England Euro 2024 Squad and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
BorisManUtd said:
It's the performances like against Serbia the other night that makes me think England won't be able to win it. Could even reach semis but that's about it. Well at least under Southgate. Perhaps they'll prove me wrong.
Click to expand...
I just don't understand how anyone can think we could win under Southgate.

He did well at the 2018 World Cup, which caused us to believe he could win Euro 2020/1, but after he botched the final the exact same way he got us eliminated by Croatia (which we gave him a pass for because, A, they were better at the time, and B, we foolishly thought he'd learn from it) it was evident he wasn't the man for the job. The 2022 World Cup went as expected (refusing to play our best player of the tournament was the self-inflicted wound this time) and this one will, too.

Euro 2020/1 was the only tournament there was a chance under him. The past three years and two tournaments have/are being wasted on him.
 
England's best attacking moments in the last two tournaments occurred when Sterling and Saka were on the wings, running at defenders. Currently, the starting XI lacks players who can beat defenders from a standing start, which is essential for a team without creative passers or a natural rhythm in their passing game. As a result, the team often circulates the ball pointlessly, leading to a one-paced and linear style of play. I propose starting with Eze instead of Foden, at least he has some on ball dynamism
 
Last edited:
Yagami said:
I just don't understand how anyone can think we could win under Southgate.
Click to expand...
You could win with a rock in charge. International football is about players and luck. Managers come a distant 3rd. Guys like Mancini, Scaloni, Rehagel or Lippi(and in his case it was the environment that made him matter) are a rarity. More often than not it's the Scolari, Del Bosque, Low, Santos, Deschamps winning. The create a good environment, send your best out and get out of their way types

Repeating the team in game 2 does seem stupid though. These are the games to experiment but there's only 3 of them, so not a lot of time to try stuff
 
You can make a case with the spine of Pickford-Stones-Bellingham-Kane, and especially with the attacking bit of that group, that England have the most structural talent on the pitch. As always though it’s the creativity and technical ability on the ball for the wide players getting into tight spots. Still I think England have as good a chance as any in this tournament. No one is really frightening yet.
 
It’s a fecking outrage that Gareth opts to start TAA over Mainoo. Can’t wait for us to crash out with the usual whimper in the latter stages.
 
The Trent in midfield/Trent is Beckham thing just seems like scouse propaganda at this point. Has he ever played there for Liverpool??

If we have to play him I’d prefer to bang him right back and Walker on the left, then sub him and switch Walker back to the left.

Foden 10, where he’s actually good, and then Bellingham deeper. Rice, Bellingham, Foden, then Saka, Kane and maybe try Palmer from out wide (could be a shit idea in fairness, if so drop Foden for him and bring in Eze).

Mainoo/Wharton off the bench.
 
If Southgate plays the same starting 11 again then that's just pure Southgate in a nutshell.

I've read that everyone went a bit OTT in their reactions to England's first game because after all, they did win the game.

But i can understand the reaction because straight away in this tournament, Southgate has reverted to type and the way the game panned out is virtually the same way England have buggered up in the last 3 tournaments.

Its literally like he has learned absolutely nothing from those losses.

Being Welsh, I'd still rather have Southgate than bloody Page.
 
Toblerone92 said:
It’s a fecking outrage that Gareth opts to start TAA over Mainoo. Can’t wait for us to crash out with the usual whimper in the latter stages.
Click to expand...

Yep. So if this was the plan... why didn't he do it earlier when there was no CM choices? It seems he has buckled under pressure of not playing Trent.

Trent is not that great on the ball in the middle, he does not have the ability to half turn in midfield. He is an exceptional passer but England dont have anyone running in behind.

We had Rice who is supposedly meant to be WC, TAA who is meant to be WC, Jude, Foden but none of them could find the ball to Kane.

If only England had a CM that can turn and drive...
 
.
Kirk lazarus said:
Couldn't agree more. It feels like self sabotage . He's going to get targeted , they'll lull him , let him start to feel secure , then pounce .

I can't get my head around how he's left it this late to try it , when Trent is saying they've been working on it for a year ?
Click to expand...
There isn’t a single aspect of midfield play TAA gets right, from position to passing, to decision making to reading the flow of the game to movement with the ball and it’s bonkers that he is getting to exhibit that at an international tournament, rather than in a bunch of meaningless friendlies or qualifying games verses minnows.

The tournament proper should have seen a definitive set of midfield options being fine tuned, if needs be: Wharton, Rice, Bellingham, Mainoo and Foden being mixed and mashed between to try and find the optimal combination. But instead vital minutes, before there’s no room for error, are being wasted, and even the plan B off of this plan A not being put through its paces, meaning when/if TAA is dropped, the new unit will have had very little competitive minutes together, which will show when the pressure is on in a two-way game where there’s little time to find your feet or intuitively know where the best options lie against strong opposition.

