that euro final is all you need to see that southgate is out of his depth. anyone that doesn’t, doesn’t understand people or management of them in general or how people tend to react in pressurised situations. you’re asking everything of a player’s mental strength and ability by just chucking them on right at the death and expecting them to take the biggest kick of their lives, in the biggest game of their lives, without even burning off any nervous energy or tension by playing 10-15 minutes beforehand. he doesn’t look like a genius if england somehow win that penalty shootout, with all the subs scoring, he just gets incredibly lucky. what happened to him is what should happen to him in that scenario, and i’m amazed he’s still in the job.
England Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Fair enough
He didn't? England came out strong, scored, played Italy off the park while they had the energy to do so. Then once the energies faded, they did literally the best thing you could do against that Italy side - fall back into a deep block. England were in complete control of that game until Mancini moved Insigne in the middle early in the second half. That's when Italy started to apply serious pressure - combined with Bonucci and Chiellini figuring out how to shut down Kane as England's release valve. That's admittedly were Southgate made the first mistake imo, accepting the tactical context hoping to kill Italy on the counter, instead of trying to break up Italy's field tilt and give his defence more breathing room. Tbf to him though, it's not like Italy were actually dangerous. The goal comes off a corner kick and it's the only reak chance Italy managed to create. And Chiellini's memefied foul on Saka at the end was a demonstration of what Southgate wanted to do. Didn't work though, so it was the wrong call. He changed things up and England were the team trying to win in extra time, but again you could criticize him for not trying enough - Rashford certainly could have come in for most of ET instead of just in time for penalties
Yeah I just disagree on the degree of how dumb/wrong that was, more than anything. I'm being a pedant
I get that, and it was an irrational decision, just one that's very easy to understand and one a lot of managers, including the very best ones, have done. He trusted Sterling - the guy who consistently came through for England in those scenarios - to come through once again, against all logic or reason
I'm a supporter of a club whose multiple-CL winning managerS - plural - often treated Luka Modric the same. Sometimes it even worked. Hell, Ancelotti wrote about Inzaghi's fitness - the lack of it - before the final against Liverpool in his book. Inzaghi, whose own teammates were begging Ancelotti NOT to play because he could barely stand, ended winning them the game...
Then goes on to invent an alternative timeline where things that didn't happen happened to give praise to Southgate.
Sometimes, you can't make this shit up!
I actually think you're trolling this subject. No way you can make cohesive posts about just about everything else and have this blind spot.
Didn't see this before I posted. By now, I think @giorno is having a giggle at the collective expense of those suffering through Southgate.
It was made so much worse by him having gone through what he did as a player. He threw players on cold to take the biggest kicks of their career. Mental, or just sheer incompetence, possibly both.
It's a possibility - a good poster in general, but needs to let off some steam on one topic and has chosen this one.
@giorno I did say have a look at the thread and you'd see how many were remonstrating about Southgate's actions throughout the game, and into the penalty shoot out.
It's not hindsight and there was nothing profound about anything he did, just plain rubbish management.
Just so you don't think I'm doctoring my view after the fact:
And I know the same can be done over and over with multiple members on here who were posting on the day.
Turns out Saka's constitution saw him through, whilst Sancho effectively fell apart from that point onward.
It's not hindsight and there was nothing profound about anything he did, just plain rubbish management.
Just so you don't think I'm doctoring my view after the fact:
And I know the same can be done over and over with multiple members on here who were posting on the day.
Turns out Saka's constitution saw him through, whilst Sancho effectively fell apart from that point onward.
yep. someone eventually has to miss a penalty, but at least he played the whole game before his miss. i couldn’t believe what i was watching when it was all unfolding, my disbelief only beaten by the fact he seemingly got away with it all. he’s the reason this generation of english players won’t win anything.
i don’t think he’s hopeless, he has done some good things for england. but he’s taken england as far as he can with his skillset and he’s not the man to bring home a major trophy. any win would be in spite of him, rather than due to him. he’s not going to get england over the line with a genius tactical move. he got the dream start against italy, at home, with all the ascendancy, and he fecked it up. not the players.
I just realised Southgate should be a god in Italy as well; the man should have trophies erected there!
I rarely get miffed about England or individual games, but when you see so much resting in the hands of a manager who is uncomfortable under such a glaring spotlight and is making so many scarily poor decisions, you can't help but despair and rue what could have been. At least have the players go out on their shield and not be left with 'what ifs'!
