Kick and chase vs passing: which style wins football games?
Roar Rookie 
Euro2012 - England's Wayne Rooney - can they get past Italy in the quarters? (AFP)
Related coverage
As another season of amateur football draws to a close here in NSW, most players, teams and clubs are glaring at their division points tables to see what needs to be done to the numbers to ensure a finals spot, or to avoid relegation.
As they do, I can’t help but feel these numbers give rise to a very ugly and very useless style of football: the “Kick and Chase” game. Worse yet, I see clubs proudly parading teams that employ this style if it achieves the desired result.
I contend that this style of football not only has no effect in determining a team’s table ranking, but that it has no long term worth in football. Let’s look at some real numbers to see why.
First though, let’s define the only two styles of football that are played in the amateur leagues: kick and chase, and passing.
The kick and chase style can be seen as an unrefined version of a counterattacking style (e.g. Italy), while the passing style can be seen as an unrefined version of the Tiki-taka style (e.g. Spain).
Regardless of any other stylistic quirks, it is clear that the major characteristic of both styles is the percentage of possession employed by each. Tiki-taka aims for maximum possession, while counterattacking purposefully employs a low percentage of possession.
Proponents of either style would claim the validity of that style based on the results of their team. However, I suggest that only the passing style can claim their results reflect the value of their team, and that the results of the kick and chase team only reflect the value of their opponents.
Greater possession equals greater results
Let’s take an extreme example to look at the connection between possession and results. If you have 0% possession during an entire game, you would of course have a 0% chance of winning, but you may lose.
If you maintain 100% possession during a game, you would have a 0% chance of losing, but you may win. At the very least, we can say that as possession increases (from 0% to 100%) the chances of a more favourable result increase (from definitely not winning to definitely not losing).
Now, I am aware that the chances of a favourable result may not increase linearly. That is to say, if you have 20% possession during a game then you do not necessarily have a 20% chance of a favourable result, just as having 80% possession does not necessarily mean you have an 80% chance of a favourable result.
The only numbers we can be certain about are 0% and 100%, neither of which is likely to ever occur in football.
So why then should we bother to maintain possession? Well, to win a match you must score at least one goal. To score a goal you must have at least some possession. Let’s say that any team has a percentage chance to score a goal each minute they retain possession. We don’t know what this chance is, but it’s fair to a make a general claim that they do have some chance.
If this is the case, then the longer any team retains possession the more likely it is that they will score a goal.
Let’s say a team has a 50% chance to score every minute they retain possession. In the first minute, you have a 50% to have scored at least one goal. In the second you have a 75% chance to have scored at least one goal. The third, an 87.5% chance.
While it may not be possible to determine what percentage chance a team actually has to score while in possession, we can at least say with certainty that the more possession a team has, the more likely they are to have scored a goal.
So now we know two things about possession. The more you have, the less likely you are to lose a match and the more likely you are to score a goal. These seem like good things for any football team, but how do they specifically relate to passing and counterattacking football styles?
Controlling your own destiny
We’ve talked a lot about possession, but how does a team actually acquire it? It might be too hard to determine how a team specifically wins possession, but we can say that in the strictest sense, a team has possession when the opposing team loses it.
Now consider what teams do with possession. When a kick and chase team obtains possession, they immediately and intentionally give it up by kicking the ball as close as possible to their opponents goal, hoping it will be regained by their team.
When a passing team obtains possession, they actively work to retain it through further passing. Given that possession is only gained by a team when it is lost by their opponent, a passing team effectively dictates its level of possession while a kick and chase team has its level of possession dictated by its opposition.
We have already established that possession directly affects the likelihood of scoring and the chances of a more favourable result.
We have also established that passing teams dictate their level of possession while kick and chase teams have theirs dictated by their opponents. Given this information, we can say by extension that passing teams dictate their chances of scoring and obtaining a more favourable result while teams that play kick and chase do not.
In short, passing teams control their destiny, while kick and chase teams leave their results to fate.
