K-League: Who is a Flat Track Bully? Part 2
 |
| (from FCSeoul.com) |
2011 K-League
Table
Rank
|
Team
|
Manager
|
Pts.
|
1st
|
Jeonbuk
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
63
|
2nd
|
Pohang
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
59
|
3rd
|
FC Seoul
|
Choi Yong-soo
(23 games)
|
55
|
4th
|
Suwon Samsung
|
Yoo Sung-hyo
|
55
|
5th
|
Busan I’Park
|
An Ik-soo
|
46
|
6th
|
Ulsan Hyundai
|
Kim Ho-gon
|
46
|
In 2011, the top six qualified for the playoffs. In the playoffs, Ulsan eliminated Seoul and Suwon defeated Busan. Ulsan then knocked Suwon out and keeper Kim Seung-gyu, by saving two penalties, was the hero for Ulsan in their win against Pohang. Unfortunately, Ulsan lost to Jeonbuk in the two-legged championship final.
Below is the record of the top three managers during the regular season. I have split it into two parts. The first part is their record against the Big Four (Jeonbuk, Pohang, FC Seoul, and Suwon Samsung) and the second part is their record against the teams in the top six of the table (Big Four + Ulsan and Busan).
Choi
Yong-Soo, Choi Kang-hee, & Hwang Sun-hong: Records in 2011
2011 vs. Big Four 2011 vs. Top Six
Manager
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
5 (1.25)
|
5 (1.25)
|
5 (42%)
|
1.25
|
6
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
9 (1.5)
|
7 (0.78)
|
11 (61%)
|
1.83
|
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
6
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
10 (1.67)
|
11 (1.83)
|
6 (33%)
|
1
|
10
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
19 (1.9)
|
15 (1.5)
|
16 (53%)
|
1.6
|
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
6
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
9 (1.5)
|
10 (1.67)
|
7 (39%)
|
1.17
|
10
|
4
|
1
|
5
|
16 (1.6)
|
16 (1.6)
|
13 (43%)
|
1.3
|
Against the Big
Four, each manager should have played six games and against the Top Six it
would be four more games. Because Choi Yong-soo did not become the caretaker until after the first seven games,
he missed out on losses to Suwon and Busan, a draw against Ulsan, and a victory
over Jeonbuk. Since he only managed in four games and two of them were draws,
his average points against the Big Four is pretty low. Yet, it
drastically improves when the results against Busan and Ulsan are factored in.
However, the
same can be said of Choi Kang-hee and Hwang Sun-hong as well. Both had a
limited sample size, so each result takes on greater significance. Choi
Kang-hee performed abysmally against the Big Four, but his average jumped quite
a bit when he when the results against Busan and Ulsan are taken into account.
Hwang Sun-hon, on the other hand, had slightly better results against
teams in the Top Six rather than the Big Four, but not by much.
Nonetheless, even
though Choi Kang-hee only averaged a point against the Big Four and improved slightly when factoring in results against the top six, he
really feasted on the teams below.
Choi Kang-hee vs. Teams Not in the Top Six
P
|
W (%)
|
D (%)
|
L (%)
|
GF (avg.)
|
GA (avg.)
|
Pts (%)
|
Avg. Pts
|
20
|
14 (70%)
|
5 (25%)
|
1 (5%)
|
48 (2.4)
|
17 (0.85)
|
47 (78%)
|
2.35
|
Besides one loss
to Jeonnam, Choi Kang-hee was quite successful.
He collected 78% of the points available and had an average of 2.35 points per game
against teams outside the top six. Let’s
compare that to how Hwang Sun-hong did against teams outside the top six in
2011.
Hwang Sun-hong vs. Teams Not in the Top Six
P
|
W (%)
|
D (%)
|
L (%)
|
GF (avg.)
|
GA (avg.)
|
Pts (%)
|
Avg. Pts
|
20
|
13 (65%)
|
7 (35%)
|
0
|
43 (2.15)
|
17 (0.85)
|
46 (77%)
|
2.3
|
Unlike Choi
Kang-hee, Hwan Sun-hong did not lose to anyone outside the top six. However, he had more draws and one less win,
hence, the four point difference between the two teams at the end of the
season. If Hwang had drawn one or two
games less, he might have been the champion that year.
