Super Frank Thread

[Superblue 6,372]

14 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Not to sound extremely selfish but any decision the FA makes goes in our favor?

Season is null and void, we are still in the CL. 

Season ends how it is, we are still in the CL. 

Only the matter of whether there will be a summer window 

They will have to come to some form of decision in my opinion because I don't see this season resuming anytime soon, as the virus in this country is only going to get worse over the coming weeks.

I can't see how it's possible to resume the season or have it still operating after June. Clubs, including ourselves, have players out of contract at that point who are under no obligation to continue playing for us beyond that point. We also have the Ziyech deal already in place so are we going to continue a season whilst the transfer window is open?

I've heard some rumours that there's a rule in place that the final places stand if the league is 75% or more complete and cannot be finished. This would mean 29 games played which most have, but in some cases teams have only played 28 games.

Whatever they decide to do, some teams will be affected in a negative manner and I believe with the amount of money riding on things, there will be legal battles to follow in some circumstances.

[Laylabelle 9,534]

Summary of Skysports article

An emergency Premier League meeting is set to take place on Thursday when football chiefs will decide what happens next.
If the season is not completed then these are some of the possible scenarios:
Give the title to Liverpool and have no relegations this season. Next season there would be 22 teams in the Premier League - with West Brom and Leeds promoted from the Championship

The season is declared null and void and next season begins with the same 20 teams - unlikely, especially because Liverpool are 25 points clear at the top of the table and have all but won their first title for 30 years

The table as it stands now is the final table - unlikely, because it would be unfair to relegate Bournemouth, Aston Villa and Norwich after only 29 matchdays and Villa have played 28

 

[Jase 43,479]

25 minutes ago, Mana said:

As long Wolves remain in the Europa League, this "5th" place is in jeopardy. If Wolves win the EL, they get automatic qualification for CL.

Meaning whoever ends up in "5th" place, will not get CL next season unless Wolves end up 3rd or 4th.

Remember, only 4 English teams can enter the CL per season, not 5.

I don't like voiding the season, but voiding it does benefit us, as nothing this season is benefiting us.

Unless UEFA have suddenly changed the rules again, you're wrong. Up to 5 teams from a single country can qualify for the Champions League.

https://www.premierleague.com/european-qualification-explained

If City's ban does stick, then 5th will be a Champions League spot. If Wolves finish in the Top 5 AND win the Europa League, then yes, only teams in the Top 5 (excluding City) will qualify for the Champions League. HOWEVER, if Wolves do not finish in the Top 5 BUT win the Europa League, then they will qualify for the Champions League along with the teams in the Top 5 (excluding City).

If City's ban gets overturned, then just replace 5th with 4th and Top 5 with Top 4 above.

[Vesper 30,083]

Straight Outta Cobham

The Athletic's experts on Chelsea - Simon Johnson, Liam Twomey and Dom Fifield are alongside Matt Davies-Adams to take you behind the scenes at Stamford Bridge and bring you the very best insight on all the latest goings on at Chelsea Football Club

 

Re-Injuries & A Losing Battle For Bellingham

 

Plenty of new still coming 'Straight Outta Cobham' as Matt Davies-Adams and The Athletic's Chelsea experts reconvene to discuss the injury concerns beyond the Coronavirus, the losing battle to sign teenage sensation Jude Bellingham & Jorginho's future...
Plus, Liam Twomey, Simon Johnson and Dominic Fifield also reminisce about this week's cult hero: The Flying Dutchman, Arjen Robben!

 

 

https://theathletic.com/podcast/139-straight-outta-cobham/?episode=18

[Vesper 30,083]

What is Lampard’s best Chelsea XI when everyone is fit?

https://theathletic.com/1689889/2020/03/20/lampard-chelsea-starting-xi-injuries/

The sudden shutdown of English and European football has had significant consequences for Chelsea. The first-team squad are still self-isolating at home after Callum Hudson-Odoi tested positive for coronavirus, Cobham remains in partial lockdown and operations at Stamford Bridge have been scaled back to such a degree that stadium tours have been suspended until at least next month, while the Millennium Hotel has been made available to accommodate NHS hospital staff.

It could be some time before Frank Lampard is able to work normally with his players again. When he does, however, the one sliver of a silver lining is that Chelsea will not be required to navigate the defining stretch of the Premier League season with one of the longest injury lists in the division.

Hudson-Odoi (hamstring), N’Golo Kante (adductor), Tammy Abraham (ankle), Mateo Kovacic (achilles) and Christian Pulisic (adductor) should all be good to go if the Premier League resumes in early June, while Ruben Loftus-Cheek will feel the benefit of several extra weeks to improve his fitness after a serious achilles rupture.

More options means more decisions. What is Lampard’s best starting XI? The Athletic has decided to risk your ridicule by proposing a team.

