By Alex Scott
There’s been a running joke in the Width of a Post WhatsApp group this season. No matter how the team played, who they faced, how many chances they created, there is only one stat that matters: How much possession did they have?
City have been a streaky team all season long, stuttering to try and find any consistency. Yet, looked through the lens of possession, Graham Alexander’s men have been utterly reliable.
Remarkably – and this stat is so neat, I didn’t trust it, and went back to re-do the maths, but I think this is right – from the start of this season, when City have more than 50% possession (half their games), they are the worst side in the division. When City have less than 50% possession (the other half of their games), they are the best side in the division.
Unbelievably, or, maybe actually very believably indeed, City have only won twice this season when they’ve won the possession battle: the 2-1 home win against Colchester (51.8%) back in August and the away win at Doncaster (50.2%) just before Christmas.
Just to be clear, I know this is a bit of a silly stat. I’ve arbitrarily drawn at line at 50% to split the sample in half, and it’s not as clear cut as that: they’re lots of games just around the margins, and lots of other things going on. But, it is neat, oh so neat, so please indulge me.
It’s also true that this isn’t just this season. There was essentially the same exact effect under Hughes, if you drew the line at 55%. For two seasons – and if you’re looking for causality, I’d posit the moment we swapped ball-playing midfielder Elliott Watt for ball-launching midfielder Richie Smallwood – we’ve been utterly incapable of winning games where we have more of the ball.
This Jekyll and Hyde phenomenon combines to leave City in lower mid-table, but due to the weakness of the division (50 points from 34 games is the lowest return for a seventh-place side at this stage of the season since 2014), City are still only 5 points off the play offs with a game in hand, and a better goal difference. So all to play for.
What’s more, City have Notts County on Saturday, who average 66% possession this season, so that’s a win.
They also face Salford and Mansfield too, both in the top seven possession-based teams in the division, so that’s six more points. And Grimsby, averaging just a shade over 50%. Three more to the tally.
But that’s the lot. City’s other eight opponents in the run-in are all in the bottom ten of the division in possession. If they are going to get the points they need, they are going to have to start winning games when they have more of the ball. The big question is how.
Counterintuitively, last week’s defeat against Wycombe might provide the blueprint. That game was heralded as one of City’s best over recent seasons, despite the result. For the first time in a long time, City were able to dominate possession and routinely create good chances. They didn’t take them, sure, but baby steps!
There were two big philosophical changes in the team for the Jonny Paint Semi-Final. The first of these came in the base of the midfield with Kevin McDonald partnering Richie Smallwood, and saw Alex Gilliead shifted out to left wing-back.
This was only the second time this season they had started in this combination, the other being the 4-0 win at home to MK Dons. All three had great performances, Gilliead pressing high up the field, joining the front three and always being a positive outlet, and Smallwood and McDonald running the centre of the park. The team overall looked much more comfortable in possession. This combination definitely seems likely to pursued into the run-in when City will need to do more with the ball.
The other big change came in the form of Tyler Smith’s return, with both Andy Cook and Jake Young on the sidelines. Smith, typically, led the line and wasn’t really involved much in the build up play. On Wednesday, however, this seemed to be a bit of virtue, creating space for the dual ‘tens’ Clarke Oduor and Calum Kavanagh. And without a physical presence up the field, the remainder of the team seemed less inclined to launch the ball long at the first opportunity.
This change, however, seems less likely to be reproduced as we enter the business end, with Smith being – at best – third choice number nine, with no realistic chance of replacing Cook or Young any time soon. Thus, presenting the big question of whether Smith’s presence in the team’s best performance of the season was coincidental or causal?
Was the midfield re-organisation the key change, and we’d have played that way with any of our forwards up front? Or did Smith’s style affect the overall team structure in a way to bring out the best of everyone else? The team did seem to be a little less incisive after Smith was withdrawn for Tyreik Wright; is there something about Smith’s play which works better than the others?
