Falhófnir
macrumors 603
We got very unlucky not being 2-0 up in the first half, and it would indeed have been enough to win 2-1 at 90m if we hadn’t been so unfortunate, the poor play from the second half onwards wouldn’t have been as big a factor.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The 2017-2018 Football Thread
- Thread starter Lord Blackadder
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
We got very unlucky not being 2-0 up in the first half, and it would indeed have been enough to win 2-1 at 90m if we hadn’t been so unfortunate, the poor play from the second half onwards wouldn’t have been as big a factor.
I used to feel the same, but after having watched these I think there is a lot of skill and involved and the more prepared side has a better chance of winning. There is an element of luck to it, of course, but I wouldn't call it a total lottery.
If it weren't for England's keeper that match score would have mimicked the Brazil vs. Germany match.
Scepticalscribe
macrumors Haswell
England were dominant in the first half of the match, and also in the first half of Extra Time, when the young legs of their substitutes meant that they dominated possession.
However, they failed to convert their chances during both periods when they were dominant, and they were profligate in the first half (by the standards of chances at that level), with wasted chances. Such profligacy is usually punished.
They could have won.
But, Croatia could also have won by even more.
This was one of those rare cases the experience - even exhausted experience with two periods of Extra-Time already played - told in favour of Croatia.
Both first periods were dominated by England; both second periods were a master class in demonstrating Croatia's powers of recovery and recuperation, come-back skills and sheer hunger and ambition.
England could have won (and did themselves proud with an excellent WC campaign, a team and a manager to be proud of - early on, I didn't expect them to progress beyond the quarter finals and had thought they would only get that far if the didn't implode on or off the pitch, or if they got lucky) but - on the night - unfortunately, Croatia were better.
However, they failed to convert their chances during both periods when they were dominant, and they were profligate in the first half (by the standards of chances at that level), with wasted chances. Such profligacy is usually punished.
They could have won.
But, Croatia could also have won by even more.
This was one of those rare cases the experience - even exhausted experience with two periods of Extra-Time already played - told in favour of Croatia.
Both first periods were dominated by England; both second periods were a master class in demonstrating Croatia's powers of recovery and recuperation, come-back skills and sheer hunger and ambition.
England could have won (and did themselves proud with an excellent WC campaign, a team and a manager to be proud of - early on, I didn't expect them to progress beyond the quarter finals and had thought they would only get that far if the didn't implode on or off the pitch, or if they got lucky) but - on the night - unfortunately, Croatia were better.
Centaurr
macrumors 65816
Lioness~
macrumors 601
If people think it's luck with penalties, they've most certainly never played any football of value themselves. Probably nothing at all 😉
And even more certain, never done penalities in any important game.
A lot of football talent is instinctual, it's instinctual, and even more instinctual.
Trainers, the good ones, that have played themselves, have a deep understanding of this.
They of course make up brilliant strategies from that understanding.
Trainers, or viewers too for that matter, that don’t have that understanding, ramble a lot of ****.
What people think is luck in football, as in most matters, is about to build up the game to that point where opportunities present themselves.
No luck, understanding of the game. Penalties is a lot about having a plan, usually with variations, reading the situation and the goalkeeper 🙂
And even more certain, never done penalities in any important game.
A lot of football talent is instinctual, it's instinctual, and even more instinctual.
Trainers, the good ones, that have played themselves, have a deep understanding of this.
They of course make up brilliant strategies from that understanding.
Trainers, or viewers too for that matter, that don’t have that understanding, ramble a lot of ****.
What people think is luck in football, as in most matters, is about to build up the game to that point where opportunities present themselves.
No luck, understanding of the game. Penalties is a lot about having a plan, usually with variations, reading the situation and the goalkeeper 🙂
Last edited:
twietee
macrumors 603
...because James wasn't playing that match. Make no mistake, I was rooting for Colombia and would have loved to see that game with James because he was the missing link (and in form). The whole game itself was a bit lame in that regard because both teams weren't really able to create a threat from open play - and England offered plenty of space, Colombia just missed the creative midfielder to punish them.
Penalties are part lottery and part skill. Don't like em but they're a necessity.
Scepticalscribe
macrumors Haswell
But plenty of practice (as Southgate demonstrated with this England team) can make them less of a lottery and more of an acquired and sort of mastered skill.
Lioness~
macrumors 601
Bad players have either luck or no luck. Because they don’t know how to place a penality.
Good players with skill don’t have to send a penality to the goal randomly and rely of luck for it to maybe maybe go in. They know exactly where to put it, and where the goaly is going. Bang!
Last edited:
twietee
macrumors 603
So Modric, Messi et al are mediocre players or what. Sorry, I don't deal in absolutes.
And the Southgate story is cute and maybe it helped a bit but I doubt he somewhat invented the wheel - let's see how they fare the next time when they are older and more experienced and also have more to lose. England had little to offer yesterday after Croatia equalized so that mentality at least was a bit lacking.