The illusion of results
But wait, why do so many teams play kick and chase and seem to get good results? How often do we seen teams in professional or amateur league resort to kick and chase football to try and stave off relegation? There must be some effectiveness to this strategy right?
The short answer is no, the effectiveness is a complete illusion, but let’s take a more detailed look at why with the following example:
- A competition is played with 10 teams
- Team A plays passing football very well such that they win 99.9% of their games
- Team B plays passing football very poorly such they win 10% of their games
- Team C plays kick and chase. Their possession, and therefore their results, are dictated by their opposition
- All other teams are listed as X and we have no data on how they play or how good they are
At the end of the season, the points table is as follows:
1st: A
2nd: X
3rd: X
4th: C
———————
5th: X
6th: X
7th: X
8th: X
9th: X
10th: B
Team A has come first, team C has obtained a finals spot by finishing in the top four and team B has finished last. Given the styles of play, and the impact of possession on results what can we say about how each team has performed?
Team A has directly controlled their results and won 99.9% of their games through possession. They are a quality team and deserve to be in first.
If you were to guess how they might perform against a random team, you could reasonably guess that they would win. Team B has directly controlled their results but has lost the majority of their games because they are bad at retaining possession. If you were to guess how they might perform against a random team, you could reasonably guess they would lose.
About Team C, most interestingly, we can say absolutely nothing, because their results are entirely dictated by their opponents. If you were to guess how they might perform against a random team, you would have no idea as it would be dependent on the team.
You might think that coming fourth is a decent result, but lets consider how this result was achieved.
Team C played against team A who has a 99.9% chance of winning, and of course lost. They played against team B, who has a 10% chance of winning, and of course won. They also played against all other teams, and on average came fourth.
So whereas team A can say they came first because they are the best team, team C can only say they came fourth because on average all other teams won and lost such that team C was ranked fourth.
Imagine now, that team C has to play team A in the finals of this competition. When team C plays matches against the whole competition they average out as a fourth place team. However the final is just a one off game, and as team C’s chances of winning are dictated by their opposition they have only a %0.01 chance to win the final.
In other words, they will never beat team A.
So in the strictest sense, when winning the competition is the only result that matters, we can say that team B did no worse then team C. However, there is one major difference between the teams.
If team B improves its ability to retain possession through practice, it will have a better chance to win the competition. However, team C, playing the kick and chase style cannot influence its chances to win the competition at all.
So let’s do a quick recap:
- Possession directly influences the chances of a favourable result
- Possession directly influences the chances of scoring
- Passing football actively works to increase possession
- Passing football dictates a team’s quality
- The quality of a kick and chase team is dictated by its opposition
Once we know all of this, we know the futility of playing kick and chase football. If it looks like playing kick and chase football has saved your team from relegation, or has earned you a finals spot, look again. You will see that all that has happened is that enough teams in your competition have failed to play with the quality required to relegate you or prevent you from making the finals. If you want to play kick and chase, you may as well be playing the football lottery.
If you want to play to win, you better start playing a passing style.
Isn’t it a lot more fun to play anyway?
- Explore:
- football, Italy football, Spain football
August 4th 2012 @ 9:00am
nordster said | August 4th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Cheers great read …especially how you’ve broken it down with the table. I think even the hoofballers in the relegation spots serve their purpose. A cruisier three points for the more stylistically advanced squads. And theres a certain pragmatism to be admired, all teams playing to their strengths even if some are more limited than others. Strayan sport seems to want to try and equalise them all the same with things like salary caps, which given just some of the technical differences in football youve outlined is not even that effective. But dont get me started on the wage fixers
August 4th 2012 @ 9:02am
Bondy said | August 4th 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
It’s the most important aspect to the sport and thats being able to pass, to put it candidly if you cant pass the ball you wont make money simple.
I dont see state football but I often think of Chelsea’s campaign in the Champs Lge and Adelaide Utd’s tilt in the A.F.C and think to myself you have to come out and play not hide.
