So, in the aftermath of last night's disappointing result, there have been more derogatory comments about computers and data analysis.
Both Speakman and Johnson have explained its use in podcasts. They have told us that its a tool to help them, not a total reliance on data to drive everything. Its not difficult to go online and find out more about this approach and to allay your fears that traditional scouting has been dismissed.
So why are people so opposed to this?
Since its codification, the history of football has been one of constant innovation: Queen's Park and the passing game; Herbert Chapman and the W-M; the 'Danubian School' culminating in the Hungary team of the early 1950s; monkey gland therapy at Wolves; the shift to 442; Charles Reep and POMO; Total Football; the 'post-Cruyffian' approach of coaches like Guardiola etc. Yet, for a sport with such a history, football has been strangely backward in coming forward when it comes to data analysis. It has been used successfully in a number of sports, including rugby union and ice hockey, as well as in athletics and, of course, American sports.
As this article points out, the growing interest in it following the Oakland Athletics' experiment with 'moneyball' bypassed football for some time.
https://soccerment.com/the-importance-of-football-analytics/
Is it that we're all huge traditionalists? I can understand the argument that football is a much more intuitive game, much freer-flowing, than some of those that I've mentioned above. For that reason, I've always been against the use of technology like VAR. But you don't see fans of Liverpool, Barcelona or other clubs that are noted for their use of data analysis complaining about it. Its use, looking at those two clubs, clearly doesn't lead to boring football or the elimination of spontaneity in the game.
I can't escape the feeling that the complaints are just a stick to beat a manager that isn't universally popular (perhaps because he doesn't talk like other managers, perhaps because he doesn't pick particular players, or perhaps because, as @monty987 said, he's southern) but lots of people would be happy to have Sam Allardyce, who is just as likely to use this approach as Johnson, back.
Johnson won't be our manager forever but data analysis won't leave with him. We're all delighted to have Kyril Louis-Dreyfuss here, right? Well, this is the approach that he wants to use. So we'd all better get used to it.
Both Speakman and Johnson have explained its use in podcasts. They have told us that its a tool to help them, not a total reliance on data to drive everything. Its not difficult to go online and find out more about this approach and to allay your fears that traditional scouting has been dismissed.
So why are people so opposed to this?
Since its codification, the history of football has been one of constant innovation: Queen's Park and the passing game; Herbert Chapman and the W-M; the 'Danubian School' culminating in the Hungary team of the early 1950s; monkey gland therapy at Wolves; the shift to 442; Charles Reep and POMO; Total Football; the 'post-Cruyffian' approach of coaches like Guardiola etc. Yet, for a sport with such a history, football has been strangely backward in coming forward when it comes to data analysis. It has been used successfully in a number of sports, including rugby union and ice hockey, as well as in athletics and, of course, American sports.
As this article points out, the growing interest in it following the Oakland Athletics' experiment with 'moneyball' bypassed football for some time.
https://soccerment.com/the-importance-of-football-analytics/
Is it that we're all huge traditionalists? I can understand the argument that football is a much more intuitive game, much freer-flowing, than some of those that I've mentioned above. For that reason, I've always been against the use of technology like VAR. But you don't see fans of Liverpool, Barcelona or other clubs that are noted for their use of data analysis complaining about it. Its use, looking at those two clubs, clearly doesn't lead to boring football or the elimination of spontaneity in the game.
I can't escape the feeling that the complaints are just a stick to beat a manager that isn't universally popular (perhaps because he doesn't talk like other managers, perhaps because he doesn't pick particular players, or perhaps because, as @monty987 said, he's southern) but lots of people would be happy to have Sam Allardyce, who is just as likely to use this approach as Johnson, back.
Johnson won't be our manager forever but data analysis won't leave with him. We're all delighted to have Kyril Louis-Dreyfuss here, right? Well, this is the approach that he wants to use. So we'd all better get used to it.