But just before we begin, a couple of disclaimers:

1) Hakim Ziyech does not feature in this list. Even if this Premier League season runs beyond June 30, under the current rules, he would not be able to be registered in Chelsea’s 25-man squad for the competition. He can be left for next season’s debate.

2) Willian, Pedro, Olivier Giroud and Willy Caballero are all set to become free agents on July 1 but, for the sake of simplicity, all are assumed to be eligible for the duration here.

With that in mind, here we go…

The formation

Lampard has alternated between 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and 3-4-2-1 at different times this season, in response to both the tactical challenges posed by Chelsea’s opponents and the form or fitness of his own players. All three have yielded mixed results but, as written earlier this month, 4-3-3 has produced the highest consistent level of performance — a conclusion reinforced by convincing back-to-back home wins against Liverpool and Everton immediately prior to the coronavirus shutdown.

It makes most sense, then, to arrange this team in a 4-3-3 formation, mindful of the fact that doing so will count against certain players who function best in different systems (apologies in advance, Marcos Alonso). And with that, on to the selections…

Goalkeeper

Kepa’s struggles this season have been very well documented, from his startlingly poor advanced save metrics to his at times shaky distribution with the ball at his feet and command of his area. Lampard ran out of patience following the 2-2 draw with 10-man Arsenal in January, benching the Spaniard for Chelsea’s next six matches.

Willy Caballero came in and performed solidly enough but Kepa is still the clear pick here. While his form since arriving at Stamford Bridge has not justified the “world’s most expensive goalkeeper” tag, he has a far higher performance ceiling and, at 25, has room to grow. Caballero, at 38, does not.

Kepa’s impressive displays upon regaining his place against Liverpool and Everton also suggested his time on the bench may have succeeded in refocusing his mind.

Defence

Alonso’s eye for goal has helped reinvigorate Chelsea’s attack at a crucial stage of the season, and in terms of intelligence, anticipation and execution, he might be the most talented goalscoring defender in the club’s history. But he is a wing-back, not a full-back. He cannot be consistently relied upon to defend his position without the safety net of a centre-back patrolling the space behind him.

Emerson has all of the physical and technical tools for the left-back job but his body of work at Chelsea has been largely disappointing. He is too frequently caught upfield in key moments but without offering much of a threat to actually break down opposition defences.

Cesar Azpilicueta is a far superior one-on-one defender than both and still offers a reasonable crossing threat from the left, even if the need to cut back onto his right foot does occasionally hinder the team’s attack. Just as importantly, shifting him to the position where he won the Premier League title in 2014-15 also allows Reece James to come in at right-back.

James is special. An athlete with the technical comfort level on the ball of a midfielder, his spectacular crossing ability will be a key weapon in Chelsea sides for years to come. In this team, his frequent forward surges can be offset by Azpilicueta dropping in from the opposite flank to form a three-man defence with the two centre-backs.

The middle of the back four is considerably trickier. Lampard has tried six different centre-back partnerships across all competitions this season — not including the matches when Chelsea have lined up in a back three — and none have staked an overwhelming claim. Kurt Zouma, Antonio Rudiger, Andreas Christensen and Fikayo Tomori are all talented defenders with different individual strengths and weaknesses but the chemistry of a partnership also has to be taken into account.

Zouma has played more Premier League minutes than any of the others, and it’s easy to see why. In a worryingly-small Chelsea team, he is the only player who could legitimately be classed as aerially dominant, winning 74.4 per cent of his duels in the air. That physicality is the main reason he has to be in this team, in spite of his occasionally erratic positioning and clumsy style in possession.

Rudiger, Christensen and Tomori all have relatively equal cases to start alongside him, but Zouma-Tomori was the partnership that provided the foundation for Chelsea’s best run of form this season in the autumn, punctuated by a brilliant 1-0 defeat of Ajax in Amsterdam. Tomori has fallen out of favour in recent weeks and endured a horrible day against Bournemouth last month. But at his best, his speed across the ground, sound defensive instincts and solid passing complement Zouma well.

Midfield

No other area of Lampard’s squad has so many high-quality options, so collective fit is vital here. The three most high-profile Chelsea midfielders are Jorginho, Kante and Kovacic but a season beset by stodgy attacking performances under Maurizio Sarri provided ample evidence that playing all three together does not give the team enough creativity or threat in the final third.

At the other end of the spectrum, Billy Gilmour’s two masterclasses against Everton and Liverpool have catapulted him into a conversation that would not have even included him a month ago.

His intelligence, passing range and general poise are all incredible for an 18-year-old and he also showed hugely-encouraging defensive understanding of the No 6 position across both games. Ultimately, 180 minutes is too small a body of work for Gilmour to push his way into this team but, make no mistake, with everything he has shown so far, it would not be a surprise if he made his omission here look very silly very soon.

