Data shows us what is optimal, and we modified how we play to avoid the lower probability chances, but the majority of the nostalgic football fans want to be surprised like they were ten years ago. Those moments were born from not knowing what was optimal.

Michael Cox on “Has the impact of analytics on modern football been overstated?” for The Athletic:

In stark contrast, the story of the analytics movement in cricket — more or less Britain’s version of baseball — is genuinely revelatory. Hitting Against The Spin, by Nathan Leamon and Ben Jones, challenges long-held assumptions and actually prescribes playing in an unorthodox fashion. In keeping with its title, but going against what most cricketers were taught, they show that hitting ‘against’ the spin is more effective than hitting ‘with’ the spin, and they show that while the ‘good-length, good-line ball from a leg-spinner’ is the rarest type of delivery in Test cricket, it is statistically the most effective.

Cricketers will read it and genuinely change how they play. That sport, like baseball, is simpler and easier to quantify than football. But it’s nevertheless a little underwhelming to read groundbreaking statistical analysis of other sports, return to football and find that the main conclusion is that more shots go in from 10 yards than from 20 yards.

So far, it seems fair to say that data has ‘changed football’ in the same way Google reviews have ‘changed restaurants’, considering almost everyone, when planning a meal out in an unfamiliar location, will check online reviews before making their decision. If there is relevant data out there, with a decent sample size, you’ll use it — and you probably won’t go for a 3.1-rated pizza restaurant over a 4.5.

I would have to imagine that for most fans, the reason they watch is to see people perform actions that they could not perform themselves. The unexpected.

Long-range shots, at the speed of a train, are one of the main things that even an above-average player could not do. We miss them, but they are not optimal.

The goal was always to score and win, but how we scored changed. There has never been more talent in football but the way in which they are trained, think, and play is different.

Before, players didn’t fully know what to expect; they had to find the solution. The players that could find the solutions stood out more because, without them, you simply wouldn’t score.

Teams before created an environment for their thinkers to find the solution. An individual shined in moments.

Now that we know how to use data, we know what to expect and we know what works. We can assign a value to each action; therefore, we know the likely outcome.

Teams now create an environment for the players to execute a plan. The entire group of players shines together.

You don’t come to a game to watch a specific player anymore; you come to a game to watch the entire team because the team executes the plan. You don’t judge a player off how they look, you judge their stats. Can you execute or not? If you wanted to stand out before, you had to perform the spectacular. If you want to stand out now, you have to make a mistake.

The unfortunate truth is that teams were never there to entertain; they were there to win. Those that say they want to entertain don’t see football as a business, which is a good thing because we want to be surprised.

The problem is not that we use data more and more; it is how we use it. If we use it to empower players to find their own solutions then everyone wins, because they learn how to produce the unexpected. But we need those long shots back.