Gareth Southgate

[DarkFruitsRam7]

12 minutes ago, Gritstone Ram said:

All failures for England 

Wasn’t the point.

[Premier ram]

Arise Sir Gareth , you and your team have put a smile back on the faces of Englishmen and women , so proud of your achievements , long may it continue, your tactics , descision making , substitutions are all paying off , lets hope your management is topped off by collecting the Euro trophy , you and the boys so deserve it , Come On England

[TimRam]

3 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Can’t say I agree with this. Depth-wise, yes, we’re very strong. But look at that 2006 World Cup team.

Lampard, Gerrard, Beckham, Rooney, Terry, Ferdinand, Ashley Cole, etc.

Great players for their clubs but not a team for England. Don't think their hearts were in it.

[Angry Ram]

4 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Can’t say I agree with this. Depth-wise, yes, we’re very strong. But look at that 2006 World Cup team.

Lampard, Gerrard, Beckham, Rooney, Terry, Ferdinand, Ashley Cole, etc.

All starters but, where is the depth behind them?

[sage]

54 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

All starters but, where is the depth behind them?

Scholes, Campbell, Cambell, Neville, Owen, Carrick, Redknapp,  Joe Cole, 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

2 hours ago, TimRam said:

Great players for their clubs but not a team for England. Don't think their hearts were in it.

Yes but that’s kind of the point. Great players at Sven’s disposal but he never  got them firing. Southgate has fewer star names but has got them going.

[Van der MoodHoover]

2 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Yes but that’s kind of the point. Great players at Sven’s disposal but he never  got them firing. Southgate has fewer star names but has got them going.

England are also benefitting I think from a far more joined up approach across all of the age groups now, than used to be the case. 

This is not a swipe at Southgate, and in fact, the continuity gained by the fa promoting him from within is sensible. 

Better than going to someone like the fat swindler who brings in his premier league favourites. 

[TigerTedd]

2 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

England are also benefitting I think from a far more joined up approach across all of the age groups now, than used to be the case. 

This is not a swipe at Southgate, and in fact, the continuity gained by the fa promoting him from within is sensible. 

Better than going to someone like the fat swindler who brings in his premier league favourites. 

Isn’t it funny that he’s probably still be manager now if he hadn’t have been caught having that conversation with the fake sheik. Southgate was only really bought in as an emergency stop gap. Funny how things work out. 

[Angry Ram]

14 hours ago, sage said:

Scholes, Campbell, Cambell, Neville, Owen, Carrick, Redknapp,  Joe Cole, 

Bridge, Hargreaves, Downing.. Pointless to carry on just putting names down. As they say it's all about opinions.

My point is this is more of a team then we have ever had before. Rooney injured, end of the world. Not so much now. Kane would be a loss for sure but we have depth all over.

[TigerTedd]

22 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Bridge, Hargreaves, Downing.. Pointless to carry on just putting names down. As they say it's all about opinions.

My point is this is more of a team then we have ever had before. Rooney injured, end of the world. Not so much now. Kane would be a loss for sure but we have depth all over.

Is this evidence of the investment they said they were making into grass roots football and training a decade or so ago finally starting to bear fruit. The plan is all coming together. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

17 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

All starters but, where is the depth behind them?

I think the key now is that we have players on the bench that can come on and play in the same way as those they replace. 

In the past, we often had to bring on different types of players (ok if you want that difference but not so much for replacing an injured player, for example).

Saturday night was seamless. Stop Rice from getting booked, bring on Henderson; give Sterling and Kane a rest, bring on Rashford and Calvert-Lewin. Like-for-like seems to be much easier with this squad.

It's a combination of the quality of players, preparation and the manager who makes it all happen.

Add in the fact that the players seem to love him because of the respect he has for them and the idea that he may just give them their best shot at joining a group of players that currently only contains the likes of Banks, Styles, Moore, Peters, Hirst and Charlton. Imagine being mentioned in the same sentence as that lot.

[Ghost of Clough]

56 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Bridge, Hargreaves, Downing.. Pointless to carry on just putting names down. As they say it's all about opinions.

My point is this is more of a team then we have ever had before. Rooney injured, end of the world. Not so much now. Kane would be a loss for sure but we have depth all over.

I think poor tactics and squad selection were the main drivers for not achieving more.

Hargreaves should have been a regular in that team rather than shoehorning two attacking players into CM. Injuries to key players also didn't help - Neville, Rooney, Owen injured at one stage or another.

First XI: Robinson, Neville, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Cole, Rooney, Owen

Backup: James, Hargreaves, Carragher, Campbell, Bridge, Lennon, Jenas, Carrick, Downing, Crouch, Walcott, Carson

That first XI, with the exception of Robinson, was world class. The backups admittedly weren't great, but Campbell, Hargreaves, Carrick and Crouch offered very good cover.

However, there were two obvious errors with squad selection given we wanted to play 442 - RB and CF.
We didn't need to take 3 backup CMs at the expense of a RB when playing 442. Neville got injured in the first game resulting in Carragher filling in at RB for a couple and Hargreaves for two as well.
With Rooney being injured from the start and Owen injury prone, why didn't we have a better 4th choice than Walcott? Bent scored 18 in that PL season (top English goal scorer). Harewood had a good season and was 4th top English scorer (behind Rooney and Lampard). There was also Beattie and Defoe as possible options..