Kante is Chelsea’s only world-class player and has shown on the rare occasions when he has been fit this season that he can still profoundly impact matches at the highest level. Kovacic has arguably been the most consistently impressive performer under Lampard this season, frequently getting the team on the front foot with his remarkable ability to slalom through an opposition press.

Both need to be in this team, which means Jorginho cannot be. Kovacic is more than capable of setting the tempo of Chelsea’s passing as a No 6, while Jorginho’s physical and defensive limitations offset the rare quality he brings to the team with the ball at his feet. Kovacic has his own problems reading danger but that is why Kante is beside him.

The presence of Kante and Kovacic also means the goal threat from Chelsea’s midfield must come from the third member of the trio. Mason Mount and Ross Barkley have each shown flashes of being able to supply that, and both were on sparkling form with and without the ball either side of Gilmour in Chelsea’s 3-0 win against Everton earlier this month.

But cast your mind back to last season and an even better candidate emerges. Loftus-Cheek blossomed into one of Chelsea’s most important players in the final months of Sarri’s tenure, breaking from midfield to score against Cardiff, Brighton, Watford and Eintracht Frankfurt — strikes that saw him break into double figures for goals in the campaign.

Loftus-Cheek’s unique blend of physical and technical attributes complete this midfield and his intelligent runs into the opposition penalty area offer what Kovacic and Kante mostly cannot. It has been a long time since he was able to show it but at his best, he gets into this team.

Attack

Olivier Giroud’s return to form has come at a key time for Lampard and, for the first time this season, created a genuine debate about Chelsea’s best No 9 — particularly in light of the fact that Tammy Abraham’s star has not shone quite so brightly since the turn of the year.

Abraham’s dip in production cannot easily be separated from the freak ankle injury he sustained colliding with an advertising hoarding during the Arsenal draw, however. He remains Chelsea’s top scorer with 13 goals in the Premier League and his expected goals per 90 minutes (xG90) rating of 0.61 is still significantly better than that of Giroud (0.45).

Giroud’s best attribute is his ability to make those around him better with smart hold and link-up play, so it is no surprise that his expected assists per 90 (xA90) of 0.20 is better than Abraham’s 0.13. But goals are the main requirement for a striker in this Chelsea team, so Abraham gets the nod. The less said about Michy Batshuayi’s form this season, the better.

On the left of the front three, Christian Pulisic is a no-brainer. The American ranks behind only Abraham in xG90 (0.51) among regular Chelsea starters, providing a much-needed secondary punch to the attack. His ability to move dangerously with and without the ball is unrivalled among Lampard’s wing options, and he is also a perfect fit for a high-intensity pressing style.

The opposite flank presents tougher choices. Hudson-Odoi is a tantalising talent who has shown exciting flashes in tandem with an overlapping James, and he is gradually learning how to incorporate the incisive runs that Pulisic regularly makes into the six-yard box into his own game. But he is also yet to truly blossom in the Premier League, his development slowed by injuries.

Pedro does not merit serious consideration on either flank because, on the rare occasions he has played this season, he has generally looked a shadow of the wide forward who proved so dangerous in Antonio Conte’s best Chelsea team. That leaves Willian, forever trusted by his managers and forever divisive among supporters.

The pure goal and assist numbers have always been underwhelming for Willian, but his other qualities make him a sensible choice to complete this team. His 2.38 key passes per 90 minutes (KP90) mark him out as more creative than any of Chelsea’s other wing options, and his dribble success rate of 65 per cent also marks him out as the most reliable ball carrier.

Out of possession, Willian’s defensive contribution offers some tactical balance. He has the best duel success rate (59.3 per cent) and tackle success rate (61.5 per cent) of Chelsea’s wingers. Hudson-Odoi may be ready to take his spot as soon as next season but for now, the Brazilian remains one of the experienced heads in a team not short on youth.

Full team (4-3-3): Kepa; James, Zouma, Tomori, Azpilicueta; Kante, Kovacic, Loftus-Cheek; Willian, Abraham, Pulisic

What do you think of these selections? Let me know in the comments below — and please be kind!

[Vesper 30,083]

ugh

Azpi at LB and Kante rammed in

hard pass

[killer1257 3,282]

My midfield for next season would be:

Kova-RLC-Billy G

                                                                                                                                                                                                   

[NikkiCFC 8,286]

6 hours ago, Vesper said:

ugh

Azpi at LB and Kante rammed in

hard pass

Plus Tammy over Giroud and Tomori over Rudiger.

