Analysis of the effectiveness of long distance passes in 2014 Brazil FIFA World Cup

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of long distance passes performed during the 2014 Brazil FIFA World Cup. All 64 matches were analyzed, however, actions performed during overtime were not included in the sample. The study defined long pass as an action made by a player from the defensive midfield aiming at passing the ball to another teammate located on the offensive field. The action result assessment followed these criteria: shots on goal, ball possession maintenance, loss of ball possession and ball possession recovery. Total long distance passes were also considered in the analysis. Throughout the tournament, 4,512 long distance passes were attempted. The main findings were that 59% resulted on loss, 28% on maintenance and 12% on recovery of the ball possession, but only less than 1% resulted in shots on goal (F = 505.5; p<0.001; partial ƞ² = 0.76). Teams with the highest number of long pass attempts loose ball possession more frequently. There were more long distance passes at the first and at the last 15 min of matches. UEFA and Concacaf teams executed, respectively, the lowest and the highest number of long passes. The major outcome of this study is that long distance passes have low effectiveness due to the high rate of loss of ball possession, rarely creating score opportunities. The more the teams executed long passes, the more the teams lose ball possession.

Success Factors in the FIFA 2018 World Cup in Russia and FIFA 2014 World Cup in Brazil

“…The reason might be that only quantity and not quality of crosses was considered. This assumption is supported by a study that found that long passes are linked to losing ball possession (Reis et al, 2017 ). Unsuccessful crosses are likely to initiate a counterattack.…”

Performance indicators to be explored in order to win Premier League matches

“…In the same way that authors claim that long passes are often ineffective and result in loss of ball possession (Reis et al, 2017), there are authors who consider ball possession a relevant performance indicator for success in soccer (Bate, 1988;Rocha-Lima, 2018;Stanhope, 2001). Complementarily, direct game approaches are also seen as beneficial for football teams at times when ball possession game models are not effective to win matches (Fernandez-Navarro et al, 2016;Tenga & Larsen, 2003), especially in the PL, league that the midfield consists of a fast passes area, not a control of the game one (Perarnau, 2017).…”

A habilidade motora passe e a organização hierárquica em equipes de futebol

“…Além de ser uma das habilidades motoras que ocorre com maior frequência nos jogos, o passe permite o deslocamento da bola no campo, de jogador a jogador (CORRÊA et al, 2014;GOES et al, 2019;REIN;RAABE;MEMMERT, 2017). O passe pode ser caracterizado em função da localização, da direção, da velocidade e da distância da ação no campo de jogo (CORRÊA et al, 2014;GOES et al, 2019;VASCONCELLOS;ALMEIDA, 2017a).…”

“…No entanto, GOES et al(2019) não considerou as equipes de futebol como sistemas organizados hierarquicamente, além(GOES et al, 2019), no presente estudo esta habilidade motora foi investigada como variável informacional ou perturbação. Importa destacar que nenhum dos estudos supracitados(BULDÚ et al, 2019;CHMURA et al, 2021;IMMLER et al, 2021;LIU et al, 2015;LIU et al, 2016a;LIU et al, 2016b;MCLEAN et al, 2021;PRAÇA et al, 2019;VASCONCELLOS;ALMEIDA, 2017a;YI et al, 2022;YI et al, 2020a;YI et al, 2020b;YI et al, 2020c;YI et al, 2019a;YI et al, 2019b)investigaram o passe e suas características (localização, direção, distância e velocidade) como possíveis influências que poderiam causar mudanças na organização hierárquica das equipes de futebol.…”