Regardless of the answer, it’s overwhelmingly likely either Cook or Young will return to lead the line on Saturday. Graham Alexander will be looking for City to maintain their form from last week: confident in possession, able to actually press forward a possession advantage, but with a more clinical finisher up top to take the chances. That is a model they could be able to rely on for the rest of the season, and break the mould of the last two seasons.
However, if the team stutter, and begin to rely again on long punts upfield, with the dual tens crowded out due to Cook dropping off into their space, the City manager will have a problem.
There’s no realistic possibility of dropping Cook, and if he was rested, Young would always start. But if their inclusion leads the rest of the side return to their default performances from this season, it’s hard to see how they will be able to overcome the succession of low blocks they are going to face over the next couple of months.
Whether Alexander’s team can build on that promise from last week, and not revert to bad habits when the cavalry return, will probably go a long way to defining whether this unexpected tilt at the play offs will have any legs.
Categories: Opinion
widthofapost.com 
Throughout the seasons of yesteryear, City have never been particularly successful with possession based football.
I recall in 98/99 season when City beat Watford 2:0, then Watford manager Graham Taylor said that Bradford don’t have much of the ball, but when they do they hurt you.
That’s a good commodity to have.
See also Leicester City’s title winning team.
This is why football is so good – there’s more than one way to win a game.
Pep insists on playing out from the back, limiting the number of transitions associated with launching the ball thereby increasing your team’s control over the game. Difficult to argue against that.
The long ball tactics developed by people like Graham Taylor and Howard Wilkinson was born from the realisation that you’re more likely to score if the ball is in your opponent’s box. Again, difficult to argue that’s not the case.
Execution is everything.
Adams / Gary Bowyer showed us how not to do direct football, the aimless passing under Mark Hughes showed us the limitations of a possession based approach. Perhaps the key here, especially at our level, is to be adaptable, a trait GA seems increasingly good at showing us. Who knows what’s going to happen between now and the end of the season but I’m hoping we can give it a good go and not let yet another season go with a whimper.
A most interesting and well-researched take on football in general as well as how possession of the ball is applicable to us. My own uncomplicated view on how to achieve success in football, dating back to comparing City with and without Bronco Layne and seeing Avenue’s dramatic fall post Kevin Hector, is that possessing a deadly striker, preferably two, is the best tactic you can have. Let’s suppose Andy Cook had not scored that superbly individualistic late winner at Wrexham. We would have been only two points worse off in the objective sense but the current mood would by no means be this high. Strikers win matches. Possession in and of itself counts for very little as this article suggests. I suspect Graham Alexander knows it already. I’m hoping in either Cavanagh or Young or both can hit the back of the net.
Yes, Alexander is imaginative, intuitive, flexible and adaptable. Never would his predecessor have had the wit or bravery to try Stubbs as a makeshift midfielder. One of our most imaginative managers was Bob Brocklebank who contrived an amazing away win by playing Stan Storton, a full back, on the right wing and debutant John Hellawell, a wing-half, on the left. This in an age when positions were less fluid.
The thing I really like about Alexander is his versatility, he’s adaptable. That will go a long way with us City fans, who don’t like hoofball but also grow frustrated with having all of the ball for no end product. He quickly figured out the teams strengths and weaknesses and recently he has found the perfect balance between those two styles of play. I like him, I hope he does get to lead us out at Wembley this season. Fingers crossed.
I mentioned on Jason’s article that the Colchester game you reference was one of our better performances of the season.
Gilli played LWB that game and Halliday was actually on the bench. Although it was Pattison over McDonald in midfield its different ways of breaking the defence down.
Gilli has had an exceptional season but is a runner, he can beat a man but lacks the cuteness that Pattison has with his runs beyond midfield. He doesn’t have the ball playing quality of McDonald either. These are the qualities required to break stubborn teams down.
While Gilli is still a player of the season contender he might not be what this side needs right now in midfield. Smallwood is a ball winning, attritional midfielder so the 2 of them limit the offensive capability of the team.