August 4th 2012 @ 9:24am
Kasey said | August 4th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Bondy, did you even see the last AU ACL game? I take it by your comment that AU ‘didn’t come out and play’ that you thought the Reds were full defensive the whole time. AU were chasing the game the whole 90 even after going 1-0 up they refused to park the bus and try to hold on. When Serge van dijk hit the cross bar in the 60+ minute it was obvious to everyone in the stadium that they were still working hard for a 2nd goal. There was no way AU could have parked the bus with Socceroo super-striker Josh Kennedy in the Nagoya line up.
August 4th 2012 @ 9:49am
Rusty0256 said | August 4th 2012 @ 9:49am | Report comment
The analogy you have created follows closely the reality of the past 2 A-League seasons with your ‘Team A’ being represented by Brisbane Roar, Newcastle Jets as ‘Team B’ and possibly Adelaide U (last season) as Team C. Perth Glory would have been ‘Team C’ the year prior.
Interestingly, following through on the same theory and using this same real world situation for analysis, you had Melbourne Victory mouthing their preference (through Mehmet and then Magilton) to play the ball on the deck but then the team, lacking either the coached cohesion or simply the lack of ability, would fail to follow it through over 90 minutes. I watched several Victory games where the ball would flow nicely for 10 or 15 minutes but as soon as enough pressure was applied by an opposition team, we would start to play deeper and the distance between the lines would open up and the long desperate (and largely ineffective) balls would return.
This coming season will be very interesting as we now have almost all A-League coaches professing their intention of playing the passing game. The question will be, how many of them will be disciplined enough to follow through with that intention over 90 minutes and over a full season of football? I think we can safely say, Ange will at Victory and so will Van Egmond at Newcastle, Vidosic at Brisbane and Arnold at Mariners. For the others we will have to wait and see.
It seems to me that the tipping point for a team to be able to consistently play quality, on the deck football is governed 4 things.
1) A coaches ability to get his players to understand and accept the methodology (as Ange did at Brisbane)
2) That same coaches determination to weed out the players who can’t or won’t play that way
3) To maintain the discipline regardless of initial results and not slip back into bad habits once desperation or game-chasing kicks in.
4) To finally be successful, because the bottom line is if a team tries to play attractive football and still finishes last, the coach and his preferred style may be jettisoned at the same time.
This last point brings me to the conclusion that attractive football can only be played consistently if a team is moderately to highly successful. And we have to remember the only people who are more desperate for success than coaches, players and supporters are the club owners. Ultimately it is that one thing, desperation, that defines a style of football. If a club fails, club owners become desperate and go for the easy fix.
Long ball football is easier to understand, easier to implement and easier (and cheaper) to staff in coaches and players. And so ultimately it will be the club owners struggling in the bottom half of the table, driven by the needs of survival and quick success, that will determine whether the passing game will be here to stay or just be a passing fancy.
August 4th 2012 @ 9:59am
Brick Tamlin of the Pants Party said | August 4th 2012 @ 9:59am | Report comment
You do whats best with the players and what suits the players you have at the end of the day.Arsenal and Blackburn had a bit of a rivalry few years back when Alladyce was there and Arsene Wenger accused them of anti football and what not but they were always great games to watch.Theres a saying “If everybody looked the same we’d get tired of looking at each other”,you could say the same about football styles.
August 4th 2012 @ 10:52am
Futbanous said | August 4th 2012 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Sounds simplistic passing vs kick,hoof,hope but it aint. As the author states :-
“The kick and chase style can be seen as an unrefined version of a counterattacking style (e.g. Italy), while the passing style can be seen as an unrefined version of the Tiki-taka style (e.g. Spain).
The truth lies in the skill level of the players involved,resulting from greater technique. The Roar played a possession game under Ange the last 2 years got great results in the A-League,yet struggled against Asian teams,particularly FC Tokyo in the ACL. Why simply because of the superior technique of FC Tokyo . Not only their capacity to hold the ball then make a pass ,but the football intelligence of the pass made,its penetration through the Roar defence & the equal intelligence of the receiving player.
All going back to the quality of coaching from top to bottom.
