Southgate. Has he done enough?

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

I'm just not sure what the answer is.

How do you get your team ready for the 5% of games?

If you're blue sky thinking then a really radical solution might be . .....

- central fa contracts for selected  England players.  with quotas loaned to pl clubs.

- the fa contracts stipulate coaching requirements /playing positions . power of recall to fa central if they believe that a player is being misused . 

- on cessation of fa contract player becomes a free agent 

- contracts for fixed term eg 4 years with renew options 

- only fa contracted players to be selected for national teams . 

There are a whole pile of assumptions in this model. also a presumption that the premier league will be for profit while the fa more broadly will run along charitable foundation lines . English players sign up for fa contracts partly out of national pride ,  partly to get access to the best training facilities and partly to make them as marketable as possible . 

Of course, I'll never see anything remotely approximating this in my lifetime . 

[Rev]

9 hours ago, David said:

On the Southgate issue, for me he would be an even worse appointment than Sam, a manager with just one job to his name where he lost more games than he won prior to joining the England setup after a 4 year break.

We have a squad of players that work week in week out with Klopp, Wenger, Mourinho, Conte turning up to England duty and working under the likes of Allardyce and Southgate. 

Forget the buzzwords like G Star said, indentity, philosophy all that ******, we need a manager that has worked at the top, a winning manager that has a clue what he's doing against the top sides which won't be a Englishman.

Won't happen tho, the complete and utter bobblehead self confessed non footballing experts that are making the appointment will lump us with Southgate and scratch their baboon like heads in disbelief of fans becoming even more disillusioned with the national team.

This is England, sorry Bris but this job CAN attract the best of the best if we had an ounce of ambition.

Makes you wonder if they are really that stupid or scraping the English barrel of averageness (which is a compliment for Southgate) a cost cutting exercise as we still struggle to pay for Wembley, if so I understand but look no further than Eddie Howe, we may lose big games, tactically outwitted by the winning managers but it would be a lot more exciting football on the pitch than a Gareth Southgate side.

 

Don't agree, for me Southgate could be the most exciting England manager for a long time.

He's identified a way of playing which could be successful for us, has bought through all the kids in the age group below, won't be scared to stick them in when the times right, and when they make the step up they will know exactly what's expected of them.

We've been down the superstar foreign coach road twice in our recent history, and it's achieved nothing!

Even when outplayed last night, we always looked dangerous on the break, rather than being outplayed and powerless to do anything about it.

 

[Sexydadbod]

On 16/11/2016 at 14:19, Derby_EnglandLoyal said:

Rashford 

Stones

Dier

Kane 

Sterling 

all of them are good enough in England first team. Stop embarrassing yourself and stop hyping up Spain. It's cringey. 

You're ignoring the point I'm making. It doesn't matter how good they are, they should be playing with the under 21s until they legitimately can't due to age restrictions. I'm not hyping Spain up but I'm saying that every other single successful international side do it but England don't. So England's way is right and every other major international nation are wrong then even though they're the ones winning the trophies

[Sexydadbod]

On 16/11/2016 at 10:30, David said:

My point is no matter what England did last night you would have hammered them for it and banged on how great the Spanish way is. 

Spain can experiment with formations but England that get bogged down with formations wouldn't dare experiment, England experiment with youngsters and it's we shouldn't be doing that, look at Spain who keep their players in the U21's.

Your England hatred and love affair with Spain is nauseating and leaving contradictions in your trail and I'm not England's biggest fan right now.

 

Nonsense. I'll give credit when England deserve the credit. It's the same old with England, play well in the friendlies when the pressure is off but bottle it when it matters. I support both England and Derby county. You see how negative I have been in the past about Derby? Why? It's because I care. I care for my club and my country. If I didn't I wouldn't criticise either of them. And it's not a love affair with Spain. I can't stand some of their players but I'm using them(and Germany as examples) of the right way to go about things. Obviously we can't copy their whole hierarchical structure and below but we should take bits and pieces and incorporate it into our game otherwise we will continue to be left behind while other nations develop 

[Sexydadbod]

Our most capped England u21 player ever is James Milner and the highest ever scorer is Alan Shearer. I'd argue both of them benefitted from the England u 21 set up

[rynny]

10 minutes ago, McLovin said:

You're ignoring the point I'm making. It doesn't matter how good they are, they should be playing with the under 21s until they legitimately can't due to age restrictions. I'm not hyping Spain up but I'm saying that every other single successful international side do it but England don't. So England's way is right and every other major international nation are wrong then even though they're the ones winning the trophies

So who should be in the England team instead? Would you rather the likes of Jagielka play than Stones? Michael Carrick or Gareth Barry or maybe Tom Cleverly ahead of Eric Dier and Delle Alli?

