Coaching seminars in the future may utilize footage from England’s match against Argentina as a case study on how to squander a one-goal advantage. This assessment, though severe, is substantiated by the match statistics.
Numerous troubling figures emerged during the post-match analysis, with the most alarming coming from OptaJoe, which reported that England held just 12% possession during the 30 minutes following Anthony Gordon’s goal until Argentina equalized. They remarked, “That is the lowest by a team to be winning for at least 10 minutes in a World Cup match in the last 60 years,”
The situation worsened when we examine this timeframe more closely. Prior to the hydration break, Thomas Tuchel’s squad seemed relatively competent. A well-placed pass from Harry Kane led to a shot in the 66th minute, followed by another attempt from Kane when England regained possession in the attacking third. While Emiliano Martínez’s goal was not under serious threat, these moments indicated that Argentina could be kept busy in their own half.
Strategic Changes and Their Impact
However, that threat dissipated once Ezri Konsa replaced Gordon, leading England to adopt a 5-4-1 formation. This alteration stripped the team of any substantial pace on the counter-attack. Although substituting Kane would have been a significant decision, his presence yielded little advantage as the team attempted to secure the match with a defensive posture.
As Tuchel prepares for the third-place playoff instead of the final this weekend, he should contemplate England’s goal difference throughout the tournament, which stood at +6 across 6.3 matches, translating to +0.82 per 90 minutes. This figure varied noticeably with different players on the field, though caution is advised against overinterpreting small individual samples in team sports. The goal difference was +2.01 per 90 minutes with Bukayo Saka on the pitch, +1.16 for Reece James, and +1.14 for Gordon.
While speed has proven beneficial, it was notably absent in this match as the Arsenal winger remained on the bench. Having a quick player to target in attack could have provided a necessary outlet amid pressure.
Poor Passing and Game Management
During the span of approximately 19 minutes from Konsa’s introduction until the winning goal, England managed just 11 passes.
Only four of these passes were completed: two were successful right after the hydration break when Jordan Pickford passed to John Stones and quickly received it back, another was during stoppage time when Kane found Jude Bellingham, who then lost possession. The remaining successful pass? Bellingham’s kick-off following Enzo Fernández’s equalizer.
This sequence epitomized how England’s aspirations unraveled. Bellingham’s backward pass to Pickford was met with a long ball aimed at Kane, which was ineffective. The goalkeeper accounted for five of England’s seven failed passes during the period between Konsa coming on and the moment they fell behind 2-1, with three of those passes going out of play.
Conceding the Winning Goal
A failure in game management compounded the issues. Argentina regularly interrupted the flow of play with fouls, some of which went unpunished, until they fell behind. In stark contrast, England managed a solitary free-kick from Gordon’s goal until the 97th minute and executed their last successful tackle in the 63rd minute.
To top it off, England conceded the decisive goal to a header from Lautaro Martínez, who stands at 174cm, despite bringing in 201cm tall Dan Burn to counter Argentina’s aerial threat. Burn’s involvement was limited to the final third after England had already gone behind, making him appear more like an oversized decoration than a defensive asset in their penalty area.
No matter which statistics are examined regarding England’s performance after taking the lead, the results are undeniably disappointing.
