Euro 2020 Türkiye: From Dark Horses to Disgrace – What Went Wrong?

Turkey entered Euro 2020 with the label of a potential “dark horse,” but their campaign spectacularly imploded. They crashed out after the group stage without earning a single point. Their defense was porous, conceding eight goals, the joint-highest in the tournament alongside North Macedonia. Their attack was equally blunt, managing to score just one goal – a mere consolation in their final match, a 3-1 defeat to Switzerland. This dismal performance resulted in a tournament-worst goal difference of minus-seven.

Statistically, Turkey’s Euro 2020 showing was a disaster. They equaled North Macedonia in goals conceded and slumped to the lowest goal difference across the entire tournament. This starkly contrasted with pre-tournament predictions that suggested a much brighter outcome for the Crescent-Stars.

Prior to the tournament, Turkey seemed to be a team on the rise. They were unbeaten in their six games of 2021, securing four wins and two draws. Among Euro 2020 participants, only England and Sweden boasted more victories in the same period. Under the guidance of Senol Gunes, who famously led Turkey to a third-place finish at the 2002 World Cup, optimism was palpable, both within the nation and across the wider footballing world.

“As absurd as it sounds now, expectations were genuinely high for this Turkish team,” explains Alp Colak, a Turkish football journalist, reflecting on the pre-tournament atmosphere. “They had remained unbeaten against reigning world champions France during the qualifiers, even securing a notable victory in France itself. Their World Cup qualifying campaign also started impressively, with convincing wins against the Netherlands and Norway. The prevailing sentiment in Türkiye was that Senol Gunes’s team was destined for a much deeper run in Euro 2020 than what ultimately transpired.”

This widespread optimism stemmed from tangible results and exciting performances. Their 4-2 home victory against the Netherlands in March served as a watershed moment, capturing the attention of casual observers and solidifying Turkey’s dark horse status for the summer tournament.

That match against the Dutch showcased Turkey’s attacking prowess, hinting at their readiness for tournament football. Their strengths were evident: scintillating counter-attacks, clinical finishing, Burak Yilmaz’s set-piece expertise, and a remarkable 3-0 lead within the first hour, all achieved with just 34 percent possession against a Netherlands side that would later achieve a perfect record in the Euro 2020 group stage.

The Turkish national team’s effective counter-attack strategy against the Netherlands in Euro 2020 qualifiers, showcasing multiple players supporting the striker Burak Yilmaz.

Adding to the excitement was the form of key players. Burak Yilmaz, affectionately nicknamed “Kral” (The King) by Turkish fans, joined the national team fresh off leading Lille to the French Ligue 1 title as their top scorer, contributing 16 goals and five assists. At Lille, he thrived alongside the pace and creativity of Jonathan David, Jonathan Ikone, and Jonathan Bamba. However, at Euro 2020, Yilmaz appeared isolated and struggled to replicate his club form. Relying on a 35-year-old striker to spearhead counter-attacks suddenly seemed like a less effective strategy against tighter, more defensively organized international teams.

Yilmaz’s disappointing tournament is further highlighted by his expected goals (xG) statistics. Across the three group games, he accumulated a total xG of just 1.0 from his 10 shots, averaging a mere 0.1 xG per shot. In simpler terms, the quality of his chances suggested he would need ten shots to score a single goal, a feat he couldn’t even manage during the tournament.

Hakan Calhanoglu was another player under scrutiny, particularly due to his contract situation. Approaching the end of his contract with AC Milan as the tournament commenced, reports indicated a significant gap between the club’s renewal offer and his demands. Euro 2020 presented a prime opportunity for Calhanoglu to showcase his talents on a global stage and attract potential suitors.

Interestingly, despite registering only one assist during the tournament, Calhanoglu secured a high-profile move across Milan, joining Serie A champions Inter Milan on a free transfer shortly after Euro 2020 concluded. This transfer occurred despite his, and Turkey’s, underwhelming performances in the competition.

So, what factors contributed to Turkey’s dramatic underperformance at Euro 2020? Several potential explanations emerge. A glaring issue was the apparent lack of a coherent attacking plan. The team seemed lost and ineffective when unable to rely on the high-tempo transition play that characterized their pre-tournament successes.

A crucial difference between Turkey’s pre-Euro 2020 form and their tournament displays was the number of players committed to counter-attacking moves.

Contrast in tactics: Turkey’s isolated striker Burak Yilmaz struggles against Italy’s strong defense in Euro 2020, highlighting the team’s ineffective attacking plan during the tournament.

The image above, contrasting Turkey’s attack against the Netherlands and Italy, vividly illustrates this shift. Against the Netherlands, Turkey had five players actively supporting Yilmaz in the final third during build-up play. However, against Italy, a recurring pattern emerged: Yilmaz often found himself isolated, battling for long balls in the channels, heavily marked by experienced center-backs like Giorgio Chiellini and Leonardo Bonucci.

Furthermore, Turkey often appeared to be a collection of individuals rather than a cohesive team unit, unlike the impressive teamwork displayed by nations like Italy and Germany at the same tournament. Players such as Calhanoglu, Mert Muldur, and Irfan Kahveci frequently resorted to speculative, low-percentage shots from long range, further highlighting the lack of structured attacking play.