Choi Yong-soo vs. Teams not in the Top Six
P
|
W (%)
|
D (%)
|
L (%)
|
GF (avg.)
|
GA (avg.)
|
Pts (%)
|
Avg. Pts
|
17
|
12 (71%)
|
2 (12%)
|
3 (17%)
|
40 (2.35)
|
21 (1.24)
|
38 (75%)
|
2.24
|
Choi Yong-soo
finished just behind Choi Kang-hee and Hwang Sun-hong as far as results against
the top six. Unfortunately, he lost to
Daegu twice (finished in 12th place) and Seognnam once. Already hampered by a terrible start (a
recurring theme), Seoul were never really in the title race. They finished eight points behind Jeonbuk,
but maybe if Seoul had won against Daegu and Seongnam, they could have made up
ground on the champions.
In 2011, being
a flat-track bully paid off. Choi
Kang-hee had abysmal results against teams in the Big Four, but cleaned up
against the lesser competition and that is why Jeonbuk finished as champions
that year. Because teams in the Big Four
and top of the table played each other only twice a year, getting a result
against a title rival was not as important then as it would become in the
future. Obviously, it was still important, but there was another route to the championship.
As long as a team, say Jeonbuk, handled their business against teams in the lower end of the table and a rival such as Seoul and Pohang did not, then they could use that as a path to secure the title. However, I would say that changed in 2012 when the split system was introduced.
As long as a team, say Jeonbuk, handled their business against teams in the lower end of the table and a rival such as Seoul and Pohang did not, then they could use that as a path to secure the title. However, I would say that changed in 2012 when the split system was introduced.
2012 K-League
Table
Rank
|
Team
|
Manager
|
Pts.
|
1st
|
FC Seoul
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
96
|
2nd
|
Jeonbuk
|
Kee Heung-sil
|
79
|
3rd
|
Pohang
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
77
|
4th
|
Suwon Samsung
|
Yoon Sung-hyo
|
73
|
5th
|
Ulsan Hyundai
|
Kim Ho-gon
|
68
|
6th
|
Jeju Utd.
|
Park Kyung-hoon
|
63
|
7th
|
Busan I’Park
|
An Ik-soo
|
53
|
8th
|
Gyeongnam FC
|
Choi Jin-han
|
50
|
In 2012, the
K-League introduced the split system and relegation. To make the numbers work, the teams played
each other twice. After thirty games,
the top 8 teams and the bottom 8 teams split and played each other two more
times. Therefore, the top teams played
each other four times, which made the results against rivals competing for the title
so much more important.
Hwang
Sun-hong & Choi Yong-soo: Records in 2012
2012
vs. Big
Four
2012 vs. Top Eight
Manager
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
12
|
8
|
0
|
4
|
26 (2.17)
|
12 (1)
|
24 (67%)
|
2
|
28
|
13
|
5
|
10
|
47 (1.67)
|
32 (1.14)
|
44 (52%)
|
1.57
|
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
12
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
10 (1)
|
17 (1.7)
|
15 (42%)
|
1.25
|
28
|
15
|
8
|
5
|
42 (1.5)
|
29 (1.04)
|
53 (63%)
|
1.89
|
This was the year
that Seoul crushed the competition. Choi
Yong-soo struggled against the Big Four teams, collecting an average of 1.25
points per game. However, he improved
significantly when you factor in the results against the teams in the top
eight. Conversely, Hwang Sun-hong
cleaned up against the top four, averaging two points a game, but was only
slightly above the mean against the top eight.
I think context
has to be taken into consideration though.
