I think both teams are of an equal footing when it comes to fitness, both seasons start this week.
But that's what Villarreal do, they fustrate teams and make it difficult which is the reason they are so good in tournaments, less so in the league.
UEFA Super Cup
- Thread starter Deery
- Start date
But that's what Villarreal do, they fustrate teams and make it difficult which is the reason they are so good in tournaments, less so in the league.
Seems like he played for penalties. He left Abraham on the bench.
Kepa - from zero to hero, fair play to him!
But it isn’t just this game. Even then no two games are really the same. Maybe Tuchel saw how great Villarreal were at pens against us and decided to change keepers etc etc.
It’s a footnote at best.
I agree that Chelsea were worthy winners of the CL last season (although I think everyone that wasn't Bayern got lucky that Lewandowski was injured), but part of that is because they were tailor made to beat the big teams that give them more space, and they struggled in the league against teams that sat back.
It'll be interesting to see if Lukaku, who was a pretty good lower team bully for us, can help them pick up points in those kinda matches this season.
Whilst that could be true I think it's a legitimate talking point personally.
You literally support Chelsea of course you think you were not lucky
The same invincible Tuchel whom also lost to Leicester in the FA cup final? He's a good manager who also signs the most expensive players (Lukaku incoming) but let's not overrate him here at a level that he shouldn't be
Come on, nothing to praise Tuchel for. The budget difference is so big they should had won by a confortable margin. Comparing both games, we created much more chances against Villarreal, who actually could had turned the game on the 2nd half and dominated the midfield against Chelsea, something they couldn't do against us.
I saw that game with optimism: it brings good pespectives on Chelsea loosing lots of points during the season.
I saw that game with optimism: it brings good pespectives on Chelsea loosing lots of points during the season.
Anyone who thinks that you should simply pick the goalkeeper with the highest penalty save percentage is stupid.
1. Sample size
If Goalkeeper A only has faced 10 penalties in his professional career whereas Goalkeeper B has faced over 50, then it's not a fair comparison. 10 penalties is practically useless as far sample size goes. Hell, even 50 is not that good of a sample size.
2. Improvements over time
Let's say that a goalkeeper starts off his "penalty career" by conceding pretty much everything up until a certain point. Even if he improves drastically, his overall stats will be doomed by his poor start. You could of course only focus on recent history, but then you potentially have biased data. Also, where do you draw the line? If a goalkeeper has saved 5 of the last 10 penalties does that mean that he's a penalty expert now? Is a goalkeeper who has saved 0 in the last 10 automatically bad at penalties?
3. The quality of the penalties faced
It goes without saying that this is not only the most important factor, but it's also completely outside the goalkeepers control. And considering how few penalties the average professional goalkeeper will face in his career, this can have pretty devastating effects on their save percentage. If a goalkeeper faces 50 penalties in his career and 40 of them are "un-saveable", then he's fecked. Even if he saves 50% of the saveable penalties(which is insane), he will only have a 10% penalty save rate. Another goalkeeper could be lucky and only be faced with 10 un-saveable penalties, and thus have a sample size of saveable penalties that are 4 times as high. Even if the second goalkeeper is nearly twice as bad at penalties, his penalty save rate will be more or less the same as the first goalkeeper.
_______________________________
TLDR; I would never use "penalty save percentage" as the only decider for which goalkeeper I pick for a penalty shootout. I'd want my data scientists to analyse the penalties in depth while heavily considering the 3 variables above.
1. Sample size
If Goalkeeper A only has faced 10 penalties in his professional career whereas Goalkeeper B has faced over 50, then it's not a fair comparison. 10 penalties is practically useless as far sample size goes. Hell, even 50 is not that good of a sample size.
2. Improvements over time
Let's say that a goalkeeper starts off his "penalty career" by conceding pretty much everything up until a certain point. Even if he improves drastically, his overall stats will be doomed by his poor start. You could of course only focus on recent history, but then you potentially have biased data. Also, where do you draw the line? If a goalkeeper has saved 5 of the last 10 penalties does that mean that he's a penalty expert now? Is a goalkeeper who has saved 0 in the last 10 automatically bad at penalties?
