You should practice, of course. But everyone in the team needs to do that, and there are limits to how much value you get from simply shooting at goal.
Interestingly, Hjulmand talked before one of the KO matches that they had been practicing, but in addition to just shooting they had worked on putting practicing the right mental frame of mind. Though he did not go into details about how precisely - he did point out what I also said above; it’s almost impossible to mimic the situation you are in, in a shootout.
Know your players. Evaluate their mental state. Taking a good penalty in a PK shootout at this level is 95% mental, and maybe only 5% technique.
I don’t actually have much issue with Sancho - based on the non-existent minutes he had on the pitch, it’s hard to say whether he was ready or not (though the evidence suggests not). But Saka was always going to miss that kick. Not only because he was being put in the worst position. As the TIFO guys point out - he looked nervous for a period in the game against DK, and at no point during the final did he look really comfortable. Picking a clearly nervy player for the last kick is always a terrible idea. Kane might have missed it too, in those circumstances, but both he and Maguire were both obviously in a much better mental state than Saka was.
It is true that there is luck involved. But it’s absolutely possible to tip luck in your favor. At the end of the day, a PK is one of the best chances you have to score. On average, players score on 85% of such efforts (slightly lower in shootouts). 1 missed penalty is to be expected, 2 can be bad luck … 3 is just bad.
And yes - of course there is a level of post-hoc reasoning involved. But it’s not just bad luck that England has “always” lost its shootouts. And it’s not just post-hoc reasoning when people familiar with the game (and I’m not referring to myself) question Southgate’s decisions here both in terms of substituting players 1 minute before full time just for the kicks + Saka as the last taker. There are psychological unknowables for sure - but the psychological knowables in play here are very clear - and all bad for England.
On average, the team taking the first shot wins 60% of the time. There were not that many shootouts, so not surprising, really. Especially considering the generally low quality of the PKs in this tournament.
Southgate had won his last two penalty shootouts before this one, so I suspect practice and approach are not the problem…
Alternatively, England was lucky against Columbia and the win against the Swiss let the English coaching team to lull themselves into the complacency of thinking they got the code cracked. But the shootout against Switzerland is meaningless in this type of context. Nation’s League is a glorified friendly tournament.
Yeah, Southgate is a straight up guy, and he represents the country well. He is also a brave manager. He’s willing to take tough decisions, and stand behind them. Never a question whether he was going to have his players back after this.
I do suspect that this final will be his high-water mark as coach, though. England will never have an easier road to the final than this year - and while it has some great players, this side has limitations. Especially offensively - it’s hard to see what the offensive plan is beyond “give the ball to Kane/Sterling and hope for some magic”. This final was lost because England wasn’t good enough in its offensive possession play.
I like Southgate, but is he the person who can change that? Will be interesting to see.
One thing I found fascinating, is that this tournament seems to have favored coaches who focus on building squads as “club teams” approach. Hjulmand, Mancini and Enrique all favor this approach, and I think Southgate is also in that type of mindset. It will be interesting to see whether that is a trend that continues.
So win England win a penalty shootout it’s luck but when they lose it’s bad practice and preparation?
Nope. No one is talking about bad practice or preparation - the point is that Southgate took poor decisions.
Yes - there is luck involved in spot kicks. But there are also a lot of well-known factors that play into this, and if you consistently put those factors in your favor, you’re more likely to win it. When England won against Columbia, Dier - one of the leader figures on that England side - took the final spot kick. You want your leaders - those with the highest mental resilience - on that final kick. Always.
Setting a 19-year old, clearly nervous player to kick the decisive shot in the final of the Euros is never going to be seen as a good decision. He could have scored and it would still have been considered a weird decision.
So he took the right decisions against Columbia and they weren’t lucky?
lol what? Not sure what you’re getting at mate
Perhaps. I don’t know why he chose the spot kick takers he did against Columbia. We do know what he has said he based his decision on this time, and it’s not an approach you’ll find many other top coaches or sports psychologists agreeing with.
Either way please drop trying to wring my words to try and find something you can say “ha-ha” to. What’s your point? I think I’ve made mine very clear. The decision to put Saka on that last kick was a stupid decision and Southgate should have known better. That’s it. That’s my opinion.
If you think that setting a 19-year old, obviously nervous player who has never taken a penalty kick at this level to be responsible for the last kick in the final is a good decision… well, that’s also an opinion. Fair enough.
I read that England didn’t have a shot on goal for 55 minutes after the early goal.
That’s ridiculous.
He was saying it was 34% in the whole match, but it was better in the first half, and worse than that in the second half. I remember ESPN showing about 80 minutes into the game that Italy had had (up to that point) 71% possession in the second half.
The moments I’ll remember this Euros for:
- Eriksen collapse. Awful.
- Ronaldo moving the Colas. A good statement. And he got away with it too.
- Schick’s sensational effort that left Marshall sprawling like a fish in the net.
- Damsgaard’s curling shot that started Denmark’s demolition of Russia.
- The Swiss Hulk.
- Højbjerg crying after the quarter final victory. Football emotions at their best.
- Chiellini having the time of his life before the semi final penalty contest. What a character. The game will be poorer when he retires.
What are yours?
But that’s not relevant to the game in any way, so it makes no sense to even bring it up. It’s like saying a quarterback who only completed 34% of his throws in a game actually completed more than that in the first quarter. So what, you still only made 34% of your passes, and in the last 3 quarters you made even less than that. It doesn’t make it look any better, just worse
Well, possession isn’t everything. Spain dominates possession in a similar way in all their games. But it ended up with a draw with Sweden, a draw with Poland, a draw with Switzerland (winning on penalties) and a draw with Italy (losing on penalties).
And bring up two halves is relevant to discussing the game and tides of how it played out. So would bringing up a quarterback and how he did in each quarter.
If you don’t really understand what you’re talking about in relation to how the game works, then sure you could bring up those numbers. But it’s utterly pointless and doesn’t make the side who struggled look any better.
England crumbled somewhat in the second half, so I was saying their possession in the first half balanced out/was balanced out by the 2nd half, so your comment of
having only 34% of the ball is just awful.
didn’t convey the full story.
edit:
according to this, Italy had less possession in their game against Spain than England did against Italy,
and the UEFA stats say much the same thing:
Well I don’t see us going back to overly conservative game styles lol.
Heh, imagine Spain had beaten Italy and reached the final, England’s possession stats might have not have reached double digits :P
