The Numbers Game

We live in a world where numbers are everything. From the per capita ratio's to which we grade our economies, to the algorithms scientists construct when searching for automated reasoning. They're the basis in how we formulate structure, sequence and can even be found in how we analyze performance. Statistical evidence is becoming more prevalent in football, but one compilation of figures remain at the heart of the game...and it's in what we call "formations."

Formations are the starting point for many who wish to learn to articulate the game, and for the most part is a solid grounding in how the game functions. 3-4-3, 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, we've seen them all; but while there are thinkers on earth, we'll undoubtedly see variations crop up from time to time. With a football fanbase growing by the second, our game has a wealth of resource available to anyone who wishes to delve deeper into each systems nuances. At the click of a button we can access endless TV companies coverage of specific instances, and before our very eyes we have beautifully presented breakdown of each players movement and how that relates to the overall team shape. Where they started, where they went, where they should have went....it's presented normally as fact rather than conjecture, but never the less, those watching now feel more informed as a result. What's becoming slightly worrying, is the growth of the "educated" football fan has brought an air of confidence that is often unsubstantiated. Some feel obliged to comment on a particular manager's "Tactical Naiveity" for example. Petulance aside, has our game become too much about the numbers & not focused enough on how we actually set out to win the game? Have we became clouded as a nation as to what "Tactics" and "Formations" really are, and what the numbers actually translate into? In this piece I intend to challenge how we should shift our attention onto how we achieve our goals, rather than what instrument we use to get there.

Methodology: a system of methods used in a particular area of study or activity.

In football coaching terms methodology is derived from a portfolio of experience, education & ability to communicate. A methodology that is implemented effectively manifests itself into a strategy that is a bridge between concept and reality.

To highlight some instances of methodology I'd like share a small extract from Dennis Bergkamp's autobiography, Stillness & Speed.

"Cruyff's coaching is based on how he was as a player; adventurous, spectacular and offensive. He doesn't analyze so much, it's more instinct & technique. Van Gaal is didactic, he gives his players instructions they need to perform to make the system work; as the system is sacred."

Bergkamp's experience tells of his time at Ajax where he played under both Van Gaal & Cruyff. Clearly two very different coaches, yet both achieved a similar level of success. What's important to remember is that both coaches employed the clubs favored system of play (3-4-3/4-3-3 variant). Therefore the structure was largely the same, however what's abundantly clear is how each coach managed to gain success through their own methodology.

Van Gaal's ability to process & transfer information is on par with any coach that has or will likely operate in the sport. Deploying such an in depth systematic approach relies heavily on his ability to build a format that players can adhere to, but more importantly transmit this in such a fashion that players comprehend clearly. Cruyff's coaching style has been replicated by many, but truly mastered by none. His ability to show belief in his players has allowed him to cultivate success through individual brilliance, and build into others qualities that he himself embodied. Cruyff challenged his players to draw confidence from their superior technique, but also afforded them the opportunity to play with freedom and trust their own judgment.

Both coaches demonstrate that there is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat, however to return to the notion that somehow their team system or formation predicates how their team operates, is one we should consider closely. Van Gaal's principles & style of play differ greatly from Cryuff, yet both of their Ajax teams stood in the same starting positions each week. Lets suggest for a moment that they did differ, 4-4-2 vs a 4-5-1 lets say....Van Gaal's wingers will still track back a little more, and Cruyff's full backs will still be more adept to filtering forward during attacks. These coaches are examples of men that have not only developed a successful methodology, but have also attributed a level of ability that allows them to imprint their style of play across many platforms. They don't feel shackled by a pre-set formation of numbers, that in turn decides which way the team should operate.

What we must work hard to do is to re-program how we envisage systems of play, and instead conceptualize how a framework can be enhanced by a style of play. Moving to a 4-5-1 shouldn't instantly transmit we want to "Shut up shop." There are a whole host of variations out there if we as coaches are willing to challenge our own ideas. Guardiola's Bayern Munich have played the vast majority of this season in a nontraditional 4-5-1, with Ribery & Robben taking up deeper starting positions at Right & Left midfield. This often affords then more space to cut inside onto their favored dominant foot, and draw pressure from further away, creating larger holes in the opposition back line. Neither are really known for their defensive qualities, nor is Guardiola for that matter, but if a deeper starting position gets them on the ball more often then why not? Moving to a back 3 is a concept that frightens a lot of my generation of coaches, simply as many were not around to see this set up in its previous incarnation. No fullbacks? Surely not? How would we do that then?.....I hear you cry. Juventus are the flagship of a team that provide a true "back 3" set up. Antonio Conte's recent 3-3-4 variant is one that better tacticians than I are probably better served to offer a clearer insight on. What is clear to me however is that there is a renewed impetus toward setting up in a back 3, such is the want for an increase in fluid attacking play.

I leave you with a quote from the great Sun Tzu

“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory.
Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”
                      --Sun Tzu, c.544-496 BCE (traditional); Chinese Military General; Strategist and Philosopher --