Euro 2020 Round-Up: Players, Teams, Themes

17 min readJul 14, 2021

Euro 2020 was one of the most fun international tournaments I can remember. It’s a surprise, because I felt real football fatigue after a season of relentlessly average European football. I lost count of the number of ‘big’ Premier League games I watched that bored me to sleep. The Champions League wasn’t much better. It felt like the problem was a combination of ultra-cautious tactics (in both defensive and attacking senses), as well as a lack of individual quality. But Euro 2020 saved the day. It had almost everything you could ask for: competitive and exciting games, great moments, surprises and superb individual performances. Here’s my round-up.

PLAYER RATINGS

I kept my own player ratings during this tournament. Nothing massively scientific, just assigning a number based on how I thought a player performed in a game. Here’s how I graded them: 5 = game-changingly good, 4 = positive impact, 3 = average, 2 = negative impact, 1 = game-changingly bad. I then gave each player an average rating based on their overall score divided by the number of games they played.

Here are my top ten players based on these ratings, only including those who played in a minimum of three games.

Paul Pogba (4.25 from four games)
Giorgio Chiellini (4.00 from five games)
Denzel Dumfries (4.00 from four games)
Emil Forsberg (4.00 from four games)
Leonardo Spinazzola (4.00 from four games)
Robert Lewandowski(4.00 from three games)
Roland Sallai (4.00 from three games)
Romelu Lukaku (3.80 from five games)
Harry Maguire (3.80 from five games)
Leonardo Bonucci (3.71 from seven games)

Of course that top ten is quite raw. It doesn’t take minutes into account and favours those whose teams went out early as they didn’t have to play as many games, as many tough opponents, and have as many big moments. There are players, like Harry Kane, who came into their own as the tournament rolled on and the stakes increased.

TEAM OF THE TOURNAMENT

Combining my ratings with a gut call on who I feel deserves to be in, here is my team of the tournament (alongside some honourable mentions for each position).

Goalkeeper: Gianluigi Donnarumma (3.57 rating)

Donnarumma didn’t have a lot to do early on, but was excellent in the knockout stages. Commanding his box well, he didn’t make any glaring errors and had the composure (despite his technical limitations) to participate in Italy’s short passing game. He also made some big saves, helping his side to win penalty shoot-outs against Spain and England.

As an aside, his reaction after the tournament-winning penalty save was incredible. No smile, no dancing or running to the fans. Just an ice-cold stare. Cool? Disturbing? You decide.

Mentions: Stole Dimitrievski (3.67) was busy for North Macedonia, but I thought he did a very good job of keeping his team in games and took control of his box when necessary. Yann Sommer (3.60) was excellent for Switzerland, particularly in the quarter-final with Spain where his reflexes kept his side in the contest.

Centre-backs: Leonardo Bonucci (3.71) & Giorgio Chiellini (4.00)

Bonucci started all seven of Italy’s games, showcasing an excellent range of passing to switch the point of attack for his side. Italy’s back four became a back three when they attacked, with right-back Di Lorenzo staying and Chiellini moving to the left. Bonucci, at the centre, was then able to access both flanks and direct the attack. He also defended solidly and came up with big moments in the shoot-outs and with his equalising goal in the final.

Chiellini was, for me, the best defender at the whole tournament. At 36 years of age he still looks better than almost everyone else in his position. He did an outstanding marking job on Romelu Lukaku in the quarter-final win over Belgium, leaving the stronger, quicker, younger man with no space to play in. Marking, blocking, organising and threatening from set plays, Chiellini also ran the ball forward on occasion (something he was doing well before the ‘Modern Defender’ became a thing). Furthermore, his emotionless tactical fouling of Bukayo Saka and his pre-penalties owning of Jordi Alba cemented his status as the master of shithousery.

Mentions: Harry Maguire (3.80) impressed me a lot. I think playing in a back five suits him. Reducing the space he has to defend helps mask his main weakness: lack of pace. It also gives him more opportunity to be aggressive closing between the lines, which he did exceptionally. All of this, along with his aerial threat at set plays, means he was unlucky to just miss out on my team of the tournament. Andreas Christensen (3.67) also impressed me a lot, making some key tackles and interceptions for Denmark.

