Gareth Southgate

[Chris_Martin]

5 hours ago, DCFClks said:

. I'd like to see someone like Graham Potter as England manager.

They're welcome to having Rooney?

Slab head up front would be ideal for his tactics

[Duracell]

2 hours ago, nottingram said:

Could anyone tell me a time where someone has had to beat all of the top teams in order to win a tournament. Given there only tends to be a handful of “top” teams at any one time I would find it surprising if there have been many occasions.

In the end Italy didn’t have to beat many top teams either because lots of top teams got knocked out by lesser teams. Maybe the lesser teams are getting better. Just a thought.

It's not an argument worth your time. Semi-final and a final in the last two tournaments, and some fans will do anything to move the goalposts to make the achievement seem lesser somehow.

We played the best team in the tournament yesterday and we didn't lose. The team played for each other and defended resolutely. We also bombarded Italy early on, but inevitably, they grew into the occasion.

People bang on about Southgate having this incredible bench, which he does, but how useful is it having loads of wingers? You can't play them all at once. I totally get the argument that bringing them on earlier might have asked more questions of Italy, but that's still up for debate. Our defending kept us in a game against a much better side.

And Italy are better than us. While Chiesa has been outstanding, he is not significantly better than our attacking players, so that is not why they are better. Bonucci and Chiellini are fantastic defenders, but they conceded more goals than Stones and Maguire, who were imperious throughout the tournament. So that is not why they are better.

Italy are better because they can control the ball. We can't. In 2018 Modric was the difference, and last night it was Jorginho. These are the players we just can't seem to produce in this country, for whatever reason.

Qatar will play out much the same. But that doesn't mean we can't win it.

[TigerTedd]

4 hours ago, DCFClks said:

Yes he's managed to get to a final and semi-final whilst only having to beat one (possibly two) top team(s) over two tournaments, how lucky can you get? I honestly think Sven could have done just as good, if not better than Southgate had he had the same opponents. 

Potters clearly a very good modern tactical coach who's already being linked to top teams. Why do England always seem to hire managers whose tactics are already 10 years out of date?

This is a stick we lovingly beat forest with. Your European cups don’t count because your opponents were rubbish. Malmö!!!! Lols”.

Doesn’t mean their manager was rubbish though. You can only beat what’s put in front of you. 

[FlyBritishMidland]

8 minutes ago, Duracell said:

It's not an argument worth your time. Semi-final and a final in the last two tournaments, and some fans will do anything to move the goalposts to make the achievement seem lesser somehow.

We played the best team in the tournament yesterday and we didn't lose. The team played for each other and defended resolutely. We also bombarded Italy early on, but inevitably, they grew into the occasion.

People bang on about Southgate having this incredible bench, which he does, but how useful is it having loads of wingers? You can't play them all at once. I totally get the argument that bringing them on earlier might have asked more questions of Italy, but that's still up for debate. Our defending kept us in a game against a much better side.

And Italy are better than us. While Chiesa has been outstanding, he is not significantly better than our attacking players, so that is not why they are better. Bonucci and Chiellini are fantastic defenders, but they conceded more goals than Stones and Maguire, who were imperious throughout the tournament. So that is not why they are better.

Italy are better because they can control the ball. We can't. In 2018 Modric was the difference, and last night it was Jorginho. These are the players we just can't seem to produce in this country, for whatever reason.

Qatar will play out much the same. But that doesn't mean we can't win it.

Edited July 12, 2021 by FlyBritishMidland
Who knows what I’m doing here??

[TigerTedd]

3 hours ago, Kennington Ram said:

In tournaments, you make your own luck and this thing about easy runs is total rubbish. We qualified well, achieved a great seeding, and then played well against our group without serious injuries or overexertion. You win the 'easy' run by earning it.

Do you remember when we played the US, Algeria and Slovenia in 2010, and I think The Sun had the headline "EASY"?

Well, we finished second to the US and then came up against Germany immediately. The US played Ghana.

 

That’s a very good point. Switzerland, for example, had France followed by Spain. A killer run. Because they weren’t seeded, and couldn’t top their group. If you’re good, you get an easier run. That’s the point. If people want us to get a harder run, we could always throw a few games in qualifying. 

And people were saying we should throw the last group game to avoid playing a team from the group of death. We just played to beat whoever was out in front of us. 

[FlyBritishMidland]

5 minutes ago, Duracell said:

It's not an argument worth your time. Semi-final and a final in the last two tournaments, and some fans will do anything to move the goalposts to make the achievement seem lesser somehow.

We played the best team in the tournament yesterday and we didn't lose. The team played for each other and defended resolutely. We also bombarded Italy early on, but inevitably, they grew into the occasion.

People bang on about Southgate having this incredible bench, which he does, but how useful is it having loads of wingers? You can't play them all at once. I totally get the argument that bringing them on earlier might have asked more questions of Italy, but that's still up for debate. Our defending kept us in a game against a much better side.

And Italy are better than us. While Chiesa has been outstanding, he is not significantly better than our attacking players, so that is not why they are better. Bonucci and Chiellini are fantastic defenders, but they conceded more goals than Stones and Maguire, who were imperious throughout the tournament. So that is not why they are better.

