Decoding the complexities of transitions in football: a comprehensive narrative review

The search was performed by three authors to identify articles published before 15 November 2023, in two electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science). The authors of this review were not blinded to journal names or manuscript authors. The search was conducted throughout the full text. The search strategy combined terms covering the topics related with transitions in sports and football phases, moments, and processes: (“offensive/defensive transitions in football” or “moments in football” or “counterattacks” or “transitions in sports”). Search strategy focused mainly on football even if nondirect literature from football was used.

After completion of the search by the researchers the articles were downloaded and stored with Mendeley software. Subsequently, one the authors screened (P.E.) the remaining records to verify the inclusion/exclusion criteria using a hierarchical approach in two phases. The papers were excluded when they were not original and met the following exclusion criteria: (1) no football- or transitions-related documents; and (2) not from reliable sources or best practices used.

Performance analysis allows for the understanding and prediction of past and future behavior patterns for teams and/or individuals, as noted by Carling et al. (2014) and Lago-Peñas et al. (2017). This can be achieved through various methods such as factorial analysis (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2016), notational analysis (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2016), correspondence analysis (Di Salvo et al., 2007), or sequential analysis (Lapresa, Arana, Anguera, Garzón, & Belén Garzón, 2013; Paulis, Perea, & Hernández, 2008). These analyses are often viewed as being of a personal or team nature because they focus on performance indicators that team leaders consider most relevant for their game and team (Di Salvo et al., 2007). There have been numerous suggestions for tactical performance indicators (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2016; Mackenzie & Cushion, 2012), as well as tactical metrics (Winter & Pfeiffer, 2016) and tactical patterns (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2016). However, their use must be cautious as they can be influenced by other situational variables (Sampaio & Leite, 2012) and, as a result, impact the performance of the team and their game mode (Fernandez-Navarro, Fradua, Zubillaga, & McRobert, 2018).

In addition to these insights, recent contributions emphasize the growing interest in sports analytics, particularly in football (Plakias et al., 2023). The research by Plakias et al. provided a structured framework for analysts and coaches, categorizing distinct playing styles in European soccer leagues based on a comprehensive analysis of 88 performance indicators. The focus on build-up and transitions in the game proves pivotal, offering valuable insights for training processes in all four key moments of the game. Similarly, a recent study concentrating on defensive playing styles in professional football identified 17 key performance indicators related to defensive styles (Ruan et al., 2023). The findings emphasize the importance of consciously adjusting defensive styles for improved performance, suggesting potential applications in scouting and match preparation.

Moreover, some authors have highlighted the importance of various technical–tactical–strategic performance indicators in football (M. D. Hughes & Bartlett, 2002). These indicators can include a wide range of measures, such as ball possession (Lago-Peñas & Dellal, 2010), the success of ball possessions in terms of scoring goals (Lago-Ballesteros, Lago-Peñas, & Rey, 2012), the characteristics of offensive play (Pratas, Volossovitch, & Ferreira, 2012), game interruptions (Siegle & Lames, 2012), and corner kick characteristics (Sainz de Baranda & Lopez-Riquelme, 2012). Additionally, football performance analysis also focuses on defensive performance indicators, such as the type and location of ball recovery (Almeida, Ferreira, & Volossovitch, 2014), and the time required to regain possession of the ball (defensive reaction time) (Vogelbein, Nopp, & Hökelmann, 2014), among others. It is evident that these performance indicators are closely linked to different tactical principles of play. Tactical principles are defined as a set of game forms that allow players to find solutions to problems posed by the opposing team (Garganta & Pinto, 1994). When properly applied, these principles enable teams to control the game in both offensive and defensive phases. Therefore, performance analyses that identify the performance indicators where teams present the most weaknesses are crucial for teams to gain a competitive advantage (M. D. Hughes & Bartlett, 2002). According to Bettega, Scaglia, Nascimento, Ibáñez, and Galatti (2021) and Clemente, Martins, Mendes, and Figueiredo (2014), various tactical principles have been developed and characterized, including general principles, operational principles, and fundamental principles. These principles are summarized and systematized in Table 1.

Transitions and counterattacks have been identified as crucial moments in achieving tactical performance in football. Various studies, including case studies of specific teams, analyses of specific leagues, and transversal studies, have found that counterattacks are a vital element in achieving success on the field. For example, Gonzalez-Rodenas and colleagues (2015a) found that counterattacks are more effective in creating scoring opportunities than other types of attacks, particularly when the opposing team is defensively imbalanced. Additionally, these studies also found that counterattacks are closely related to the offensive transition phase. It is important to note that counterattacks and transitions are distinct concepts, but they are closely related. A counterattack is defined as a “fast direct attack with few players”, triggered when the ball is won followed by a “quick pass played over many opponents” that in the instant of passing, “one or two players should rush forward to support the player who receives the ball in plenty of space” (Lago-Ballesteros et al., 2012).