[communicate 2,703]

On 3/21/2020 at 9:58 PM, Vesper said:

What is Lampard’s best Chelsea XI when everyone is fit?

https://theathletic.com/1689889/2020/03/20/lampard-chelsea-starting-xi-injuries/

The sudden shutdown of English and European football has had significant consequences for Chelsea. The first-team squad are still self-isolating at home after Callum Hudson-Odoi tested positive for coronavirus, Cobham remains in partial lockdown and operations at Stamford Bridge have been scaled back to such a degree that stadium tours have been suspended until at least next month, while the Millennium Hotel has been made available to accommodate NHS hospital staff.

It could be some time before Frank Lampard is able to work normally with his players again. When he does, however, the one sliver of a silver lining is that Chelsea will not be required to navigate the defining stretch of the Premier League season with one of the longest injury lists in the division.

Hudson-Odoi (hamstring), N’Golo Kante (adductor), Tammy Abraham (ankle), Mateo Kovacic (achilles) and Christian Pulisic (adductor) should all be good to go if the Premier League resumes in early June, while Ruben Loftus-Cheek will feel the benefit of several extra weeks to improve his fitness after a serious achilles rupture.

More options means more decisions. What is Lampard’s best starting XI? The Athletic has decided to risk your ridicule by proposing a team.

But just before we begin, a couple of disclaimers:

1) Hakim Ziyech does not feature in this list. Even if this Premier League season runs beyond June 30, under the current rules, he would not be able to be registered in Chelsea’s 25-man squad for the competition. He can be left for next season’s debate.

2) Willian, Pedro, Olivier Giroud and Willy Caballero are all set to become free agents on July 1 but, for the sake of simplicity, all are assumed to be eligible for the duration here.

With that in mind, here we go…

The formation

Lampard has alternated between 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 and 3-4-2-1 at different times this season, in response to both the tactical challenges posed by Chelsea’s opponents and the form or fitness of his own players. All three have yielded mixed results but, as written earlier this month, 4-3-3 has produced the highest consistent level of performance — a conclusion reinforced by convincing back-to-back home wins against Liverpool and Everton immediately prior to the coronavirus shutdown.

It makes most sense, then, to arrange this team in a 4-3-3 formation, mindful of the fact that doing so will count against certain players who function best in different systems (apologies in advance, Marcos Alonso). And with that, on to the selections…

Goalkeeper

Kepa’s struggles this season have been very well documented, from his startlingly poor advanced save metrics to his at times shaky distribution with the ball at his feet and command of his area. Lampard ran out of patience following the 2-2 draw with 10-man Arsenal in January, benching the Spaniard for Chelsea’s next six matches.

Willy Caballero came in and performed solidly enough but Kepa is still the clear pick here. While his form since arriving at Stamford Bridge has not justified the “world’s most expensive goalkeeper” tag, he has a far higher performance ceiling and, at 25, has room to grow. Caballero, at 38, does not.

Kepa’s impressive displays upon regaining his place against Liverpool and Everton also suggested his time on the bench may have succeeded in refocusing his mind.

Defence

Alonso’s eye for goal has helped reinvigorate Chelsea’s attack at a crucial stage of the season, and in terms of intelligence, anticipation and execution, he might be the most talented goalscoring defender in the club’s history. But he is a wing-back, not a full-back. He cannot be consistently relied upon to defend his position without the safety net of a centre-back patrolling the space behind him.

Emerson has all of the physical and technical tools for the left-back job but his body of work at Chelsea has been largely disappointing. He is too frequently caught upfield in key moments but without offering much of a threat to actually break down opposition defences.

Cesar Azpilicueta is a far superior one-on-one defender than both and still offers a reasonable crossing threat from the left, even if the need to cut back onto his right foot does occasionally hinder the team’s attack. Just as importantly, shifting him to the position where he won the Premier League title in 2014-15 also allows Reece James to come in at right-back.

James is special. An athlete with the technical comfort level on the ball of a midfielder, his spectacular crossing ability will be a key weapon in Chelsea sides for years to come. In this team, his frequent forward surges can be offset by Azpilicueta dropping in from the opposite flank to form a three-man defence with the two centre-backs.

The middle of the back four is considerably trickier. Lampard has tried six different centre-back partnerships across all competitions this season — not including the matches when Chelsea have lined up in a back three — and none have staked an overwhelming claim. Kurt Zouma, Antonio Rudiger, Andreas Christensen and Fikayo Tomori are all talented defenders with different individual strengths and weaknesses but the chemistry of a partnership also has to be taken into account.

Zouma has played more Premier League minutes than any of the others, and it’s easy to see why. In a worryingly-small Chelsea team, he is the only player who could legitimately be classed as aerially dominant, winning 74.4 per cent of his duels in the air. That physicality is the main reason he has to be in this team, in spite of his occasionally erratic positioning and clumsy style in possession.

