None of the ones I have seen are "proper" own goals. They are still, as usual, defenders doing desperate clears in front of attackers that would have scored 999 times out of 1000 if the defender had let it be. Those in my view shoulnd't even count as "own goals" as they currently do. The passer should get the goal and that should be the end of it. This is how it works elsewhere like in ice hockey and others.
Counting "own goals" as any goal where a defender is last to touch the ball and it wouldn't have gone into the goal otherwise is simple but it's just not useful. The skill is setting the defender in that impossible situation to begin with, and it's the attackers' effort that does it. It's filed together with true own goals which are mistakes - and it's silly.
"Proper" own goals where a normal goal isn't almost a given in the milliseconds after, are still extremely rare and always were.
I agree with what you say, but the question that TFA asks is still relevant, since 'own goals' have always been counted the way they are. So the number of own goals is still higher than usual.
I think the reason is because there is more at stake. Take last night for example. The defender busted a gut to get back to try and cut out the cross, even though the chances of doing so were minimal - the end result being he put it into his own net. In a normal league game the defender would likely have just accepted his team's fate and Sterling would have had an easy tap in.
And yet there's some doubt as to whether the OG is attributed correctly. Most people who watch football would say Simon f*cked up badly. But records are gonna say Pedri did it. What we really want records to reflect is the responsible part, no? Even that ends up in a bit of a grey area if we consider that a lot of goals are scored as tap-ins where the credit should really go to someone who unlocked the defense.
Yep, that's hard to attribute to an attacker with maximum effort, so should count as one of those extremely rare own goals. My guess (without having seen all the games) is that it's just 1-2 in the tournament, and that the figure historically has been just 0..2 as well. What would stand out would be if there were 4-5 such goals in a tournament. Not that there is a dozen of the "defender own-goals from the goal-line" type.
I think you're nitpicking a bit but let's go along with your definition and rephrase the question: why are there so many "defender own-goals from the goal-line" in this tournament? It's still an interesting question
there is, IMO, a very simple answer to this: Own goals were often attributed to the last person to hit the ball from the attacking team.
The defender (or other, but usually defender) didn't want the own goal and the attacker did - it was a system that suited everyone.
Take a look at this goal by 'rio ferdinand' in the 2002 World Cup - this is given as Rio's goal - that would be inconcievable today, its clearly an own goal. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/21785916
Why has the attribution suddenly changed this tournament?
Edit: I just watched the clip you linked - are you saying that was an own goal because the goalkeeper touched it? That’s just a fumbling attempt at a save. That sort of thing has never been considered an own goal, and wouldn’t be in the current tournament either.
No. Despite not being recognised as such by FIFA, this is clearly an own goal. Even at the time people were surpised by FIFAs decision
"It is hard to define the reasoning behind Fifa's decision to award England's opening goal to Rio Ferdinand since he headed David Beckham's corner away from the net before Thomas Sorensen fumbled the ball back over the line. That was an own-goal and no argument."
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2002/jun/17/worldcupfoo...
"The goal is clearly a Sørensen own goal but despite the availability of TV replays, FIFA officially credit the goal to Rio Ferdinand."
Source: https://www.englandstats.com/matches.php?mid=794
Compared to 2002 there's now much more high-quality, high-speed video being recorded - and soccer authorities recently started using VAR (Video Assistant Referee).
Soccer was slow to adopt instant replays; IIRC the official reason for this was the sport's governing bodies didn't want to widen the chasm between the top leagues and the grass roots game.
As you yourself point out downthread, the award of this goal was disputed at the time, and the guidance hasn't changed. Plus unlike the Ferdinand header, nobody could have thought the cross that Kjaer diverted into his own net last night was a shot on target.
It might be a factor in some goals not being recorded as own goals in the dim and distant days before multi-angle TV replays, but can't possibly explain a spectacular rise in own goals since 2016. Ferdinand-style goal awards are as rare if not rarer than recorded own goals in recent tournament history
Also it makes no sense to attribute a rebound on a defender to the defender (Spain-Switzerland, own Goal by the switzerland defender which is just a kick by J. Alba).