Is it really fair to the manager to not be able to play his best players beacause they are eligible for the under 21s?

[RadioactiveWaste]

22 hours ago, HantsRam said:

If you're blue sky thinking then a really radical solution might be . .....

- central fa contracts for selected  England players.  with quotas loaned to pl clubs.

- the fa contracts stipulate coaching requirements /playing positions . power of recall to fa central if they believe that a player is being misused . 

- on cessation of fa contract player becomes a free agent 

- contracts for fixed term eg 4 years with renew options 

- only fa contracted players to be selected for national teams . 

There are a whole pile of assumptions in this model. also a presumption that the premier league will be for profit while the fa more broadly will run along charitable foundation lines . English players sign up for fa contracts partly out of national pride ,  partly to get access to the best training facilities and partly to make them as marketable as possible . 

Of course, I'll never see anything remotely approximating this in my lifetime . 

I think that's a really interesting concept - It has certainly worked wonders for the England cricket team, although, in cricket international games have much more power than counties.

I like it, but I think the PL money and power will squash any move along those lines.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I think that's a really interesting concept - It has certainly worked wonders for the England cricket team, although, in cricket international games have much more power than counties.

I like it, but I think the PL money and power will squash any move along those lines.

I think that's right RW - the analogy I have in my head is that the FA is like a sovereign nation and the PL is a bank that is too big to fail, so the FA (the game) will simply have to keep accommodating whatever the Premier League wants and this will only ever not be true if the Premier League loses power.

The FA has really sold its soul already - having touted the premier league as "the best league" it now cannot put the genie back into the bottle so we are where we are.

I heard today that the FA are going to interview GS for the job. Seems odd they haven't done so already.

[Sexydadbod]

1 hour ago, rynny said:

So who should be in the England team instead? Would you rather the likes of Jagielka play than Stones? Michael Carrick or Gareth Barry or maybe Tom Cleverly ahead of Eric Dier and Delle Alli?

Is it really fair to the manager to not be able to play his best players beacause they are eligible for the under 21s?

In the short term we would suffer but in the long term(10 years+) we would see the benefits. If the likes of Stones, Alli and Rashford stayed with the u21s and won tournaments, it would give them the confidence which would stay with them in the seniors, especially in the deeper stages of international football. Again I don't like repeating posts because it becomes across that I'm being self-riteous but I go back to Germany. 6 of the starting 11 that won the u21 championships in 2009 went on to become important members of the germany starting 11 that won the world cup in 2014- Neuer,Boateng,Hummels,Ozil, Khedira and Howedes

[Van der MoodHoover]

3 minutes ago, McLovin said:

In the short term we would suffer but in the long term(10 years+) we would see the benefits. If the likes of Stones, Alli and Rashford stayed with the u21s and won tournaments, it would give them the confidence which would stay with them in the seniors, especially in the deeper stages of international football. Again I don't like repeating posts because it becomes across that I'm being self-riteous but I go back to Germany. 6 of the starting 11 that won the u21 championships in 2009 went on to become important members of the germany starting 11 that won the world cup in 2014- Neuer,Boateng,Hummels,Ozil, Khedira and Howedes

Are you assuming that they would be successful in the U21's? Not a given surely.....and in the meantime, which old has-beens are we stuck with in the seniors?

A bit like my ideas - great in principle, but we as a nation and a set of supporters would never be far-sighted enough not to insist on the best we can find RIGHT NOW!!!

[Sexydadbod]

4 minutes ago, HantsRam said:

Are you assuming that they would be successful in the U21's? Not a given surely.....and in the meantime, which old has-beens are we stuck with in the seniors?

A bit like my ideas - great in principle, but we as a nation and a set of supporters would never be far-sighted enough not to insist on the best we can find RIGHT NOW!!!

