After England’s encouraging 3-2 win against Germany yesterday the English are predictably getting excited about the prospects for Euro 2016. Readers of this blog are no doubt familiar with one of the best chapters in Soccernomics, which provided the original title of the UK edition- ”Why England Lose”. In this Simon hilariously described the eight-phase progression from excessive optimism to ultimate humiliation that accompanies most England campaigns.
So before we get going for Euro 2016, I would like to pre-empt accusations against one of the usual suspects paraded in the scapegoating phase (no 7). As I watched on US TV yesterday the commentary team was already pointing the finger- the English players might do well as long as they are not too exhausted by the excessive demands of the English season.
I must admit I have been exposed to this theory for so long that I have never thought to challenge it. Why do the English think they play more games than anyone else? On the face of it the idea is absurd. Each club in the Premier League plays 38 games in a season. That’s the same as the Italians, French, Spaniards, who between them have won 6 of the last 10 World Cups and Euros. True, the Germans and the Dutch only have 34 game league seasons – and while they produce great teams, it hardly seems enough to account for the exhausted English.
Of course, there are also Cup competitions. Every other major nation has its own version of the FA Cup, so no difference there. But then there is also the League Cup- a peculiar trophy invented in 1960 to generate more revenue – which most other nations have not imitated. Getting to the final can add up to 7 games- but that’s only for two teams. Moreover, most of the big clubs have adopted to the policy of resting star players in early rounds of cup competitions, so this does not seem like a major difference.
More, importantly, big clubs focus on the Champions League, up to 13 games from the group stage to the final- but this also seems to affect all the big countries in the same way.
It’s true that most other countries have a midwinter break which England managers long to copy, but there does not seem any reason to believe that English players play many more games in a season than their counterparts abroad. Ultimately, this is an empirical question. How many games do they play in the season prior to a major tournament? Thanks to wikipedia and websites like http://www.football-lineups.com/ we can answer these questions.
It takes a little time to copy all the data, but here’s one example that should help put the myth to rest. In 2014 England sank to two narrow defeats and early exit from the World Cup and Germany laid foundations for ultimate victory by dismantling Portugal, followed by a slightly shaky draw against Ghana.
In both cases the starting elevens were the same for each game. The English squad had played an average 39.2 club games over the previous season and the Germans had played more- 40.6. Four German starters had actually played their club football in England in the previous season- and had played only 40.25 games on average, less than the average German playing in Germany!
Taking the entire squads for the two nations, England players had played 39.2 games on average, the Germans 38.2. There were only three players in the England squad who had played 45 or more games in the previous season, while there 6 players in the German squad who had done so.
Well, this isn’t absolute proof. Maybe the Germans of 2014 were just an exception, and English players generally play more than players from other nations. I doubt it. If there’s any interested student or statto out there who has the time I’d be very interested to see similar stats compiled for other nations competing in major tournaments. My guess would be that, if anything teams with players who play more often do better, because experience is more importance than exhaustion.
You might need to dig deeper to analyse how demanding games in England are compared to games in other countries. Are there more high intensity sprints per game? More total kilometres covered? Anecdotally, a lot of people seem to believe the Premiership is more intense and physically exhausting.
I doubt this is true comparing Germany to England, but data analysis could settle this too
I still get baffled on that people still is spreading the myth about how the English is believing that they “will win every championship”. I mean it is 2016 now. Not 1956.
It is about hopes and not about expectations. That is a big difference.
Just read the tabloids one week before the tournament starts 🙂
Miguel Delaney looked at the number of games played by core players in a few teams before Euro 2012. http://www.espnfc.com/story/1057486/miguel-delaney-spanish-stars-at-risk-of-burning-out
We all know who won it.
My guess is you are partly right. More games could be a plus over shorter periods (say 2 or maybe 4 years cycles), and especially if team members play together during club season, but it may also be they are highly detrimental over longer ones (if the same players are included).
As of England, probably more due to the lack of quality (in that I include an ability to gel together even when the look good on paper) than exhaustion from club season. By the way, I can’t find a source, but I am pretty sure I saw a video once with former English player telling the story about German player answering him that eternal English question. Went something like this: “We knew you would always rush at the start, and we just needed to wait till you got tired from it.”
I believe its the “intensity” that is cited as a factor, as well as the absence of a winter break. More number of games (which like you say, is unsubstantiated) is an easy excuse out.
Piggybacking off of Alex’s comment above, and providing an American analogy that may meet your geographical fancy, the “English Premier League is more demanding” claim strikes me as very similar to the “Big Ten and NFC North football is bruising and thus exhausting” trope that is anecdotally trotted out with blatant disregard to reality. It provides media commentators with a familiar idea to throw to the consuming public to fill airtime.