It definitely seems soccer is becoming more and more efficient. The games of the EM in particular feel like watching one brick wall against another, goals mostly happening by sheer brute force and stacking probabilities in ones favor. May be it's just imagination, but I think in the past there used to be more fun, elegant plays. Kinda reminds me of online games when a meta has settled and at the highest level everything is purely optimized for winning.
I think that's why I've been enjoying women's football more (well, that, and my country only recently starting performing well): it's still at an earlier stage with more variance. Or I think that that's the reason for it.
Adding World Cup data shows a similar uptick but makes the series messier (last few World Cups in reverse order: 12, 5, 2,4, 3, 6, 1).
World Cup has more participating teams and usually more mismatches which partly explains the larger numbers.
The Euros added more games in 2016 and back in 1996, and only had four teams participating pre-1980, which plays a large role in why so few own goals were scored back then, but size alone can't explain the jump in 2018/2021 tournaments. Either it's a statistical anomaly or tactics
Croatia did a full proper own goal, most likely due to nervousness and maybe a bit of orientation loss.
All the others have been mere redirected shots from opponents, some of which would have landed or not, thus, so to say "forced auto goals".
Other issue is why was the penalty given to England last night, they had video review and I am still wondering how that could qualify as a malicious foul. I suppose it's the same rule with hands on ball, intentional or not doesn't seem to matter.
Other issue is why was the penalty given to England last night, they had video review and I am still wondering how that could qualify as a malicious foul. I suppose it's the same rule with hands on ball, intentional or not doesn't seem to matter.
A penalty doesn't require malice, only an offence inside the penalty area that would otherwise qualify for a direct free kick. If the ref had thought it was malicious, he would have been reaching for his card pocket as well.
Once the ref has made a subjective decision, VAR will only change the outcome if there has been a clear and obvious error by the referee.
I think there's a number of trends that are all tied to video refereeing:
- Offsides seem to be called more correctly. This is maybe a good thing, the only issue is it's often not obvious to the fans exactly what the law is, ie which body part is the offside point?
- More penalties. Stats are clear on this, the number of penalties in the last year or two has rocketed. I suspect this is because the laws of the game were written before vidrefs were a thing, and when you have video the grey zone can be sharpened. The interesting thing is of course there's been video replays since forever, they just haven't been used by refs. So we can actually go back in time and check if hands-on in the box actually happened just as often.
- More own goals is probably a change in attribution. With vidrefs being a thing you can move away from using common sense and just say "whoever touched it last". For the people who decide the attribution it's easier than deciding those corner cases where someone kicked it but the defender also sorta touched it.
I wish they would use the videos to detect and punish simulation. There will always be some borderline cases, but where a player is untouched (or touched in a completely different area) and then kicks off, hurtling to the ground while screaming in agony, and then jumps up as soon as the play resumes.
The game would be better without so much focus and time spent on playing to trick the referee. Having teams that are more evenly matched as ever and adding more penalties without addressing simulation will make for a boring game in the end that is just a contest of whoever can fool the referee better to get an advantage.
Unsporting behaviour can already get a player cautioned (and therefore a second such offence can already get a player sent off) and attempting to deceive the referee is literally the first example of unsporting behaviour given in the rules. It's strange that this isn't used more often, particularly in matches where certain players are frequent offenders.
In other situations, like putting the ball out so an opposing player can receive medical care, every player understands that this is just good sportsmanship. Likewise no-one criticises a player from that opposing team who gives possession back to the team who put it out when play restarts. So why are players who all respect that tradition OK with people who frequently take a dive or appeal for something they know they don't deserve?
For example, the English Premier League this year finished on 23rd May and starts again on 13th August (82 days rest). Last year, teams played 9-10 games between the COVID resumption on 19th June and league finish on 26th July. There were then just 48 days rest until the next season started on 12th September 2020.
The continental competitions (Champions League and Europa League) were also played during August 2020 meaning many players at top clubs had next to zero break between the two seasons. This has all had a knock-on effect to this tournament. I'm actually surprised there haven't been more injuries.
P.s. Small nitpick but the "European Cup" is the aforementioned Champions League trophy which is contested by the top club teams in Europe. The current international tournament is the European Championships or Euros.
