Football is objectively a subjective game. There are many opinions, different beliefs and a variety of ways to score goals and stop goals. But there are also some parts of the game that cannot be argued against. And this way of thinking can help players succeed and make better decisions on the pitch. 

I’m going to use an example to highlight what I’m talking about, because it is crazy how many can get so caught up in the tactical nuances of the game, that they miss what we are actually trying to accomplish.

Let me explain…

It is said that no moment in football is completely identical; meaning all 22 players stood in exactly the same place, with the ball in that exact same place. Something will always be different. It’s like a game of chess, there are millions and millions of different combinations as the game goes on. But we have plenty of ‘similar’ moments. Moments where we know ‘what’ we want to do and ‘how’ we want to do it. And this is why we ended up splitting the pitch into thirds or zones and in-possession, out of possession, to allow us to categorise these moments together. This helps the players understand the exact thing the game and the coach requires them to do to create successful actions and increase the chances of winning. 

Here Arsenal are in the final third and they are trying to create a chance, then convert that chance; which is ‘objective’, right? We can all agree that is what they are ‘trying’ to do. The other thing that is objective is that, if they can, they want to create this chance as ‘directly’ and as ‘quickly’ as possible in the area that exploits space behind the opponent backline, central to the goal. Because why would you not want to do that? This links to the PDMS (position, moment, direction, speed) framework discussed in ‘Analysing football’ by Raymond Verheijen and Rene Maric.

So we freeze the picture here and Arsenal’s primary best option (if they can) is to penetrate into the highlighted zone behind the opposing backline. Myles Lewis-Skelly lifts his head (perception) and he can see three forward options; the ball wide or the ball through to Calafiori or Havertz. 

Then comes the decision. His decision should be based on that ‘best option’ as a reference, meaning ‘if I can do that, I’m going to try it’. Many players would immediately play the ball wide in this moment and this isn’t a ‘bad’ option at all, it’s just not the ‘best’ one. The wide ball gives the City backline a chance to drop back 10 meters and defend the box upon delivery and so it doesn’t exploit space behind the backline, but instead in front of. The pass through to Calafiori is therefore objectively a better option since it gets us closer to the goal, as directly and as quickly as possible.

Now let’s assess if this pass is ‘on’. The City midfielder jumps to pressure the ball and leaves a significant space between the City RB and RCB. Calafiori is already edging his body towards that space and if the weight of pass is right, he has every chance of getting onto the pass.

By the way, this is all happening within a matter of seconds, which highlights the intricacy and pace of the elite game. 

Then comes the execution. Of course, the ‘best’ option is far more difficult to pull off, meaning there’s a higher chance you lose the ball, but there also a far higher chance that you score. High risk, high reward. Because of this the technical execution is far more difficult. Lewis-Skelly uses ‘deception’ as he cuts back on the pass with an open body, since many would think he is going to play wide. The timing of the pass is also excellent, as he interacts well with his teammate. Then the weight and direction of the pass is equally as good, allowing Calafiori to get onto the pass. 

Thinking in this way allows your players to think with greater clarity when placed in situations that require instinctive decision-making. They will always look for the ‘best’ option first, which also helps the teammates ‘off the ball’ since they can provide the correct support to make this happen. This improves the overall communication of the team and allows them to carry out more successful actions, more often. 

But, a teams’ principles can also play a part and this is where subjectivity comes into play. Taking the same example, that coach might want to use wide zones to create chances as a first principle when the ball is in the final third. So in this case, Myles Lewis-Skelly might end up playing that ball wide and sacrificing that ‘best option’, to align with the teams’ principles. And again this is why having clearly defined principles helps a teams’ players align their actions and order their priorities.

However, sometimes we can get so caught up in trying to play a certain way and trying to play neat and pretty football, that we miss the point of what we are actually trying to achieve. Scoring goals and stopping goals, to win the match. So ask yourself these questions:

Football is simply complex, so you have to think like it…

Talk soon,

Lucas

p.s: my community is nearly ready to launch so if you want to find out before anyone else when that is, click here.