Counterattacks and transitions have been found to be crucial moments in achieving tactical performance in football. Counterattacks are defined as an attack that begins when the ball is won in open play, and progresses by exploiting or creating the opposing team’s defensive imbalance from the beginning to the end of the play, using a penetrative pass, dribble, or a combination of both (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2018; Tenga et al., 2010). The main objective of counterattacks is to exploit the weaknesses and imbalances of the opposing defense in order to achieve penetration (Gonzalez-Rodenas et al., 2016; Lago-Peñas et al., 2017; Tenga et al., 2010). Counterattacks should be performed as soon as possible after regaining possession and progress relatively quickly (Tenga et al., 2010). Some authors have also suggested that the speed at which the ball is moved up the field during a counterattack determines its value (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2018). Counterattack is described as typically involving moving the ball quickly in transitional moments trying to outnumber defenders (Hewitt et al., 2016).

Transition periods present both exciting opportunities and vulnerabilities (Turner & Sayers, 2017) that teams should aim to exploit in order to achieve their goals. Theoretically, it is established that in a transition, the team that takes possession should try to reach the target as quickly as possible in order to capitalize on space that may have resulted from the possession shift (Garganta, Maia, & Basto, 1997). However, there is no clear consensus in the literature on when a transition begins and ends. Some authors have suggested that the defensive moment of the game starts before the ball is lost, and the offensive moment begins before the recovery (Maneiro et al., 2019).

Several studies have found that fast offensive transitions give the possibility of a higher conversion rate of shots per goal than slower attacks (M. Hughes & Franks, 2005; Yiannakos & Armatas, 2006), which increases the chances of scoring a goal by transitions than by establishing an attack. Additionally, the “counterattacks were characterized not only by the offensive game tactics, but also by the opposing defensive tactics” (Gonzalez-Rodenas, Lopez-Bondia, Calabuig, James, & Aranda, 2015a) and during the transition periods, the positioning and behavior of both teams create a tactical environment in which the final result is interdependent and multifactorial (Gonzalez-Rodenas et al., 2016).

From the above, it is clear that counterattacks result from transitions, and that these represent a crucial moment in the development of the game. Therefore, in this narrative, counterattacks will be considered as transitions. However, it is important to note that the term “transition” has been used inadvertently to explain two distinct concepts, which can generate confusion. Some authors consider the game to have four moments (Oliveira, 2004) or five moments (Gollan et al., 2018; Hewitt et al., 2016), where the term “Transitions” seems to define two of these moments (Table 2). Regardless of the author, when referencing and describing play styles, the terminology “transition/counterattack play” has always emerged (Gómez, Mitrotasios, Armatas, & Lago-Peñas, 2018). Further research is necessary to understand the tactical factors related to offensive success in counterattack possessions in order to improve the training process of this transitional moment.

In today’s football, teams have evolved to exhibit complex positional, tactical, and strategic overlaps (Fig. 1). Recent research suggests that all the concepts outlined in Fig. 1, namely strategies, tactics, principles of play, styles of play, and key moments of the game, stem from the coach’s philosophy regarding the team’s overarching game model (Plakias, 2020). Additionally, the same author indicates that consideration should be given to players’ abilities, the club’s culture, structure, and objectives, as well as the national culture of clubs and coaches. Nevertheless, to fully understand the game, it is important to distinguish between the concepts of offensive and defensive transitions. These concepts are crucial to understanding the dynamics of the game and how teams approach both attacking and defending during transitions.

According to Yiannakos and Armatas (2006), offensive transitions are initiated when a team gains possession of the ball and end when the team achieves a predetermined outcome, marking the transition from the defensive to the offensive phase. This moment of change in ball possession is considered a crucial aspect of high-level competitive football (Vincent & Durny, 2017). In contrast, defensive transitions are defined as beginning when a team loses possession of the ball and attempts to reposition itself in order to regain control of the ball (Wade, 1996). However, there is still a lack of consensus on when exactly these transitions begin and end, and the process between them. Recent studies have suggested that the “defensive moment of the game starts before the ball is lost, and the offensive moment begins before the recovery” (Maneiro, Rubén et al., 2008; Maneiro et al., 2019), which further complicates the definition, analysis and characterization of offensive and defensive transitions. Despite the lack of consensus on the definitions of offensive and defensive transitions, there is a general agreement among authors on the concept that whenever there is an offensive transition, there is an opposing response from the opposing team in the form of a defensive transition (Casal, Andujar, Losada, Ardá, & Maneiro, 2016; Vogelbein et al., 2014; Winter & Pfeiffer, 2016). Furthermore, it is acknowledged that offensive and defensive transitions according to their characteristics can still be classified as they start, the outcome and characterized by determinants observed during the transitions. Also, offensive and defensive transitions are integral to a team’s offensive and defensive processes, even if they can occur independently of possession of the ball. This classification allows for more detailed understanding of the dynamics of the game and how teams approach both attacking and defending during transitions.