Doesn't seem plausible that stress causes a factor of x10 or whatever number of OGs. Were there a huge number of OGs in all the other tournaments as well?
Stress just doesn't seem plausible. It would mean that WC/Euro/Copa/UCL/etc final stage games would be flooded with OGs, even without Covid.
> WC/Euro/Copa/UCL/etc final stage games would be flooded with OG
Another factor is the difference of team dynamics in Club vs International football. The first three you mentioned are all international tournaments (nations play each other) while UCL is club football.
Consider that national teams only play a handful of times over a season (generally 2x per international break), and then on to a big event like the Euros. And all the other times they play outside of a tournament (friendlies, tournament quals) their manager is trying to win and tweak the team at the same time. Not to mention, the selection pool for a national team is very limited compared to what even a mid-table club could assemble (Arsenal, looking at you :P ).
So, national teams playing this tournament are not only stressed, they are also less-acquainted with each other.
I guess you could argue for comparing Euros and Copa America but another thing to keep in mind is the variance of skill level per player in this tournament. I find it reasonable to claim the variance is less in Euros than in Copa (quick reason: Messi, Neymar, Aguero, Coutinho, Firmino, etc. all play in European clubs but are eligible for Copa).
This gap in skill in Copa makes OGs less likely. South American defenders don't always deal with Messi or Neymar but the European defenders and strikers could've played (with or against) each other in club competition. This makes close situations leading to OGs more likely.
It was pretty hot during most games, especially in the first weeks. Maybe that was a factor. Maybe the strategy to involve players more actively in defense was also relevant. Most own goals were tries to kick the ball away from the penalty area and perhaps it was just bad luck in many cases.
Well, teams are allowed 5 substitutions rather than the usual 3 because many European competitions were extended (and hence close to the Cup) due to Covid, so possibly that played a role?
Maybe an extension to the "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no": "If the headline starts with 'Why' and ends with a question mark, then no explanation will be given".
“If you look at each one and how they’ve occurred, many have come from “dangerous areas” on the pitch. At AS Monaco over the last season, we looked at where and how goals were most often scored and key areas to shoot/cross from to apply in our game model.”
With teams applying more analytics to soccer there are more cases of high goal probability crosses and defenders’ attempts to clear these are often futile. A great example was England’s equalizer yesterday that technically was an OG but realistically the defender had no chance to clear it and Sterling was right there to tap it in.
The other strange thing I noticed is how many goals have been reverted due to video analysis (mostly offside situations). Maybe I just haven't watched enough soccer recently, so I didn't see that trend earlier, but I found it curious. Maybe the two are connected, with defensive players trying to enforce offside situations by playing back into their own direction, and accidentally hitting the own goal more often than before. Or that the technology and its more frequent use allows for more precise detection of who was actually last to touch the ball (sounds more reasonable).
The increase in disallowed goals is due to new guidance to referees in the face of video assistance. They are instructed to let play go on and then check it after the possession has come to an end to prevent any dangerous chances being incorrectly stopped prematurely.
There does seem to be a reluctance by assistant referees to flag very obvious offsides, such as Italy's against Spain, meaning players run off celebrating, while VAR is reviewed and the goal is inevitably disallowed.
The explanations provided in the article are at best educated guesses and overall quite unsatisfactory. Honestly I don't know much about football and I only rarely watch matches, but somehow I got the feeling that over the years the sport has become more "athletic" and "mechanics-driven" (terms I just made up) as opposed to "artistic" and "technical" (again my terms). Does this make sense to anybody else? Could this be a cause for the increase in own-goals (things are happening way faster etc.)?
> the sport has become more "athletic" and "mechanics-driven" (terms I just made up) as opposed to "artistic" and "technical"
I think football has made this transition a long time ago. I wouldn't argue exactly when but consider how extremely talented players with lots of showmanship rarely perform well at an elite level on guile and "artistry" alone. Ronaldinho comes to mind vs. the athleticism and discipline of CR7 and Messi's games respectively.
