Arsenal’s penalty shootout win over Crystal Palace in the EFL Cup quarterfinal at the Emirates on Tuesday was noted by many for the quality of spotkicks. There was just one failed conversion from 16 combined attempts, that of defender Maxence Lacroix. More astonishingly, the two keepers – Gunners’ Kepa Arrizabalaga and the Eagles’ Walter Benítez – couldn’t get a fingertip to any of the other 15. And yet, the game theory enthusiast in me knew it was all over after the coin toss for the shootout.
Not only did Arsenal get to shoot first, but the second flip of the coin also gave them the goal end of choice. No prizes for guessing which supporters’ side they picked. Factor in the already partisan atmosphere in their stadium, and this became a triple threat to Palace.
Not that it’s required to understand, but there is sound research proving penalties are easier to score at one’s home ground and vice versa. Moreover, according to research by Massimiliano Ferraresi and Gianluca Gucciardi in 2021, “such an effect is more pronounced as the size of the attendance increases.” Enter Arsenal’s 60,000+ stadium capacity. Interestingly, the study also showed that during COVID-19, matches behind closed doors resulted in a notable decrease in home team penalty conversion rates.
What about the kicking order theory?
A study in 2009 by Jose Apesteguia and Ignacio Palacios-Huerta found a first-mover advantage of winning three in five shootouts. This isn’t completely representative, though, as the research only accounted for 1,343 kicks from 129 shoot-outs between 1976 and 2003. Not to mention football moving on since then.
Embed from Getty Images
A December 2024 paper by Silvan Vollmer, David Schoch, and Ulrik Brandes, apart from being far more recent, analysed about 17,000 penalties from over 1,500 shootouts from the previous 11 seasons in European men’s football. Surprisingly, it found “no empirical evidence for a first-mover advantage. Either there is none, or teams have learned to compensate for it.” If anything, their results marginally favoured the team going second (51.17%).
Why the double toss?
In 2016, under Law 10.2.1, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) mandated referees to toss a coin twice after extra time ends with scores level. Once, as usual, for the kicking order, and again to decide at which goal the action takes place. As reported by The Athletic in 2021, it was done as referees “could otherwise be perceived as giving an unfair advantage to one team.”
Obviously, there is still a one in four probability of a team choosing end as well as kicking order. However, the same odds apply to the other team. But for absolute neutrals, it gets worse. There’s a 50% probability that one of the two teams walks into the shootout with both advantages stacked in their favour. And herein lies my concern.
Embed from Getty Images
Even though the results suggest a fairer way has been implemented, it still doesn’t eliminate the chances of psychological advantages doubling up. It’s worth asking: is it desirable to retain any odds of double jeopardy? Imagine a 2026 FIFA World Cup finalist getting that upper hand against their opponent.
A simple solution?
I’ll be honest. I’m not completely opposed to the idea of removing this element of luck. When going to penalties is anyway a lottery, why not compound it for fun? But since there’s every chance football tomorrow tries to fix something which isn’t broken, here’s an alternative.
What if there’s just one toss and the captain has to choose between kicking order and goal posts? The toss-losing captain then gets to pick the option left out. This way, neither team risks the double whammy. It also introduces a new chain of thought. Previously, the captains only had to consider kicking first and second or simply selecting their home end. Here, they must decide if taking the first kick is more valuable than their supporters’ end or the other way around.
Psychologically, both captains would be guaranteed a chance to make a decision. It would transform pre-shootout jitters arising from the passive circumstance of a coin flip to a state of perceived control. This could be crucial in reducing anxiety for both sides and thus enabling better execution of the penalties.
Personally, I believe this would open an exciting chapter in strategy. Football can only benefit from more meaningful choices within play, rather than relegating all variables to pure luck. That’s an upgrade worth making.
Abhishek Ramesh
Abhishek is a London-based sports journalist and motorsport editor at the Sports Gazette. He has four years of experience in reporting, copywriting, and editing, and champions diversity and sustainability in racing. When not immersed in on-track action, he covers football, tennis, athletics, and cricket.
View all posts