[sage]

5 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Bridge, Hargreaves, Downing.. Pointless to carry on just putting names down. As they say it's all about opinions.

My point is this is more of a team then we have ever had before. Rooney injured, end of the world. Not so much now. Kane would be a loss for sure but we have depth all over.

We had better first choice then. We have more depth now in around and behind Kane but that's the only place.

The main difference is this team/squad is more united and organised and Southgate deserves praise for that.

 

[MuespachRam]

4 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I think poor tactics and squad selection were the main drivers for not achieving more.

Hargreaves should have been a regular in that team rather than shoehorning two attacking players into CM. Injuries to key players also didn't help - Neville, Rooney, Owen injured at one stage or another.

First XI: Robinson, Neville, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole, Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Cole, Rooney, Owen

Backup: James, Hargreaves, Carragher, Campbell, Bridge, Lennon, Jenas, Carrick, Downing, Crouch, Walcott, Carson

That first XI, with the exception of Robinson, was world class. The backups admittedly weren't great, but Campbell, Hargreaves, Carrick and Crouch offered very good cover.

However, there were two obvious errors with squad selection given we wanted to play 442 - RB and CF.
We didn't need to take 3 backup CMs at the expense of a RB when playing 442. Neville got injured in the first game resulting in Carragher filling in at RB for a couple and Hargreaves for two as well.
With Rooney being injured from the start and Owen injury prone, why didn't we have a better 4th choice than Walcott? Bent scored 18 in that PL season (top English goal scorer). Harewood had a good season and was 4th top English scorer (behind Rooney and Lampard). There was also Beattie and Defoe as possible options..

Hargreaves WOULD have been a regular if he could have stung 3 games together without getting injured and if you think that Beattie, Defoe, Bent or Harewood(!) would have been a decent replacement for Rooney you must be on glue.. 

we had a world class 11, a really crappy 22, an idiot of a manager and all the squad harmony of an angry French national team. 

[Ghost of Clough]

55 minutes ago, MuespachRam said:

Hargreaves WOULD have been a regular if he could have stung 3 games together without getting injured and if you think that Beattie, Defoe, Bent or Harewood(!) would have been a decent replacement for Rooney you must be on glue.. 

we had a world class 11, a really crappy 22, an idiot of a manager and all the squad harmony of an angry French national team. 

Not decent replacements for Rooney, but they all would have been better 4th choice CFs than Walcott who had only scored 4 in the Championship that season.

[MuespachRam]

21 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Not decent replacements for Rooney, but they all would have been better 4th choice CFs than Walcott who had only scored 4 in the Championship that season.

None of them were anywhere near good enough to play for England. 

[Leeds Ram]

Lampard and Gerrard discussed the failures of the supposed golden generation and it seemed like the big issues were the tactics and the lack of squad cohesion. Between 2002-2006 we did have the squad to win a major tournament, if the Greeks could win a major tournament in that time so could we have done if we'd managed our resources appropriately. There was some bad luck involved- 2002 the ronaldinhio freekick to the winners, 2004 going out on penalties to the finalists so you do have to think that the squads we had were also slightly unfortunate. 

However, what Gareth has done cannot be underestimated. Two major semi finals in a row is a major achievement and in this tournament we've looked comfortable and better the further we've gone. If we get Spain in the final I'm fairly confident we'll win the tournament tbh as they don't look great at the back or going forward. Italy will be trickier and we'd have to look to Austria as a model if we were to try and beat them. 

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 hour ago, MuespachRam said:

All the squad harmony of an angry French national team. 

Wouldn't go that far! 

8 minutes ago, MuespachRam said:

None of them were anywhere near good enough to play for England. 

I'd say Defoe was good enough as a backup. 20 goals from 57 caps isn't to be sniffed at.

Edited July 5, 2021 by DarkFruitsRam7

[MuespachRam]

2 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Wouldn't go that far! 

I'd say Defoe was good enough as a backup. 20 goals from 57 caps isn't to be sniffed at.

Yeah Defoe wasn’t too bad to be fair. The rest though… 

[MuespachRam]

5 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

Lampard and Gerrard discussed the failures of the supposed golden generation and it seemed like the big issues were the tactics and the lack of squad cohesion. Between 2002-2006 we did have the squad to win a major tournament, if the Greeks could win a major tournament in that time so could we have done if we'd managed our resources appropriately. There was some bad luck involved- 2002 the ronaldinhio freekick to the winners, 2004 going out on penalties to the finalists so you do have to think that the squads we had were also slightly unfortunate. 

However, what Gareth has done cannot be underestimated. Two major semi finals in a row is a major achievement and in this tournament we've looked comfortable and better the further we've gone. If we get Spain in the final I'm fairly confident we'll win the tournament tbh as they don't look great at the back or going forward. Italy will be trickier and we'd have to look to Austria as a model if we were to try and beat them. 

Lampard and gerrard were 2 of the main reasons we didn’t win anything during the golden generation…! 
 

gareth will go down as the  best English manger ever after we cruise past Denmark and thrash Italy.