This week, it has been a week of Champions. And of course, goals. Goals like the ones we are going to analyze in this article. As we always say, our interpretation is not an exact science. In previous articles we spoke that the game vision is the ability to interpret plus the decision making. This interpretation depends on many factors: Life lessons, experiences, way of understanding the game … So let’s go to it![vc_text_separator title=”FIRST GOAL” title_align=”separator_align_right” color=”sky”][vc_video link=”https://vimeo.com/266722414/acdd0c1806″]As we can see in the image, Ulreich correctly makes the different positioning changes before the shot. We could even say that he is at an adequate distance. However, just at the time of the shot and perhaps for having previously corrected several times, he does not finish corporally positioning before the shot. Since it gets him with certain inertia towards his right and doing the famous “timing”. We can correct very easy this mistake when training, giving the goalkeeper the following directive: before the ball reaches the opponent, you already have to be stopped. To do this, your movements must be as fast as possible and with the right balance-tension.
In the behind image, we can see how as if he not even wants to get his hands out to attack the ball.
Does the goalkeeper have to quickly correct his placement positioning in order to interpret the different situations?
Do you think that had he been “stopped”, this is, without inertia, could it have been blocked-diverted?[vc_empty_space][vc_text_separator title=”SECOND GOAL” title_align=”separator_align_right” color=”sky”][vc_video link=”https://vimeo.com/266722597″]More than difficult to interpret, in this goal what we think is that there can be many interpretations both goalkeepers and goalkeeping coaches.
So let’s start with the following reflection:
A 1×1 is played but … Should he have tried a shot? If he had positioned two steps back, would he have taken that ball?
It gives the sensation that the shot surprises him since he reacts late … Is it more a reason to “surprise” him or to have hardly time to react?
If we talk about playing a 1 × 1 … Is that the right distance? Should he have reduced more?
It is a situation as we said before difficult to interpret but in which we believe that a shot should have been played. That is to say, to stand after the correct withdrawal that he made and from that position, to hold on to that the rival throws. In this way, we believe that he would have had enough time to be able to intervene.