Full-backs: Denzel Dumfries (4.00) & Joakim Maehle (3.67)

The big trend at Euro 2020, which I noticed in the group stages and wrote about, was the development of wing-backs as scoring threats. Germany thrashed Portugal with Joshua Kimmich and Robin Gosens hitting the box, scoring or setting up goals from wing-back. And in the final, the opening goal came from one wing-back (Kieran Trippier) setting up the other (Luke Shaw).

Dumfries was perhaps the best individual example of this trend. He acted almost as an extra forward for Holland, running in behind and exploiting space on the break. His speed (see the video below) made him impossible to catch in these moments, and he also demonstrated an aerial threat in the box. With two goals from four games, I’d be stunned if top European clubs didn’t at least take a look at him. In the right team, I feel he could get between 10 and 15 goals per season from wing-back.

Maehle offered something similar down the left for Denmark, albeit in a different way. Naturally right-footed, he was always looking to cut inside and dribble at defenders. His pace, confidence and directness caused headaches, and he too managed to hit two goals. He also set up a goal in the quarter-final win over the Czechs with a beautiful curled, outside-the-boot cross. Defensively he looked a little shaky, particularly in the defeat to England where he was turned inside out in the lead-up to the winning goal. But going forward he was great.

Mentions: Leonardo Spinazzola (4.00, and henceforth known as ‘Spinny’) was superb for Italy on the left-hand side. Acting as a winger in the hybrid back four/back five system I referred to earlier, he drove opponents crazy with his runs and dribbling. His injury was a great shame, for him and for the tournament as a whole.

Central midfielders: Paul Pogba (4.25) & Pedri (3.67)

It was refreshing to watch Pogba away from the circus that is his club career. France’s tournament was much shorter than I envisioned it being, but Pogba was stunning in his four games. Splitting defences, switching play, beating his man, scoring a worldie, he did it all during his short time at Euro 2020. If only we could have seen more of him.

Having not seen much of Pedri before, initially I wondered if his combination with Jordi Alba was a party piece, something systematised at Barcelona, continued here with Spain, that made him look better than he was. But he went on to show great variety, vision and accuracy in his passing. At 18 he was Spain’s main creative force, consistently opening up games, and he also gave everything defensively, tracking back, closing down and tackling. The comparisons to Andres Iniesta are easy to make (right-footed attacking mids who play mostly inside left), but to me he looks more like Toni Kroos. Either way, Spain have found their next great playmaker.

Mentions: Xaver Schlager (3.50) grew into a deep playmaker role with Austria after they changed formation. Koke (3.50) was overshadowed by Pedri for Spain, but still had a great tournament. Kevin De Bruyne’s (3.50) return to fitness was key to Belgium reaching the quarters, and Gini Wijnaldum (3.50) underlined his status as a top attacking midfielder with three goals in four games for Holland.

Wingers: Raheem Sterling (3.43) & Emil Forsberg (4.00)

England oscillated between trying to break down stubborn opponents, and being stubborn themselves. In both states, Sterling was crucial. Time after time, his dribbling made the difference. His bravery, speed and balance on the dribble helped open up teams and offered an outlet on the counter-attack. He wasn’t as ‘involved’ as other attackers at this tournament, but on those occasions he did get the ball, he usually made a big contribution.

Forsberg was scintillating for four games. Coming inside off the left, his mazy dribbling and shooting threat inside and outside of the box made him a thorn in the side of every opponent Sweden faced. He was on a one-man mission against Ukraine in the second round, and it’s a shame that’s where his tournament ended after going so close to a potential match-winner.

Mentions: Federico Chiesa (3.71) was often Italy’s difference-maker, turning non-stop passing sequences into meaningful attacks with his personality. He showed great pace, desire to run at his opponent and ability to work a shot for himself coming in off the right or the left. His teammate Lorenzo Insigne (3.67) also had a good tournament, while Denmark’s Mikkel Damsgaard (3.60) announced himself as one to watch with a 2014 James Rodriguez-esque finals filled with game-changing moments of audacity.

