Did Lion City Sailors really deserve to win against Hougang United? Match Analysis using R language

Did the Lion City Sailors really deserve to win against Hougang United? (27 Feb 2022)

In a mouth-watering clash between the top-half contenders, we saw a lot of thrills and spills. It was a game where Lion City Sailors ended up winners by a margin of 3-1. But did LCS deserved to be winners? 

Using R-language programming, I'm going to dig into the match statistics and find the reasons to explain this result. Here's the data csv file from the tagging done from the match. Feel free to use it: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1YSa6luYACqIwnWKxwGbkmrXyDvjeZRIr?usp=sharing

You can view the match highlights from the video I've pasted in above. ^^^^^

fig 1. Total Shots by team

As expected, LCS had 100% more shots than Hougang. In terms of shots on-target, the Sailors had nine shots with one more hitting the woodwork. Meanwhile, Hougang had three shots on-target. Technically, they had the same conversion rate compared to the shots on-target. So the conclusion is that the problems doesn't rely on the shoot-conversion department. 

Verdict: LCS wins

 

fig 2. Set pieces 

For fig 2, we are looking at the hotspots for set piece areas for both these teams. During the first half, LCS had five set pieces in the opponents' half while Hougang had only one. It looked better for Hougang in the second half with three set pieces while LCS maintained at five. 

So what can we tell? Set pieces in the opponents' half indicates possibly a strategic decision by the opponents to stop the said team from progressing in an area where the opponent thinks is a dangerous area. Going by that logic, it shows LCS penetrated sensitive areas perceived by Hougang players more than the other way around. 

The flank in which the set pieces happened also indicated that both sides would attack with more threat on the flanks. LCS made more meaningful penetrations from their right flank in the first half, and more from left flank in the second half. Hougang made one penetration on the left flank in the first half, and in the second half, more from the right flank. 

I'd say that both teams also kept their opponents away from having set pieces in direct-scoring areas. Verdict: Draw

fig 3. Areas where players foul

 Fouls committed usually gauges how aggressive a team plays and at which part of the pitch. What jumps out at me on first glance is how LCS were aggressive in the second half at their opponents half. The high press. It had an effect in the final outcome as two goals were scored by LCS during the second half.

Verdict: LCS wins

fig 4. Interceptions in 1st Half

fig 5. Interceptions in 2nd Half

From fig 4 and 5: In the first half, LCS and Hougang both had more battles in the Hougang half in the first half. Later in the second half, the bulk of the battles was at Hougang's left flank in their half.  Both teams also had more or less the same amount of interceptions. 

No insights on first glance, Which I think Hougang edged it in terms of slightly more successful interceptions. Verdict: HGU wins

fig 6. First half crosses

fig 7. Second half crosses

fig 8. Total crosses

From fig 6-8 shows the crosses coming in from both teams. Again, Hougang look abysmal compared to LCS. Were Hougang trying to beat LCS in their own game? This match fielded a hougang team that looked like it wasn't focused on counter-attacks. But anyways...

Hougang mustered only two crosses in the first half and another eleven more in the second half. Overall, they had 2 successful crosses while the Sailors had six. LCS clearly has the upper hand here. Verdict: LCS wins

fig 9. HGU Possession(1st Half)

fig 10. LCS Possession(1st Half)

fig 11. HGU Possession(2nd Half)

fig 12. LCS Possession(2nd Half)

 The matrix for this series of possession graphs(fig 9-12) were born out of the need to quantify the total possession spread out over 6 'zones' on the pitch.  The arrow shows the direction on which the team in question is attacking from. A good "healthy" sign of a team dominating the match with a good array of attacks would have more amount of possession lost in the opponents half, especially in the attacking third.

I'll start with the easy one: the Sailors' had the "perfect" graph. Reason being, LCS had lost possession in the opponents half and low percentages within their own half. 

Meanwhile Hougang performed decently in the first half, but had a disappointing second half.  Verdict: LCS wins

fig 13.Thru/Key Passes(First Half)

fig 14.Thru/Key Passes(Second Half)

fig 15.Thru/Key Passes

Hougang tried to go toe-to-toe with LCS in their own game this season. Its' good to see Hougang going away from counter-attacking football, but I think they performed decently. 

In the first half, Hougang edged LCS in having more thru passes. In the second half, the Sailors put the pedal to the metal and produced more thru-passes. Hougang faded away during this period.  The biggest shock was that neither Andre Moritz or Zulfahmi contributed to the thru-passes list.

 

Perhaps they could not adjust to the increased speed and urgency of LCS who built upon their momentum from the first half while Hougang's changes couldn't went the opposite way.  Verdict: LCS wins

fig 16.

fig 17.

fig 18.

fig 19.

This series of graphs show each teams passing endeavours in each half. Each player is color-coded. I avoided using the start and end point of the pass(as it will be messy and confusing). So, it only shows the successful passes that got received by its intended target with the start position where the ball is played/pass. 

Straight away I can see how many passes  were played from LCS in the first half. Strangely, they were more effective in the
second half despite having a much less number of passes. LCS also had passing all throughout the pitch while Hougang were concentrated at passing quite a bit within their own half. 

Perhaps the players are still hard-wired to break into counter-attacks with less passing build-up in their opponents half. 

Verdict: LCS wins

fig 20. Hougang had more throw-ins in the first half

fig 21. It was throw-ins stalemate in the second half

There is just more throw-ins from Hougang than the Lion City Sailors. Take note that throw-in areas might suggest to us which flank had the busier time. Verdict: HGU wins

Final Verdict:

It looks like LCS were the better side definitely in the second half, but in the first half, Hougang really took the game to LCS. It's just a matter of time before LCS goes down with another team that recognises this pattern. They need their marquee signings to start the match first before being subbed instead of the other way round. 

As for Hougang, the new direction towards a more sustainable "build-from-the-back" play will take awhile to work perfectly. In a counter-attacking system, players tend to save more energy. But building from the back requires much more stamina and work rate. In the second half Hougang tired-out and LCS got their breakthrough. That, and also some ineffective substitions. 

© 2022 Fadly.M.H.Wychowvski