3. The quality of the penalties faced
It goes without saying that this is not only the most important factor, but it's also completely outside the goalkeepers control. And considering how few penalties the average professional goalkeeper will face in his career, this can have pretty devastating effects on their save percentage. If a goalkeeper faces 50 penalties in his career and 40 of them are "un-saveable", then he's fecked. Even if he saves 50% of the saveable penalties(which is insane), he will only have a 10% penalty save rate. Another goalkeeper could be lucky and only be faced with 10 un-saveable penalties, and thus have a sample size of saveable penalties that are 4 times as high. Even if the second goalkeeper is nearly twice as bad at penalties, his penalty save rate will be more or less the same as the first goalkeeper.
_______________________________
TLDR; I would never use "penalty save percentage" as the only decider for which goalkeeper I pick for a penalty shootout. I'd want my data scientists to analyse the penalties in depth while heavily considering the 3 variables above.
Neither would any sensible club. Henderson has a better save percentage because his penalty saving technique is very good, in comparison to DDG who has poor technique in this regard. Ole and Tuchel will have access to everything you talk about and more.
This highlights how illogical the 'received wisdom' that Ole subscribes to is
I'll happily admit 2012 we had a large slice of luck (but that team would have been on about 3 before then with luck on their side prior so meh) but people who think there was even the remotest element of luck involved in the 2021 win need to follow a different sport.
I wasn't really talking about Ole or Tuchel specifically. My post was targeted towards the posters who use 'penalty save rate' as their only argument. Of course professional coaches know about the variables I posted above. That is probably also why it's so rare to switch goalkeepers before a shootout. The goalkeeper on the bench should be significantly better at penalties for the gamble to make sense. A goalkeeper who comes off the bench to save the day is put under a lot more pressure.
I have no idea how they calculate "expected saves", but I hope it's not all about where you place the penalty or how hard the shot is.
Last edited:
Mendy's record with penalties is very poor, he basically gets sat down while the player rolls it the other side (apart from Aguero who stupidly tried to lob him).
Look at the shootout here against Spurs, the first four pens almost looked like action replays.
I hate being too critical of him as he's been a revelation for us and is fantastic in almost every other aspect of goalkeeping but with penalties he is very poor, I have no faith he will he save one.
Again: I'm not talking about specifics here. After the backroom staff have crunched all the data and added a bit of common sense, I'm sure that the arguments for making the switch were strong(and probably correct).
My issue is when people only look at 'penalty save rate' to make their conclusion. That is stupid, to say the least.
Honestly quite a good shout actually.
The goalkeeper substitution will become a lot more common now that there are more substitutes available. It makes total sense so why not use it.
Not really. Chelsea had the most players (15) at the Euros out of all clubs so many came back to preseason training late. For example, Mount and Jorginho who played last night returned only last week and haven't even played a minute in a preseason.
Apart from Pau Torres and Gerard Moreno I don't know any other Villareal players that were involved in the Euros so I imagine the rest started their preparation for the season at their regular time.
Goalkeepers generally love shootouts, it's their big moment and often they only need 1 or 2 saves from 5 to be the hero. The pressure is overwhelmingly on the players taking the penalties.
Personally I think we will see more and more keepers getting subbed in shootouts. Not a massive amount though because often the best penalty saver will already be on the pitch.
It will be, at least in part, where they place and how hard they hit the penalty. I guess it becomes more murky if you don't factor in which way the keeper dives. Then again, that's all part of technique. Some keepers dive too soon whilst others give themselves the best chance by diving as late as possible.
I agree that the pressure is higher on the players taking the penalties.
But a goalkeeper who comes on specifically because he's better at penalties is going to feel more pressure than a goalkeeper who's played all game. If your only job is to come on for penalty shootouts, then it becomes harder to forgive yourself if you don't make a single save. I also think the psychological blow to the rest of the team potentially is greater.
That being said, the best penalty keeper will typically be the starter. And in most of the other cases it will be too close to call so making a sub will be the wrong choice. In the case of Chelsea, it might very well be one of the few cases where a sub is the smart choice.
all these points are easily accessible for Ole and goes toward Henderson advantage, but he is even 1, not brave enough to make the right decision. 2, not good enough to realize and make the right decision. I will go with no 1.
