PSG signed a poor draw against FC Nantes, despite being stuck in a long series of poor results, despite having 84% of ball possession. This eloquent figure, a French championship record, is however not to be considered in the same way depending on the two halves and describes two very different problems of the capital club.
Luis Enrique's PSG, decidedly outside the norms of modern football, set a new record this Saturday evening by accumulating no less than 84% of ball possession during their draw against FC Nantes. This statistic is a record since the Opta institute has been recording data from the French championship, namely almost 20 years and it is even quite probable that it is the historical record given the Parisian game and the evolution of the balance of power in the round ball.
84%, a figure linked to a game project
With 84% possession for a single goal scored, the figure appears logically ridiculous and describes a team with an incredible inability to score. This unique figure, even if PSG had already achieved close ball possession rates in the past, is all the more striking as it was constructed in the same way over the half-times: PSG had 83% of ball possession. possession at halftime and the number remained virtually the same in the second half. It is precisely this continuity in possession while the two periods of the meeting were very different which forces us to contextualize it a little more.
The 84% possession does not represent the same thing in the way PSG held and exploited the ball. In absolute terms, the figure is that of Luis Enrique's game plan, who is keen to have the ball as much as possible, regardless of the opponent or the players he lines up at the start of the match. But the ability of the players in question to exploit the ball more or less well necessarily varies the interest of this statistic.
From good 84% to bad 84%
With 83% of ball possession in the first period, PSG scored a goal, found the goal, and created no less than 5 to 6 very clear scoring chances. With almost two Expected Goals on the clock at the break, the ball possession statistics were positive and showed a team in total control of the game, although surprised by an individual exploit from Abline.
But this PSG was weighed down by another deficiency, the well-known one of the lack of success in front of goal. However, it was the sequence of times of possession of the Parisian team which wore down FC Nantes since several of the Parisian chances arrived at the end of sequences that were long to say the least. And the Parisian ultra-possession of the first period was therefore in no way negative.
This figure of 84%, however, becomes particularly negative in the second half since the chances created were rare and PSG lacked inspiration and imbalance in their possession of the ball. Where Paris managed to alternate possession and acceleration of the game during the first period, it was no longer successful at all after the break and locked itself into a monotonous rhythm which served the Nantes team well.
In this sense, possession at a rate of 84% has now become negative and even the Parisian players who came into play have not managed to revitalize it, although Désiré Doué has probably achieved his best minutes in the jersey of the PSG as a winger. The difference between the two halves should not, however, be used to point the finger at Luis Enrique's game plan as this figure of 84% expresses both the good and the bad sides of the Parisian project drawn up by the coach.
An unfair criticism?
As long as this possession, against an opponent who is very grouped together on the field, makes it possible to create clear scoring opportunities, and even very clear ones for many of them, it is unfair to criticize, and even counterproductive, the way of playing Parisians. How can we present his 84% as a negative figure when the offensive production was very present, and the defensive animation overall effective?
On the other hand, when this figure of 84% leads to a completely relaxing game and an inability to create the slightest imbalance, it is then normal, and even logical, to point the finger at the choice to hold the ball without doing anything with it. But, with a few exceptions, who were on the field in the first and second half, with the same style of play and the same opponents overall.
If critical there must be on this figure of possession, perhaps the finger should also be pointed at the players. The holders knew how to use the ball but they were still very clumsy in front of goal and frankly ran out of steam over time. As for the substitutes, with one exception, they contributed nothing at all and even contributed to this poor quality possession which bothered PSG as much as FC Nantes.
If Luis Enrique was wrong, it is probably more in his management of the match over time rather than in the ultra-possessive approach, the best part of the match having been that at kick-off where the two teams were still the most connected to the plans of their respective coaches. Worse, Paris opened the scoring at a time when possession was even higher than the famous 84%…