Strikers: Romelu Lukaku (3.80) & Harry Kane (3.43)

Lukaku confirmed his place among the elite strikers with several fine performances at Euro 2020. His hold-up play was fantastic and, in space, there were few strikers as devastating. His strength, pace and acceleration made him impossible to live with. Chiellini did a job on him in the quarter-finals, but Lukaku didn’t get much support. He, with De Bruyne, carried an ageing, slowing Belgian side as far as they could.

Kane was quiet in the group games, but came to life as the tournament went on. His game-clinching goal against Germany was an iconic way to make his presence felt, and his movement and link play were vital in the subsequent wins over Ukraine and Denmark. We didn’t get to see the same playmaking from him that we see at Tottenham, but his ability to win fouls was key in buying time and territory for an England side that went defence-first in the big games. When the pressure was on, Kane stepped up.

Mentions: Patrik Schick (3.60) looks a lot stronger nowadays than he did when I saw him break through at Sampdoria. His efficient finishing helped the Czechs into the quarters, and he scored the best goal of the tournament for me against (…sighs…) Scotland. Robert Lewandowski (4.00) did his best to get Poland through the group stage, leading from the front and burying whatever opportunity came his way. Roland Sallai (4.00) of Hungary also deserves immense credit for three excellent group stage performances, showcasing speed, determination, link play and creativity.

THEMES & TEAMS

Goalscoring wing-backs

Back fives are well and truly in season. Perhaps their growing popularity is related to a shortage of truly world class central defenders, which creates a need for extra coverage (opting for quantity when there’s a lack of quality). This felt like the case with Germany, who also lacked a real ball-winner in midfield and compensated for openness in that area with an extra man back to stall attacks. Those are just thoughts, but here’s a fact: over half the teams at Euro 2020 used the back five at some point, and that’s after Chelsea won the Champions League with a back five.

Obviously not all back fives are the same, but the increasing use of wing-backs as genuine scoring threats feels quite new. This makes sense — if top teams, who tend to have a lot of possession, are going to sacrifice a midfielder or attacker to play an extra defender, they need other players to step up on the offensive end. With defences looking increasingly organised, wing-backs can’t just be good at crossing and runs, they need to step up on the finishing side. Of the 142 goals scored at Euro 2020, 12 were scored by wing-backs in a back five (8.5% of the total).

Dumfries was, for me, the best example of this at the tournament. At club level he averages a goal every six or seven games for PSV Eindhoven. Germany’s Robin Gosens looked similarly well-suited to a back five having played in one for Atalanta, where he has averaged a goal every four or five games. When I think of great wing-backs, I think of the Brazilians: Cafu and Dani Alves. Incredibly energetic, non-stop runners, gifted dribblers and crossers. But Cafu scored just nine goals total (!) in 11 Serie A seasons. Gosens hit more than that last season alone. And Alves only averaged a goal every 17 or 18 games during his time at Barcelona.

Maybe Dumfries and Gosens are the first wave of a new type of player: goalscoring wing-backs. (Although do let me know if you can think of other historic examples.)

Pressing advantage

After a condensed club season, Euro 2020 was always going to be defined by fatigue to a certain extent. But some teams didn’t look tired at all. Luis Enrique got criticism for some weird selections, but he was perhaps simply rotating his players to keep them fresh. If so, it paid dividends — Spain were the most intense pressing team at the Euros, at least according to my eyes and the Wyscout PPDA (passes allowed per defensive action) metric, which they topped (i.e. they didn’t let their opponents complete a lot of passes).

Denmark and Italy were also in the Euros top ten for PPDA. Both made the semis, the latter progressing to the final. Their ability to get pressure on the ball — whether from organised play or in transition moments where they had just lost possession — was impressive. The Danes almost overwhelmed Belgium, then did overwhelm Russia and Wales. They looked a little leggy against the Czechs and England, unsurprisingly. Italy protected an ageing centre-back pairing by trying to stop counter-attacks at source, applying immense pressure to cut off the opponent’s short passing options.