Pens are of course about skill but psyche, pressure, situational context, luck and of course the opposing goalie all play their role.
Or in other words: you can't practice pens after 120mins intense fighting while the whole world watches you. Impossible.
Edit: and because I wrote it earlier (and didn't really know about it) while rooting for Croatia and some of its players, mostly Rakitic and Modric, I absolutely despise the ultra-right/ nationalistic tendencies offered by some players. Lovren for example.
Last edited:
Lioness~
macrumors 601
No there’s no absolutes, but it’s not about luck.
Even the best penalty shooters have bad days, when they are not sharp, when they make misjudgements.
Some players are much better then others, no doubt.
Some players that are good penality shooters also have more difficulty with some goalkeepers. It’s a fact too.
It’s about skill, not luck.
Of course you become better if you’re training on it. But sure, some are more talented at it. That has a lot to do with a lot of things. If they can’t deal with the pressure, no they are not penality scorer.
It’s not about luck.
Even the best penalty shooters have bad days, when they are not sharp, when they make misjudgements.
Some players are much better then others, no doubt.
Some players that are good penality shooters also have more difficulty with some goalkeepers. It’s a fact too.
It’s about skill, not luck.
Of course you become better if you’re training on it. But sure, some are more talented at it. That has a lot to do with a lot of things. If they can’t deal with the pressure, no they are not penality scorer.
It’s not about luck.
bmac4
Suspended
Scepticalscribe
macrumors Haswell
They are, but they are also about practice and getting used to doing this and thinking about it and planning it.
Gareth Southgate had the English team practice penalties - a lot - at the end of (each and every) long, demeaning, difficult and draining training session; he made the point that penalties tend to happen at a stage of the game when you are physically and mentally exhausted and tried to have his team replicate - even to a small degree - those conditions.
Precisely because he had personal experience of taking (and missing) penalties in those trying conditions (without advance practice or training), he was determined to ensure that it was a lot less of a lottery and remove this amateur and unprofessional mindset of "ah, well, it'll be good, enough on the day", or "we're useless at penalties" that had bedevilled the English team at major tournaments until then. And tis is entirely to his credit.
This doesn't mean that one will always score; nerves, a good goalie, shooting to a side you may not be comfortable with, psyche, plus skill will all play a role. But so will practice, which will take some of the capricious subjectivity out of such an activity.
Agreed.
No, it is not.
c0ppo
macrumors 68000
Of course you need luck on penalties. You need luck in football match as well. Croatia played great, but we had luck as well. Kane had a clear chance for 2:0, but frame of the goal saved us. So that is luck.
But as in football match, you need skill and cool head for penalties. Or is anyone here claiming that most successful football nations are just plain lucky? Because Germany, Brazil, Argentina, Italy... Well, they win most of their penalty shootouts. And by some chance, those are the countries that won WC most times.
Player needs to be comfortable with penalties. Messi is ok penalty taker, but just ok, not even good. And no one can deny that he is really skilled football player. Modric is bad at penalties, but also, no one can deny his skill.
On the other hand I remember Robert Prosinecki really well. That guy took most of penalties for his teams. He missed just 2, and both misses came in the same game (Croatian league, vs Hajduk). And by some chance, goalkeeper was his team mate in national squad. And goalkeeper used to stay longer in practice to take penalties with Prosinecki. So skill mostly.
If Croatia vs France match goes to penalties, I really wish Modric doesn't take penalty this time. Because he really isn't good at them.
But as in football match, you need skill and cool head for penalties. Or is anyone here claiming that most successful football nations are just plain lucky? Because Germany, Brazil, Argentina, Italy... Well, they win most of their penalty shootouts. And by some chance, those are the countries that won WC most times.
Player needs to be comfortable with penalties. Messi is ok penalty taker, but just ok, not even good. And no one can deny that he is really skilled football player. Modric is bad at penalties, but also, no one can deny his skill.
On the other hand I remember Robert Prosinecki really well. That guy took most of penalties for his teams. He missed just 2, and both misses came in the same game (Croatian league, vs Hajduk). And by some chance, goalkeeper was his team mate in national squad. And goalkeeper used to stay longer in practice to take penalties with Prosinecki. So skill mostly.
If Croatia vs France match goes to penalties, I really wish Modric doesn't take penalty this time. Because he really isn't good at them.
twietee
macrumors 603
Exactly - that's why this discussion is a bit strange to begin with.
They are called a lottery because a focused and motivated Real Madrid (for example) will win 9-10/10 games against the outlier underdog but will they win 9-10/10 penalty shoot-outs against the very same team as well? More than doubtful. To think that's because the underdog is better skilled at shooting pens than the elite players from Real Madrid seems...questionable.
Players having a "bad day" or a "bad moment" (which btw equals having luck/ bad-luck) can easily be compensated by the other ten teammates plus they have 90 mins minimum to bring their superior talent/skill-set to the table which is all irrelevant during a shoot-out. That's also why smaller clubs basically always rather try to reach the penalties instead of scoring the winning goal and the big dogs try to do the opposit. Strange discussion, really.
