The 'Biased Basis' of the GOAT Debate- Part 1

In the history of sport, there has always been debate on the greatest ever with regards to a particular sport. However, when it comes to football, this topic is perhaps never ending and so open-ended, that there can never be a conclusive, and completely objective answer.

Sure, there are several names that crop up. Pele, Maradona, Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, 
Di Stefano, Ronaldo 'el Phenomeno', and Cruyff are perhaps the most common, although there are several others who can certainly stake their claim. But can we actually decide who the greatest ever is? All those names I mentioned do have one thing in common. They are all forwards or attack-minded players.

If you think about it, forwards or attack-minded players dominate headlines, shirts with their names are sold more, and most individual awards these days are won by them. Even the Ballon d'Or, considered to be the most prestigious individual prize in football, which has been awarded since 1965, seems to favour forwards, with 44 of them claiming the honour, compared to 14 midfielders, 5 defenders and just the one goalkeeper.

This of course seems befitting, seeing that these players are the ones with the most goals, assists, chances created and what not. However, just because these players have such a large number of goals, assists and dribbles among other easily available statistics, does it make them the greatest players of all time? 

Of course not. Several factors such as positioning, maintaining the offside trap, and of course, pure intimidation due to a player's presence are either never depicted or cannot be measured, and hence aren't taken into account while determining the GOAT. How then are we to determine the GOAT? Should we divide players into attack-minded and defense-minded and pick one from each? Maybe we can, or we can differentiate players on the basis of skill-sets and maybe try to better understand which skills are the ones which only the GOAT can have. (I will be considering only outfield players and not goalkeepers as the latter requires a completely different set of skills and has a very unique role)

Let us think of forwards- including attacking midfielders, wingers and strikers- as players who exhibit most of their talent or skill while they are 'on the ball'. Naturally, defenders- including centre-backs, defensive midfielders and full backs- are players who exhibit most of their talent or skill 'off the ball'. Now the average person watching the game will be drawn towards the step-overs, the bending crosses, the shimmies past the sliding tackles, and those inch-perfect, perfectly weighted through-balls, and everything else that requires 'forward skills', but if you're someone who actively follows and analyses the game, you'll be aware that all that is just one side of the coin.

A rock-sturdy shoulder push, a perfectly timed sliding tackle, the straight lines that have to be maintained to 'just catch' the lurking forward offside...all these often go unnoticed by most viewers. In recent times, defending has rightly been called as 'the lost art' by commentators, analysts and even former players. Gone are the days when teams had a Moore, a Beckenbauer or a Maldini. 

Nowadays we see 'wing-backs' crossing and centre-backs playing out from the back. Barcelona and Spain's famous 'tiki-taka' style of play that dominated world football from 2008-2012, is in it's very foundation, a defensive style that required highly skilled players instead of robust, tough-tackling ones. 'Traditional Defending' however, requires tremendous 'off the ball' skills.

However, good forwards also have a few 'off the ball' skills, such as the ability to make runs into space, and similarly, solid defenders often have an excellent first touch and an ability to deal with air-balls, which certainly qualify as 'on the ball' skills. 

Now that we have divided players into two different skill-sets rather than by position, let us focus on how much importance we must give to each set. Statistically speaking, players generally have the ball only for around 2-3 minutes per match. Hence, for around 87 minutes or more, the player's 'off the ball' skills are on display. How well a player utilizes these 87 minutes determine how effectively one can capitalize on those 2-3 minutes when those 'on the ball' skills are required. 

In this post, let us try to analyse what each player, depending on position or playing style, will be doing during those 2-3 minutes when he or she has the ball.

A defender or defensive minded player, will usually be involved in the slow monotonous drone of passing the ball around either in triangles, horizontally across the field or vertically upwards unless the opportunity for a long-ball or through-ball presents itself. 

However, should the ball be given away in a dangerous place, either through a miscued pass, a dreadful first touch, or simply by an opposing forward capitalizing on a moment of laziness, the consequences might be dreadful for the team. Hence, an individual mistake by a defensive player, or by one in a defensive role/position at that moment, may prove to be more costly for the team than an 'attacking' mistake.  

A forward or attack-minded player will either try to create chances, convert chances to goals and assists, or may simply be involved in either the build-up play or do all the necessary legwork to tire and stretch defences open, exposing gaps for others to exploit. 

Now should an attack-minded player fail to perform the desired role perfectly, there is always someone else who can take over and pinch that vital goal or create that 'comes only once in every game' chance. Several games, including major finals, have been won by pinching a goal through a set-piece or a scramble in the box. So if an 'individual' attacker fails to provide his dues in a match, it generally may not cost a team much in a negative sense, compared to an 'individual' defender giving the ball away in a dangerous area. 

How many times have we seen a forward not deliver and all commentators and experts will say "Oh, he/she's had a bad game" or "He/She's not been in good form lately"? More often than not, it's not because he/she has had a bad game, but it's probably because the opposing defenders would have been exceptional for those 87 minutes that they don't have the ball. More about that, on my next post!