NICK HORNBY has made a lot of money out of being a football fan. The only occupation he could have chosen that would have been more remunerative is leader of the Palestinian resistance. But I think that he has been worth every penny.

Lots of Hornby’s work has been fun, but, in my view at least, there is a single observation of his that alone has been worth all the cash. Football fans should be enjoying themselves, they should be laughing, but instead they are furious.

I have been a witness at bitter political protests and at mid-table clashes in the Isthmian League. Believe me, the latter involved far more violent emotions. And, extraordinarily, the incandescent rage is generated not by rival fans but by the team the fans support.

May I add a further observation to that of Hornby’s? There is a league table of football rage. Appearing lazy is a league title challenger, but it is edged out by poor refereeing decisions (especially when made by a referee’s assistant). However, at the very top of the table comes poor passing. When my son is old enough to attend his first match, I shall explain that “you fat ****” means “I say, you have been passing the ball in a most sloppy manner”.

Now this rage may be a little mad, but it is not entirely irrational. And if you want to know why, the Fink Tank will reveal all. Dr Henry Stott and Dr Alex Morton have been sifting through data provided by Opta for four Premiership seasons to identify the signature of a good team. What is it that differentiates a good team from a bad one?

Teams differ in style, so the data on two successful teams will differ as well. What we were interested in is what good sides have in common. And it turns out that, above all other things, the answer is good passing. The fans are right to be furious when passes go astray because that is the mark of a failing team.

It will not surprise readers of this column to learn that the proportion of shots that are on target and the proportion that go in are key measures of a good side, both in attack and defence. Yet the relationship between overall team success and both the total number of passes and the passing success rate turns out to be even stronger than that between shots and success.

Good teams pass more, and more successfully, and they also stop their opponents from passing so much. The top teams will let between 20 and 25 per cent of their passes go astray, while at the bottom, relegated clubs, such as Coventry City and Bradford City, both in 2001, were losing the ball more than 33 per cent of the time.

One particular form of passing is surprisingly highly correlated with overall success — passing by the goalkeeper. Successful distribution from the goalkeeper to a player from his team is one of the hallmarks of a good side. This may suggest that building slowly from the back is better than launching the ball upfield hoping to find one of your own.

At the same time, two things that fans might believe are crucially important turn out not to be. Football commentators are forever talking about the need for teams “to get to the byline and cross”.

Yet despite their extra possesion, good teams do not cross significantly more often than weaker ones and, if anything, their crossing is slightly less successful at reaching one of their own players.

With Manchester United near the top in terms of numbers of crosses and Arsenal near the bottom, it seems that crossing the ball is simply a matter of team style.

Unsurprisingly, reducing both the number of crosses made by the opposition and their success rate is part of the signature of a good team.

The number of tackles also appears to be a matter of style rather than being either positively linked with success or even negatively (since you might imagine that successful teams do not need to tackle as much).

It seems that fans are directing their fury at just the right target.

finktank@thetimes.co.uk