Yet IMO you could play a long ball game with precision if you had players with great skill. The reason that a long ball game is ineffective most of the time is because thats all the players can do. Theres examples of skilful players,passing the long ball with great accuracy bypassing many defenders,resulting in a goal by an equally talented striker.
Watch video clips of the Kaiser in action in his heyday for an example of the effective accurate long ball.
So the bottom line,regardless of style is the level of skill through superior technique first & foremost. Personally I don’t believe that possession football is necessarily better than long ball football if all players have equal skill,because whatever method used unless a player can pass accurately & the receiver control instantly,neither method can be played to its full potential.
A mixture of both is better IMO,sticking to one method religiously,often can be detrimental to achieving a result.
Take the Roar last season,got to the opposition final third,passed around & around the defence seeking the chink in the armour. Trouble was the the opposition had closed ranks,because the Roar didn’t have the quality of players to penetrate a tight defence by quick intelligent passing. Time & time again I saw Franjic speed down the flank waiting for the quick(long ball cross) before the defence could regroup. But no round & round we go.
Also IMO an obsession with tika taka (whatever quick short accurate passing is called nowadays) detracts from the great uncertainty of “The middle” where the aerial challenge between striker & defender is a spectacle. Once again though it all comes back to skill/level of technique. There is no aerial challenge if the ball hits a flying seagull.
August 4th 2012 @ 12:00pm
Ian Whitchurch said | August 4th 2012 @ 12:00pm | Report comment
To play a possession game well requires a particular sort of player – one who has a brain for the game and is a good ‘touch’ passer.
To play a long ball game requires another sort of player – one who is fast enough to get into space, and tall enough and with enough of a leap to dominate the contest for the ball.
Athletes vs footballers, in short.
And its a lot easier to identify athletes than footballers.
August 4th 2012 @ 1:23pm
jbinnie said | August 4th 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
JayBee – An interesting discussion point but it should always be remembered that it doesn’t matter a damn to most fans, players, and coaches, what systems are being used as long as their team scores more goals than the opposition for it should never be forgotten that that is the main aim in any game.All tactical ploys are based on that simple factor, and as a coach builds his squad he has that constantly in the back of his mind.
Take our own Josh Kennedy for instance. If you had him in your team would you not be tempted to play a,fast moving,quick on his feet striker beside him to feed off the long balls that he,JK, with his height advantage,could win and lay off for his partner in the danger area.
In my time I have seen this tactic used very successfully by world class pairings like Kocsis& Puskas,Smith & Greaves,Torres&Eusebio,to name a few and there are many others I’m sure. Get my point ?Available players can affect the chosen tactics. jb
August 4th 2012 @ 3:33pm
Ben of Phnom Penh said | August 4th 2012 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
I tend to agree. I love any system that forces goalkeepers into a plethora of saves, and that is going to change with each squad and each opposition.
August 4th 2012 @ 2:20pm
Chips Rafferty said | August 4th 2012 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
Jay Bee , this peace should of been writ for Europe for blokes who has genuine sockah nous.
This goes over the heads of the average two bob suburban blogger in straya. Far too much for the nitwits, consolers and dullards on strayan sockah blogs and forums like Anarchy, 442 and Big Sockah. We just dont have the sockah kulcha here.
But half decent article their son. Ya should prolly replace dopey two bob fraud strayan sockah journos like Cawkerill, Fink and Lynch.
Give yerself a lolly from the lolly jar. Or if yer older, a beer at yer local pub son.
August 4th 2012 @ 2:38pm
PaddyBoy said | August 4th 2012 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
Great article, though I would contest one part. You use the logic of possession leading to wins is actually wrong(ish). Possession which leads to penalty box possessions is the most important (say when Barcelona started playing very flat against the bus parkers wasn’t efficient).
It was in “Inverting the Pyramid” and was discussed on Zonal Marking about the fullbacks playing too high (I think). I was surprised as what you said seems obvious.
August 4th 2012 @ 4:58pm
Midfielder said | August 4th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Jay
Enjoyed the read…