Tweet
Soccer: A Year to Forget for the Armenian National Team
By M.J. Graham on December 29, 2014
http://armenianweekly.com/2014/12/29/soccer-2014/
Special for the Armenian Weekly
In business, it is customary and good practice to complete a
comprehensive year-end assessment of team performance. This usually
includes providing high-quality, candid performance and development
feedback and working to set "S.M.A.R.T." goals for the upcoming year
(i.e., specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time bound).
Once a close look has been taken at results and development over the
previous year, overall performance is generally ranked into broad
categories such as Distinguished, Commendable, Meets Expectations, and
Needs Improvement.
Performers at the high end of the scale get their rewards either on a
monetary level or with some sort of professional advancement in their
career. Performers at the other end of the spectrum are on the hot
seat and quite rightly put under the microscope in terms of finding
areas for improvement. Having won just one match in nine attempts in
2014, while also finishing the year languishing in the cellar of Euro
2016 qualifying Group I and slipping from 35 to 79 in the FIFA
rankings, one doesn't need a keen eye or astute management speak to
assess Armenia's results in 2014, although a new category may need to
be added at the low end of the scale: perhaps "Below Target," defined
as a team not meeting performance expectations, having displayed some
good quality work but achieving inconsistent results.
Euro 2016 qualifying Group I results
But is that a fair assessment? Should it be that easy to write off a
year's work as being below target based on results alone? After all,
the team went through a managerial change, a change of formation, and
countless injuries to key players. The complex game of soccer is loved
and celebrated throughout the world, but it is also analyzed and
dissected in equal measure by pundit and fan alike. So what other
factors can be considered in rating performances beyond results alone?
Is there some way to gauge whether a team deserved to win, lose, or
draw? Other statistics besides results can help paint a more
descriptive picture. Possession, chances made, shots on target,
corners, or even fouls can all be interpreted and manipulated to form
an opinion and come to some sort of conclusion. Whether that
conclusion is right or wrong is another thing. It is after all a game
of opinions.
The guys at OPTA, the highly touted sports data company, have an
interesting metric known as "Expected Goals." They look at each shot
or opportunity in a match and, using sophisticated modeling, determine
the likelihood of that shot or opportunity to result in a goal. The
Expected Goals metric is not perfect nor does OPTA's modeling claim to
be. When Expected Goals is calculated on a per-game basis (over
samples of ~30 shots) the metric can fall victim to the biases caused
by small sample sizes. Sometimes, however, it can be useful in
understanding a team's performance during a particularly good or bad
run of form, a stretch that Armenia currently finds itself in.
But what about luck? In the professional game or at any level for that
matter, can much stock be put into such a thing? It is often said that
good teams make their own luck. I'm not sure I fully buy into that
claim. I believe good players and good teams rather than making their
own luck, have in fact an innate ability to capitalize and profit from
whatever luck comes their way. I believe that to be a skill, and not
entirely related to the rub of the green. Having a keen sense of
concentration, reaction, balance, and spatial awareness can see great
players profit from lucky situations. Average players or the average
team who never seem to profit from such situations on a consistent
basis are usually left cursing their bad luck. With that said, does
Armenia deserve to be rock bottom of Group I?
New York-based OPTA statistician Devin Pleuler, a regular contributor
to the Central Winger series on mlssoccer.com, was kind enough to
share Armenia's numbers from their recent three qualifying matches.
The results aren't very surprising, but they do indicate a performance
level that is below par. By solely looking at the Expected Goals
metric, it could be concluded that Armenia deserved nothing from their
away games versus Denmark and Portugal, and somewhat overachieved in
Copenhagen by getting on the score sheet at all, when the quality of
their chances only resulted in 0.36 Expected Goals. Conversely,
Armenia can feel a little unlucky not to secure the three points
against Serbia. Even though Serbia out shot Armenia in that match,
Armenia's Expected Goals was much higher, indicating a higher quality
of scoring opportunity (namely, the penalty kick and rebound effort
from Marcos Pizzelli who was denied by an outrageous double save by
the Serbian goalkeeper late in the match).
Armenia's Expected Goals metric from their recent three qualifying matches
What about Armenia's S.M.A.R.T goals for 2015? Considering seeding and
past history, a realistic and attainable goal for Armenia should be
third place in the group and a playoff berth. Nothing more, nothing
less. This is after all an incremental improvement beyond their last
Euro campaign (where they just missed out on the playoff) and
something they have yet to achieve in their history. Arguably they
should have three points, but the fact of the matter is Armenia sits
on one point in Group I, three adrift of the playoff spot. That third
place berth is currently occupied by Albania, Armenia's next
opponents, a match scheduled to be played in Albania on March 29,
2015. Regardless of the outcome of the other match in the group on
that day, Serbia vs. Portugal, securing a victory against Albania will
get Armenia's campaign right back on track at the halfway point in
proceedings. That would leave Armenia with at least a tie for that
third place spot after four matches with four more left to be played,
three of which are at home. If that can be achieved, the results of
2014 will be a distant memory and the task at hand will once again be
within reach.