Rudiger, Christensen and Tomori all have relatively equal cases to start alongside him, but Zouma-Tomori was the partnership that provided the foundation for Chelsea’s best run of form this season in the autumn, punctuated by a brilliant 1-0 defeat of Ajax in Amsterdam. Tomori has fallen out of favour in recent weeks and endured a horrible day against Bournemouth last month. But at his best, his speed across the ground, sound defensive instincts and solid passing complement Zouma well.

Midfield

No other area of Lampard’s squad has so many high-quality options, so collective fit is vital here. The three most high-profile Chelsea midfielders are Jorginho, Kante and Kovacic but a season beset by stodgy attacking performances under Maurizio Sarri provided ample evidence that playing all three together does not give the team enough creativity or threat in the final third.

At the other end of the spectrum, Billy Gilmour’s two masterclasses against Everton and Liverpool have catapulted him into a conversation that would not have even included him a month ago.

His intelligence, passing range and general poise are all incredible for an 18-year-old and he also showed hugely-encouraging defensive understanding of the No 6 position across both games. Ultimately, 180 minutes is too small a body of work for Gilmour to push his way into this team but, make no mistake, with everything he has shown so far, it would not be a surprise if he made his omission here look very silly very soon.

Kante is Chelsea’s only world-class player and has shown on the rare occasions when he has been fit this season that he can still profoundly impact matches at the highest level. Kovacic has arguably been the most consistently impressive performer under Lampard this season, frequently getting the team on the front foot with his remarkable ability to slalom through an opposition press.

Both need to be in this team, which means Jorginho cannot be. Kovacic is more than capable of setting the tempo of Chelsea’s passing as a No 6, while Jorginho’s physical and defensive limitations offset the rare quality he brings to the team with the ball at his feet. Kovacic has his own problems reading danger but that is why Kante is beside him.

The presence of Kante and Kovacic also means the goal threat from Chelsea’s midfield must come from the third member of the trio. Mason Mount and Ross Barkley have each shown flashes of being able to supply that, and both were on sparkling form with and without the ball either side of Gilmour in Chelsea’s 3-0 win against Everton earlier this month.

But cast your mind back to last season and an even better candidate emerges. Loftus-Cheek blossomed into one of Chelsea’s most important players in the final months of Sarri’s tenure, breaking from midfield to score against Cardiff, Brighton, Watford and Eintracht Frankfurt — strikes that saw him break into double figures for goals in the campaign.

Loftus-Cheek’s unique blend of physical and technical attributes complete this midfield and his intelligent runs into the opposition penalty area offer what Kovacic and Kante mostly cannot. It has been a long time since he was able to show it but at his best, he gets into this team.

Attack

Olivier Giroud’s return to form has come at a key time for Lampard and, for the first time this season, created a genuine debate about Chelsea’s best No 9 — particularly in light of the fact that Tammy Abraham’s star has not shone quite so brightly since the turn of the year.

Abraham’s dip in production cannot easily be separated from the freak ankle injury he sustained colliding with an advertising hoarding during the Arsenal draw, however. He remains Chelsea’s top scorer with 13 goals in the Premier League and his expected goals per 90 minutes (xG90) rating of 0.61 is still significantly better than that of Giroud (0.45).

Giroud’s best attribute is his ability to make those around him better with smart hold and link-up play, so it is no surprise that his expected assists per 90 (xA90) of 0.20 is better than Abraham’s 0.13. But goals are the main requirement for a striker in this Chelsea team, so Abraham gets the nod. The less said about Michy Batshuayi’s form this season, the better.

On the left of the front three, Christian Pulisic is a no-brainer. The American ranks behind only Abraham in xG90 (0.51) among regular Chelsea starters, providing a much-needed secondary punch to the attack. His ability to move dangerously with and without the ball is unrivalled among Lampard’s wing options, and he is also a perfect fit for a high-intensity pressing style.

The opposite flank presents tougher choices. Hudson-Odoi is a tantalising talent who has shown exciting flashes in tandem with an overlapping James, and he is gradually learning how to incorporate the incisive runs that Pulisic regularly makes into the six-yard box into his own game. But he is also yet to truly blossom in the Premier League, his development slowed by injuries.

Pedro does not merit serious consideration on either flank because, on the rare occasions he has played this season, he has generally looked a shadow of the wide forward who proved so dangerous in Antonio Conte’s best Chelsea team. That leaves Willian, forever trusted by his managers and forever divisive among supporters.

The pure goal and assist numbers have always been underwhelming for Willian, but his other qualities make him a sensible choice to complete this team. His 2.38 key passes per 90 minutes (KP90) mark him out as more creative than any of Chelsea’s other wing options, and his dribble success rate of 65 per cent also marks him out as the most reliable ball carrier.