Italy are better because they can control the ball. We can't. In 2018 Modric was the difference, and last night it was Jorginho. These are the players we just can't seem to produce in this country, for whatever reason.

Qatar will play out much the same. But that doesn't mean we can't win it.

Good post.  I think he’s done a cracking job.  The main reason Italy won in my view is match know how and a bit of nous.  That all comes with experience.  They knew how to take the sting how the game, make little fouls when needed or win a few free-kicks to take the sting out the game and disrupt the flow.

This will come for our boys with experience of these scenarios.  If anything, we were too nice and need a bit of nastiness in there.

[Van der MoodHoover]

4 minutes ago, Duracell said:

Qatar will play out much the same. But that doesn't mean we can't win it.

But until we develop greater control of the ball we will be less likely to. 

We were shot last night. Towards extra time Italy could just walk up the pitch patting the ball side to side to each other and we just hung back unable to press, tackle or intercept. 

In Qatar it'll be hotter so I expect we will be shot sooner. The knockout rounds come every 3-4 days. That's more often than the pl. We'll probably be down to last night's energy levels by the quarter finals at a guess. 

Need to be able to rotate the centre mids more. I'd prefer to see us move to a single pivot but we can't just have 1 and expect them to play every minute of every game. 

[TigerTedd]

5 minutes ago, FlyBritishMidland said:

Good post.  I think he’s done a cracking job.  The main reason Italy won in my view is match know how and a bit of nous.  That all comes with experience.  They knew how to take the sting how the game, make little fouls when needed or win a few free-kicks to take the sting out the game and disrupt the flow.

This will come for our boys with experience of these scenarios.  If anything, we were too nice and need a bit of nastiness in there.

That does go for management as well as players. Mancini had that bit more boys than Southgate. 

it’s okay to say Southgate did a great job, getting us to the finals, got almost all the decisions right and was just the width of the post away from bringing home the trophy. 

it’s also okay to say that he ducked up the timing of the substitutions and got played by Mancini. 

both things can be true at the same time. 

he’d be an absolute idiot to not learn some lessons from the few decisions he got wrong. Snd I don’t believe he’s an idiot. 

Any talk of replacing him 18 months before a World Cup we could win is ridiculous. What’s more likely, we get a new manager that manages to get up to speed, change our tactics, maybe introduce new players and wins a World Cup just 18 months from taking over (when has that ever happened?), or the manager that has gradually taken us from 4th to 3rd to 2nd in consecutive tournaments continues to work with his team, learn his lessons and continues to progress and go one better in the next tournament?

[G STAR RAM]

46 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

The penalties were also a failure on the coaching side. The sports science is that you gain the best chance of winning the shootout by putting your best penalty takers later in the shootout. We must think Kane is our best penalty taker as he's the designated person during the game, yet he went first. What was Southgate thinking? Also, the best penalty according to the science is blasted into the top corner, which is unsaveable (sp?), like Harry Maguire's. This is what we should have practised for hour after hour over the last month. How come we hit three soft penalties instead, none of them being scored?

Because football is played on a pitch, not a computer is probably the most realistic answer to this question.

[FlyBritishMidland]

7 minutes ago, TigerTedd said:

That does go for management as well as players. Mancini had that bit more boys than Southgate. 

it’s okay to say Southgate did a great job, getting us to the finals, got almost all the decisions right and was just the width of the post away from bringing home the trophy. 

it’s also okay to say that he ducked up the timing of the substitutions and got played by Mancini. 

both things can be true at the same time. 

he’d be an absolute idiot to not learn some lessons from the few decisions he got wrong. Snd I don’t believe he’s an idiot. 

Any talk of replacing him 18 months before a World Cup we could win is ridiculous. What’s more likely, we get a new manager that manages to get up to speed, change our tactics, maybe introduce new players and wins a World Cup just 18 months from taking over (when has that ever happened?), or the manager that has gradually taken us from 4th to 3rd to 2nd in consecutive tournaments continues to work with his team, learn his lessons and continues to progress and go one better in the next tournament?

Totally agree.  I think he’s self-aware enough to know he could have done some things better.  And, importantly, not too arrogant to think he didn’t.  And a good point about progress - small steps is far more sustainable than a giant leap.

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, DCFClks said:

I agree that Italy were lucky as well but not as much as England. You can't just dismiss Belgium like that and I'm honestly not sure England would have been able to take Spain to penalties. Most teams who win tournaments have luck, but it doesn't come around very often and you have to make the most of it. I just think the last two tournaments are big missed opportunities.

Are you really saying you were happy with Southgate's tactics last night? 

Why are we not allowed to question Southgate's tactics in the final? It doesn't mean I'm not supporting them or that I'm not happy they got to a final.

So it's ok to dismiss Germany but not Belgium?

England couldnt have taken Spain to penalties but they managed it with Italy...who beat Spain. 

Is there actually any logic to what you are saying or is it correct to assume that you just dont like Southgate because he is not a fashionable name?