The lull into pouncing aspect is a guarantee if TAA fields in the latter stages, and you can’t even blame the player for it. Management are supposed to ensure each area of the pitch is as optimised and secure as can be, yet fielding TAA in midfield is highly likely to compromise the side right through its heart.
 
Judging by what people are saying today it looks like Foden is our official scapegoat of Euro 2024.
 
Spark said:
The Trent in midfield/Trent is Beckham thing just seems like scouse propaganda at this point. Has he ever played there for Liverpool??

If we have to play him I’d prefer to bang him right back and Walker on the left, then sub him and switch Walker back to the left.

Foden 10, where he’s actually good, and then Bellingham deeper. Rice, Bellingham, Foden, then Saka, Kane and maybe try Palmer from out wide (could be a shit idea in fairness, if so drop Foden for him and bring in Eze).

Mainoo/Wharton off the bench.
Click to expand...
Trent has played in midfield for Liverpool and he was a midfielder in the youth set-up, he's not completely foreign to the role. I think his problem is more of a lack of application than anything else. People go crazy when he switches positions when other players do it all the time. He can play there it's just when and how, and also what teams you do it against considering he's not necessarily needed there with our other options.

Foden plays out wide for City and does well all the time, but City plays completely differently than England. The problem against Serbia was that he didn't get the ball for large parts of the game and he was partnered with Trippier who's been shit this season. England needs orthodox wingers in southgates systems which means you either drop Foden or move Bellingham back to accommodate him.

Brave decisions need to be made, but I think people are blowing things out of proportion as usual. There are teams who've played worse but people love to jump on England.
 
mintyred said:
Judging by what people are saying today it looks like Foden is our official scapegoat of Euro 2024.
Click to expand...

Is he being scapegoated? or are is performances for England being rightly questioned?

He's 35 caps deep for England and I can't think of a memorable performance in an England shirt in that time.. His form for city is unquestionable, but he hasn't made any impact for England so far. If a player continues to disappoint when playing, why would you continue to play him?
 
mintyred said:
Trent has played in midfield for Liverpool and he was a midfielder in the youth set-up, he's not completely foreign to the role. I think his problem is more of a lack of application than anything else. People go crazy when he switches positions when other players do it all the time. He can play there it's just when and how, and also what teams you do it against considering he's not necessarily needed there with our other options.

Foden plays out wide for City and does well all the time, but City plays completely differently than England. The problem against Serbia was that he didn't get the ball for large parts of the game and he was partnered with Trippier who's been shit this season. England needs orthodox wingers in southgates systems which means you either drop Foden or move Bellingham back to accommodate him.

Brave decisions need to be made, but I think people are blowing things out of proportion as usual. There are teams who've played worse but people love to jump on England.
Click to expand...

The reason why people jump on England is that we are objectively awful when you consider the strength of the squad - especially the front six. Dropping Bellingham back is an obvious move, he's an unbelievable talent and we don't need to (on paper) rely on him for goals. I genuinely thought Trent and Foden were total shite and would be keen to drop Foden for a game for Cole Palmer and bin off Trent entirely. Foden has shown nothing in an England shirt to warrant his starting place, at least in the immediate future. Very similar to how Rooney was anonymous for England.

Incredibly keen to see Eze perform for England, but Southgate is probably saving him to come on at 120 minutes for pens.
 
mintyred said:
Trent has played in midfield for Liverpool and he was a midfielder in the youth set-up, he's not completely foreign to the role. I think his problem is more of a lack of application than anything else. People go crazy when he switches positions when other players do it all the time. He can play there it's just when and how, and also what teams you do it against considering he's not necessarily needed there with our other options.

Foden plays out wide for City and does well all the time, but City plays completely differently than England. The problem against Serbia was that he didn't get the ball for large parts of the game and he was partnered with Trippier who's been shit this season. England needs orthodox wingers in southgates systems which means you either drop Foden or move Bellingham back to accommodate him.

Brave decisions need to be made, but I think people are blowing things out of proportion as usual. There are teams who've played worse but people love to jump on England.
Click to expand...

He's played like a handful of games and that's it. He's mainly played as a RB for Liverpool.
 
If Southgate picks the same team again we are sunk, maybe not in this game, but for future prospects in the tournament, certainly.
It won't surprise me in the slightest if he does though, he is way out of his depth.
 
ErikElevenHag said:
Is he being scapegoated? or are is performances for England being rightly questioned?

He's 35 caps deep for England and I can't think of a memorable performance in an England shirt in that time.. His form for city is unquestionable, but he hasn't made any impact for England so far. If a player continues to disappoint when playing, why would you continue to play him?
Click to expand...
Right but he's getting blamed like he's the anti-Christ when it's not really a big deal. He has had good performances for England but people don't remember them most likely because they aren't watching. He's not been amazing for England like he has been at City but this is England... they don't play to his strengths. He'll be the blame for everything that goes wrong this summer. His only real issue is not getting involved enough in the last game.
 