Out of possession, Willian’s defensive contribution offers some tactical balance. He has the best duel success rate (59.3 per cent) and tackle success rate (61.5 per cent) of Chelsea’s wingers. Hudson-Odoi may be ready to take his spot as soon as next season but for now, the Brazilian remains one of the experienced heads in a team not short on youth.

Full team (4-3-3): Kepa; James, Zouma, Tomori, Azpilicueta; Kante, Kovacic, Loftus-Cheek; Willian, Abraham, Pulisic

What do you think of these selections? Let me know in the comments below — and please be kind!

Kovacic as lone holder is a sackable offense. What is Kovacic strength? Ability to carry ball forward. Is he a great long range passr? Nope. For emergency purpose sure he can play as holdrr, but as besr 11,nope.

[Vesper 30,083]

On 21/03/2020 at 3:04 PM, killer1257 said:

My midfield for next season would be:

Kova-RLC-Billy G

                                                                                                                                                                                                   

[communicate 2,703]

Hopefully I can see lineup of

CHO - Tammy - Puli 

            Mount

I want to see how we play with that very young front line

 

[Vesper 30,083]

The 10 Commandments of football analytics

https://theathletic.com/1692489/2020/03/23/the-10-commandments-of-football-analytics/

Last year, The Athletic’s Ben Baldwin wrote a piece detailing the 10 Commandments of numbers-based analysis of the other football. The one with the funny-shaped ball. The beautiful game lends itself to plenty of analysis using numbers, too but just because the data is there, it doesn’t mean that it’s always used correctly.

This guide will give you a better appreciation of the context required when talking about teams and players, which numbers to focus on and how to better question what you’re seeing.

Here are The 10 Commandments.

---

1) Thou shalt not use save percentage to evaluate a goalkeeper’s shot-stopping ability

Example: “Martin Dubravka has been the eighth best shot-stopper in the Premier League this season with a save percentage of 73.9 per cent”

Why it’s misleading: The equation for save percentage is shots saved/total shots faced. Straight away, there’s no accounting for the difference in the type and quality of shots that a goalkeeper faces, which will have a large impact on his ability to make a save, and therefore, his save percentage.

Goalkeeper X facing 10 shots from inside the six-yard box is going to have a tougher time making saves compared to Goalkeeper Y, who’s facing all of his ten shots from 30 yards out or more.

Expected Goals and its cousin, Expected Goals on Target, tell us that shots from further away are less likely to result in a goal and shots that are either right at the keeper or down the middle are more likely to be saved. Anyone reading who has watched enough football will, of course, tell you the same thing.

By equally weighting each shot to calculate save percentage, we are doing a disservice to Goalkeeper X and making Goalkeeper Y look better than they actually might be.

What to use instead: Comparing the quality of on-target shots by using Expected Goals on Target (or Post-Shot Expected Goals) to the number of goals conceded, which I’ve written about previously here, adds much needed context to a goalkeeper’s numbers.

Goals Prevented tells us how many goals a goalkeeper saved given the quality of shots he’s faced, compared to the average goalkeeper. Through doing this, Martin Dubravka looks far better than his save percentage says he is, and Vicente Guaita looks like a world-beater:

2) Thou shalt not use distance or sprint stats to indicate effort

Example: “Mesut Ozil has run more than any other player for Arsenal today, clocking up 11.2km”

Why it’s misleading: Premier League clubs have had access to tracking data since 2013-14 and, as part of that deal, the media get access to derived outputs too. Up to this point, all we’ve really seen is distance and speed statistics.

The reality is, these numbers are some of the most contextless around, yet they’re used frequently when analysing teams and players. The reasons for not using are plentiful.

Firstly, there’s no correlation between the distance you run and your likelihood of winning a game. The amount of distance covered in a finite amount of time is only useful in a time trial, which football is not. From last year’s UEFA Technical Report on the Champions League, Shakhtar Donetsk ran the furthest on average of all 32 teams in the competition, yet finished third in their group and crashed out of the Europa League in the round of 32. Manchester United ran the second-least on average, yet were still able to reach the quarter-finals. Distance doesn’t really tell us much.

Secondly, distance and sprints are going to be stylistic, as in, the numbers that players rack up will be linked to what’s asked of them, the system they play in, how the opposition sets up, game state, and various other factors. Without controlling for — or at least mentioning — these other factors, these numbers don’t give us much insight.

Finally, there’s also some evidence to suggest that running less actually can be beneficial — just ask Lionel Messi. Most players have the fitness levels to last a full game but the manipulation of space is what matters. Similarly, there have been plenty of quick players to have played the sport but the very best know when to use their pace. Very rarely do players need to beat another in a foot race but it’s quick bursts of speed to get past someone or latch on to the end of a loose ball that are key.