[AndyinLiverpool]

Here's a novel idea, people. Why just try to enjoy a tournament and England's progress?

In Qatar, just go with it. Leave the sense if entitlement in the cupboard and soak in the sense of togetherness, the uplift it gives people. Be part of that instead.

[TigerTedd]

I would like to see us adopt a ‘zero tolerance to penalty shoot outs’ policy in the future. 

we’re clearly crap at penalties, so it bewilders me why we’re happy play for penalties sometimes. 

We should’ve brought rashford and Sancho and any other attackers we could find with 5-10 mins to go and just gone attack vs defence for 10 minutes. Bring Pickford up for every corner. 

penalties: we might win, we might lose. 
attacking siege: we might concede a goal on the break, we might score a spectacular last minute winner. 

given the two options, I can’t see any reason to not go for the second option. We could lose in either, but at least that way it’s not one individual’s fault, and it saves everyone the agony of penalties.

[DCFC Kicks]

18 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So it's ok to dismiss Germany but not Belgium?

England couldnt have taken Spain to penalties but they managed it with Italy...who beat Spain. 

Is there actually any logic to what you are saying or is it correct to assume that you just dont like Southgate because he is not a fashionable name?

When did I dismiss Germany? Belgium are much better than Germany at the moment anyway. 

Why is beating someone on penalties classed as a win when it suits your argument, but only counts as a draw when it doesn't?

Spain outplayed Italy and England would have needed luck, like Italy had, to take it to penalties against them. But Spain's strongest area is there midfield, even better than Italy's, and England's weakest area is the midfield. That's why I think we'd struggle against them.

I don't dislike Southgate at all. I think he's done well overall. But the final showed he's just not at the same level tactically as the likes of Mancini and Enrique, which is understandable, and it cost us in the end. 

[Gone]

12 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Here's a novel idea, people. Why just try to enjoy a tournament and England's progress?

In Qatar, just go with it. Leave the sense if entitlement in the cupboard and soak in the sense of togetherness, the uplift it gives people. Be part of that instead.

I think you can be part of the togetherness and uplift but also be critical if that’s your opinion. With the attacking talent we had at our disposal, in your own back yard and with the Fans behind you, that final was ours for the taking. That’s not entitlement “or whatever the new label is” is reality, Southgate was to slow to change it, we all saw it coming. He needed to change it earlier be more offensive and take the game to them instead of protecting a 1-0 lead. Italy were great however so hats of to them, we though should of made the most of our great start and that’s down to the manager. He should take us to the World Cup and hope he learns from yesterday and I really hope he makes use of the resources he has better next time. 

[DCFC Kicks]

1 hour ago, Duracell said:

Italy are better because they can control the ball. We can't. In 2018 Modric was the difference, and last night it was Jorginho. These are the players we just can't seem to produce in this country, for whatever reason.

Is there anyone coming through who could do this? Bellingham? I wanted Ward-Prowse in the squad but he's not quite that kind of player. Harry Winks played well for England a while ago, not sure what's happened to him. Or maybe move Foden more central?

[G STAR RAM]

16 minutes ago, DCFClks said:

When did I dismiss Germany? Belgium are much better than Germany at the moment anyway. 

Why is beating someone on penalties classed as a win when it suits your argument, but only counts as a draw when it doesn't?

Spain outplayed Italy and England would have needed luck, like Italy had, to take it to penalties against them. But Spain's strongest area is there midfield, even better than Italy's, and England's weakest area is the midfield. That's why I think we'd struggle against them.

I don't dislike Southgate at all. I think he's done well overall. But the final showed he's just not at the same level tactically as the likes of Mancini and Enrique, which is understandable, and it cost us in the end. 

I struggle to believe that an international manager, who isnt very tactically astute, could take his team to 2 semi finals and a final in his first 3 major tournaments. 

[Chris_Martin]

19 minutes ago, DCFClks said:

Is there anyone coming through who could do this? Bellingham? I wanted Ward-Prowse in the squad but he's not quite that kind of player. Harry Winks played well for England a while ago, not sure what's happened to him. Or maybe move Foden more central?

i don't think it a personnel problem, just that we as a team dropped too deep. Understandable given the circumstances though. I'm sure we will be better off for it in the future 

[Chris_Martin]

39 minutes ago, DCFClks said:

Is there anyone coming through who could do this? Bellingham? I wanted Ward-Prowse in the squad but he's not quite that kind of player. Harry Winks played well for England a while ago, not sure what's happened to him. Or maybe move Foden more central?

 

an english midfielder who can control and run a game you say...….

 

 

 

 

not completely out the question though. Kalvin Phillips was given his first England game as a Championship player.

[Bob The Badger]

2 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

This is a stick we lovingly beat forest with. Your European cups don’t count because your opponents were rubbish. Malmö!!!! Lols”.

Doesn’t mean their manager was rubbish though. You can only beat what’s put in front of you. 

I only beat them with the stick because I was a seething cauldron of vitriolic jealousy and it was the only stick I had. 

More like a twig really. 

A very slender and poorly twig. 

With Dutch twig disease.