Don't bring up the shootouts in this tournament. That's a sample size of what..4? I'm talking about data from thousands of matches. The fact that Modric, as captain, didn't know what to say to the ref when asked says it all. No preparation.
No, pelanties are not lottery is not untrue
- Thread starter Andycoleno9
- Start date
A lot of teams don’t prepare - England haven’t practices pens in the past, and this is just bonkers. Practice and preparation gives you a better chance to win - of course there is some luck involved as well.
Penalties are not lottery. Apparently, Subasic saves more than 40% penalties against him.
https://www.sportskeeda.com/footbal...saving-goalkeeper-europe-diego-alves-valencia
Number 4 on this list.
https://www.sportskeeda.com/footbal...saving-goalkeeper-europe-diego-alves-valencia
Number 4 on this list.
Rakitic was actually a good penalty, not the best possible way (i.e. look at the keeper and adjust shot according to his movement) but composed and poker faced. The reason the GK ended up in the other corner was because Rakitic suggested to place it there and tricked him.
Yeah I mean preparation doesn't guarantee anything. But even if it increases your chances of winning by just 1% (and it's MUCH higher than that) you have to do it. Just reading this BBC article would give an edge over some of the teams at the WC I feel. Which is absoulutely bonkers. https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/44641247
Okay, if you have that skill and composure (Hazard is another one) then that's ok. I have no idea what Modric was doing though. And don't get me started on the Russians.
The thread title is slightly confusing with the double negative.
The real question isn't if penalties are lotteries, but if the game of football should be reduced to a 2 player mini game.
True. But at the same time it is more likely that the player won't hit the target if he aims for the top corner (or top half in general) then if he shoots low. There is a tradeoff.
And giant typo.
Exactly - marginal gains. https://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains
Worked wonders for David Brailsford (Team Sky, Cycling).
We saw what preparation did for us against Colombia - we will never know, but there has to be a correlation between meticulous preparation and is winning our first ever shootout at a World Cup.
Very interesting, thanks!
Dave Brailsford applied it to GB Cycling, not really Team Sky. At Team Sky they simply outspend every other team and ignored most of cyclings age-old ettiquettes.
100% with you on the preparation though.
Someone uses Google Translate.
Pickford had the favoured spots of all Colombia's takers printed on his water bottle and he said something after the match about how only two of them didn't go there or something like that, and he obviously saved one and I think got close to another.
I don't think it's any surprise that four of England's five takers went to Ospina's right, all scoring, with even Dier's relatively poor effort going in, while Henderson went to his left and had his saved. Think we clearly identified him as having a weak side and exploited that.
They are no lottery. You need a bit of luck, preparation and class, but usually it is not lottery.
I think Croatia have looked terrible in both shootouts, only saved by a good keeper and worse bottling from the the other side.
They are scoring the first and have Rakitic (their best one as the last one). Inbetween they miss some but Subasic is saving. They are not great, but have a plan and a great keeper. Not a surprie they won their last two shootouts. A bit luck is needed, but they are not terrible.
Russia bottled two of those penalties as bad as you will see. Nothing to do with what Croatia were doing. The first taker was crapping it as bad as Carragher 2006.
Always think it's a terrible strategy to have your defacto best penalty taker as no. 5. Someone with a cool head, yes, but your best taker needs to be 1-3 otherwise you could be out before they've stepped up. Seen it backfire a few times when teams do that then get off to a terrible start with less accomplished takers.
Yeah it is a bit risky, but their GK saves one or two and normally keeps them in the race. I think it paid out having Rakitic as the fifth so far. England had Kane as their first one, but if he misses, you are in trouble.
Think it's a terrible strategy to bank on the other team missing too. I've always viewed penalties as the domain of the takers. Keepers can do everything right and still not save a single penalty because they're all well hit.
Personally I'd go most composed first, best taker second, next most composed last, with the other two spots being the next two most up for taking one.
Yep. It is pretty stupid IMO to not start with the best/most composed penalty takers and leave them for the end. The likes of Portugal in 2012 when Ronaldo was fifth vs Spain but didn't take it cause they already lost. Also, when you lose a pen you put the team in stress and give a psychological advantage to the other team, so better to have first players that don't miss that much.
Of course, if youe first (and best) penalty taker misses, then it is really a trouble but that usually doesn't happen.
I dont agree. Big keepers and coming out of the line can save most shots, unless you hit the post or the top corner. Look at Eriksen, Subasic saved it, but you cant hit it better horizontally. If you have a team that has a killer keeper, someone that saves 40% of penalties on average, i would bank on that and start from there. If you have De Gea or Cillessen in goal, then yeah, better to choose a different strategy. Most penalties are not great penalties. Every penalty today was saveable if you guess the direction right, maybe Vida's one was hard to save cause it was higher than you average penalty.
That said, i think the strategy has to suit your strength of the takers and goalkeepers. If you have 5 great penalty takers, it doesnt matter who starts and who is last. If you have only 2 or 3 good ones and a great GK, i would do it just like Croatia today.
Think it's happened twice to Ronaldo if I'm remembering correctly. Can remember it happening to a few teams over the years.
As far as I'm concerned, all you can bank on in a penalty shootout is scoring your penalties. As we know pressure is intensified on the next taker after a miss, and obviously pressure is relieved a bit if the other team miss, you have to do as much as you can to secure goals in the first few penalties, and that means getting your most composed and best takers in early. The importance of this is then furthered, as we've discussed, as you could potentially end up losing the shootout after 3 or 4 penalties if you get off to a bed start, meaning whoever you saved until last doesn't even get to take one.