There’s value in this data but it’s on the athlete-management side and ensuring that the players are in the right condition to be playing. Football is a game of space and time, and the current tools to measure these are too blunt to be interesting right now.

What to use instead: There’s not really a great substitute here. Either these numbers need to be framed properly before using or we’re probably better off without them.

---

3) Thou shalt not use possession as an indicator of quality

Example: “Tottenham had 79.8 per cent possession in their 0-1 defeat to Newcastle; the second-highest figure for a losing side in the Premier League since 2003-04.”

Why it’s misleading: As Marti Perarnau puts it in Pep Confidential (my pick for The Athletic’s list of favourite football books) “possession is only a means to an end. It’s a tool, not an objective or an end goal.” Leicester City won the league averaging 42.6 per cent of possession in 2015-16. Manchester City won the league last season averaging 67.7 per cent of the ball. In essence, it doesn’t matter how much you have — it’s what you do with it.

Winning the possession battle doesn’t really tell us that much beyond how teams stylistically set up to play and in-game, can be entirely dictated by the scoreline. Take Atletico Madrid’s 1-0 victory recently against Liverpool in the Champions League. After a fourth-minute goal, Atleti set up shop, having just 27 per cent of possession. That figure may have looked entirely different had Atleti not scored early on.

What to use instead: Possession is still a useful nugget of information to understand which side had more of the ball — but just don’t use it to win any arguments that one team is better than another. Expected Goals is a far better indicator of the quality of a team, so if you want to argue about quality, see how good your team is at creating and preventing goalscoring chances.

---

4) Thou shalt not judge a player’s defensive ability on the number of tackles and interceptions they make

Example: “Ricardo Pereira is the best defender in the Premier League, making 119 tackles this season”

Why it’s misleading: Not all the defending that a player does is tangible and the measurable output that can be counted is often biased by team style. Logically, if a team has less possession, they have more opportunities to defend, and vice versa.

For that reason, tackle and interception numbers are better indicators of defensive style (i.e. is the player passive or active) and not necessarily the defensive quality of a player. Virgil van Dijk attempts just 0.76 tackles per 90 minutes, yet no one would make the case that that makes him a poor defender.

In addition, because these defensive numbers are at the mercy of the style of team that a player plays in (mainly the frequency of time they are out of possession and therefore are called into action), it’s hard to compare one player to another.

What to use instead: To combat this, we can adjust defensive statistics for the number of times that they make these actions for every 1,000 touches that an opponent makes when on the field of play — an interpretable method of getting all players on a level playing field. Jordan Henderson’s 2.6 tackles per 90 is 15th best in the league but, when adjusting for possession, he jumps to 4.6 per 1,000 opponent touches, the fifth most defensively-active midfielder in the league.

Possession-adjusted defensive numbers give a more rounded view of defensive activity but these still only show style and not overall quality.

---

5) Thou shalt not use tackle win-rate to judge a player’s tackling ability

Why it’s misleading: I’m going to let you into a secret: tackles lost and tackles won are practically the same thing and ignore two other key outcomes when trying to make a tackle.

Tackles are usually split into two categories — those that are won and those that are lost. Winning a tackle consists of a player winning back possession when challenging for the ball, while losing a tackle sees a challenge take place but the ball isn’t won back. Losing a tackle could be due to the ball being poked out for a throw-in for the opposition, the ball knocked loose for the opposition to recover, or some other reason.

Tackle win-rate is currently defined as tackles won/(tackles won + tackles lost). What this currently tells us is the proportion of tackles that a player makes where his team wins the ball back.

What’s the problem? Well, this currently ignores times when a player attempts a tackle and gets bounced off the player currently in possession, or when attempting a tackle, commits a foul. Of full-backs in the Premier League with the highest tackle win-rate, Martin Kelly is the best with 80 per cent of tackles won. The eye test tells us Aaron Wan-Bissaka should be amongst the top players, yet he’s only 11th. What gives?

What to use instead: True tackle win-rate can help avoid this error by incorporating these two missing categories, with the equation of total tackles/(total tackles+challenges lost+fouls when attempting a tackle). Through this metric, Wan-Bissaka is top with a 78.9 per cent true tackle win rate, and Martin Kelly is down in 29th — much better.

6) Thou shalt not use goals minus expected goals as an indication of finishing ability in small samples

Example: “Roberto Firmino has only scored eight goals from 12.7 xG, therefore he’s a poor finisher.”

Why it’s misleading: When it comes to understanding goalscoring ability, there are two crucial elements that need to be considered and judged in isolation. The first is a striker’s ability to generate chances for himself. Goals are a striker’s main currency and to score goals, strikers need to take shots. To measure the quality of these shots, we use expected goals. If a player consistently gets into good goalscoring positions, over time, goals will come.