Taking your keeper off in the 119th minute for the upcoming penalty shoot-out takes balls. If it works then you're a genius. If you lose then it's the first thing that pundits and fans will throw at you. I can sort of understand why ole didn't take DDG off in Poland. Had we gone on to lose the shoot out with Hendo too he'd have been buried in the press for that decision.
First of all, like I said to the other guy: my post isn't about Ole. It's about the massively flawed logic of picking a goalkeeper purely based on 'penalty save rate'.
But since you brought it up: Henderson has played less than 100 games on the highest level. How many penalties has he faced in that time? I'd guess somewhere between 5 and 20. And if that is the case, then we're talking about a sample size that is too small to strongly conclude that he is a significant improvement.
That's not to mention the psychological aspect. Has Henderson ever been put in a high pressure situation like that? Can we say for sure that he would be as composed as he would when playing for Sheffield United and no one really expects anything?
Lastly, you make it sound like only Ole(or bad managers) would make that call. But historically, the call Ole made is a typical one. Even among good coaches.
I also guarantee you that he would have been even more criticised if he made the switch and we still lost.
EDIT:
So I googled it. Henderson has only faced 5 penalties at the highest level(for a Premier League team). He's saved 2 of them. Not exactly a huge sample size.
Last edited:
There's no pressure on a goalie who comes on for penalties. During a game you can make a mistake that could cost you a game, but in pens, a couple of correct guesses makes you the hero, but you can't really make a mistake, that's just a "good penalty"
I've been subbed off for another goalie for pens, it's fecking infuriating
I've been subbed off for another goalie for pens, it's fecking infuriating
Of course there is. Statistically, roughly 1 in 5 penalties are saved(shots that hit the post or miss the target not included). If you don't save a single penalty, then you have statistically underperformed and let your team down. I say "statistically", because reality is a bit more complex. If all 5 penalties are great, no one should blame you.
DDG got a lot of shit after that penalty shootout despite most of the penalties being excellent. That was uncalled for, imo. But it goes to show that there is some pressure. No sane goalkeeper goes into a penalty shootout thinking that they "cannot fail no matter what" or "my job here is done, everything else is just a bonus". If you can do a good job on penalties, then it also means that you can do a bad job, even if the odds favor the penalty taker.
To prove he also has balls, by changing goalkeepers for the penalty shootout
Fair enough, there's some pressure, but compared to the pressure of an actual game, it really isn't a lot. Also, 1 in 5, 1 in 7, moving in the right direction gives you a chance to get something on it, so most keepers should make one save, percentage wise.
I have no idea why DDG is so poor at pens, but that "negative step" analysis above might be a good reason
DDG's all-time penalty save stats(from almost 70 penalties) is between 17% and 18%. That is only marginally worse than the average goalkeeper.
Before the penalty shootout he had faced a lot of penalties in a row without making a save, which is why Ole was criticised for not making the sub. But when you're only expected to save 1 in 5 penalties, it's not really that crazy to go 10-15 penalties in a row without making a save.
Overall, I don't think the stats that are available are conclusive enough to definitely justify the sub. Henderson has a very small sample size and DDG was actually better than average before suddenly entering a slump. I'm not saying that making the sub necessarily is wrong either, though. My issue is that people have a very black-and-white view on this matter.
@OleBoiii
This is what Eric Steele the former United goalkeeping coach says about Henderson and the psychology of penalties
“He is putting sufficient doubt in the taker’s mind via whatever means possible, be that good movement on the line, something he has said to the penalty taker or maybe even a delaying tactic he uses. If the ball hits the crossbar or post, Dean will consider his job has been done.”
“The big thing about Dean is how he thrives in one-on-one situations, whether it be in open play or certainly when it gets to the situation of an opposing player putting the ball on the spot,” adds Steele, who has followed Henderson’s career path closely after the Cumbrian first joined the Manchester United youth set-up as a 14-year-old.
“He loves that challenge. It has always been part of him, ever since he was young.
“That is not to say you could say back in his early development that he would go on to save penalty after penalty. But that relishing of the one-on-one situation is something he has always had. He has always had a confidence, too, that he won’t be beaten.