Three of the five losses against the Big Four for Choi Yong-soo were
against Suwon and the fourth, a 5-0 thrashing from Pohang, came at the end of
the season when Seoul had the title comfortably wrapped up. If we eliminated the four games against the
Bluewings, Choi’s average jumps up to a much more respectable 1.75 points per
game. It would be even higher if we did not count the meaningless 5-0 loss that Seoul had against Pohang at the end of the year when Choi sent out a team of reserves. In other words, outside of Suwon, Choi performed at a much better rate against his title rivals than the numbers indicate.
2013 K-League
Table
Rank
|
Team
|
Manager
|
Pts.
|
1st
|
Pohang
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
74
|
2nd
|
Ulsan Hyundai
|
Kim Ho-gon
|
73
|
3rd
|
Jeonbuk
|
Fabio
Lefundes/Choi Kang-hee
|
63
|
4th
|
FC Seoul
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
62
|
5th
|
Suwon Samsung
|
Seo Jung-won
|
53
|
6th
|
Busan I’Park
|
Yoon Sung-hyo
|
52
|
6th
|
Incheon Utd.
|
Kim Bong-gil
|
50
|
In 2013, there
were 14 teams in the K-League. Just like
2012, the system was the same, so after 26 games, the top teams split and
played each other twice for a total of 38 games, which the K-League seems to
believe is the gold standard.
Hwang
Sun-hong, Choi Kang-hee, Choi Yong-soo, & Seo Jung-won: Records in 2013
2013
vs. Big Four 2013 vs. Top Seven
Manager
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
12
|
7
|
3
|
2
|
19 (1.58)
|
12 (1)
|
24 (67%)
|
1.5
|
24
|
10
|
8
|
6
|
35 (1.46)
|
30 (1.25)
|
38 (53%)
|
1.58
|
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
8
|
1
|
3
|
4
|
6 (0.75)
|
12 (1.5)
|
6 (25%)
|
0.75
|
17
|
7
|
5
|
5
|
20 (1.18)
|
20 (1.18)
|
26 (51%)
|
1.53
|
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
12
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
16 (1.33)
|
15 (1.25)
|
16 (44%)
|
1.33
|
24
|
8
|
8
|
8
|
30 (1.25)
|
31 (1.29)
|
32 (44%)
|
1.33
|
|
Seo Jung-won
|
12
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
16 (1.33)
|
17 (1.42)
|
15 (42%)
|
1.25
|
24
|
7
|
5
|
12
|
26 (1.08)
|
31 (1.29)
|
26 (36%)
|
1.08
|
For Pohang, I
would say this was the perfect season.
They collected 28 out of the 30 points available in their first 10
games, did not lose to anyone below the top seven all year, and lost just once
after the league split. In fact, they
won their last six games, all against teams in the top seven, which is why they
won the title.
Jeonbuk were not
much of a factor that year, as Choi Kang-hee did not return until mid-season. However, in the eight games he managed against the Big Four, he did pretty poorly (collecting only 0.75 points per
game). Seo Jung-won’s first year as
coach of Suwon was a bit of the reverse.
He did better against teams in the Big Four, but much worse against
teams in the top seven (averaging just above one point).
In my opinion, this
is the year that Choi Yong-soo’s reputation as a flat-track bully began to
develop. Against teams in the Big Four
and top seven, he collected less than 50% of the points available and only averaged
1.33 points per game, which is below the cut-off line of 1.5 as being the mean. Against teams in the bottom seven, he did
much better, collecting 71% of the available points and averaging 2.14 points
per game.
Nonetheless, if a team outside of the top seven had won the FA Cup, Choi would not have qualified for the ACL and probably would have been out of a job. Therefore, I would say he was quite lucky in 2013 that Pohang and Jeonbuk, both above Seoul, contested one another in the final since it enabled the fourth place finisher a the final ACL spot.
Nonetheless, if a team outside of the top seven had won the FA Cup, Choi would not have qualified for the ACL and probably would have been out of a job. Therefore, I would say he was quite lucky in 2013 that Pohang and Jeonbuk, both above Seoul, contested one another in the final since it enabled the fourth place finisher a the final ACL spot.