It’s one thing taking shots, it’s another thing to finish them. In small samples — such as a whole season — a player’s goals and xG may not match up. Take Roberto Firmino. This season, he’s scored fewer than you’d expect given the chances he has but it is his best in terms of getting into great goalscoring positions.

Firmino’s three prior seasons at Liverpool have seen him score above, below and on expectation. This isn’t enough data to give any concrete conclusions on his finishing ability.

What to use instead: Comparing expected goals (the chances players have) with expected goals on target (what they do with those chances) is one method of considering finishing quality in a very basic way. Even over larger samples, use with caution, and consider at least several hundred shots.

There’s a lot of debate in football analytics circles of whether finishing is a repeatable skill, though, so until there’s a proper answer, go ahead and rely on expected goals’ indication that, over time, most players score in line with their xG.

---

7) Thou shalt not judge a team’s performance with or without a given player

Example: “Arsenal’s win percentage this season without Mesut Ozil is higher without him (40 per cent) compared to with him (28 per cent)”

Why it’s misleading: With or without you (or WOWY, as it’s known in sports analytics circles) stats are intended to isolate the impact of a single player in a team to see how results change with that player involved compared to when they’re missing.

These stats can work in sports with smaller segments to analyse such as basketball, which has more line-up changes and is far higher-scoring. In football, however, there are just way too many moving parts for this to be a good way of analysing if a player’s any good or not. There’s too much out of Ozil’s control that he gets penalised for in both situations.

Here’s just a sample of things that ideally should be taken into account but aren’t with WOWY: What was the quality of the opposition? What was the quality of the other players playing alongside Ozil? Was there a red card? Was Ozil subbed on?

Equally, you have the Burnley problem. Ben Mee and James Tarkowski have both played every minute of Premier League football this season. Which is better? We’ll never know.

What to use instead: It’s better to analyse players within the context of their position and focus on just what they can control. For Ozil and other creative midfielders, that’s chance creation, for strikers, it’s goalscoring and so on. Leave WOWY stats to sports played by big lads indoors.

---

8) Thou shalt not judge a player’s pass ability on his passing accuracy

Example: “Phil Bardsley is the worst full-back at passing in the Premier League, completing just 63.6 per cent of his passes”

Why it’s misleading: The degree to which a player’s passing is accurate or not depends a lot on what they’re being asked to do, and the choices they make when on the ball. Some teams, such as Manchester City, play the ball very short and in certain areas of the field, under little pressure. Due to this, they’ll have a high pass-completion rate. Others, like Burnley, look to hit the channels and user longer passes instead of shorter ones — passes that are, on average, less likely to be completed.

The passes may be, by the definition of the data, inaccurate, but that doesn’t tell the whole picture. Consider the example below, from a recent Leeds United game:

https://cdn.theathletic.com/app/uploads/2020/03/22085743/costa_pass_example.mp4?_=1

Here, Helder Costa’s pass goes down as a failed pass into the area but it’s largely due to the excellent recovery run of the Hull City defender. Here, we should care about possession retention and the progression that Costa has enabled. There are various other times when this situation takes place — possession being retained but the pass incomplete — which players get unfairly judged on.

What to use instead: I’ll write more on other options on this in future, as currently I don’t think that there are many metrics that properly cater to this issue. Expected Pass completion rates may give a more rounded view of why a player’s pass completion rates are low but that data is relatively sparse in the public domain.

---

9) Thou shalt not judge players if they fail a lot

Example: “Trent Alexander-Arnold has made more unsuccessful passes than any other outfielder in the Premier League”

Why it’s misleading: The Athletic’s Michael Cox wrote at length back in January on what being a “failure” in the Premier League means, so I won’t go into too much depth here. The Golden Boot winner every season will fail to score more times than they succeed in doing so. But if we want to find out the most clinical finisher, we’d look at conversion rate and therefore need goals.

What to use instead: In most cases, if the focus is on how many times a player has failed, it’s worth turning that into a percentage to add more context. Have they failed a lot, or is it that they’re tried something far more than other players?

---

10) Thou shalt not compare players with differing numbers of minutes played

Example: “Trent Alexander-Arnold and James Maddison are the joint second-best chance-creators in the league, with 75 each”

Why it’s misleading: Players who play more minutes have more chances to do things on the field that are counted. By not putting all players on a level playing field in terms of minutes played, it means that those who have played less will nearly always look worse.

I’m probably building some sort of a reputation for always fighting Emi Buendia’s corner but by adjusting for minutes played, Buendia is actually the second-best chance-creator in the league on a per 90 basis (3.3 per 90).

What to use instead: By adjusting stats per 90 minutes played (that is, dividing the stat by minutes played/90), players who have played differing numbers of minutes can have their numbers compared, and more fair comparisons can be made.