Understand data's place in coaching

The image above shows, in the right-hand column, the PPDA value for the top three teams in Europe’s top five leagues (England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) in the 2018-2019 season. This data point has been coupled with possession percentage statistics in the left-hand column.

While cursory, the intention is to connect an analysis of what these teams do with the ball, compared to what they do without it.

For example, Atletico Madrid - who have generated repeat finishes at the top of La Liga and gone deep into the latter stages of the Uefa Champions League on a number of occasions in the last decade - are known for playing counter-attacking soccer and defending aggressively near their own goal, rather than pursuing an early press.

This is perhaps the benefit in connecting different, associated data points as part of our analysis to seek to connect what we do with the ball with what we do without it.

The teams towards the top of both tables are those who have a low PPDA and a high percentage of possession.

If a team has a majority of possession, it possibly affords them the opportunity to have a lower PPDA. This can be a consequence of being able to press more intensely from positions of greater organisation and structure, enabled through controlling possession.

Similarly, connecting different data references can add additional context. A team that has a low PPDA (lots of attempts to win the ball back from the opposition) with a lower percentage of possession may be a team that works hard yet unsuccessfully to win the ball back.

Further, if we want our team and players to be able to both press intensely and look after the ball when we win it back, we’ll need to train this across all of the human systems.

That is why the data references and broader analysis should be nested inside, and align with, the commitments we agreed underpin the type of club we are.

If we want our use of possession to be progressive and controlling, we may focus our attention on this.
Should we believe that an intense press, and a low PPDA, is important, then this might, at times, shift our attention to other aspects of the game.

Starting and finishing with the data points, though, is a little erroneous. We would be wise to analyse games more purposefully - either in the moment or in a recording - and, within this broader analysis, consider the following, linked to the PPDA data capture:

1. When we play different types of opposition, do we find it harder to successfully initiate our press? Teams that play with certain systems like a 3-box-3, or include brave players who are willing to carry the ball into and past pressure, may make it harder (or easier) to press intensely.

2. Does our team and player organisation impact our ability to press intensely? Playing different systems, or having different types of players in certain positions, can impact upon our defending.

Playing with a front two against two centre-backs might enable our press to be more intense than playing with a lone striker. 

Additionally, players who are quick, powerful, able to sustain this over time or who have really good defending skills might support a better, more effective press.

3. Does the game state, or broader environmental conditions, impact our ability to regain the ball? Being behind and feeling the need to chase the game can lead to perhaps a less coherent pressing strategy, as can highly-charged atmospheres with perceived hostility or certain climactic conditions.

"A group of players unfamiliar with each other can impact team cohesion..."

A group of players relatively unfamiliar with each other can also impact team cohesion. This may occur in environments with a high numbers of injuries, or players leaving, joining or transitioning across age groups.

These constraints aren’t good or bad, positive or negative; just deeper aspects of the territory that is our experience. 

Considering and factoring these deeper contextual elements into our thinking is an important part of the analysis that extends significantly beyond the numerical data.

Whatever our analysis uncovers across time should inform the evolution of our programme. This is one of the reasons why a pre-set, arbitrary syllabus synonymous with school is systematically mistaken.

It is very difficult to analyse what is going on and layer it into an evolving, responsive player-development programme if we have already decided, ahead of time, what is being coached on each day of the programme. What we have agreed is important is where we focus our attention.

This isn’t blindly retained or belligerently pursued. Our analysis can shape subtle shifts in our behaviour as we enable the evolution of the players’ development to emerge from the experiences we share.

If one of our central midfielders finds it challenging to recognise when to release in some of our pressing strategies, we layer additional elements of this into the games and sessions the players enjoy.

Further, when our press, inevitably, fails from time to time, and we end up outnumbered in deeper areas near our goal, this is a great opportunity for the players to be supported to learn some of the defending skills that are important when we are on the stretch and imbalanced.

Analysis of individual players might also focus on the things that are important to them and the development of their game.

Alongside, and in league with, the analysis of the team, there can be significant benefit garnered from observing, analysing and, if appropriate, generating some data on individual players. Connected and aligned with the broader development and training programme, this can deepen both player and coach understanding of progress.

Similar to the examples highlighted within the overall team analysis, this increased self-awareness can sharpen perception of the influence that different situations and opponents have on, for example, the aforementioned central midfielder.

This can then inform how we subtly constrain future experiences these players, and others, can be exposed to.
Focused individual analysis that genuinely connects with the nature of specific individual players can also trigger a more meaningful personal connection.