2014 K-League 2015 K-League
Rnk
|
Team
|
Mgr.
|
Pts.
|
Rnk
|
Team
|
Mgr.
|
Pts.
|
|
1st
|
Jeonbuk
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
81
|
1st
|
Jeonbuk
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
73
|
|
2nd
|
Suwon Samsung
|
Seo Jung-won
|
67
|
2nd
|
Suwon Samsung
|
Seo Jung-won
|
67
|
|
3rd
|
FC Seoul
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
58
|
3rd
|
Pohang
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
66
|
|
4th
|
Pohang
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
58
|
4th
|
FC Seoul
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
62
|
|
5th
|
Jeju Utd.
|
Park Kyung-hoon
|
54
|
5th
|
Seongnam FC
|
Kim Hak-bum
|
60
|
|
6th
|
Ulsan Hyundai
|
Cho Min-kook
|
50
|
6th
|
Jeju Utd.
|
Jo Sung-hwan
|
50
|
In 2014 and 2015,
the K-League once again changed how the season would be contested. Each team would play one another three times,
then the top six and bottom six would split and play each other once, for a total
of 38 games (again, the K-League Gold Standard). The Big Four teams and teams in the top six
played each other four times.
Choi Kang-hee, Seo
Jung-won, Choi Yong-soo, & Hwang Sun-hong: Records in 2014
2014 vs. Big
Four
2014 vs. Top Six
Mgr.
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
12
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
15 (1.25)
|
12 (1)
|
21 (58%)
|
1.75
|
20
|
10
|
6
|
4
|
24 (1.2)
|
16 (0.8)
|
36 (60%)
|
1.8
|
|
Seo Jung-won
|
12
|
5
|
0
|
7
|
14 (1.17)
|
15 (1.25)
|
15 (42%)
|
1.25
|
20
|
11
|
2
|
7
|
27 (1.35)
|
19 (0.95)
|
35 (58%)
|
1.75
|
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
12
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
8 (0.67)
|
5 (0.42)
|
19 (53%)
|
1.58
|
20
|
8
|
7
|
5
|
19 (0.95)
|
12 (0.6)
|
31 (52%)
|
1.55
|
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
12
|
3
|
3
|
6
|
11 (0.92)
|
16 (1.33)
|
12 (33%)
|
1
|
20
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
21 (1.05)
|
24 (1.2)
|
24 (40%)
|
1.2
|
The
table in 2014 confirmed what I said earlier about the importance of getting
results against your rivals. Choi
Kang-hee did well against teams in the Big Four and Top Six, thereby winning
the title with a fair amount of ease. The
race between third and fourth however, is where things get interesting.
FC
Seoul and Pohang were tied on points, but FC Seoul edged out Pohang on goal
difference. I would also say that Choi
Yong-soo’s record against teams in the Big Four and Top Six is actually what
helped them win the final ACL spot. As
evidenced by the amount of goals Seoul averaged (0.67 against Big Four teams and 0.95 against Top Six teams), one can discern that they were
a dreadful team to watch. Seoul were
quite defensive and had difficulty scoring goal, but this approach worked
against the top teams that looked to attack.
Seoul could sit back, keep their shape, and spring a surprise. Slightly more often than not, it ended in a positive result. Therefore, even though I would argue the team in 2013 was significantly better, this iteration had better results because of their offensive limitations. Since Seoul struggled to score, it was in Choi’s best interest to defend resolutely and hope for a chance on the break. For whatever reason, this approach seems to be rewarded quite frequently in soccer, which is why so many managers most likely adopt it.
Seoul could sit back, keep their shape, and spring a surprise. Slightly more often than not, it ended in a positive result. Therefore, even though I would argue the team in 2013 was significantly better, this iteration had better results because of their offensive limitations. Since Seoul struggled to score, it was in Choi’s best interest to defend resolutely and hope for a chance on the break. For whatever reason, this approach seems to be rewarded quite frequently in soccer, which is why so many managers most likely adopt it.
