In the world Cup, some of the most critical matches are decided on penalties. When that moment comes, the captains want to win the coin toss and decide the kicking order. The reason is the venerable belief that regardless of the skills of the scorer and goalkeeper, the team that takes the first penalty kick has a greater chance of winning. Most soccer players take this for granted, but the reasons for this apparent advantage remain a matter of scientific debate
While most strategic thinking regarding penalties focuses on the order in which players kick, it is also critical to consider psychological pressure. During this year’s World Cup, two of the first four round of 16 matches – Paraguay’s victory over Germany and Morocco’s defeat against the Netherlands – were decided in extremely invigorating shootouts.
For years, the psychological explanation dominated. According to this hypothesis, the team that takes the first penalty kick plays with less pressure while the other team has to constantly react so as not to fall behind on the scoreboard. This emotional burden ultimately affects players’ performance. A 2010 study published in the American Economic Review became a benchmark on this issue and found that teams that started the shootout won almost 60 percent of the time, compared to 40 percent for teams that took penalties second.
However, as databases grew and more researchers began to study the phenomenon, this advantage began to decline. Most subsequent research does not question the existence of psychological pressure on the team that shoots second; they question whether this pressure is enough to make a significant difference in the likelihood of winning a shootout.
Studies published in 2012, 2019, 2023, 2024 and 2025 gradually reduced the estimated advantage. The the most comprehensive analysis has so far, based on almost 7,000 penalty kicks and 74,000 shots, found no evidence that the team taking the first kick wins more often than the team taking the second kick. Moreover, the authors concluded that if there is any advantage, it will be less than 1.8 percentage points, which is a much smaller difference than the much-discussed 60-40 split.
A up-to-date group of researchers believes this question was asked incorrectly. A recent study published in Football studies suggests that, rather than asking whether there is an advantage in taking the first penalty, we should explain where that advantage might arise when it actually occurs. Their hypothesis is that pressure remains a determining factor, but not all high pressure situations are the same. The key is to distinguish between penalty kicks, where a miss immediately eliminates a team, and those where a goal ensures victory.
The study shows that the current football the rules do not evenly distribute the moments of maximum pressure. The team taking the second penalty kick is much more likely to encounter situations where a miss means immediate elimination, and the chances of scoring and winning are distributed differently as the shootout progresses.
The researchers found that penalty kicks, where a goal immediately secured victory, were successful 89.1% of the time. In contrast, when a miss meant immediate elimination, the success rate dropped to 60.4%. More importantly, they found that once elimination and win penalties were taken into account, whether a team took the first or second penalty no longer explained a significant portion of the observed results. According to the authors, the clear advantage of the first team does not result from the order of kicks, but rather from the type of psychological situations this order creates.
The authors argue that these differences may have strategic consequences. If some players can handle extreme pressure better than others, it may be advisable to leave them for high-stakes shootouts rather than putting them at the start of the shootout.