By M.J. Graham on December 29, 2014
http://armenianweekly.com/2014/12/29/soccer-2014/
Special for the Armenian Weekly
In business, it is customary and good practice to complete a
comprehensive year-end assessment of team performance. This usually
includes providing high-quality, candid performance and development
feedback and working to set "S.M.A.R.T." goals for the upcoming year
(i.e., specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time bound).
Once a close look has been taken at results and development over the
previous year, overall performance is generally ranked into broad
categories such as Distinguished, Commendable, Meets Expectations, and
Needs Improvement.
Performers at the high end of the scale get their rewards either on a
monetary level or with some sort of professional advancement in their
career. Performers at the other end of the spectrum are on the hot
seat and quite rightly put under the microscope in terms of finding
areas for improvement. Having won just one match in nine attempts in
2014, while also finishing the year languishing in the cellar of Euro
2016 qualifying Group I and slipping from 35 to 79 in the FIFA
rankings, one doesn't need a keen eye or astute management speak to
assess Armenia's results in 2014, although a new category may need to
be added at the low end of the scale: perhaps "Below Target," defined
as a team not meeting performance expectations, having displayed some
good quality work but achieving inconsistent results.
Euro 2016 qualifying Group I results
But is that a fair assessment? Should it be that easy to write off a
year's work as being below target based on results alone? After all,
the team went through a managerial change, a change of formation, and
countless injuries to key players. The complex game of soccer is loved
and celebrated throughout the world, but it is also analyzed and
dissected in equal measure by pundit and fan alike. So what other
factors can be considered in rating performances beyond results alone?
Is there some way to gauge whether a team deserved to win, lose, or
draw? Other statistics besides results can help paint a more
descriptive picture. Possession, chances made, shots on target,
corners, or even fouls can all be interpreted and manipulated to form
an opinion and come to some sort of conclusion. Whether that
conclusion is right or wrong is another thing. It is after all a game
of opinions.
The guys at OPTA, the highly touted sports data company, have an
interesting metric known as "Expected Goals." They look at each shot
or opportunity in a match and, using sophisticated modeling, determine
the likelihood of that shot or opportunity to result in a goal. The
Expected Goals metric is not perfect nor does OPTA's modeling claim to
be. When Expected Goals is calculated on a per-game basis (over
samples of ~30 shots) the metric can fall victim to the biases caused
by small sample sizes. Sometimes, however, it can be useful in
understanding a team's performance during a particularly good or bad
run of form, a stretch that Armenia currently finds itself in.
But what about luck? In the professional game or at any level for that
matter, can much stock be put into such a thing? It is often said that
good teams make their own luck. I'm not sure I fully buy into that
claim. I believe good players and good teams rather than making their
own luck, have in fact an innate ability to capitalize and profit from
whatever luck comes their way. I believe that to be a skill, and not
entirely related to the rub of the green. Having a keen sense of
concentration, reaction, balance, and spatial awareness can see great
players profit from lucky situations. Average players or the average
team who never seem to profit from such situations on a consistent
basis are usually left cursing their bad luck. With that said, does
Armenia deserve to be rock bottom of Group I?
New York-based OPTA statistician Devin Pleuler, a regular contributor
to the Central Winger series on mlssoccer.com, was kind enough to
share Armenia's numbers from their recent three qualifying matches.
The results aren't very surprising, but they do indicate a performance
level that is below par. By solely looking at the Expected Goals
metric, it could be concluded that Armenia deserved nothing from their
away games versus Denmark and Portugal, and somewhat overachieved in
Copenhagen by getting on the score sheet at all, when the quality of
their chances only resulted in 0.36 Expected Goals. Conversely,
Armenia can feel a little unlucky not to secure the three points
against Serbia. Even though Serbia out shot Armenia in that match,
Armenia's Expected Goals was much higher, indicating a higher quality
of scoring opportunity (namely, the penalty kick and rebound effort
from Marcos Pizzelli who was denied by an outrageous double save by
the Serbian goalkeeper late in the match).
Armenia's Expected Goals metric from their recent three qualifying matches
What about Armenia's S.M.A.R.T goals for 2015? Considering seeding and
past history, a realistic and attainable goal for Armenia should be
third place in the group and a playoff berth. Nothing more, nothing
less. This is after all an incremental improvement beyond their last
Euro campaign (where they just missed out on the playoff) and
something they have yet to achieve in their history. Arguably they
should have three points, but the fact of the matter is Armenia sits
on one point in Group I, three adrift of the playoff spot. That third
place berth is currently occupied by Albania, Armenia's next
opponents, a match scheduled to be played in Albania on March 29,
2015. Regardless of the outcome of the other match in the group on
that day, Serbia vs. Portugal, securing a victory against Albania will
get Armenia's campaign right back on track at the halfway point in
proceedings. That would leave Armenia with at least a tie for that
third place spot after four matches with four more left to be played,
three of which are at home. If that can be achieved, the results of
2014 will be a distant memory and the task at hand will once again be
within reach.