Hwang Sun-hong,
Choi Kang-hee, Seo Jung-won, & Choi Yong-soo: Records in 2015
2015 vs. Big
Four
2015 vs. Top Six
Manager
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
P
|
W
|
D
|
L
|
GF (Avg.)
|
GA (Avg.)
|
Pts (Pct.)
|
Avg. Pts
|
|
Hwang Sun-hong
|
12
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
13 (1.08)
|
7 (0.58)
|
21 (58%)
|
1.75
|
20
|
10
|
5
|
5
|
25 (1.25)
|
16 (0.8)
|
35 (58%)
|
1.75
|
|
Choi Kang-hee
|
12
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
14 (1.17)
|
12 (1)
|
18 (50%)
|
1.5
|
20
|
10
|
4
|
6
|
26 (1.3)
|
18 (0.9)
|
34 (57%)
|
1.7
|
|
Seo Jung-won
|
12
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
16 (1.33)
|
17 (1.42)
|
15 (42%)
|
1.25
|
20
|
8
|
5
|
7
|
29 (1.45)
|
26 (1.3)
|
29 (48%)
|
1.45
|
|
Choi Yong-soo
|
12
|
3
|
3
|
6
|
14 (1.17)
|
21 (1.75)
|
12 (33%)
|
1
|
20
|
6
|
6
|
8
|
25 (1.25)
|
30 (1.5)
|
24 (40%)
|
1.2
|
Unlike
2014, I would say that Jeonbuk in 2015 were nothing special. Choi Kang-hee was average against teams in
the Big Four, but he did well against teams in the Top Six. Hwang Sun-hong did well against teams in both
the Big Four and Top Six, which means he probably did not win as many points
against teams in the bottom of the table as he should have.
Seo
Jung-won did not do well against teams in the Big Four and Top Six and this, along
with Jong Tae-se’s departure, was the reason why they did not win the
league. I agree with Scott Whitelock
that Suwon would have probably won the league if Jong had stayed. I think they missed his presence in games
against the top teams and the results show.
For example, in the last two games that Seoul played against them, Suwon were clearly a different team than the first two games that these two teams contested. Suwon lacked his ability to hold up the ball and be the focal point for attacks, and I think it gave Seoul a certain amount of freedom to attack. The back three CBs for Seoul could contain Mitsanski much easier than Jong, it negated Suwon's offense. This was particularly evident in the game that finished 4-3. Seoul dominated the first 70 minutes, but lost their head looking for a fifth goal (imo), and allowed Suwon to get back into the game. The score is much closer than the game really was.
For example, in the last two games that Seoul played against them, Suwon were clearly a different team than the first two games that these two teams contested. Suwon lacked his ability to hold up the ball and be the focal point for attacks, and I think it gave Seoul a certain amount of freedom to attack. The back three CBs for Seoul could contain Mitsanski much easier than Jong, it negated Suwon's offense. This was particularly evident in the game that finished 4-3. Seoul dominated the first 70 minutes, but lost their head looking for a fifth goal (imo), and allowed Suwon to get back into the game. The score is much closer than the game really was.
Finally,
I would say that 2015 is the year that Choi Yong-soo earned the label
flat-track bully. Seoul were dismal
against the Big Four, collecting just a third of the points available. They were not much better against teams in
the top four either, collecting only 40% of the points available. Contrasting that against teams in the bottom
six, Seoul did much better. They
averaged 2.1 points per game and collected 70% of the points available.
I
feel this is why Seoul are perennial top four finishers. They tend to do quite well against weaker opposition
but struggle against the better teams. That is good enough to qualify for the ACL, but not enough to become champions. If they want to win the title in 2016, Choi Yong-soo must fix
this immediately. The game on March 12th against Jeonbuk would be a great time to start.
![[about]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-X5XZtOqAinM/WIhWWYQ1A9I/AAAAAAAACRs/Xmkcwyr_P3Aprc4t_Wijw_oPcsoOGjq0wCK4B/s1600/KLU.png)
No comments:
Post a Comment