No guarantee that they would win tournaments but simply getting to the latter stages of them like the semi finals would give the players invaluable experience for the future. If they flopped then at least we would know that they're not good enough for the seniors(there can be exceptions if a player individually has a great tournament)

[RadioactiveWaste]

I'd keep him sweet but get Wenger in the summer.

[rynny]

16 minutes ago, McLovin said:

In the short term we would suffer but in the long term(10 years+) we would see the benefits. If the likes of Stones, Alli and Rashford stayed with the u21s and won tournaments, it would give them the confidence which would stay with them in the seniors, especially in the deeper stages of international football. Again I don't like repeating posts because it becomes across that I'm being self-riteous but I go back to Germany. 6 of the starting 11 that won the u21 championships in 2009 went on to become important members of the germany starting 11 that won the world cup in 2014- Neuer,Boateng,Hummels,Ozil, Khedira and Howedes

Great in theory, didn't really answer my question.

What you are talking about is a comete reset (something that should have happened 6 years ago after the world cup in south africa) but I dont think that is the stage we are at with this team. Also the other issue is that players develop at different rates. I would say look at the team that lost to Germany in the 2009 under 21 championship and how many are in the full team now?

[cannable]

3 hours ago, McLovin said:

In the short term we would suffer but in the long term(10 years+) we would see the benefits. If the likes of Stones, Alli and Rashford stayed with the u21s and won tournaments, it would give them the confidence which would stay with them in the seniors, especially in the deeper stages of international football. Again I don't like repeating posts because it becomes across that I'm being self-riteous but I go back to Germany. 6 of the starting 11 that won the u21 championships in 2009 went on to become important members of the germany starting 11 that won the world cup in 2014- Neuer,Boateng,Hummels,Ozil, Khedira and Howedes

Those players also "bottled" the semis of the 2010 World Cup and Euro 2012. Also, it was England they demolished in the final.

Of that Germany side the lowest League any of them play in is the Eredivisie. Compare that to our side; of the fourteen players to take part we have as many in the Premier League as Germany had winning the World Cup, four in the Championship, one in League One, on retired and one in prison! 

This would suggest to me that the problem isn't tournament experience at all and that we simply don't produce the players. 

Have a look at the Under-17's that won the 2010 Euros. That was an immensely talented group but few of the players have been given a decent chance and in fact, about half of them ended up with us!

Winning/taking part in youth tournaments isn't the problem.

[Van der MoodHoover]

So I've just seen on SSN that Southgate being interviewed on Monday for the managers job. he reportedly has 2 "demands".

- a contract until after euro 2020 

- financial parity with hodgson and allardyces deals aka the most highly paid national coach in the world . 

So the question should be reworded to "has Gareth Southgate done enough to justify these terms?"

[Dimmu]

1 hour ago, HantsRam said:

So I've just seen on SSN that Southgate being interviewed on Monday for the managers job. he reportedly has 2 "demands".

- a contract until after euro 2020 

- financial parity with hodgson and allardyces deals aka the most highly paid national coach in the world . 

So the question should be reworded to "has Gareth Southgate done enough to justify these terms?"

I can guarantee this one is not true or happening. Lippi made such deal with Chinese national team that no one will get close to him.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, Dimmu said:

I can guarantee this one is not true or happening. Lippi made such deal with Chinese national team that no one will get close to him.

this then is my faulty extrapolation . I recall hodgson being quoted at the last world cup as being the most highly paid coach of the nations there.

China weren't present I believe - so I am guilty of assuming no such nation  (ie outside the 32) would pay so highly for a national coach.

[G-Ram]

Give him the job. We're rubbish anyway so doesnt matter who manages us 

[Van der MoodHoover]

5 hours ago, G-Ram said:

Give him the job. We're rubbish anyway so doesnt matter who manages us 

You are Ian Holloway and I claim my £5

[Carl Sagan]

Terrible manager who somehow masterminded a 2-0 win over Malta. Shouldn't have been allowed near the U21s except no one decent ever wants that job - they even had to give it to Stuart P*****e one time. Of course if he can be persuaded it should be Wenger. And if he can't I'd like to try Klinsmann as someone who played a lot in England and has great experience in international management.