The feeling and attachment that more personal, individually responsive analysis promotes is a powerful purveyor, galvanising human relationships and appending immeasurable value.

This deepening of relationships can support us to connect the insights that we garner from our analysis to our practice. 

Principally, that is why analysis exists - less so that coaches can ensure players can tell them what they should do in specific situations, and more to inform how we support and set up future experiences, enabling players to continue to learn.

There is no suggestion that the reader should combine the specific data points highlighted previously.

It might be we decide to align our commitment to pressing by measuring the number of final-third regains and synthesising this with how many final-third regains result in chances on goal, and goals themselves.

This can be done via notation rather than needing more sophisticated data capture and can help us to consider how frequently we win the ball back high and whether those regains lead to chances and goals.

"Analysing our own  coaching can help us deepen awareness of what we do..."

Alternatively, we might measure and analyse some completely different things linked to the kind of club we are.

We might measure smiles, laughs, and positive interactions that occur between our players and the coaches. These are all things we can encourage, demonstrating and developing their value in our environment.

Considering how we then analyse whether our coaching programme is delivering what we agreed acts as an additional layer of self-analysis as to whether we are helping the players to be able to do the things we collectively agreed are important.

My second article in Boot Room focused on this. Analysing our own behaviour and coaching approach can support us to deepen awareness of what we do.

We can collect information on the programme we deliver, connect it to the things the players have agreed are important and combine it with the way we feel about our coaching sessions.

Many academic institutions have promoted the notion of measuring coaching behaviour. As yet, few have connected what is measured to what is valued in a particular context.

Instead, it has frequently lead to generic coding and standardised, often comparative, data collection of coach behaviour. Perhaps it would be better if these approaches support coaches to generate reflection strategies that are unique, individual and responsive.

This isn’t a lowering of standards, more an empowering of each coach and group of players to establish and commit to the highest of standards.

However, these aren’t ‘standard’, universal or lifted from somewhere else. They are ours, we own them - ensure we enable them to drive us forward and hold ourselves to account in alignment with them.

We are not comparing whether we are better or worse than someone else; rather, focussing on bettering ourselves and harmonising our cares to the judgements we make as to how we are getting on.

The nine questions in the reflection form (above) are an example of some ways we might review our practice sessions, in alignment with some of the principles raised throughout these articles.

The principles highlighted in this reflection tool align to things that I, personally, value. They are used to focus attention on the importance of measuring what we value.

While these questions may not align with your context, establishing a reflection and analysis method that aligns with the beliefs of your environment can generate at least the following three benefits:

Firstly, on a sessional basis, it will enable us as coaches to analyse what we did and whether it was what we and the players wanted or needed.

Secondly, across longer periods of time like half-terms, seasons and whole player development journeys, it will help support us to analyse the broader diet of practice that players have been exposed to.

If, for example, we reflect that our players aren’t very good at managing the ball in tight areas, we may consider the amount of exposure the players have been given to small pitches.

Further, if the players aren’t good at timing runs to stay onside - and we rarely include the offside law in our games - then that might be something to think about.

It may also be that this illuminates any blind-spots we have in our coaching repertoire. These may include stopping practice sessions frequently or a tendency when using larger number games to not influence individual player needs as readily.

This synthesis of our coaching behaviours can contribute positively to our own development and that of our players.

"Reflection may illuminate any blind sports we have in our coaching repertoire..."

Finally, the reflection tool is an opportunity to connect the analysis of our coaching behaviour to the way the team and the individual players play on matchdays, as encouraged in the opening part of this article.

Are there certain approaches that may impact positively on the ways the team play come gameday, or which certain players share that they respond well to?

A combinatory approach of this nature can support a session that had brilliant energy, emotion and feel but perhaps was misaligned with some of our other intentions to be valued for the positivity it elicited.

Generate your own reflection tools that are a reflection of what is important to you and the people in your environment.

Connect these reflections across time and retain a reminder of what the players have experienced in previous seasons or iterations of our player-development programme.

Not all analysis needs to focus on data and objectification.

Human beings sense, feel joy and mirror the emotions of others. We are lifted or affected by kindness, consistency and warmth. This sense and feel is often what attracts people to soccer and the personal connection it promotes.

Data is increasingly a constituent part of our eco-systems and should be embraced and seen as supportive of our collective growth and development.

However, so many of the emotions that soccer elicits are very difficult to condense. Attribute value to and ‘measure’ this too - even if we can’t pin a number to it.