Minority Report - Blackburn Rovers

I think it's a great report again - thanks Red Rain for taking the time to post something both thought provoking and well crafted.
I've loved reading through the following debate and still can't make my own mind up!

When we dominate possession I enjoy the game and tell myself 'we're bossing this'. When we play mainly on the break we make more memorable moments as five players suddenly pour forward (only to slightly over hit the final ball!).

All I would say is that we've had an unforgettable 12 months of success - edge of the seat stuff, but I'm absolutely loving it. We definitely ride our luck, but maybe with the sheer bloody determination these players are putting in we are going some way to "making our own luck"!

 

In terms of possession (as that seems to be what this thread has mainly become) then I'd maybe agree with you Red Rain if the stats weren't so close to 50/50. 43% isn't that far off half, you'd maybe have a point (to me) if you were talking about us having 30% or less but at so close to half then I'd don't think it's something to affect my enjoyment. You say you go to watch us but not the opposition but this way you get to watch us attack and defend in equal measure which is more interesting (to me) than if we had the ball all the time and could just pass it around the opposition all day with the defenders having nothing to do. Now that would be boring!

 

Does the opposition picking the ball out the back of their net count towards possession stats?

 

I was talking with Hecky on Christmas day in my local. He expected Blackburn to come and play and try for the three points. He said he felt we could get in front and that would play into our hands. He sets us up to break at teams with pace and precision and that work better for us on when we're on the back foot. Whether by luck or judgement today, that played out pretty much how he predicted.

 

I agree with most of what you say but I think as far as possession is concerned you are obsessed with quantity and overlooking quality. Surely the overriding factor is not how much possession you have, but what you DO with it. Today we had the ball 43% of the time and scored 2 goals. Blackburn had 57% of the ball and achieved nothing. Im really really struggling to see a problem with that.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

Not picking a fight or being deliberately awkward RR , but surely passing across the back four and back to the keeper is
quantified as possession , and is statistically counted as so?...if not how is it quantified ?

 

I really enjoyed the game. I haven't seen many teams in all the years I've been watching football that are capable of counter attacking the way we can. Not at this level of football anyway. The speed in which we get from back to front with fast, pin point passing and lung bursting runs is exhilarating. With Hourihane in the team we always look capable of scoring from our set pieces. But we now also look capable of scoring from the opposition's set pieces. 10 seconds after the opposition take a corner we can have five or six players in their penalty area. It's breath taking at times. Any opposition manager watching us will be terrified of pushing more than a couple of players up for a corner.

I actually thought we spurned more good opportunities than they did. We carved them open at times, and can blame ourselves for poor finishing, where as they always found a Barnsley player ready to put his body on the line to charge down or block a shot. That's not us being lucky in my view, it's us showing the kind of determination that makes the difference between winning and losing.

 

Having watched Chelsea lose 44% to 56% to Bournemouth on MOTD, I now realise the error of my ways...

 

Massively more of a Red card than Marley's and Hammill's.

 

That made me laugh....

 

For your information, here are the full Premier League stats of scores and possession:

Watford 1 (56%) v Crystal Palace 1 (44%)
Arsenal 1 (76%) v West Brom 0 (24%)
Burnley 1 (44%) v Middlesbro 0 (56%)
Chelsea 3 (44%) v Bournemouth 0 (56%)
Leicester 0 (43%) v Everton 2 (57%)
Man Utd 3 (62%) v Sunderland 1 (38%)
Swansea 1 (56%) v West Ham 4 (44%)
Hull City 0 (33%) v Man City 3 (67%)

They are just for information and they prove very little in terms of measuring win ratios. However, if you look at the figures in terms of which teams you prefer watching, the highest figures are for Arsenal, Man United and Man City. They are the teams along with Liverpool whose style I most enjoy and who for me are most pleasurable to the eye. I am not suggesting that Barnsley can match what they do. I am simply saying that their domination of games allows them to put their style over best and to entertain in the way that I enjoy being entertained.

I am surprised that my reference to possession has provoked so much reaction. It has long been a tenet of the game that if your team has the ball, the opposition cannot score. I remember the broad Scottish brogue of Bill Shankly saying exactly that back in the 1960s. Neither do I understand why many posters immediately link mention of possession statistics to tippy-tappy football or playing the ball across the back four, because that is not what I mean, at all. Possession seems to be shorthand for all that was perceived to be wrong about Keith Hill and Lee Johnson. The fact that I see those two in different terms allows me to be more dispassionate about the term.

 

Hasn't the success of these teams got more to do with the millions of pounds they spend on players?

I'm not sure how comparing our playing style to say, Manchester City's gets us anywhere I'm afraid.

As I said I agreed with 3/4 of your report, but not with your conclusions.

 

I wouldnt change anything about how we are playing at moment , pleasure to watch .

 

**** me I'm 74% sure this thread is a right load of bollax to read on the morning after Boxing day.

I like numbers, like Rodney Trotter I got a GCE in Maths but **** me its making my head melt. Stop it for the love of god stop it.

You plonkers.

 

I'm 100% certain you've said what I was thinking


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Bill Shankly also said football is a simple game...

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

It's all opinion. I watched the first hall of Dull/City and was bored stiff watching the posession football of the away team. Maybe I shouldn't have switched off at half time because goals went in during the second half. Many people love that so many of the best managers in the world are in our top flight. We are arguably only missing Anchelotti for the whole lot but I hate so many of our top sides having dull bosses in charge of our best clubs and playing drab continental style football. It's no wonder Sky Sports viewing figures are down by a huge amount based on previous seasons. BT Sport can't crack a million for any premiership game and their Champions League figures are dreadful. To say we've got Jose/Klopp/Conte/Pep etc the premier league hasn't been so boring in ages.

 

You didn't defend Marley's sending off with as much vigour as this lads,
Are you related?

 

As I said earlier, I am old school. I much preferred the game when there was more physical contact, when there was less diving and when referees ran the game rather than some of the players. Yesterday, I watched Emnes, and not the referee, run much of the game. After the sending off, he had a long conversation with the official. I could imagine him asking why he had sent off their player without his permission.

I used to love the atmosphere in the old Brewery Stand, with the noise increasing as the home team exerted more and more pressure on the visitors. I used to love the release of tension that the eventual goal(s) gave me. The feeling that our victory was deserved because of the pressure that we had brought to bear. My head is full of these memories of past games, of the gradual increase in tension and of its eventual release in a moment of sublime relief. That was the real entertainment that built the game in Britain. The physical challenge as well as the challenge of skill, bravery and tactics. We invented the game as a mirror of the British character. We invented it to be played in that fashion, and we have allowed Jonny Foreigner to take it away from us. And because the game is now played in a foreign accent, it should not be a surprised that Jonny Foreigner is better at it than we are, and that Jonny Foreigner comes in to our game and takes all our money away with him.

When the FAs interpretation of the game changed to match that of FIFA, the gladiatorial nature of the game was lost. It became not so much the game described above as a game of chess. And that in essence is what I miss about the game played on the counter-attack. There is no doubt that it can be very successful in terms of results. But it does not give me that same feeling in the pit of my stomach as the old game. It is all about the feelings that the game produces inside, and those who value the result more than the game can never understand what I am on about.

 

I've always been of the opinion that 90% of successful football management is identifying the strengths of your player pool and getting them to play a style that compliments those strengths.

With the group of players we have, playing a counter attacking game is a no brainer to me, and this means that we will naturally have less of the ball than the opponent.

And at the end of the day, the quality of the possession is much more important that the quantity.

I wouldnt mind us having only 30% possession if it lead to us winning 2-0 every week...