Scepticalscribe
macrumors Haswell
Actually, it is an interesting discussion.
Until (the then legendary) Roberto Baggio blazed a penalty into outer orbit in the World Cup Final in the 1994 World Cup Final, I had given penalties little thought except as an exciting spectacle.
Following that, - a spectacle which I viewed with slack-jawed disbelief - I regraded exceptionally well paid individuals - individuals whose profession involved kicking a ball - who yet couldn't score in a penalty setting (which I considered something almost akin to an open goal) with something approaching contempt, having little respect for their perceived mental fragility.
The way England approached this matter - whereby they simply turned up and proceeded to lose on penalties if they failed to win in normal or extra-time, seemed both unprofessional and breathtakingly fatalistic. I couldn't believe that a team of professional footballers - with a history and tradition of going out (excruciatingly) on penalties - rarely or never practised taking them.
Practice - in as close to the real-life game conditions as possible (when you are exhausted after a lengthy and demanding training session) may not eliminate the element of luck, or caprice, entirely, when taking penalties, but it should serve to give sufficient confidence to some of the players (along with some mental strength) to reduce its importance as an element in this equation.
Apple fanboy
macrumors Ivy Bridge
Also if you are the clear favourites but you haven't got the job done in 90 minutes plus extra (NOT OVER) time, you are psychologically at a disadvantage.
Where as a plucky underdog who has held on for 120 minutes is on a real high.
But there is always a degree of luck and unpredictablity in any football match. If the favourites always won, we'd not watch would we?
edvj
macrumors regular
twietee
macrumors 603
I'm not disputing that trainging/practice helps - of course it does! And of course there is a lot of skill involved and that there are better penalty shooters and worse ones. But that's imho implicit and not really worth a (even lenghty!) discussion.
It's just such an integral part of the system for such a long time that
it'd be really strange that they just now started to approach that element systematically. Not saying that Southgate's actions didn't help but I do think we'll need a larger sample size 😉 (and maybe that's not clear although I'd say it's obvious: I never believe in such nonsense that Englsih players are bad at pens by birthright..)
I mean players are running around with GPS tracking systems during training for a long time now and what not.
I'm just saying that due the heavy psychological aspect of a penalty (shoot-outs after extra-time especially) there is always also a lot of mumbo-jumbo involved as well. Sometimes they (publicly) say that they specifically didn't practice beforehand - sometimes the opposite..
Anyway, I still don't really like em but see them as a mere necessity. 😀
Scepticalscribe
macrumors Haswell
Oh, yes, agreed.
But, whereas I cannot speak for other teams, I do genuinely believe that this is the first time that England took penalties seriously, and practiced taking them professionally.
I don't doubt that Southgate's own experience informed this decision (and I have come to hold Southgate in very high esteem, a sensitive and intelligent man) and I am impressed by the way he approached it, and managed as well to banish (to some extent) England's fatalistic (and profoundly unprofessional) attitude towards taking penalties.
He also seems to have recruited a sports psychologist, who is said to have been very good.
Now, one may wonder why this wasn't done earlier - but I am glad to see it having taken place now, at last.
Last edited:
Gutwrench
Suspended
Are you new to football? It seems you don’t appreciate the skills involved between the players or the pressures involved in competition.
Then every 1 on 1 shot against a goalkeeper is a matter of luck so it’s merely a sport of luck.
Then every 1 on 1 shot against a goalkeeper is a matter of luck so it’s merely a sport of luck.
Lioness~
macrumors 601
Little boys, or an immature mentality, believe in luck.
Because they have no skills. Takes years and plenty of sweat to evolve. So the little boys are either lucky or not.
If you believe in luck, you can always blame luck, instead of the lack of preparation, your own focus and ability.
Little boys can still be talented football players, with a some instinctual feel for the game.
To reach the mature mental place that it takes to be a successful penalty scorer, it takes practice and instinctual talent to start with.
Men prepare well, have trained harder a longer time. They hone their skills, knows their pros and cons. They have matured mentally. Are less affected of disturbance, pressure etc.
They are usually better at penalities. Team captains usually provide this kind of energy.
That’s the difference.
The comments here reveals whose are the boys or men too 😉
Because they have no skills. Takes years and plenty of sweat to evolve. So the little boys are either lucky or not.
If you believe in luck, you can always blame luck, instead of the lack of preparation, your own focus and ability.
Little boys can still be talented football players, with a some instinctual feel for the game.
To reach the mature mental place that it takes to be a successful penalty scorer, it takes practice and instinctual talent to start with.
Men prepare well, have trained harder a longer time. They hone their skills, knows their pros and cons. They have matured mentally. Are less affected of disturbance, pressure etc.
They are usually better at penalities. Team captains usually provide this kind of energy.
That’s the difference.
The comments here reveals whose are the boys or men too 😉
Last edited:
- Status