Much was written about the Euro Finals two days ago when England lost their last penalty shoot-out (again). To be honest, I supported Italy in the final because, in my opinion, it had the best performance in the tournament overall, with a refreshingly “un-Italian” way of playing attractive offensive football.

I don’t want to repeat what has been written in the English press about who and why should be blamed for the missed penalty shootout. However, I want to focus on what coach Gareth Southgate said when explaining the choice and the fact that two of the penalty takers were brought into play at the last minute.

Personally, at first I thought it would be a pretty bad idea to have players shoot who didn’t actually play in the game, but that’s what Southgate said:

“I picked the guys to take the kicks. I told the players that nobody is alone in this situation. We win and lose together as a team. They’ve been tight the whole time and that’s how it has to stay. It is my decision to give it [Saka] this punishment. That is entirely my responsibility. It’s not him or Marcus or Jadon. We worked them through in training. That is the order we came in

“To get all of these attacking players in, you have to do it late. It was a gamble, but if you play early you might lose in overtime anyway. “

So Southgate and the English team did something very sensible: they trained penalty shots, and Southgate made a list of who did the best and “executed” the list. He brought the two players so late because the game as such didn’t need their presence.

Many commentators argued that a training situation is not comparable to a final with 65,000 spectators, on the other hand I would counter it with the question: WWhy would you put the responsibility on someone who doesn’t even do well in a training situation?

What I think Southgate did was: He significantly increased the odds for England by bringing along the players who were best in trainingg but straight (slightly higher) odds do not guarantee success in a particular penalty shootout. There is so much luck in the game (and the skill of the opposing goalkeeper) that winning a penalty is never certain.

However, if they keep doing this it will certainly increase your win rate on penalties in the future, which is the best thing you can do to increase the likelihood of a big win in a future tournament.

Why am I writing about it on an investment blog now?

I suspect some readers have already noticed a similarity: if you buy a single stock, good luck is involved in what happens in the future. I believe that thorough analysis can increase the chances of a successful outcome, but it is not a guarantee of the success of an individual stock idea.

It can be especially frustrating to see people making money with “hot stocks” or crypto coins that they bought without analysis. But in contrast to football Picking a new stock is a much more common event, and increasing the odds on any of these events will result in superior performance in the long run.

It remains to be seen whether England will keep Southgate and have the courage to continue selecting players who are best at training regardless of age or experience, but luckily, as an individual investor, quitting is not a risk, so you can and so should keep it up work so that the chances increase and are not just decided on the basis of “gut instinct”.

Further research / statistics:

It should be noted that after some research, whoever wins the coin toss is really important to score the first penalty kick. Several studies, such as this one, show that the team that goes first has a 60 percent chance of winning the penalty shoot-out. There is also research showing that, for example, the top 5 shooters in reverse order of their skills, etc., etc.

Statistically speaking, England actually has a miserable percentage of penalties won over a long period of time with only 17% wins compared to, for example, Germany with 71% or Argentina with 73%. Interestingly, Italy were pretty bad on penalties too, but in that tournament they won twice in a row.

An aspect that, as far as I know, has not yet been analyzed so deeply is the goalkeeper’s skill. Germany has a tradition of really excellent goalkeepers (Neuer, Kahn, Schumacher, Maier etc.) and a really good goalkeeper could significantly improve the chances. The English, on the other hand, were never really famous for their goalkeepers, so maybe that plays a role. In the final both goalkeepers were able to defend 2 penalties each, so England seems to have improved here too.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here