Football isn’t about picking the best 11 individuals it’s about picking the best team. I think Gilliead can strengthen his case for player of the season at LWB but to break teams down when we have possession we need the passing ability of McDonald or the threat of a Walker/Pattison.
We’re a better team than against Colchester. Halliday has returned after ridiculously being looked over early on. Tyreik Wright might be a squad player alongside Jake Young or, if those in the team don’t perform, they have options ready to replace them.
Reasons for optimism at least.
We all know the saying “there are lies, dam lies, and statistics “ but even so that still makes a brilliant read.
There is one in our group of city watchers who positively dislikes Tyler Smith, even when he isn’t even in the match day squad! And it must be said that he was guilty of not putting away the chances that were presented to him in the Wycombe game: however I do think that he played his part in that very convincing performance, and not just because of the fact that his stature compared to Cook made us keep the ball on the pitch. He has scored a decent number of goals this season, but he needs to do it in league games and not just against the under 21 sides. At the moment he is the footballing equivalent of a cricket flat track bully. So did we play well against Wycombe because of Smith or despite Smith? I think we have to give him credit for, as Alex rightly points out the space that was created for Cavanagh and Odour to exploit. I agree with those who say that had we played like that with Cook leading the line we would have won that game, so it is now up to the rest of the team to show us that they have got the discipline required to not revert to the long ball every time when Cookie is playing. We have some good footballers in this squad of players, it’s time for them to come to the party.
Crazy that we are picking 3 from Cook, Young, Kav, Clark, Wright, Smith, Pointon, Chappers and maybe Walker. While our available centre mid is a choice of 2 from a suspended Smallwood, a brilliant but sparsely available KMac and the Swiss army knife that is Gilly.
What I noticed about Gilli playing wing back was his ability to roam and almost create the third central midfielder at times and create a more intense press. This became a further feature when Ridehalgh played the left centre back role, who effectively played left back when we’re on the attack verses Wycombe.
And although Kelly has looked solid, defensively at left centre back, he isn’t particularly a great crosser of the ball and isn’t intent on pushing up into the space vacated by the wing back. Tomkinson on the other hand is prepared to do this on the other flank.
I think the unfortunate injury to Kelly that led to this in game tactical tweak is surely something worth pursuing going forwards.
Any successful team that adopts an attacking 3-5-2 or 3-4-3 needs defenders to be committed to move up the pitch.
City have demonstrated that they can be an effective counter attacking side, but recently they have been slightly better at hunting the ball back in the oppositions defensive third.
They don’t need to dictate play at the back with slow build up play. It’s quite clear that when you have both Smallwood and Kev Mac playing together, they are a force at this level and have great ability to read the game. They win back the ball centrally and restart the attack due to the options around them. But it only works if the balance of the squad is correct.
The pace and skill of Kavanagh and Oduor alongwith willing wingbacks to get forwards with the left centre back and right centre back being prepared to push into the space vacated by them is evident of this.
Whoever the centre forward is, probably doesn’t make too much of a difference so long as the likes of Oduor and Kavanagh provide the support to press.
The key to it all is for Alexander to play players in roles that they are suited to. It is also important that Taylor doesn’t feature for the rest of the season. The amount of times he has been caught out by pace across the season and the opposition have scored must be high. Equally the defence has had a tendacy to sit deep, when he’s played, to prevent the chances of him being turned to a minimum which the effected the team’s overall ability to press high.
This combined with the issues at left wing back, have cost city the points that would sit them comfortably in the play offs. We should be talking about what the difference is between reaching the play offs or the autos. We’ve underachieved across two periods of the season. The main reason has been the balance and set up and wrong players being selected.
Hopefully we’ve stumbled across the right set up just at the right time of the season!
Agreed.
Our current ambition of sneaking a 7th place finish would have been considered a very very low bar at the beginning of the season.
Still, the outlook is brighter than it was at the turn of the year. Let’s just hope the team can continue its form and we can enjoy the football between now and the end of the season.
One word of caution. The current upturn does not fix the problems running through the club. We should continue to constructively push for positive change off the pitch.