Is possession ball over?
This is the question that popped into the minds of fans and fans of the round after the exit of the big teams, which topped the acquisition rates in the Russian World Cup.
On the other hand, other teams play in defensive or somewhat conservative ways and do not tend to own the ball in an exaggerated manner and play directly. This World Cup continued in a remarkable phenomenon.
The current World Cup edition witnessed the departure of the first four holders in possession rates in the group stage and then the round of 16, as Germany, the defending champion and the second most possessive team in the current World Cup, exited the group stage for the first time in 80 years from the group stage. The Spanish and Argentine teams, who ranked first and third in terms of possession, were eliminated from the final price round. According to the statistics of the International Federation of Football Associations (FIFA), the average possession of the ball by Spain during its matches in the tournament was 69%, and this percentage rose to 75% against Russia in the round of 16 match. However, this dominance did not translate into goals or victory, and when penalty kicks were decided, this domination of the course of the game had no effect on the final result of the match.
The tournament invited Germany from the first round, although its average possession of the ball amounted to 67% in 3 matches. Despite this, Germany lost two matches and achieved one hard-won victory over Sweden in stoppage time.
Argentina was no better after facing great difficulties in its first three matches, but it qualified for the knockout stages before losing to France and depositing the tournament, despite the fact that the average percentage of possession of the ball reached 64%. France won 3/4 over Argentina, although its possession of the ball did not exceed 41% only in some periods.
The surprise was that Al-Akhdar Al-Saudi ranked fourth in terms of possession, albeit negatively, after it left the World Cup early by receiving two consecutive defeats at the hands of Russia in the opening and then Uruguay.
Switzerland, which came fifth in terms of possession, was not better than the first four teams after bidding farewell to the World Cup in the round of 16 by losing to Sweden with a clean goal.
The irony is that Sweden, which eliminated the Netherlands from the group stage in the qualifiers, then expelled Italy from the European playoffs, before leading its group, which includes Germany, ranked 28th in possession percentages, but with organization, a solid defensive plan and good rebound, it managed to reach the quarter-finals in the World Cup. .
In fact, all of the quarter-finalists, with the exception of Belgium and England, had lower possession ratios than their losing counterparts.
Perhaps the closest example to this is Uruguay's victory over Portugal in the round of 16. Coach Oscar Tabarez's team owned 39% of the ball, but it won 2/1 over Portugal.
Uruguay did not depend on owning the ball as much as it relied on implementing an ideal plan to achieve a shocking victory.
"There is often this misconception that possession leads to goals," Tabarez said. And he continued, “But even if you do not possess the ball a lot, the team can reach the opponent’s goal in different ways.”
Elimination roles
The quarter-final, semi-final and final rounds proved the uselessness of the possession theory, after Belgium, the least possessive, managed to eliminate Brazil, one of the biggest candidates for the tournament.
In the same way, France eliminated Belgium and defeated the Croats in the final, although the percentage of possession tends to be favored by the losing teams.
The exit of these teams, which topped the percentage of possession in the matches they played in the World Cup, and the French team won the championship, although it was the lowest in possession rates in 5 out of 7 matches played in the Russian World Cup. Dutch football, its Spanish application, and a number of European teams and clubs.
Or did the coaches work on developing defensive tactical methods that limit the danger of the possessing teams, reduce their danger, and exploit the counterattacks to eliminate and defeat these teams, in the absence of developing this method?
While another category of critics believes that the reason for the loss of possession is not due to the style of play, referring to bad tools that do not have individual solutions or skill that enables their teams to transform this possession into creating real opportunities and translating them into goals.
«Rtem» play
The national coach and sports critic, Samir Hilal, comments on the matter by saying: “Possession is of two parts, positive and negative.
He attributed what happened in the World Cup from the exit of the teams that play in possession to a change in the rhythm of the game faster, which is something that tired the big teams whose players are mostly old and heavy in movement in front of teams that play at a faster pace.
Hilal saw that some teams did not do their possession properly, meaning that the end was weak due to the lack of a sniper striker or poor effectiveness in the last third of the field.
Hilal noted that most of the opponents knew how to absorb the pressure of the possessing teams, with tight defense and high pressure, and the implementation of counterattacks quickly and neatly, especially as they have players with a high “tempo” and play directly with strong performance and high physical ability.
Captain Samir touched on a point that was overlooked, which is that most of the medium and small teams enjoy less pressure, and they are not active in large clubs and leagues, while we see most of the players of the big teams playing in large clubs and strong leagues, and they have been drained throughout the year physically and physically from the large number of participations, as happened with Messi, as well as Ronaldo, who disappeared in the last two matches and decreased his effectiveness, stressing that these are things that made less teams win and exclude larger teams.
aim first
The national coach, Bandar Al-Ahmadi, confirms that the methods of playing in the World Cup were many and varied, including possession, direct play, or relying on counter-attacks, and other various methods in football.
He added, "Talking about possession leads us to the goal of possession, and it is always required that the competitor respond to you, such as taking possession in order to remove the competitor from the defensive areas, for example."
And he added, "If the goal of possession comes out, but if it continues to defend the area, then the goal of possession will not be achieved, unlike direct play, transformations, and other methods that depend mainly on the team's performance."
This explains the ineffectiveness of possession in football, especially in knockout matches.
And he stressed that the exit of senior teams that depend on possession as a method of playing outside the competition is normal.
He pointed out that possession in dangerous areas will be at the expense of the team being exposed from its back lines, and this explains the danger of possession after the opponent extracts the ball and makes a quick offensive rebound.
Al-Ahmadi stands firmly with direct play, which is more effective from his point of view than the method of possession.
However, he points out that many coaches refuse to change, because it is their own philosophy and cannot be changed, because the senior coaches do not easily back down from their philosophy and methodology, even if it costs them to get out of the World Cup, as happened with the major teams.
Al-Zahrani: “Tools” failed those adopting the acquisition philosophy
The sports critic, Captain Saad Al-Zahrani, attributes the futility of the idea of possession in the World Cup to the lack of tools that apply it properly, in addition to the inability of the coaches to develop it. He said: “When we talk about the philosophy of possession after Cruyff, we consider Pep Guardiola and Arcons as among the innovators of this philosophy.” When he took charge of the Spanish national team he found many glorious talents to implement this philosophy.
He stressed that the success of the coaches in applying this philosophy depends on the tools, indicating that Guardiola's application of the philosophy of possession is due to the quality of the tools, such as Xavi and Iniesta, unlike what we found in the World Cup in terms of passive possession that depends on passing without a clear philosophy, with great slowness, which is what we saw in the Spanish and Argentine national teams, despite They have skilled stars, such as Messi and Isco.
He added, "With the development of the philosophy of possession, so did the counter-plans and tactics that many teams began to absorb.
Al-Zahrani noticed that the teams in the World Cup were converged with two close lines, leaving three-quarters of the field to the opponent and relying on defense in the last 30 meters and leaving the rest of the field to the opposing team, so we found the hearts of the defending teams in possession in the middle line, and the counter-attacks posed a great danger to them, as we saw many teams leaving space On the outskirts, but when you arrive, you find a defensive “block” in front of you that is difficult to penetrate.
And he stressed that the exit of the possession teams from the World Cup in Russia does not mean the end of the era of this philosophy, but rather they need tools and players who have individual solutions, not just one player, with the need to develop them continuously to confront counter-defensive plans.
Naeem Tamim Al-Hakim (Jeddah) @naeemtamimimalhac