Stars like Harry Kane will not be attractive when England is still in the hands of coach Southgate (right) - Photo: REUTERS
After 3 matches, both scored 2 goals, conceded 1 goal, and got 5 points. The only difference between them is that England is the group leader, while France is the group leader.
Total disappointment
That difference is not an achievement to be proud of for the "Three Lions". Until the last seconds of the last match of Group C, England could have lost the top spot if Denmark had scored a goal against Serbia. Denmark had dominated their opponents for most of the match. And only luck could have saved England's fate. If the "Three Lions" finished second in the group, they would have had to face Germany in the round of 16 and fall into the semi-final bracket with Spain, Portugal, France...
Fans can criticize coach Southgate for his calculations because many coaches choose a safe style of play to ensure the final result. But in the case of England, they played poorly because they were really... incompetent. Not only did they score few goals, England were also among the worst attacking teams in the tournament. In terms of the number of shots, the "Three Lions" only had 29 shots, ranking 17th out of 24 teams. Their number of shots in the penalty area was only 11, ranking 20th out of 24 teams. And the number of passes that created opportunities for England was 22, ranking 15th out of 24 teams.
Another important attacking metric is expected goals (xG). England's xG (*) after 3 group stage matches is only 3.42, ranking 17th out of 24 teams. Meanwhile, Spain, Germany, and France all have xG greater than 5. The "Three Lions" clearly do not create many clear-cut scoring opportunities.
France are slightly better than England in terms of attacking stats. In particular, they are the second team to have taken the most shots in the tournament, with 48 after 3 matches (only 57 behind Germany). But that reflects another problem for France: the ability to convert chances into goals. In fact, 2 of France's goals came from 1 penalty (Mbappe) and 1 own goal. Therefore, the French team has not scored any real goals.
Why?
First, coach Gareth Southgate must take responsibility for the "Three Lions"'s soulless and lackluster playing style. In addition, there is also conservatism. Before the match against Slovenia, full-back Trippier suffered a minor injury. But coach Southgate still let him play until the 84th minute in his preferred position on the left wing (Trippier is a right-back). Trippier played well, but he was very limited in participating in the attack due to playing in a position that was not his forte, and because of injuries and physical problems.
It was just one of many conservative decisions by Southgate, which made England's possession of the world's most expensive squad meaningless. Palmer replaced Saka in the 71st minute, playing the first 20 minutes of Euro 2024. Similarly, Gordon replaced Saka in the 89th minute, playing the first two minutes of Euro. Off the pitch, Toney, Gomez, Wharton are still waiting for their chance, even though the players in their positions are disappointing.
In the French team, coach Didier Deschamps has put aside his conservatism. He boldly put Griezmann on the bench and gave the opportunity to young talent Barcola. But that was not enough. France played heavily, lacked ideas, and lacked determination in the 3 group stage matches. The only player with enough class and determination in the French team, Mbappe, was injured. The reason France scored so few goals was partly due to Mbappe's (understandable) decline. Despite playing well and being energetic, Mbappe also missed at least 3 chances.
France paid the price for their lacklustre displays, now in the same semi-final bracket as Germany, Spain and Portugal. England were luckier, remaining top and falling into the less-rich bracket. But what does that mean when both teams keep playing like this?
From Georgia, Romania to Switzerland, football nations far inferior to England and France have brought a festive atmosphere to Euro 2024. In contrast, the two most expensive teams in the tournament have only left fans bored. "Dull, boring, uninteresting" - the Daily Mail headlined England's performance.
(*) Expected Goals xG is a fairly new metric in football. It is based on statistics on the ability to convert different shots into goals. For example: xG of a penalty kick is 0.76, a close-range shot is 0.5. If in that match England is awarded a penalty, has 1 close-range shot and has no other scoring opportunities, their xG for the whole match is 1.26.
Source: https://tuoitre.vn/anh-va-phap-khien-khan-gia-nan-long-20240627101553177.htm
Comment (0)