The Most Important Soccer Performance Analyst You Have Never Heard Of

Page 2 of 3

Not surprisingly, Reep found that his extensive statistical analysis supported his thesis. His basic premise was that nearly 80% of goals came from moves that consisted of three received passes or fewer. (Writer Jonathan Wilson and others have since pointed out that around 90% of moves do not proceed beyond three passes so Reep’s primary thesis is inherently flawed in terms of efficiency).

Reep believed that an emphasis on possession and passing were in fact detrimental to winning. (Even after witnessing the likes of Hungary at Wembley in 1953 and five times European Champions Real Madrid, the wing commander found a way to show that these teams actually proved him right.)

Nonetheless, the acceptance of Reep’s philosophy grew over the years. His first involvement with a professional team was at Brentford and after he took on the position as an “advisor” relegation fears quickly evaporated.

The initial success brought Reep to the attention of Stan Cullis, manager of Wolves.  Three English league titles in the 1950s won by Wolves solidified Reep’s growing reputation and he brought his analysis and fundamentalist doctrine to a broader audience through journal articles.

Reep’s influence grew and his theory became embedded within the Football Association through Charles Hughes who became the Technical Director in 1983. It remains a point of debate of how much direct influence Reep had on Hughes but it is clear that they did discuss Reep’s theory and worked together.

Over the years, Hughes’ theories would vary from Reep, but on core issues, they were clearly two peas from the same pod.

Hughes position of authority was such that his influence extended deep into England’s soccer system. In the 80s and 90s Graham Taylor (Watford and England), Howard Wilkinson (Leeds and caretaker boss of England) and Dave Bassett (Wimbledon) all enjoyed relative success while emphasizing the principles of “direct football.”

The philosophy extended to Norwegian soccer under another disciple, Egil Olsen and Norway reached the World Cup Finals in 1994 and 1990. It was the same with Jack Charlton and the Republic Ireland in the late 80s and early 90s with the Irish making it to the final stages of major tournaments for the first time.

Today, we can see the same “direct football” principles demonstrated in the Barclays Premier League when we watch the likes of Stoke under Tony Pulis or West Ham under Sam Allardyce.

Whenever the England national team plays poorly, the old chestnut of an inability to maintain possession is aired once again. It is ironic when you consider that at the club level the same players turn out for possession-orientated teams.

So if the long-ball game has been discredited why do some managers and clubs still play that style? The following is a generalization but nonetheless the answer is simple. Up to a certain point, the long-ball game offers a less skilled team the opportunity to level the playing field.

A lesser skilled team is going to create problems of its own making trying to pass the ball from their own half through midfield and up to the strikers. In fact, far too many times the ball will not progress beyond midfield.