FootballFan
Striker
Of course it is, you select your best takers prior. Its like during a game, you know who's gonna take a kick..nothing different, just a increase in numbers.
What's the scientific method?
eh? that is
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Of course it is, you select your best takers prior. Its like during a game, you know who's gonna take a kick..nothing different, just a increase in numbers.
What's the scientific method?
It was already put to bed iirc in the presser this morning by Southgate
In that same period the only ones I can think of from shoot outs all scoredActing a tinker as I hate Owen, has he got a list of young lads who took and scored or do they not normally have that burden placed on them?![]()
Southgate said 5 minutes after the shootout that he chose the list and it was all on him. Nobody seemed to listen though.
@FootballFan is saying having your takers picked based on experience/stats/training pre match is the more scientific method when compared to “who’s up for it lads?” after extra timeOf course it is, you select your best takers prior. Its like during a game, you know who's gonna take a kick..nothing different, just a increase in numbers.
What's the scientific method?
Looks like his stats will get skewed/changed after England and Italys performance.Interesting article from Four Four Two: Does bringing substitutes on for penalty shootouts ever work? | FourFourTwo
"Geir Jordet, a football psychology researcher undertook a study of all penalty shootouts at World Cups, European Championships and Copa Americas between 1976 and 2004. He founf that (unsurprisingly) attackers are better than defenders at scoring penalties; that players aged 23 and under performed better than older players; and that fatigued players (those who play 120 minutes) are less successful than substitutes."
Interesting article from Four Four Two: Does bringing substitutes on for penalty shootouts ever work? | FourFourTwo
"Geir Jordet, a football psychology researcher undertook a study of all penalty shootouts at World Cups, European Championships and Copa Americas between 1976 and 2004. He founf that (unsurprisingly) attackers are better than defenders at scoring penalties; that players aged 23 and under performed better than older players; and that fatigued players (those who play 120 minutes) are less successful than substitutes."
Won't tbh. Dataset is too big to be affected by a few penaltiesLooks like his stats will get skewed/changed after England and Italys performance.
Scientific method, never heard the like. Why do people complicate football its a Simple Game, you know who your best are.@FootballFan is saying having your takers picked based on experience/stats/training pre match is the more scientific method when compared to “who’s up for it lads?” after extra time
I’m not saying anything about the virtues of either approach.Scientific method, never heard the like. Why do people complicate football its a Simple Game, you know who your best are.
Picking a 19yr old who looked well overawed whilst on the field, noticable when he sidestepped a challenge. Followed by M Rashford who's struggled all season. Two huge blunders from GS.
Jack Grealish was spot on calling out Keane and GS, he like many others would have stepped up. Well done JG.
So your saying the manager knows they were his best, scientific style?I’m not saying anything about the virtues of either approach.
You’ve said you know who your best are. How would a manager know who the best penalty takers are?
It wasn’t me who made the original assertion, I was just clarifying some confusion about it. All I’m saying is that taking penalty scoring records in matches and training is a more scientific method (it’s hardly rocket science) than asking “who fancies it?” on the pitch. They probably have psychologists who profile the players for those with the coolness to score under pressureSo your saying the manager knows they were his best, scientific style?
I was joking mate.Won't tbh. Dataset is too big to be affected by a few penalties
Too much bollocks on here for me to know what's up or down nowadaysI was joking mate.
If there were psychologists using player profiles to pick those who would perform best under pressure I’d want to look at their profiling / testing methods, results, analysis etc as it seems clear there are factors which have been missed or not taken account of in the conclusions made.It wasn’t me who made the original assertion, I was just clarifying some confusion about it. All I’m saying is that taking penalty scoring records in matches and training is a more scientific method (it’s hardly rocket science) than asking “who fancies it?” on the pitch. They probably have psychologists who profile the players for those with the coolness to score under pressure
I’ve made no suggestion which is better. Southgate has said that he picked the takers. Certainly Rashford falls into the ‘good history’ category. I think Sancho is 3/3 so a good record. Saka is a stranger one but maybe he bangs them in in training, I have no idea.
Woodlebert not having a go at you.It wasn’t me who made the original assertion, I was just clarifying some confusion about it. All I’m saying is that taking penalty scoring records in matches and training is a more scientific method (it’s hardly rocket science) than asking “who fancies it?” on the pitch. They probably have psychologists who profile the players for those with the coolness to score under pressure
I’ve made no suggestion which is better. Southgate has said that he picked the takers. Certainly Rashford falls into the ‘good history’ category. I think Sancho is 3/3 so a good record. Saka is a stranger one but maybe he bangs them in in training, I have no idea.
Much of psychology is a pseudoscience anyway. Just look at the success of FBI "profiles."If there were psychologists using player profiles to pick those who would perform best under pressure I’d want to look at their profiling / testing methods, results, analysis etc as it seems clear there are factors which have been missed or not taken account of in the conclusions made.