I'm thinking this era is England's best chance to get over the line and win a major. So many other traditionally strong nations are in disarray and England are genuinely one of few in the ascendency; it's such a shame that Southgate is the one with the baton in his hand at such a pivotal time.
at least we’ll get a new pizza hut advert out of it. him in uniform, complete with a manager’s badge, as the kitchen catches fire whilst kids piss on the salad bar.
Holy batman that is a lot to unpack
And it may very well be that he's taken England as far as he can, that really he's the reason why Kane keeps fecking up when the chips are down, that England really needs something else - that being competitive at the right time simply will never be enough for England, unlike most WC/Euro winners.
But on the other hand, why shouldn't it be England's turn at some point? England have been consistently competitive under Southgate. And they've been going from strenght to strenght too, the performances improving with every new tournament...why shouldn't this be enough? When it works for France, and Italy, and Argentina and Germany...?
@rimaldo actually made a very good point which I wholeheartedly agree with about this. He should have given them 10-15 minutes of play to break the tension and get the juices flowing, instead of sending them in cold
Nah. I mean partially yes, obviously, but mostly, no
Yes, and again, so? It happens. Guardiola has been criticized for overcomplicating CL ties how many times? And he's Guardiola. You have to accept that the England manager might screw up. I get the frustration though. Frankly I might also feel like you if I were english
Never said this, had no reason not to believe you
So, are you actually blaming the penalty on Sancho's failures at United? Because this is the part I said you were straight up making up, in case it wasn't clear
See this, this is why I keep getting into these arguments with you lot. You seriously need to stop turning the manager into a scapegoat, to the point of blaming future failures on him
Yeah again, no. Sorry but the players are the ones on the pitch. He screwed up, but so did they. He got some things rights - the ascendancy you talk about was a direct result of both his job preparing the team and the surprising tactical setup which caught Italy with their pants down - and he got sime things wrong - the substitutions, mostly - but ultimately it's a football game. No manager ever wins or loses alone.
And it may very well be that he's taken England as far as he can, that really he's the reason why Kane keeps fecking up when the chips are down, that England really needs something else - that being competitive at the right time simply will never be enough for England, unlike most WC/Euro winners.
But on the other hand, why shouldn't it be England's turn at some point? England have been consistently competitive under Southgate. And they've been going from strenght to strenght too, the performances improving with every new tournament...why shouldn't this be enough? When it works for France, and Italy, and Argentina and Germany...?
Holy batman that is a lot to unpack
@rimaldo actually made a very good point which I wholeheartedly agree with about this. He should have given them 10-15 minutes of play to break the tension and get the juices flowing, instead of sending them in cold
Nah. I mean partially yes, obviously, but mostly, no
Yes, and again, so? It happens. Guardiola has been criticized for overcomplicating CL ties how many times? And he's Guardiola. You have to accept that the England manager might screw up. I get the frustration though. Frankly I might also feel like you if I were english
Never said this, had no reason not to believe you
So, are you actually blaming the penalty on Sancho's failures at United? Because this is the part I said you were straight up making up, in case it wasn't clear
See this, this is why I keep getting into these arguments with you lot. You seriously need to stop turning the manager into a scapegoat, to the point of blaming future failures on him
Yeah again, no. Sorry but the players are the ones on the pitch. He screwed up, but so did they. He got some things rights - the ascendancy you talk about was a direct result of both his job preparing the team and the surprising tactical setup which caught Italy with their pants down - and he got sime things wrong - the substitutions, mostly - but ultimately it's a football game. No manager ever wins or loses alone.
And it may very well be that he's taken England as far as he can, that really he's the reason why Kane keeps fecking up when the chips are down, that England really needs something else - that being competitive at the right time simply will never be enough for England, unlike most WC/Euro winners.
But on the other hand, why shouldn't it be England's turn at some point? England have been consistently competitive under Southgate. And they've been going from strenght to strenght too, the performances improving with every new tournament...why shouldn't this be enough? When it works for France, and Italy, and Argentina and Germany...?
he’s paid at least £5m per year. he shouldn’t be fecking up simple things on that kind of salary. it’s not just his first big job, it’s his first proper job. it’s exactly like united recently and over promoting capable people into roles they’re not ready for. he’s learning on the job and his mistakes have big consequences.
we’ve lost to anyone half decent throughout his tenure, often with far better players available. blowing away lichtenstein in qualifiers isn’t difficult. his record is dire when viewed with any kind of context. his role is to get the best out of the players, their feck ups are his. he simply isn’t good enough.
