The camera pledged to Sarina Wiegman in the 82nd minute from the opening night loss from England to France. She was deep in mind.
But a heavy expression had come to her face long before, while she tried to understand how and why her ruling champions were so extensively dominated.
France looked like a total team at night. A team all in synchronization, fresh and sharp, ready to run faster, move smarter and pass a slicker. In the meantime, England was stuck in front of a spark and did not land a single shot on goal until the 87th minute when Keira Walsh offered a half -hearted lifeline and a short reason to cheer.
For the next five -minute period, the Lionesses actually played as a side with faith. They turned the French in the game for the first time; Grace Clinton was persistent in dangerous areas and Michelle Agyemang gave defenders something to think about. But those threats flickers were too late. Really, they only passed excerpts.
England had long lost this match. Perhaps the battle was subliminal lost due to the break. At the last whistle, the figures told a fascinating story.
France won the total number of head-to-head duel number by 53 to 36 and the expected goals count with 2.22 to 0.91. The 'Big Chances Created' column was a whitewash: 4-0. England was not only less aggressive than their French counterparts, they were also much sloppy.
Wiegman in particular IRK will lose the physical and technical struggle. Speaking with ITV after the game, she said that her side “played herself out of the game”, which is conceptual conversation for “the game plan has not carried out”.
It is clear that the Dutch woman had not instructed her team to be passive and not to be in it, but England were both of those things that the ball turned much more often than it was retained and chose to play briefly when the need to go longer was so clear.
“We were not tight enough,” Wiegman continued. “They wanted to print and are strong on the counterattack. We were sloppy and caused our own problems a bit. We can do better.”
Captain Leah Williamson removed similar shortcomings. “Cheap defensive one-VS one. We were not good enough on the ball. I didn't see ourselves that way, in terms of turning the ball so much, it's frustrating.”
The three -minute implosion in the first half was indeed not characteristic. Wiegman's England is rarely undone so easily at a large tournament finals. With all the talent and expectation of a knockout draw, this was a one-off game if you will probably see between two European heavyweights. Holders vs hopeful this was not.
England has become the first ruling champions to lose their opening match of a euro group phase. An unwanted tag that corresponds to an unwanted result. For Wiegman – whose teams can be seen in the final of each of the last four major tournaments – this represents her very first loss ever at a euro final. The 'readyness' she spoke about the game simply did not exist.
And many of the gambling of Wiegman have not been paid either. Starting Lauren James, who had only played 40 minutes since April, was the first mistake about Ella Toone. Not correcting that decision up to the 60th minute can be considered the second. There was no balance and little structure for the game of England. Changes to tackle that have arrived late.
And yet Wiegman can very well point out the marginal offside that the opener of Alessia Russo eliminated, or the clear error on her that was never given, which became the forerunner of the second goal of France. But in reality, VAR simply reflected the despondency of the presentation of England.
It is no shame to lose 2-1 on the side of Laurent Bonadei, full of an abundance of talent and stimulated by a rich form. France won nine from nine in 2025. In the game prior to this final they came from behind to beat Brazil 3-2.
Life just quickly passed into this 'New England' team. Their ability to get it together before they stand against the Netherlands on Wednesday is now becoming more striking than ever. Loss, and simply, their euro defense is in doors.
Comments