“All the greats — I go back to [Ipswich Town’s goalkeeper in the 1970s and Eighties] Paul Cooper and through to Peter Schmeichel — are intimidating to anyone about to take a penalty. They had a presence that could have an unbelievable effect on an opponent.”
DDG is the opposite of this. If 11 players are putting the ball into the side of the net then the keeper has failed because they're feeling no intimidation or pressure to take the penalty.
There may be some keepers that would feel pressure to be brought on just for a shootout in a cup final but most will be desperate to get on the pitch.
There's more breakdown in the article of Henderson's penalty saving technique.
https://theathletic.com/1566685/202...enalty-de-gea-manchester-united/?redirected=1
This is what Eric Steele the former United goalkeeping coach says about Henderson and the psychology of penalties
“He is putting sufficient doubt in the taker’s mind via whatever means possible, be that good movement on the line, something he has said to the penalty taker or maybe even a delaying tactic he uses. If the ball hits the crossbar or post, Dean will consider his job has been done.”
“The big thing about Dean is how he thrives in one-on-one situations, whether it be in open play or certainly when it gets to the situation of an opposing player putting the ball on the spot,” adds Steele, who has followed Henderson’s career path closely after the Cumbrian first joined the Manchester United youth set-up as a 14-year-old.
“He loves that challenge. It has always been part of him, ever since he was young.
“That is not to say you could say back in his early development that he would go on to save penalty after penalty. But that relishing of the one-on-one situation is something he has always had. He has always had a confidence, too, that he won’t be beaten.
“All the greats — I go back to [Ipswich Town’s goalkeeper in the 1970s and Eighties] Paul Cooper and through to Peter Schmeichel — are intimidating to anyone about to take a penalty. They had a presence that could have an unbelievable effect on an opponent.”
DDG is the opposite of this. If 11 players are putting the ball into the side of the net then the keeper has failed because they're feeling no intimidation or pressure to take the penalty.
There may be some keepers that would feel pressure to be brought on just for a shootout in a cup final but most will be desperate to get on the pitch.
There's more breakdown in the article of Henderson's penalty saving technique.
https://theathletic.com/1566685/202...enalty-de-gea-manchester-united/?redirected=1
Jesus people defending that Ole call. For sure De Gea might do bette in training to save pens, but he has looked awful in games.
Also consider his confident would not exactly be high after not saving many pens for a long time.
People here would defend to sub on Phil Jones or Bailly to take pens too I guess. If Ole does something it got to be right since he is the best manager there is.
Also consider his confident would not exactly be high after not saving many pens for a long time.
People here would defend to sub on Phil Jones or Bailly to take pens too I guess. If Ole does something it got to be right since he is the best manager there is.
It’s hilarious that some people still think that it wasn’t an obvious decision for Ole to make. Anyone that has seen DDG play could have told you before the shootout that he is absolutely hopeless at penalties. He is now like 0 for 35 in the last few years. It’s practically impossible for anyone to be this bad but yet Ole trusted him in such a huge moment which is truly embarrassing.
I also think that for the opposition players there must be a psychological impact of the new keeper coming on,you have probably prepared more for DDG and you are wondering about how good this new guy must be that they have sent him on just for the shootout. In the DDG Hendo case it was the most no brainer decision ever. I can promise you that at least amongst United fans no sane person would have blamed him if he had lost with Henderson
Love Dave and love Ole but he definitely got it wrong in not dropping him for the shoot out.
There isn't really any sensible argument to defend his decision (or lack of decision really), just hope lessons have been learnt because the same situation could happen again one day.
There isn't really any sensible argument to defend his decision (or lack of decision really), just hope lessons have been learnt because the same situation could happen again one day.
I'm going to guess that Lukaku gets at least 20 goals next season
Madness. Broke the champs league clean sheet record, had 1 shot on target against us in the final, but were lucky to win it. Have a lie down
He has to be a wum. His take is shocking. He'll be telling us Tuchel is an average manager next
Nah mate, incredibly lucky draw
i know like, atletico madrid, porto, real madrid, man city. Could not have asked for easier!.....
He's faced more than 1000 in training. Why do they train?