Not gonna lie, it's throwing me off how you're the one making the best arguments against him
Yeah, not much to say to that. Agree to sort of disagree. See, I don't think he needs to be "good enough" for england to win. Or rather, the bar is much lower than you think
Most worrying post
Beyond a joke now with him selecting Henderson, can't wait for him to leave his post, why not just use the friendlies to try out a new centre back and put stones in midfield who is better option over Henderson in that position
It's so weird when you post a real post about football
the majority of modern football turns me off. the state ownership, the greed, the data driven safety of the football. but there is still something pure about international football, especially major tournaments, and having someone feck that up for me unearths deep childhood football trauma. trauma that stems back to failing to qualify for ‘94 and not winning ‘96. having southgate cropping up repeatedly in those doesn’t help his cause.
i’ve forgiven him for ‘96. players miss penalties. i’m not ready for southgate and i to try again though after his 8 years of management. he’s been here 4 years too long. knowing he’ll feck up again in the summer doesn’t help either. it’s not his fault. he shouldn’t be managing us. he has his merits. give him a role behind the scenes, ensuring continuity across the youth set up, through to the first team or something. these england players deserve a manager of their calibre.
I'll echo this. Magnolia manager and captain, as well as the repeated selection of players like Phillips have completely turned me off watching the current England team.
Yeah I agree with the sentiment. I'm not sure about the "purity" of international football, mainly because of the inherent corruption of international bodies like FIFA/UEFA but I do get what you mean.
Here's the other side of the coin though: Southgate has his flaws, made his mistakes, whatever. But he's been good, and England have been competitive through 3 tournaments with him. So you change him, ok...who with? It's not like international football is full of top managers fighting each other for the best jobs - hell, Brazil just got turned down by their first choice. Brazil.
Add to that the fact that most top managers only have experience at club level - which is an entirely different job, and there's no way to tell whether they could translate their skill to the international game
So what do you do: stick with the guy who has consistently been good, if not good enough, and hope next time around the lucky bounces go your way, your captain doesn't miss the biggest chance to put you into the WC final, your players don't feck up defending a corner kick, and you might actually win....or, go with someone new and hope, really HOPE, they do better?
Mourinho would be my pick
Said when he left World Cup that I didn't think he will play for England under Southgate again
England lost to France thanks to player error. Stones Abdicating his marking duties and Kane missing a penalty.
Actually a decent kit
Stones is great stepping into midfield from defense. He'd be much worse as a pure midfielder.
Henderson isn't the answer, I know. I have a nagging feeling it's a bit too soon for Mainoo. Surely one of Foden/Bellingham/whoever can play as a more disciplined 8 in the midfield?
Only Bellingham can. But that doesn't solve the issue of no alternative to Rice with Phillips out of commsion with shocking form. That is why love it or hate it, Henderson will get picked for squads.
Foden has played in a midfield trio at City on many occasions. He’s been coached his entire career by Pep Guardiola, I’m sure he can handle some very basic tactical instruction.
A midfield three of Foden / Rice / Bellingham would be absolutely fine. Whether that’s better than using Foden and Saka on the wings (which would also be very dangerous) is another matter.
Genuinely not sure who else we could pick over Henderson. What if rice gets injured?
Harvey elliot or mainoo should be ahead of Henderson, we will get dominated with Henderson in our midfield, he was a let down in the last world cup let alone 2years on and playing in 2nd rate leagues
It really wouldn't be, unless the plan is to sacrifice Bellingham's attacking output in exchange for defensive work
Saying Foden plays in a midfield trio at City when A) he's mostly played either out wide or as a forward and B) City don't really play with 3 midfielders, so much as 2 midfielders and 5 forwards, and Foden is one of their weakest players defensively(which is part of the reason Guardiola prefers to line him up wide)
The reality is that if Southgate wants to get the version of Bellingham that's killing it for Madrid, or most recently for England, killed Italy, then he needs a midfielder with roughly Henderson's skillset next to Rice. Solutions such ad Stones moving up, or a FB, would require time to implement and are not necessarily doable, while playing guys like Maddison or Foden would be very risky defensively. Not to mention Foden wouldn't really solve anything since he's not an organizer or tempo setter either. Maddison can do that some, so even if Henderson is too cooked play and Phillips too, Maddison would still be a better option than Foden
The debate about bringing players on just for penalties being smart or not reminded me of Van Gaal being hailed as a master tactician for doing that with Tim Krul, at the 2014 WC.