At the other end of this spectrum was France, who really didn’t press much at all. That’s fine, but they were also too easy to open up, and paid the price for this combo against Switzerland. Something similar could be said about Belgium, Germany and Portugal, whose defences were let down by individual or collective limitations. The only team without an intense pressing game to make the last four was England. This was partly about the speed of Kyle Walker on the recovery, partly about the youthful energy in midfield of Declan Rice and Kalvin Phillips, partly about Maguire’s’ ability to dominate his own penalty box, and partly about luck. England didn’t press like Spain, Italy or Denmark, but they were difficult to break down.

Hungary: the wall-striker

Picking up draws against France and Germany, Hungary briefly threatened to make the knockout stages against all odds. I liked the way they played, setting up in a 5–3–2 formation, defending with incredible energy and counter-attacking quickly. Adam Szallai led the line for them, a unique striker who is almost completely lacking in mobility or skill, but gives an aerial outlet and holds the ball up well. Typically he would be described as a target man, but I think a more fitting description here would be a wall — his teammates just bounced the ball off him, running in support for the return. It was remarkably effective in getting Hungary up the pitch after defending in their low block.

Portugal: finishers in need of supply

On paper, Portugal looked brilliant. They had enough talent to fill two top class front threes. But they didn’t click. I felt their biggest problem was the profile of their frontline. They started with a four of Bernardo Silva, Bruno Fernandes, Diogo Jota and Cristiano Ronaldo. Silva aside, I see all of these players primarily as goalscorers. Ronaldo has adapted with age into a penalty box poacher with serious aerial prowess. Jota is quick but I wouldn’t call him an outstanding dribbler or creator. He’s a one-touch finisher type, scoring on cut-backs and crosses, with surprising aerial ability for his size.

Then there’s Fernandes. As a playmaker, I wouldn’t put him in the top bracket of players. He can pick teams apart on the break, but I don’t think he has the range, ingenuity or variety to slice open low blocks like, say, Pogba. What he does have is a good shot and excellent movement. He looks sensational at club level playing off a selfless centre forward like Cavani, who he can combine with and make runs off of. That same relationship was never going to be there with Ronaldo, who is more selfish than selfless.

Portugal had great shooters, but nobody to load the gun. Joao Felix, with his ability to find space and take the ball in tight areas, might have knitted it together if he’d been given more minutes. As it was, Portugal fired crosses into the box, hoping that Ronaldo or Jota would get on the end of them. Fernandes would play the cross, or linger at the edge of the box to shoot off the loose ball. It didn’t surprise me that the two games where Portugal dominated possession were where they really struggled to make things happen. They took 84 minutes to score against Hungary and failed to find the net in defeat to Belgium. There just wasn’t enough variation to their final third play.

England: Southgate knows his team’s weaknesses

Jordan Pickford had a good tournament, Stones is back to being a top defender, Rice and Phillips are potentially top base midfielders. Is all of this really true? I still saw Pickford lacking composure, parrying when he could catch and punting when he could play short. Stones still made basic errors, like failing to clear his lines. Rice and Phillips brought energy and aggression, but were quite easy to play through at times (Germany did it consistently, just lacking the finishing touch).

The reality for me is that England have a weak defence, but it was masked brilliantly by their manager, who learned from his predecessors and avoided the old mistake of fitting in everyone’s favourite attacker. Southgate had a lot of choice, but didn’t fall into the trap of fielding more than three or four of them at one time. Consequently, Jack Grealish, Jadon Sancho and Phil Foden spent a lot of time on the bench.

The goalkeeper needed protection from the centre-backs. They themselves have limitations which required protection from the midfield. But England don’t have one ‘positional’ defensive midfield type to sit and screen, block and intercept, so they decided on two base midfielders instead of one. To me it was effectively defence in numbers. And it worked very well. England kept five clean sheets and conceded just twice in seven games. No team conceded fewer goals per 90 minutes. Up top, it was Kane and Sterling plus two others, or one if the opponent was strong. It was no surprise Mason Mount and Bukayo Saka, two hard workers with the tactical intelligence to be ‘role players’ supporting the ‘star players’, who got the nod.

