more interest and feel they understand better what’s going on. It adds something to their assessment about particular players. You’d go backwards 10 or 20 years without statistical data.”
In support, at the NSCAA Convention in Baltimore 2008, Arsenal Ladies Assistant Coach Emma Hayes said her players (2007 UEFA Champions, FA Cup Champions, League Cup Champions) spend less time on the ball than any other team in the English Premier League. And this makes them incredibly successful. Additionally, ProZone’s data may, for example, tell her exactly when to drop Kelly Smith or why Karen Carney deserves to start at UMEA, based on what output she expects from each individual.
When I visited London Colney in January 2006, I was pleased to see that Arsenal’s men, ladies, coaches, staff, trainers, and physios all eat in the same lunchroom. It’s no wonder Emma has managed to rub elbows with the main man over a turkey sandwich or two. After years of reviewing matches, obsessing over Arsenal’s forward-passing style of play and conversing with Arsene Wenger at lunch, she’s found a practical application of knowledge as the coach for the best ladies club in the world.
Like Wenger, Emma seeks stats that are far more detailed than which player has run the most miles or who has completed the highest percentage of passes. Yes those stats are still important, but (among many other things) she wants to know where her players passed, in which direction, how long it took them at what speed.
Does science underpin the beautiful art of soccer?
Matt Dickenson, at Times Online, spells out his opinion about how Moneyball (a book about statistical analysis in baseball) introduced the sports world to how objective analysis, rather than relying on scouting judgments, could make a team far more efficient.
In Dickenson’s article Sam Allardyce, the manager at Newcastle United, says his players are reluctant to embrace science. Allardyce explained how at Bolton he was able to determine the desired output he would need from each player, and how this information is crucial to identifying potential players. Today, many other clubs, especially football teams in the Premiership, use ProZone.
My ProZone story.
I direct Technology Education for the Region 1 Olympic Development Program (ODP). We host a Symposium in February/March of every year. In 2006, I gave a presentation about the benefits of computer technology in sport, including team management systems, video analysis programs, email, text messaging, practice planning tools, etc.
Thinking it would be innovative to show my peers about ProZone, my friends at XLTravel introduced me to ProZone’s Jonathan Smith, and shortly thereater I sent him a video of the US National Team U15s vs. Region 1 ODP U16s. Jonathan was awesome, and had his guys break down the second half of our match, providing every stat that a coach could ever dream of seeing. The program is amazing - I highly recommend checking it out at www.prozonesports.com. The coaches in Region 1 ODP were blown away by the program’s capabilities. That was over a year ago, so I’d bet the company has made great strides even since then.
If you’re interested in buying ProZone for yourself, check out American-based retailers XLTravel at http://www.xltravel.com/pz/index_E.html, and mention that this blog directed you there. ProZone has even created a version for College coaches throughout the USA as a condensed, affordable version of the program.
“Technical superiority can be measured.” -Arsene Wenger.
The program is called ProZone, and the guys over at Arsenal Football Club are some if its biggest proponents.
“In the past, it was just about feelings, opinions,” Arsenal’s Arsene Wenger explains at www.tribalfootball.com. “So I thought, ‘That’s not good enough,’ and I wanted to know a little bit more. I am always in the situation where I have to judge people, and the more concrete objective numbers you have the better you can achieve that.” Wenger has become addicted to the statistical analyses, and in fact says, “after a match I am like a guy who is after his doses! He needs to inject!.”
FC Business Magazine asks Arsene Wenger, “What is the importance of such a system when coaching a highly successful team?” Wenger’s response: “It is critical because the game is played by 11 players and you have only two eyes to observe everything on the pitch. The more concrete data you can have, the happier you are in terms of making the right judgement. Sometimes you are guided too much by the result and can misjudge performances. Data like this helps rate players who maybe you have neglected too much and helps everyone take a more objective view. It benefits the game enormously by allowing fans to take more interest and feel they understand better what’s going on. It adds something to their assessment about particular players. You’d go backwards 10 or 20 years without statistical data.”
In support, at the NSCAA Convention in Baltimore 2008, Arsenal Ladies Assistant Coach Emma Hayes said her players (2007 UEFA Champions, FA Cup Champions, League Cup Champions) spend less time on the ball than any other team in the English Premier League. And this makes them incredibly successful. Additionally, ProZone’s data may, for example, tell her exactly when to drop Kelly Smith or why Karen Carney deserves to start at UMEA, based on what output she expects from each individual.
When I visited London Colney in January 2006, I was pleased to see that Arsenal’s men, ladies, coaches, staff, trainers, and physios all eat in the same lunchroom. It’s no wonder Emma has managed to rub elbows with the main man over a turkey sandwich or two. After years of reviewing matches, obsessing over Arsenal’s forward-passing style of play and conversing with Arsene Wenger at lunch, she’s found a practical application of knowledge as the coach for the best ladies club in the world.
Like Wenger, Emma seeks stats that are far more detailed than which player has run the most miles or who has completed the highest percentage of passes. Yes those stats are still important, but (among many other things) she wants to know where her players passed, in which direction, how long it took them at what speed.
Does science underpin the beautiful art of soccer?
Matt Dickenson, at Times Online, spells out his opinion about how Moneyball (a book about statistical analysis in baseball) introduced the sports world to how objective analysis, rather than relying on scouting judgments, could make a team far more efficient.
In Dickenson’s article Sam Allardyce, the manager at Newcastle United, says his players are reluctant to embrace science. Allardyce explained how at Bolton he was able to determine the desired output he would need from each player, and how this information is crucial to identifying potential players. Today, many other clubs, especially football teams in the Premiership, use ProZone.
My ProZone story.
I direct Technology Education for the Region 1 Olympic Development Program (ODP). We host a Symposium in February/March of every year. In 2006, I gave a presentation about the benefits of computer technology in sport, including team management systems, video analysis programs, email, text messaging, practice planning tools, etc.
Thinking it would be innovative to show my peers about ProZone, my friends at XLTravel introduced me to ProZone’s Jonathan Smith, and shortly thereater I sent him a video of the US National Team U15s vs. Region 1 ODP U16s. Jonathan was awesome, and had his guys break down the second half of our match, providing every stat that a coach could ever dream of seeing. The program is amazing - I highly recommend checking it out at www.prozonesports.com. The coaches in Region 1 ODP were blown away by the program’s capabilities. That was over a year ago, so I’d bet the company has made great strides even since then.
If you’re interested in buying ProZone for yourself, check out American-based retailers XLTravel at http://www.xltravel.com/pz/index_E.html, and mention that this blog directed you there. ProZone has even created a version for College coaches throughout the USA as a condensed, affordable version of the program.
“Technical superiority can be measured.” -Arsene Wenger.
I thought it was a great read, I work a lot with people and there a is a strong trend towards a quantitative approach even as a basis for therapy, and it seems to be working like a charm, you can measure progress and regresssion and I think we can measure a whole lot and football is no-exception Wenger is obviously a step ahead, isn't he an economist? The future lies in measurements I think.
Comment