" Winning Ugly" is also winning?

The Euro 2016 are over and wanne make an evaluation on the final only. The final was tactically an interesting game. Not entertaining but interesting. Overall I can sum up the Euro 2016 in a few words before i get to the analyses of the final:

" This tournament made the football evolution go backwards"

Pepe from Portugal was the player of the tournament for me and that reflects a lot on how "GOOD" this tournament was. He deserved it by the way. He was for me the driving force for Portugal NOT Ronaldo. Ronaldo had only minimum impact in this tournament. If your have a bias for Ronaldo you will disagree with me but he was really not the driving force. Crazy enough his exit in the final was the decisive factor for Portugal's winning the Euro 2016 final!!!!!

Portugal sneaked out of their group as best 3rd place. They played 7 games and only won 1 within 90 minutes. Lost their star player in the final, played ugly football and won the Euro 2016. Unique? Absolutly.

Football is weird and fantastic at the same time. For the UEFA an interesting point to look at is if you become third in a group and still have a chance to qualify, does that stimulate "playing it safe football"? Look at the overall quality of the tournament. One win and having 3 points can get you to the next round!!!

Portugal won in a very 'Ugly" way according to my opinion. Non entertaining, but who cares? Tournament football is about getting the title, and for most people "HOW" getting it is not important. So Ugly winning is also winning. End of story.

What if i tell you that the exit of Ronaldo was the decisive factor for Portugal win the final game and became champion!!!

Lets go to the analyses of the final:

The final was for me before the start an interesting one to look at. Both teams had a specific midfield that could be decisive for the game. Portugal had a very solid and strong midfield with Carvallio in the pivot role and was a lock on the door for the team. Portugal was difficult to beat because of him and Pepe behind him. France has a very dynamic and physical midfield that is all over the place. I wanted to see how Portugal would deal will all this movement because it creates confusion and lots of spaces for Griezmann, Sissoko and Poyet to dive into. To suddenly show up and score. As we have seen in other games.

Lets first look at the formations of both teams. 

Portugal a 4-4-2 diamond formation and France a 4-2-3-1 formation. The first half till Ronaldo had his exit in the 24th minute because of his injury, Portugal was completely outclassed in the midfield. A steam walls of running power and strength was killing Portugal's midfield. Not creativity!!! Read again not creativity. 

The thing that strikes me most was the amount of times that the midfielders just  crossed over from the middle line to the box on power with and without the ball, without Portugal doing anything or not able to. Main reason for me being that in a 4-2-2 diamond formation you have not enough players to cover each other in the width of the field when the opponent circulates the ball quick from left to right. In Portugal's case it was more the lack of defensive power of Sanches and Mario who are more offensive players and not always close spaces quick enough. From the other hand Portugal was difficult to beat in the other games. So overall Portugal was Physically outclassed in this game and especially in the first 24 minutes. So lets have a look at the video that i put together to show in a nutshell what was happening.

if the video is not showing it is due to copyrights on youtube send me an email to [email protected] and i will share the link privately. That seems possible.

Extra day rest discussion:

There was another discussion that the extra day rest for Portugal could have had a positive influence on the game result for Portugal. It is possible but this can not be proven and there for no need to argue about. In football there are 4 qualities needed to play the game. 

1. Technical abilities
2. Physical abilities
3. Tactical or cognitive abilities
4. Mental abilities.

Those for are the ingredients that decide the outcome of a player and together as a team. The variables possible are to many in order to take that extra day as a conclusive evidence for being it an advantage for Portugal. If you play a long league and those extra days could be taken in consideration. In a tournament the mental factor is bigger in my opinion. Just look at the following moments that  can question the influence of that extra day.

• Pepe who had an extra day and was vomiting at the end. He had an extra day off. Did he went "deeper" because he is mentally stronger or he was less fit and had to vomit while he had an extra day off? 
  
• Quaressma in the 83rd minute doesn't close defensively the space any more  that results in a shot on goal from France and very close to the winning goal. He had more rest than most players so he should be fitter!! Question remains is it mental or physical that he did not close that space?
  
  
• in the 91st minute Gignac the French substitute who came in and did not play much at all was top fit and rested and misses a crucial ball ending on the goalpost. This would be the winning goal !!! Is this Technique, fatigue, Cognition or Mental failure? 
  

The point here is that the extra day rest is a useless discussion in this particular case because it can't be measured and be proven to be true. In a long run league i would agree. When 2 people are fighting and are in survival mode, the mind is stronger than the body. Having an extra day rest for one of them would not matter. I think this is more applicable in a tournament where it is about "do" or "die". 

Euro 2016 short team review:

 In this last part i wanne look shortly back on the coaching style and their cultural approach of a few teams this tournament. It is easy to talk from the sideline and afterwards. Thats why I can sincerely say that i try to make a prediction of what is going to happen before the games and look at history events and try to recognise a pattern in the way Coaches and countries approach their game. 

Belgium:

Lets start with Belgium. Belgium has one of the best talented groups and did a good job in the world cup 2 years ago. These players got more experience on international level and are almost all key players at international clubs. Without going into full depth i most say that Wilmots the coach of Belgium Made some tactical blunders. The first one was making Hazard captain of the team. He marched on the field like he owned the world without being effective or  decisive for the team. He only delivered against Hungary who was not that strong. Hazard is not a leader. He has laissez-faire attitude and can't carry a team. Secondly his reading of the game was not that strong. He made the mistake against Italy, who played with 5 defenders, to let de Bruyne play on the right wing. This resulted in that the team played everything trough the middle. Hazard who went running all over and de Bruyne who naturally wants to go inside also because there is his best position and strength. There was no occupation on the wings and that is essential playing against a 5 man defence. Wilmots made this same mistake again against Wales who also play this 5 man defence line. In this game Belgium dominated till they scored the 1-0 and start playing it safe. They retreated back on own half and Wales scored 1-1. Wilmots was scared while he was dominating at first. The second half he changed his formation set up and put de Bruyne again on the wing. What you think happened? Yes all trough the middle and they lost the game 3-1. 

 See below how the wings most of the time never where occupied against a 5 man defense line.

England:

The country that invented football. What did they win? One world cup and thats it. This was in 1966. England have never won the UEFA European Football Championship – after fourteen attempts over fifty two years, their best performances were semi final appearances at the 1968 and 1996 championships, the latter of which they hosted. What is it with english football that they dont progress internationally? 

In my opinion England has one of the strongest leagues in the world. This is mainly because of the financial back up and the best players of the world are able to come to the UK. I do think that the amount of second  and third ranked best players are bigger than in any other league. This makes it more difficult for English talents to  come trough the ranks and reach the first team. Because these places are the spaces that for talents can be used. 

If i see the talented players in the English team i have to conclude that they are average and not even the best players at their own teams in the premier league. This team was also young and inexperienced. I was at an internship at Arsenal in March of 2016 and came to know that English youth players till 18 years old not even compete in a league. They play only friendlies and everyone has to play. Meaning if you are a substitute you have to get playing time. So every game there are always 5 substitutes because official rule is everyone gets playing time. How the hell you are going to compete and fight for your place because of this rule and no league competition only friendlies? 

Last but not least, I have never been a fan of English Coaches. They are to conservative and tactical weak in my opinion. They always talk about how it was in the early days and how players don't have the passion. If i listen to analyses on TV they talk more about the romantic side of football than details. Retired players like Rio Ferdinand and Ryan Giggs had much more useful inside and comments on the game than older English coaches. English Football culture should have a serious look on how much money they pay for average players. These are the ones that stand in the way developing talents not the top players.