Personally, I like the hypothesis that tactics are now so data-driven [1] it's catching defenders unaware more often than not, a prime situation for getting an own-goal counted in your account. I think "more intricate play in the final third" (Burton in the article) is a result of this. Max the xGs in your striker positioning [2]!
I'm also certain fatigue plays a part here (so, similar to Thorsvedt in the article). Playing schedule of an elite athlete is already brutal but the pandemic shifting and compressing timetables definitely did not help. I'm inclined to think defenders react ever so slowly in this contest.
In short: It's a weird time to be playing elite international football.
[1] Can't be bothered to look up a proper link but Liverpool's PL-winning team was touted to be data-driven, with analysts informing Klopp's selection and strategies.
[2] This is just my loose claim but someone with access to the games' data could verify this.
I'm curious, in your assessment, is the game today nicer to watch than it was 20-30 years ago when there was more "artistry"? Is it possible that football clubs are optimizing for the wrong things?
Would there be a way to change the game so that artistry is stimulated (assuming that's something people would like)?
In my very personal and non-European opinion, most flicks and tricks are only great to watch on Youtube highlight reels :P. Haven't been watching for 20-30 years but even in my 4K TV/monitor, Neymar's showboating is not as impressive without the commentator pointing it out or in close-up replay. Imagine how field play footage from even 15 years ago would look like to a casual today.
What's nice to watch even in bird's-eye wide-field view are great dribblers (like Messi) and great team tactics (if you know what to watch out for).
> Is it possible that football clubs are optimizing for the wrong things?
Man, tactical philosophy is another religous war to get into. Mourinho vs. Guardiola could be an ideological debate to rival our beloved tabs vs. spaces.
If you're trying to get into this, I'd say find a team whose narrative you like and start with them.
> Would there be a way to change the game so that artistry is stimulated
I think this depends on team tactics. The tactic dictates the behavior of individual players.
I haven't followed football as closely in the last two years but I think your best bet for teams like this is either Paris St-Germain or try to watch games in the South American leagues. After all it's the South American (Brazil, in particular) players who are well known for this.
(As for PSG, they paid a king's ransom to get Neymar in their team, and Neymar loves to play like he's still in the streets of Brazil. So I assume they built a team and tactics that allows him to do what he loves.)
> most flicks and tricks are only great to watch on Youtube highlight reels :P
Well, that makes sense - that's pretty much the level I'm at as a football fan.
> great team tactics (if you know what to watch out for).
Yeah, these are probably wasted on me at my current level of understanding.
> an ideological debate to rival our beloved tabs vs. spaces.
Is there a debate still going on? I thought it was settled - you just set a tab to be 4 spaces and you're done * laughs coyly *.
> they built a team and tactics that allows him to do what he loves
Interesting that somebody can be so much of a singular talent that they would shape a team around him. Does this happen often? Are such teams more frail in the long run if their star leaves?
The biggest change in football over the last 30 years is the "rising tides lift all boats" of globalization, which has produced a much higher caliber of player pool overall - more athletic, better trained, better coached at all levels, and - as you note - optimized by efficient markets.
The 22nd best player on the pitch in 2021 would probably be in the top 8 in the same match in 1991, and the gap between #1 and #22 has significantly shrunk in relative terms.
"Artistry" requires a domination of the discipline so you can then focus on the product without fear of failure to execute.
Funny, to my mind capitalism had destroyed much of the sport.
But it's true I'm thinking from the perspective of somebody coming from a small country (Romania in my case). 20-30 years ago we used to have pretty good teams and players, but the entire sport was gutted once it was open to the international market.
Romanian teams didn't have the funds to compete with Western clubs. Eventually all the good players and coaches left - nowadays Romanian football is played at the level of a second league in a powerful country. The best players get sold off quickly, the experience accumulated over the years has been lost, the national team is in disaray etc.
Counting "own goals" as any goal where a defender is last to touch the ball and it wouldn't have gone into the goal otherwise is simple but it's just not useful. The skill is setting the defender in that impossible situation to begin with, and it's the attackers' effort that does it. It's filed together with true own goals which are mistakes - and it's silly.
"Proper" own goals where a normal goal isn't almost a given in the milliseconds after, are still extremely rare and always were.