Eriksen's penalty wasn't great at all. Not particularly powerful, a nice height, and not destined for the inside of the side netting either; was a good foot inside the post. Think you need to rewatch that one if you don't think you can hit them better horizontally than he did. Rashford and Kane both hit better penalties in the same direction against Colombia, and two of Russia's were better struck in the same direction but Subasic dived the wrong way.
Think Croatia have been very lucky with some of the penalties Subasic has saved. Denmark's first (Eriksen) was hit at a nice height, same for their second, and their third was a poor effort slightly off centre that he saved with his feet. Russia's first was just some weird terrible attempt at a chip that Subasic almost had time to get up and dive again for, and their other miss would have been a goal had it been on target because Subasic didn't move. Think there's also been a lot of luck with Modric's shootout penalties in particular. His penalty against Denmark was literally an inch or two away from Schmeichel's feet, and his penalty against Russia was less than that away from being pushed out by Akinfeev rather than against the post.
The last 11 penalties I've seen against Subasic (the two shootouts this World Cup and Ramos in the last Euros) he's saved five, and four of them were diving to his right. The one he saved not diving to his right he saved with his feet because he dived left and it was off centre. Also don't know how he got away with the one vs Ramos in the last Euros because he was about three yards off his line by the time Ramos hit the ball. Not seen him save any that I would call "well-struck".
At the end of the day, I think it's a bad strategy to bank on your keeper making saves in a shootout.
Penalties is mainly one-man show. And that is the goalie. Preperation is good but having the good goalie is the main thing. England won because they at last had a goalie who made some saves. It was the first PK save since 1996 if I remember correctly.
It's not luck, but just plain better goalie on the day.
It's not luck, but just plain better goalie on the day.
This isn't entirely accurate. Both Keepers made a save each. Pickford's was a case of going the right way and you save it due to it being a poor penalty, with no real power and a great height for a keeper. Ospina made a great save, not only guessing right but covering the ground to stop a decent hit from Henderson. So you would argue the best keeper was on the losing side.
If the first Columbian miss was an inch lower, it is all but over, nestled in the top corner. This is where the luck comes in. No keeper is saving that penalty if it is on target.
Henderson telegraphed his penalty with a daft run up, it was a bad pen.
The guy who hit the bar wasn’t unlucky. There’s no need to hit it in the very top corner to make it unsavable. It was a bad pen too.
Think this WC has been interesting in that many teams seem to have favoured sides to shoot at.
If you look at England's four scored penalties they all hit them to the right of Ospina. When Russia beat Spain pretty much all their penalties went to the right of DDG.
Russia again tried the tactic yesterday but obviously forgot to get one of them on target (Fernandes) and also that wierd chipped effort.
Not sure what the stats are but maybe keepers are a touch slower to dive/spring to one side than the other.
That's the stats I'd be looking at. Keeper's last 20 penalties he's faced and which side he's tended to dive more as in high pressure situations he's always going to his favoured side more.
You've seen this tactic used also in CL finals. Go back to 2008 and Chelsea seemed to keep hitting penalties high to VDS's right (Anelka ignored the instruction) and Real Madrid keep hitting it to Oblak's right in the 2016 final ( helped Oblak was like a traffic cone in stature).
Think if I was a coach that would be my tactic for a team in a shoot out, hit 3/5 (the confident ones) to the keeper's weaker diving side and then the less confident players just hit it down the middle as keeper rarely just stays still in a shoot out.
If you look at England's four scored penalties they all hit them to the right of Ospina. When Russia beat Spain pretty much all their penalties went to the right of DDG.
Russia again tried the tactic yesterday but obviously forgot to get one of them on target (Fernandes) and also that wierd chipped effort.
Not sure what the stats are but maybe keepers are a touch slower to dive/spring to one side than the other.
That's the stats I'd be looking at. Keeper's last 20 penalties he's faced and which side he's tended to dive more as in high pressure situations he's always going to his favoured side more.
You've seen this tactic used also in CL finals. Go back to 2008 and Chelsea seemed to keep hitting penalties high to VDS's right (Anelka ignored the instruction) and Real Madrid keep hitting it to Oblak's right in the 2016 final ( helped Oblak was like a traffic cone in stature).
Think if I was a coach that would be my tactic for a team in a shoot out, hit 3/5 (the confident ones) to the keeper's weaker diving side and then the less confident players just hit it down the middle as keeper rarely just stays still in a shoot out.
The grammar in the title gives me headaches.
Are penalties a lottery or not?
Are penalties a lottery or not?
I actually thought they were going to use the A-B-B-A method in this world cup e.g. a team takes one penalty and then opposition takes two like in a tennis tie break. Was that just an English experiment last season?
If you win the toss you always take the first penalty. It's scoreboard pressure if you're second as if the oppositon keep scoring you always have to keep up with them and that can impact on players walking up.
Modric never been convincing on them, I remember him dragging one wide in euro 2008 shoot out v Turkey. Does he ever take any for Real Madrid?Okay, if you have that skill and composure (Hazard is another one) then that's ok. I have no idea what Modric was doing though. And don't get me started on the Russians.
That happened to Portugal in 2012, had Ronaldo as fifth taker which wasn't a terrible strategy but it never got to that stage. I would say 1 and 4 is best places for best two takers. Aim to get off to good start and then 4th can get you back in it if 2 or 3 miss. Also hope your keeper can save one.
That's an amazing stat.
Yeah, me too, is it really necessary?
to be honest it wasnt so bad as it is now. after my comment i guess a mod took the absolute piss with the title
All 4 penalty shootouts have been won by the team going 2nd. Sidenote hopefully the EFL bins the ABBA shootout system
Yes you did... long story
What it means is that you cannot possibly predict the outcome of a penalty shootout based on the players in each team. That's all. A pub team could beat Brazil.