Valeriy Lobanovsky

Further Shame Of The Iron Curtain
Lobanovsky's "Peculiarity" Obscured

The collective, Comrade, is the secret...
Valeriy Lobanovsky

The horrors of Eastern European Post-Revolution history are legion.  But as a far-off disaster like the Tsunami of 2010 causes us relatively little pause, whereas the unexpected break-up of a romantic relationship causes weeks and months of disrupted behavior, small things give us reason to consider further the costs of the Communist experiment.

Valeriy Lobanovsky, along with Victor Maslov, revolutionized football in the Ukraine and is credited in some circles (most notably by Jonathon Wilson of The Guardian Newspaper; read his Inverting the Pyramid for a comprehensive history of the tactical evolution of the game....not nearly as dry as that sentence makes it sound) with establishing some of the very earliest statistic and scientific approaches to the game.

Football became for him a system of 22 elements – two sub-systems of 11 elements – moving within a defined area (the pitch) and subject to a series of restrictions (the laws of the game). If the two sub-systems were equal, the outcome would be a draw. If one were stronger, they would win. The aspect that Lobanovskyi found most fascinating was that the sub-systems were subject to a peculiarity: the efficiency of the sub-system was greater than the sum of the efficiencies of the elements that comprise it. That, as Lobanovskyi saw it, meant football was ripe for the application of the cybernetic techniques being taught at the Polytechnic Institute. Football, he concluded, was less about individuals than about coalitions and the connections between them. 

(Emphasis added, quote taken from Jonathon Wilson via The Guardian Newspaper)

Slightly more thoughtful than "boot it!"  This particular revolution in football peaked, according to Wilson, in 1986; Lobanovsky faded after that.  I have yet to hear an American coach discuss sub-systems, cybernetic techniques, coalitions and the connections between them.  26 years on, and evidently, American soccer hasn't caught up to Lobanovsky.  Remarkable.

It's a reminder of the still-fledgling nature of American football.  OPTA, Soccermetrics Research, Match Analysis, Prozone, as well as the Norwegian Research Council are advancing our research-based knowledge of football well beyond the good old "well, I played a little college ball..."  The Norwegian bit is particularly Orwellian.  Match Analysis has several college and MLS clients, so the groundswell is building.  Sports Tec offers video collection programs (I used these at Colgate and loved them) that allow for fast breakdown of video and data collection, though it's far from automatic.  Most college programs are using something similar.

Sports Illustrated has a great piece on stats in the MLS.  But when mom and dad gripe about playing time or brag on how great their kid is, do they reference tackles won, chances created, or touches per 90?  Nah, they just tell the coach it's "obvious" junior is better than the coach thinks.  Of course, how many coaches are tallying those scores?  If only they would, there'd be fewer debates about junior's minutes!

Consider this analysis (quoted from the Boston Globe)

“In the second half, Algeria’s ability to retain the ball player-by-player dropped from 71.4% to 58.5% (US’s increased from 67.2% to 69.7%). Algeria’s touch count in the second half also dropped 24%. That seems to indicate a weary and manhandled Algerian side.
“Donovan is known for being able to perform in the big matches. In the US-Slovenia match, Donovan had only 48 touches and drifted to the left side of the field for over half of them, lost the ball over half the time he touched it, and made no passes leading to shots. His goal was critical but his performance was not as strong as it was against Algeria.
“In the Algeria match, he stayed wide right with 91% of his touches right of center, saw the ball 67 times, played 4 passes leading to shots, and retained possession 69% of the time he touched it. Much better game for Donovan against Algeria.’’

Imagine if that was the response from a coach to a whiny player/parent!  Or, more positively, to a player who is underperforming...

At any rate, a fellow like Lobanovsky ought to be given his due.  His philosophical approach to the game was both systemic and quantifiable, but also attempted to include the less-tangible factors, the connections between players.  It's a shame that one of the early pioneers of quantifying the game is often forgotten or overlooked.  It would be a further shame if we get all baseball on our wonderful sport, and forget that even the grandaddy of quantifying football thought the connections between players were as important as the actions of the individuals.