According to how they start, offensive transitions can be classified and identified as “state transition” if the team that gains possession of the ball manages to start a play immediately, and as “interphase transition” if the game is forced to stop due to loss of ball possession or if any reglementary violation is committed (D. Barreira & Garganta, 2007; Machado, Barreira, & Garganta, 2012). The same authors (2012) define the “state-transition” and the “interphase transition” as “the recovery/loss of ball possession happens, or not, directly, that is, the dynamic phase of the game is maintained” and these are valid for both offensive and defensive transition. A defensive transition can be classified as direct and indirect (D. Barreira, 2014). For example, a transition is considered direct “if they started and ended directly” (C. Casal, Andujar, Losada, & Ardá, 2010), which means that the “game flow was preserved, with no interruption, and the ball was recovered” (D. Barreira, 2014). The ball is recovered by an interception by tackle or by intervention of the goalkeeper in the defensive phase (D. Barreira, 2014). A transition is considered indirect if the “game flow was broken up due to an opponent’s violation of the laws of the game or because the ball leaves the pitch” (D. Barreira, 2014). The ball is recovery by opponent’s violation of the laws of the game, by a corner kick, a goal kick, or a dropped ball (D. Barreira, 2014).

Regarding the outcome, the offensive transitions can be claimed as positive or non-positive. Thus, a positive offensive transition comprises all those that result in a scoring situation by shot, a penalty kick, or a free kick and non-positive if it ends up as an out pass or intercepted pass (Turner & Sayers, 2017). Thus, all situations that allow the team to keep possession of the ball in a privilege situation or bring a clear possibility of a goal are considered positive. Thus, offensive transitions that result in a corner kick or a throw-in at the attacking third of the field should be considered as positive. Likewise, those that result in offensive offside should be consider as non-positive. Contrary to what the vast majority of authors have defined and shown over time, Turner & Sayers (2017) clearly indicate “that no significant relationship was found between transition outcome and the average transition speed”. These results are extremely interesting as “this suggests that positive and non-positive attacking outcomes occur irrespective of how fast the team transitioned” (Turner & Sayers, 2017). This fact seems to open a valuable perspective for future studies, which should include motion sensors, in the sense of understanding which performance indicators best influence the outcomes of the offensive transitions, but above all, it paves the way for transitions not to be linked to performance speed but rather tactical and decision-making factors that can be reached by optical sensors. In defensive transition, the outcomes have been classified as successful if there is a “direct recovery of the ball without the intervention of the goalkeeper” and failure if a “shot or goal by another team, or interruption of play of any type” ends the transition (C. Casal et al., 2010). Similarly, some authors classified as successful or unsuccessful based on whether the team that loses possession manages to regain it or not (D. Barreira, 2014; Casal et al., 2016).

Relatively to the determinants or variables of the offensive transition and how they affect the successful transition remains undefined (Turner & Sayers, 2017). Many authors in their studies consider only a specific characteristic or determinant of the offensive or defensive transition, so there is a lack of studies that analyze the transitions as a whole.

These determinants are difficult to characterize in isolation as they influence each other. The situational variables must also be considered, although these refer to external and uncontrollable aspects by the teams. The situational variables most often considered are the match status, match location and quality of opposition (C. Casal et al., 2010), to which must be added the playing venue and the current score line (Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2018; Wade, 1998; Machado et al., 2012; Barreira & Garganta, 2007). According to Fernandez-Navarro et al. (2018), these situation variables, both “location of the match” and “quality of the opposition”, “influence the different styles of play with the exception of the transition game”, which in addition to being particularly interesting suggests that further study is needed to clarify the concept of transition and understand the tactical factors related to offensive and defensive success.

In summary, the concepts of transition, counterattack, and their relationship have been widely discussed in the literature. Studies have shown that the number of goals obtained through transition and counterattacks are significant, that they are highly effective in creating scoring opportunities, and that they are closely linked to the outcome of the game. The characteristics and determinants of offensive and defensive transitions have been defined, although there is still a lack of consensus among authors on when they begin and end and the process between. Additionally, there is a need for more research to understand the tactical factors and decision-making that are related to offensive and defensive success in transitions, in order to improve the training process. On that it is also important to distinguish between the different types of transitions, such as state transitions, interphase transitions, direct, and indirect, and the outcomes, such as positive and non-positive, to make them more trainable, effective, and successful. Finally, studies have emphasized the importance of considering situational variables, such as match status, location, and quality of opposition, in the analysis of transitions. There is a clear need for further studies to focus on the defensive transitions and the specific determinants that influence their success.

