Have England been lucky at Euro 2024? Examining the cases for and against
England’s progress to the semi-finals of Euro 2024, where they face the Netherlands on Wednesday, has not been fun, but do jibes about luck stack up – or is something else going on?
That any successful team needs the rub of the green is one of the game’s most hackneyed cliches but, like many of them, does contain a kernel of truth.
The consensus is that Gareth Southgate’s team have played badly at Euro 2024 yet they find themselves 180 minutes away from a first major tournament win since 1966. So, as they prepare to face the Netherlands in the semi-finals on Wednesday, have England been lucky?
With England managing to win just once in 90 minutes across their five games so far and needing Jude Bellingham’s acrobatics to bail them out when they were seconds from elimination by Slovakia, the accusation passes the smell test.
The numbers don’t reflect very kindly on them either. England rank 21st out of the 24 teams for quality of chances they have created, as measured by the metric expected goals per 90 minutes (xG p90), according to FBref.com. When penalties are stripped out they are still 19th, underlining how little attacking threat they have posed.
But defensively the data is more flattering. England have been the third hardest team to open up at Euro 2024, as illustrated by xG conceded per 90 minutes, and the sixth best when penalties are disregarded – significantly better than the Netherlands. So, they can certainly argue that their place in the last four is less down to luck than diligence.
What about their individual games? England had a lower xG than their opponents in both of their knockout games, yet beat Slovakia in extra-time and Switzerland on penalties. Lucky? Maybe, but by the same measure they deserved to win all three group games, only to run into stubborn defences in two of them. It cuts both ways.
And they are not alone in fashioning wins against the balance of chances: none of the semi-finalists generated a better xG than the team they eliminated in the last round – even free-flowing Spain. Then of course there is the parallel argument with xG, that good teams are simply more efficient and therefore don’t need so many chances.
England have undeniably benefited from a kind draw which placed them in the opposite half to France, Spain, Germany and Portugal, although Southgate justifiably argues that they earned that luck by winning their group when others didn’t. And opponents can’t point to any egregious refereeing errors that have eased their path.
Perhaps they are overdue a smile from the footballing gods. At the 1990 World Cup they bettered West Germany in the semi-final but could not find a winning goal; Paul Gascoigne was an inch or two away from righting that wrong at Euro 96; and Sol Campbell is still haunted by harshly disallowed goals in 1998 and 2004. All are ‘what if’ moments.
At Euro 2024 it has, until now, gone England’s way. Have they been dull? Yes. So have they been lucky? Not necessarily. Maybe that is what the rub of the green is really about. And maybe a team that has historically found ways to lose is learning how to win – however uncomfortable it may be to watch – and deserves a bit more credit for that.