League Focus: Should English Football be Open to a More Direct Approach?
Tony Pulis’ name has more or less become synonymous with a style of football widely maligned in this country. Few children will aspire to be players that thrive in his teams and fewer still fans will yearn for their club to play his kind of football. He was thought to have reached a ceiling at Stoke; it was thought he could take them no further playing a direct game, with an emphasis on set pieces that was thought of as depressingly English. With the success of passing games at Barcelona, Spain, Bayern Munich and Germany, there developed an obvious goal for English football at club and particularly international level. There was almost more hope at the World Cup this summer that England would play well and go out with their heads held high rather than play badly and progress further than expected.
Pulis had in the season just finished taken Crystal Palace from relegation certainties to mid-table safety and was named Premier League LMA Manager of the Year for his efforts. Deserved recognition indeed, but it did little to change his popularity or that of the style of play he propagates. Hell, this summer even Sam Allardyce changed tack after Davids Gold and Sullivan told him they wanted to see a more attractive brand of football played at the Boleyn Ground or he would face the sack.
And yet, in the absence of Pulis and with Big Sam’s side playing a more fluid game involving a greater emphasis on ball retention, no matter how much we fight it, direct football retains importance in the game.
As Daniel Levy continues to search for a manager that brings good football and success to White Hart Lane and Brendan Rodgers almost blindly insists his team play out from the back, both teams’ struggles persist. If Liverpool hadn’t done exactly that against Basel in their must-win Champions League game last week they would not have conceded the goal they did. Liverpool have committed more errors leading to a goal than any other Premier League team this calendar year (17). Closely following is Tottenham (16). Of course not all of those errors are borne out of overplaying at the back, but a significant proportion of them are.
At other clubs there is a recognition that short passing is not always the best method of attack. Allardyce in particular has done just that.
He has heeded the words of his superiors and West Ham are unquestionably a more attractive footballing outfit this season, but their manager has also seen that sometimes his team need to play more directly too. The Hammers have retained possession better than last season, though only marginally (46.5% on average up from 44.2%), with their play still regularly bypassing midfield. The proportion of their passes that they have played long this season is at 17.9%, the sixth most in the Premier League and up from 16.7% last term. They are also playing the fourth highest proportion of their passes forward (42.5%) in the top flight.
In fact, one of their best performances and undoubtedly their best result of the season was the 2-1 victory over Manchester City. In that match, they played 29.3% of their passes long and some 56.9% forward; the third and second highest proportions by any team in a Premier League match this season. Going more direct certainly worked, but nobody was complaining about negative tactics or negative football.
Interestingly, the four instances of teams playing the greatest percentage of long balls in a game in the top flight this season have all seen underdogs victorious. In addition to West Ham’s win, Burnley played 35.2% long in their win at Stoke; Aston Villa played 29.6% long as they won at Anfield; Palace went long 28.6% of the time in beating Everton on Merseyside.
The rest of the top 10 games in this regard are all games in which the ‘lesser’ team was unfortunate not to come away with more: Hull’s 2-1 defeat at home to Tottenham when Gastón Ramírez’s red card changed the game; Palace’s defeat at Old Trafford when they were only downed by Juan Mata’s long-range strike that Julian Speroni should have saved; QPR’s 3-2 loss to Liverpool when playing long up to Bobby Zamora caused their opponents all kinds of problems.
The first of the Premier League’s ‘big’ teams to appear in this list are Manchester Untied – when they played 25.5% of their passes long in winning at the Emirates. Defending deep and playing direct, when done well, can be devastating.
At the other end of the spectrum, plenty of the games in which teams have looked long the least have seen favourites slip up. Arsenal played just 3.6% of their passes long in a home draw with Hull (the lowest proportion in any game this season); City did so just 5.1% of the time as they lost at home to Stoke; Chelsea played 7.6% long as they struggled to break down Sunderland in a goalless draw.
Of course, this is not for even a second to say that Arsenal, Man City and Chelsea should all revert to route one football, but that some of the league’s lesser teams might do well to play more direct more often. There is not a rule but rather a trend that seems to suggest that more direct play can indeed increase a smaller side’s chances. It sounds simplistic and extremely amateur, but getting the ball as far away from your own goal and as close to the opponent’s as often and quickly as possible can be extremely beneficial. Get the ball near the likes of Liverpool or Tottenham’s goal and important mistakes can be induced more readily. Long ball football is unattractive and easy to defend against when employed unimaginatively; it still requires variation, movement, invention and innovation, but it can retain effect and quality when done well.
And that is what some managers recognise. Pulis had vast success at Stoke playing direct and he worked his magic at Palace last season with only 35.3% possession. Surely he could turn things around at any number of the top flight’s strugglers? It is just that chairmen are reluctant to give him a chance given how uncelebrated he is as a manager. He simply isn’t the popular choice.
West Ham’s start to the season has quickly made Allardyce the next best option as England boss, and the pace to their play has helped, but he retains a respect for the most fundamental thing in football in amongst all the hope for beautiful tiki-taka style play: winning matches. It might be ugly and it might not be what the fans always want, but it might be time for England – unquestionably now underdogs at major tournaments – to be more open to the idea of playing a more direct brand of football in order to breed success. A few steps back might be needed in order to move forward. Or they could continue as things are, playing in their sometimes-attractive-sometimes-exciting way, and be content with that.
Do you think England and Premier League clubs should be more open to playing more direct football? Let us know in the comments below