Bellingham (as you well know) is a complete midfielder. He’s playing further forward for Madrid because that’s where’s he’s been most needed. There isn’t the same need for England (Kane 37 goals + 12 assists / Saka 16 goals and 15 assists… that doesn’t even include whoever we decide to play LW).
I don’t think Maddison is much more of a tempo-setter than Foden, they both seem very similar in terms of being most comfortable in final phase but technically secure enough to contribute in the buildup if required.
Guardiola has played with a midfield trio for the majority of his time in England. Foden has grown up in a 4-3-3 with him playing in midfield on many occasions. If Rice can be the anchor behind players as attacking as Odegaard and Havertz in a trio, he can definitely do so for Foden and Bellingham. It’s not 1995, English players can work out how to play in a 3.
I doubt Southgate will do it, but that’s because he’s overly conservative, not because it’s some tactical impossibility.
Last edited:
Rice plays in a very good Arteta system with two top CBs behind him. Arsenal also press really well, which compresses the pitch, which makes it easier for Rice to patrol the spaces. In a Southgate team he'll be more exposed I think. Kinda like if you compare Caicedo at Brighton and Caicedo at Chelsea. He's the same player but De Zerbi almost never left him in situations where he's had to cover acres and acres of space on his own.
I'd like to see a Rice, Foden and Bellingham midfield but my guess is Rice would be left carrying the load on his own which would leave him exposed against the good teams.
That's true (though Stones and Guehi / Tomori /
Check Bellingham and Foden's transfermarkt stats and you see that CM is the most played position for both of them - Bellingham overwhelmingly so. They're midfielders. They just happen to be lethal offensively. But seeing as England have incredibly productive forwards, they would be freed up to focus on controlling games.
Last edited:
England having guys who've been scoring at club level doesn't mean they won't need Bellingham to be a game winner. And if they want him to be that, he needs to play in attack.
Even deeper though he's just not an organizer, either. You don't want him getting 80 touches in midfield, that's not what he excels at
He is. Foden isn't that player at all. For all the thinking of Foden as a midfielder, he's actually closer to a forward. Maddison at least is more of a midfielder, and he has taken on the role of organizer at times for Leicester and now Spurs, though he's not really that type of player either
That's all well and good in theory except City have NEVER played a 4-3-3. It's always been this 3-2-5/442 hybrid, with some variations here and there. And again, Foden mostly plays as either wide forward, inside forward or false nine for them. He is only a midfielder in the sense that he needs to play looking at the goal.
Odegaard is an organizer though. More importantly, that's club football. Rice had 2 months of training camp plus a whole season training to do that. That doesn't happen for England. Who still don't have an Odegaard. Nor a Saliba or a Zinchenko, for that matter.
It's not impossible, just suboptimal in so many ways that he's better off not doing it
My exact thoughts. Right now all you have for the role is Rice, Phillips (out of commison wity dreadful form), Henderson as a fill in and unproven Mainoo and at a stretch under 21 champion James Garner IMO its slim pickings.
A midfield 3 of Bellingham- rice - mainoo is a very tasty prospect, can’t wait till Southgate fecks off so we can actually see it.
It's a tactical impossibility. It's like some of you refused to accept just how complicated playing with inverted fullbacks, over attacking cms whilst playing pressing football is.
At club level not only does a Rice having a none changing completely compatible pair of cbs behind him. He is aided by inverted fullbacks and the fact his team spends months on end training the system every day!
In international football the training ground time isn't there, neither are the partnerships. You are more likely to be punished severely in transition for the short falls in application.
It's why for example Spain at their brilliant best STILL added Xabi Alonso to Busquets in the middle. Pushed Xavi to 10 and played Iniesta as a wide forward rather than full scale replicate their magic triangle from Barca. For the also knew full well because the defence personnel was different, plus the combination of attackers ahead of them, they'd not be able to replicate it as effectively.