This raises a fundamental challenge in international football: how to mold a group of talented players who only occasionally play together into a harmonious and effective team? The limited time available for national team managers to work with their squads makes building team cohesion a significant hurdle.

According to journalist Colak, the immense weight of expectation may have proven too burdensome for the Turkish squad. “They were simply unable to cope with the pressure,” Colak suggests. “Now, as the post-mortem analysis unfolds, we, the Turkish people, are still missing the crucial point. We are focusing on scrutinizing player performances, questioning their commitment, when the reality is they were crushed by the unrealistic expectations placed upon them by the country and the wider footballing world.”

Unsurprisingly, the Turkish media reacted with fierce criticism to the national team’s dismal showing, given the pre-tournament hype and subsequent failure.

Fotomac, one of Turkey’s leading sports newspapers, captured the national mood with the headline “DISGRACE!”.

Milliyet, a long-established Turkish newspaper, ran with “Our boys are on their way to Cesme.” “Bizim Cocuklar,” meaning “Our Boys,” was the official motto of the Turkish team leading up to Euro 2020. Cesme, a popular holiday resort town in Turkey, is often associated with footballers spending their summers relaxing after the season.

Hurriyet, another widely read publication, declared “The rout of 2020,” adding, “We did not deserve this.”

Sabah opted for a more blunt headline: “We were embarrassed, boys.”

Fanatik, adopting a slightly more restrained tone, simply stated “The End” in English on their front page.

“Hindsight is always 20/20, but labeling Turkey as Euro 2020 dark horses, not just within Turkey but across the continent, was a significant overestimation,” Colak reflects. “Turkey has never been a consistent presence in major tournaments, and relying on a 35-year-old striker, regardless of his excellent club season, as the primary attacking threat was always a risky proposition.”

The discontent extends beyond media criticism. Numerous columnists have publicly called for Senol Gunes’s resignation, holding him directly accountable for the disappointing defeats against Italy, Wales, and Switzerland. While acknowledging that almost every player underperformed relative to their usual standards, with Caglar Soyuncu being a possible exception, much of the public and media anger is directed squarely at the manager.

For some Turkish football observers, the national team’s Euro 2020 debacle points to a deeper, more systemic issue: the Turkish Football Federation’s (TFF) decision to relax regulations on foreign players in the Super Lig, the top tier of Turkish football.

In 2015, bowing to pressure from Super Lig clubs, the TFF permitted teams to field up to 11 foreign players in their starting lineups. The official rule stipulated that out of a 28-man squad, 14 should be Turkish, although this rule is subject to change in subsequent seasons.

A prevailing belief within Turkish football circles is that continuously producing top-level domestic talent for the national team is unsustainable if clubs prioritize foreign players over providing opportunities for Turkish players in the domestic league.

“Turkey’s premier football league simply isn’t developing enough players for the Turkish national team,” argues Colak. “Of the five players from the Turkish Super Lig who represented Turkey at Euro 2020, only two played a significant percentage of available minutes in the league: goalkeeper Ugurcan Cakir (95 percent) and Ozan Tufan (75 percent). In stark contrast, in the opening game against Italy, nine out of Italy’s starting eleven players were from Serie A clubs.”

“Super Lig clubs exploited the relaxed foreign player rules, indiscriminately signing foreign players and fielding them in starting lineups. Consequently, Turkish players found it increasingly challenging to secure first-team opportunities in their own country.”

“Proponents of the foreign player rule argued that it was ultimately beneficial for Turkish players, suggesting that increased competition from foreign players would ‘improve’ Turkish talent. They also absurdly claimed that this rule would facilitate Turkish players moving to top European clubs – a tenuous and illogical cause-and-effect relationship at best.”

The issue of limited game time extends beyond Super Lig players within the Turkish national team.

Merih Demiral, for instance, played in only 28 percent of available Serie A minutes for Juventus in the preceding season. Kaan Ayhan, who featured in all three Euro 2020 group games for Turkey, accumulated just 800 minutes of Serie A football the previous season. Yusuf Yazici, despite being a Ligue 1 champion with Lille, started only 10 Ligue 1 matches and played just 32 percent of available league minutes.

Furthermore, left-back Umut Meras and forward Kenan Karaman play in the second divisions of France and Germany, respectively, highlighting a potential lack of top-level club experience within the squad.

“The problem runs deeper than just this misguided foreign player rule,” Colak emphasizes.

“Turkey is failing to produce sufficient top-tier talent because we are not adequately investing in youth development and providing young players with opportunities. Football infrastructure and facilities are woefully inadequate, both in quantity and quality. Even in Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, there are a surprisingly limited number of football pitches available for young players to develop their skills.”

“In my view, qualifying for Euro 2020 should be considered a success for this Turkish team in itself. Our primary objective should be to become consistent participants in these major tournaments, rather than prematurely dreaming of winning titles.”

“And crucially, we must prioritize giving Turkish players genuine opportunities to play and develop within our own Turkish Super Lig.”