It is important to note that these moments of play and processes are not independent from each other, as they are closely related and interact with one another. The offensive and defensive processes are constantly changing throughout the game, and a team’s style of play will influence the way in which these processes are executed. For example, a team that prioritizes possession-based play will likely have a different approach to offensive and defensive transitions compared to a team that focuses on transitional play. Another example of this relates the team’s strategic behavior to the process and moment of the game in which the team finds itself. A team may have possession of the ball but still be in a defensive process, such as when they are trying to defend a lead late in the game. Conversely, a team may not have possession of the ball but still be in an offensive process, such as when they are pressing high up the field to try and win the ball back in a dangerous area. Therefore, it is important to consider not only ball possession, but also the tactical and strategic objectives of each team, as well as the specific moments and phases of the game, when defining and analyzing offensive and defensive processes.

Considering Table 2, it seems obvious that the style of play influences and even determine the moments of the game as well as the game processes, namely the relationship between speed, space (location) and the nature of the actions (Gómez et al., 2018). Hewitt et al. (2016) present a definition of style of play which mentions the importance of the players’ movements and the interaction between them and the ball, considering the variables of speed, time, and space (location). Additionally, the situational variables, such as the match status and location, will also have an impact on the way in which these moments and processes are executed.

Overall, while these moments of play and processes can be defined and analyzed separately, they must be considered in relation to one another to fully understand the dynamics of the game. Although the connection between a moment of the game and the offensive/defensive process of the game seems simple, it is crucial to define it and show its limits. Thus, the defensive process is constituted when a team does not have possession of the ball and has as principle to delay or make unfeasible the offensive game of the opposition (Wade, 1996). The offensive process is constituted when a team obtains the possession of the ball and has as principle to attack the opponent team with the intention of obtaining goals (Gonzalez-Rodenas et al., 2015b).

In the same way that when a team is in an offensive transition there is an opposite response from the opposing team in the form of a defensive transition, it seems logical that while one team is in an offensive process the other is in a defensive process (Fig. 2). However, and considering the increasing impact of tactical performance indicators on game analysis, it seems to be limiting that the definition of offensive and defensive game processes is based on the variable “to have or not” ball possession.

In the realm of competitive sports, the potential for a change in status during game moments is a crucial aspect that teams must take into consideration in their preparation and tactics. The relative position of the ball and the key positioning of players in both defensive and offensive processes are determining factors in whether a team is in a defensive posture while in possession of the ball or in an offensive posture while not in possession. It is important to note that transition moments are inherently risky, as the attacking team must maintain possession in order to avoid vulnerability to counterattack (Gollan et al., 2018). Therefore, it is imperative that all stakeholders know what their team configures as a positive outcome for these moments.

Previous research has also demonstrated that teams ranked higher in competitions tend to exhibit an offensive transition style characterized by physical attributes that lend themselves to strength during these moments, in contrast to teams ranked lower (Gollan et al., 2018). This highlights the need for specific training to address these moments in the game. Furthermore, Gollan et al. (2018) notes that “a transition game style is characterized by relative dominance in both offensive and defensive transition moments”.

The literature on team sports performance suggests that behaviors occurring “off-the-ball” may be of huge significance to influence a team performance (Santos, Lago-Peñas, & García-García, 2017; Taylor, Mellalieu, James, & Barter, 2010; Taylor, Mellalieu, James, & Shearer, 2008). These behaviors include runs, both offensive and defensive, tactical behaviors, and positioning that occur away from the ball and can be influenced by situational variables (Taylor et al., 2008). The aim of these behaviors is trying to predict future actions of the game and this way take advantage for their teams. In this way, and being the behaviors adopted by the players based on the game plan established through a preplanned strategy, which also includes variations and tactical adjustments in response to an opponent’s response (Gollan et al., 2018; Memmert, Lemmink, & Sampaio, 2017), it seems overt to corroborate the idea that strategies and tactics are crucial factors to determine the outcome of a football match (Yiannakos & Armatas, 2006), which will reflect the importance of the player positioning of the ball.

This suggest that the best teams in possession, in addition of being in the offensive process, prepare the moment of defensive transition as if predicting or anticipating the moment of loss of possession. Likewise, the best teams in the defensive process anticipate the offensive transition through tactical and positional changes of their players. The team will then be in a better position to start an offensive transition with better chances of success.

Therefore, it is logical to conclude that the objective of strategies is achieved through the application of specific tactics (Carling, C., Williams, A. M., & Reilly, 2005) and that tactical performance indicators are key considerations for the analysis and training of the game (Gonzalez-Rodenas et al., 2015b; M. D. Hughes & Bartlett, 2002).