It’s the age old question that must drive team selection decision makers crazy. When making this particular judgement which is the more important, form or reputation?
It does not matter whether you are deciding over which available players to add to your fantasy teams, or whether you have to make the hard call over who will best represent the nation at the next major tournament.
There is no doubt that this is a tough decision to make. However, is the tougher decision to go with the in-form player or does the safer option lie in selecting the proven star player that has earned their stripes, despite perhaps not being at their best lately?
Ultimately, the selectors make decisions based on who they think can contribute best in guiding the team to victory. However team selectors are sometimes too reluctant in taking a risk in selecting an in-form player particularly if they are deemed to be inexperienced over an already established one that may not be in the best of form?
The obvious choice and what many selectors claim to do, is to select whoever is performing regardless of status, although many argue that there are certain players that you need to have in your squad regardless of their recent performances.
When it comes to a major tournament for example, there is no doubt that as supporters we want the players in our team that are proven, the ones that we feel can rise to the occasion. Of course current form and proven reputation must not be neglected, but when it comes down to deciding between the two, which one comes out on top?
Let’s create a hypothetical situation where we need to select the Socceroos team for the World Cup. Let’s say that arguably Australia’s greatest Socceroo Tim Cahill, is a little down on form and is not scoring at his usual rate.
Now we all know how important Cahill is to the Socceroos and how significant his contributions to Australia’s previous campaigns have been. However does his reputation earn him a place in the line-up despite recent form not warranting it, or do we take a risk and select someone like Jamie Maclaren who scored 20 goals in the most recent A-League campaign?
Luckily, the Socceroo selectors have been privileged in that they have not had to make such a decision as of yet – leaving Timmy out of a World Cup side would be considered a crime by many.
However, we must of course not neglect the fact that no one player is bigger than the team and sometimes, risks have to be taken for the greater good. This generally means leaving a star or proven performer out of the squad.
While this debate has certainly been a recurring one, this piece was triggered by something that occurred far away from home, that being England’s Euro 2016 squad selection.
While many fans enjoy seeing England implode in major tournaments some of the selection decisions were quite perplexing.
The main one that comes to mind is Fabian Delph’s selection over someone like Mark Noble in the English side. Delph is established as a pivotal player in midfield. However despite this, Delph only played 17 games in total, not starting once last season and only managed two goals.
In comparison, Mark Noble had arguably his greatest season yet, only missing one match and scored seven and assisted four, while in similar fashion to Delph maintained an 86 per cent pass accuracy rate. Noble ultimately playing a pivotal role in what was a very successful season for the Hammers.
Ultimately Delph was ruled out of the squad due to picking up an injury before the tournament, adding more fuel to the fire with Delph being quite injury prone.
It is very difficult to see, looking at this from a statistical point of view, how Delph made the cut ahead of Noble. Has reputation triumphed form in this instance?
When it comes to selecting players, there are certain players whom you would think would make the cut regardless, having reached a certain point in their career. Could you imagine Barcelona ever not selecting Messi in the side due to being down on form, despite being fully fit?
Nonetheless, these decisions are ones that are not easy to make. While it may be easy to criticise and to say that we know better, it is the manager’s or selector’s job to pick the players who they feel can give the team the best possible chance for victory.
So I put the question forth to all the Roarers out there, which is more important, form or reputation?
Les Mara
Roar Rookie
One would still pick Tim Cahill cause till now he has done the business. In going forward, we can follow his progress. Roy, he plays players out of position, England are out of Euros, se la vi!
144
Roar Guru
IMO - There are players in a national set up that are pivotal to the teams success and style of play, regardless of form or reputation. For example, many people who have criticised the decision to pick Jack Wilshere in the current England squad present at the Euros in France. Many people thought it would be more suited to pick someone like Danny Drinkwater who won a premier league medal and of course is one of the most in form english midfielder right now. You must take into account the fact that Drinkwater has never been apart of the squad while Jack Wilshere, bar injuries was apart of every single squad chosen by Roy Hodgson, Why? Because he suits the style of play and Hodgson obviously trusts him to work in this setup rather than Drinkwater who is untried or tested at the international stage at the moment. This is my take on things but i believe to answer the ultimate question, reputation does not really have to be taken into account, take for example some of the players chosen recently by Postecoglou against Greece, you never see a bias in reputation or even form in the squad and there is a nice balance.
pacman
Guest
Interesting article Athos. Common sense would suggest you go with the in-form player(s), providing that form is displayed on a consistent basis. There is nothing worse, however, than selecting an in-form player who doesn't live up to expectations, whilst leaving a player of repute on the side-lines. Not only are observers asking questions, including questioning your sanity, you are asking yourself very similar questions. When the coach is the sole selector, much depends on the personality of said coach. Roy followed the conservative approach in England's first two Group 2 matches, thereby surrendering first place to Wales. It remains to be seen whether or not Roy's conservatism impacts negatively on England's progress at Euro 2016. There is no straight out answer to this question. For instance, I believe Roy is likely to prefer players with reputations, whilst Ange is more likely to prefer form players, although he was a little reticent in selecting Jamie Maclaren when said player was making his mark with Brisbane Roar. So , who knows?