Before this tournament I predicted England would go out by the second round, or quarters at best. I thought their defence was too weak to withstand top tier opposition. What I didn’t envision was Southgate knew his own team’s limitations so well, and that he would plan around them. It was pragmatic, and highly effective.

Conclusion: The final, routines & difference-makers

England’s weaknesses were masked by good management, but I also think opponents failed to consistently test their weak points. Germany had the majority share of possession in their second round clash, and broke through the Rice/Phillips midfield several times, and created a few decent scoring chances. But they were extremely passive in the final third. With their wing-backs neutralised by Southgate’s deployment of a back five, Germany lacked individuals of the quality and personality to make something happen. A similar scenario played out for most of the final.

England took the lead early, which allowed them to lean into their defensive nature and sit on the 1–0. With two midfielders in front of the back three, and wing-backs neutralising the space out wide, England didn’t give Italy a lot of space in the final third. Italy dominated in terms of possession and territory, but it didn’t mean a lot. They passed and passed, back and forth, in front of the English low block. Then, after an hour of play, they whipped in a cross.

Someone decided to ask a question of the English back line. Stones lost sight of Insigne, who just missed the header, and Maguire was forced to head behind by Bryan Cristante’s charging run from midfield. Italy scored from the resulting corner. Trippier and Mount lost aerial challenges, and Stones was outmanoeuvred by Chiellini. Bonucci reacted first to the loose ball.

That took the game to extra time and then penalties, and Italy deserved the win for the simple fact they tried to attack more often. Roberto Mancini did take the initiative by changing his front three arrangement, removing Ciro Immobile, playing without a natural striker, and moving Federico Chiesa wide left. But it could have been all so different if Chiesa hadn’t gambled and whipped in that tricky cross which England couldn’t properly deal with.

The issue for Italy, as for Germany, was about finding solutions to a low block. When a team like England, with some degree of competence, removes space in the final third, there’s a need for variety and individual quality. Passing routines alone cannot be relied upon to do the job. When playing around pressure, whether a high press or a midfield press, knowing your game two or three passes in advance can come in handy. But against a low block of England’s calibre, where the space to play into is minimal, there needs to be an alternative to short passing combinations. You vary your approach play somehow. Or someone, at some point, must make something happen.

It’s fitting that Chiesa was the one to take a chance. Of all Italy’s players, he was the one who most frequently ‘took the game by the scruff of the neck’. Some people might not like that saying, because it sounds like typical pundit mumbo jumbo. But it has relevance, particularly in these situations where the game is tight and the collective approach isn’t working. Lionel Messi is one example of this in action. He can change the game, on his own. Steven Gerrard was the same, albeit in a different way. This requires skill, of course, but also stuff we can’t see plainly: self-belief, bravery, imagination, instinct.

Chiesa has a bit of this. Sterling does too. Does anyone remember how England broke the deadlock against Germany? Answer: they gave the ball to Sterling, who took on four players to open the game up, laid off, hit the box and scored on the low cross. How did they open the scoring against Ukraine? Sterling dribbled in from wide left, beat two defenders, and made an angle to find Kane in the box. What about the winning penalty against Denmark? Sterling got the ball wide right, turned Maehle inside out, and drew the foul.

Sterling, like Chiesa, was a difference-maker. He shaped his team’s destiny with individual actions. Were it not for him, England might have gone out three rounds earlier. This isn’t an attack on the importance of managers and coaches. Quite the opposite — coaches help develop these individuals into the difference-makers they become. At senior level, managers prepare them game by game, motivate them, organise them as part of the team. Southgate, after all, stuck by Sterling when most of the country wanted him dropped. Mancini moved Chiesa wide left, from where he could come in onto his favourite right foot (and play a vital cross). Good management doesn’t need to involve ultra-detailed possession sequences. It can be about sensing that small tactical adjustment, or finding the right platform for a gifted individual.

Euro 2020 had many themes, but perhaps the biggest one for me was the importance of individuality in football.