The two-part World Cup tournament exposed Susijengi’s situation in a harsh way – these two things will define the future

The World Basketball Championship ends on September 10. The upper extension blocks will be played to the end on Sunday, September 2. The playoffs start on September 5. in the quarterfinals. ‘s online World Championships are followed in this article.

– Advance expectations can be questioned. Were the expectations realistic?

Sports expert Pieti Poikolan the question sums up the Finnish national basketball team’s struggle in the World Cup. Finland won its last two matches of the tournament. The stakes were places 17–32. In advance, there was speculation about placing in the top two in the rock-hard initial block and placing among the top 16 countries in the world.

– The team is in the construction phase. Susigengi looked like a world-class team at its best and was really far from that level at its weakest, emphasizes Poikola.

The final match of the tournament against Venezuela was one example of this. Finland dominated at both ends of the court at times, but mistakes kept Venezuela seemingly involved in the battle for victory until the final quarter. In the end, Finland took a routine victory with figures 90–75.

Finland’s tournament was marked by long difficult periods during the games, problems with one-on-one attacking and problems on the defensive end. However, the team’s routine level was ahead of Cape Verde and Venezuela.

1. Minimum performance in the final match

Venezuela did not win a single match in the tournament. Poikola says that Finland was ahead of its final opponent on both the individual and team level, both in attack and defense.

– In addition Lauri Markkanen was a sovereign individual in this match, even though he didn’t play his best match, Poikola states.

The experienced coach emphasizes that Finland’s performances showed that they cared about the final result and playing. Especially in the first half, the team’s body language and unity garnered widespread criticism. Against Venezuela, the team wanted to do things together.

– However, there was a tired team on the field. Fatigue together with inexperience caused sloppy performances, says Poikola.

Poikola illustrates that only the team captain Sasu Salin was a player in the tournament who did not have clear failures regularly. Also Mikael Jantunen garners praise for its smoothness.

– For everyone else, there will be “highlight performances”, but a bad failure may follow. These also kept Venezuela in the game, Poikola summarizes.

2. Good team defense is not born in an instant

In the 2010s, Susijengi, which became a permanent visitor to the prestigious competitions, formed the backbone of the tight and active team defense at that time. The playing of a team that had been together for years was seamless at best. Now the team seen at the World Cup was on its “maiden trip”.

– This team was not capable of the kind of team defense that would have made it possible to topple the top countries, says Poikola.

Poikola emphasizes that the key roles of the defense were the new players. When the defense was not a sufficient backbone, the difficult moments became long. For example, against Australia, Finland lost in the second half with a score of 9–27 in a seven-minute stretch.

Japan turned a 63-73 deficit into a 79-78 lead at halftime as the team struggled to win against Finland in the final quarter. Germany took advantage of the same when running away from Finland on both sides of the halftime break.

Read more: These things saved Susijengi from a real World Cup disaster – Sasu Salin tells about the moment that made the Georgians jealous

Poikola illustrates that every player needs to defend well on a personal level in order for the team defense to work. Now the Finnish players lost too many one-on-one situations.

He raises a 19-year-old back man as an exemplary player Miro Little, from which Poikola is a really good one-on-one defender. In Okinawa, Little lost a variety of one-on-ones.

– Opponents inoculated him in cuts to the basket, surprising direct times to the basket and in screen situations, Poikola lists.

According to the master coach, the experience is valuable. Young players learn what is the right distance as a defender to the world’s top level player. The defender must be close enough, but take a suitable distance at the right moment, so that the opponent does not rush past.

– In the next tournament, Miro will not lose those situations, but he will be the player who stops the opponent in them, Poikola predicts.

The team defense had its moments, because at times Germany was also in trouble with the Finnish defense.

– However, against the best teams, it was immediately apparent when one player was momentarily in the wrong place, Poikola times.

3. Wrong choices in attack

The problems in defense were also reflected in Finland’s attacking game. When Finland did not get possession of the ball or controlled defensive rebounds, the team did not get enough quick attacks. Attacking slowly was difficult.

– It was really difficult for Finland to find that thing in the attack that would have constantly created an advantage over the opponent. This was seen as a shortcoming of Flow, Poikola analysed.

When the rhythm was missing, the players made wrong choices even in promising situations. The team lost the advantage that had been created.

– Either they tried to give a pass leading to the basket too early instead of an easy pass, passed into the opponent’s hands or stopped the movement of the ball, Poikola lists.

At the same time, he reminds that especially in the last two games, and occasionally also against Japan, Finland’s attack rolled. The team created longer passing chains when the opponent’s defense was in a bad position.

Read more: Susijengi, which was criticized with these methods, was able to crush its opponents – still a strict reminder from the expert about Finland’s current level

Poikola says that the level of the Finnish team in the future will be determined by two things.

– First, how good players Little, Jantunen, Elias Valtonen and Oliver Nkamhoua are developing. In addition, it is decisive whether there is enough quality among the substitutes to maintain the level of the game for 40 minutes, Poikola reflects.

In this starting World Cup, there was no player from Finland who could have solved the problem with his individual skills in weak moments. Poikola says that before Petteri Koponen was this player.

– He was able to throw the ball to “Petsku”, and something happened.

Poikola believes that Little can be such a player in the backfield of the national team in the future. Skill features and physique allow you to rise to a high level player.

– The competitions showed how important it would be to have someone in the backfield who can create from scratch, Poikola times.

He believes that the players and coaching learned a vital lesson from the World Cup tournament. Poikola emphasizes that the team would be more ready to face countries like Germany and Australia again based on this tournament experience alone.

Next summer, Finland will face a qualifying tournament for the Paris Olympics. Poikola trusts in Susijeng’s improvement.

– Among the players, for example, Miro and Elias are talents who have the prerequisites to develop quickly, Poikola estimates.