Spark said:
The reason why people jump on England is that we are objectively awful when you consider the strength of the squad - especially the front six. Dropping Bellingham back is an obvious move, he's an unbelievable talent and we don't need to (on paper) rely on him for goals. I genuinely thought Trent and Foden were total shite and would be keen to drop Foden for a game for Cole Palmer and bin off Trent entirely. Foden has shown nothing in an England shirt to warrant his starting place, at least in the immediate future. Very similar to how Rooney was anonymous for England.

Incredibly keen to see Eze perform for England, but Southgate is probably saving him to come on at 120 minutes for pens.
Click to expand...
You're making my point by exaggerating how bad England is, don't know why you took that route. England doesn't get judged extra critically because they're bad, they get judged because they're English and many people (including the English) don't like England. A lot of what I see is people being snide, then you have fans to who can't separate club and country and hate certain players because they play for certain clubs.

England is an ugly team to watch because we play Tory football under Southgate but that's his tactic. It actually works and if it wasn't for players bottling penalties then we might have a Euro trophy and a WC too.

Dropping Bellingham back is a Fifa tactic that I see a lot of people suggesting, but people don't realise that we will need to defend at times as well. That team would get walked through. I'd drop Foden for Palmer and play Trent at RB for his creativity. Of course that wouldn't work in a Southgate team so Walker would be the option for him. Rooney has had some very memorable moments for England I'm guessing you're a younger fan who only saw him in his latter years.

Sometimes I struggle to get hyped for England during tournaments but the weird hate the team gets makes me root for them harder. I don't want to see us fail just because there aren't any United players in the starting 11. There needs to be a study on how English people resent their national team, it's a bit of a reflection of the crabs in a bucket mentality people have here.
 
It's always over-complicated. Instead of playing Foden on the left and Trent centre mid, why not play Foden in the centre. Sure he's playing a bit deeper but is it really the end of the world? Would England be a bit more open? Yeah, possibly but they'd be a far better unit and more of a threat going forward. It should be tried at least once instead of playing players way out of position.
 
Fully expect the same team, some sort of boring win but topping the group. My only hope is if it is the same team then they either actually kick on or the subs impact so positively he's forced to change it for Game 3 onwards.

England can get far enough with the 11 from Game 1 but they will get found out when they come up against a better side.
 
Here's a good tactical analyses of England by the always very knowledgable Football Meta:



Key points: Most of England's attacking players like to receive the ball into their feet and dropped deep to do so but there were no players who like to make runs inbehind or move into the areas Foden and Bellingham they leave vacated when picking up the ball which lead to Kane being isolated and the wide players Trippier and Saka being outnumbered in possession. Since the opponent's defense line wasn't really occupied or pinned back by movement, the midfield was pressed and particularly the not so pressing-resistant Alexander-Arnold suffered because he couldn't really make his strengths count.

In essence, England were too static. It seems the team wasn't selected in a way that they "naturally fit together" and complement each other intuitively but there were also no tactical instructions to fix these issues.
 
Zehner said:
Here's a good tactical analyses of England by the always very knowledgable Football Meta:



Key points: Most of England's attacking players like to receive the ball into their feet and dropped deep to do so but there were no players who like to make runs inbehind or move into the areas Foden and Bellingham they leave vacated when picking up the ball which lead to Kane being isolated and the wide players Trippier and Saka being outnumbered in possession. Since the opponent's defense line wasn't really occupied or pinned back by movement, the midfield was pressed and particularly the not so pressing-resistant Alexander-Arnold suffered because he couldn't really make his strengths count.

In essence, England were too static. It seems the team wasn't selected in a way that they "naturally fit together" and complement each other intuitively but there were also no tactical instructions to fix these issues.
Click to expand...

That's why I'd start Gordon. Not the best player in the world but he's quick, he runs in behind and tracks back. Him and Saka would create more space for the likes of Bellingham and Foden (if he tried him central)
 
giorno said:
You could win with a rock in charge. International football is about players and luck. Managers come a distant 3rd. Guys like Mancini, Scaloni, Rehagel or Lippi(and in his case it was the environment that made him matter) are a rarity. More often than not it's the Scolari, Del Bosque, Low, Santos, Deschamps winning. The create a good environment, send your best out and get out of their way types
Click to expand...
Yes, but that doesn't seem to be what Southgate does, that's the problem why he could be an obstacle. In that sense I found it quite interesting to see how open Nagelsmann talks about how he adjusted to the job of managing a national team and how different it is to managing a club team, and therefore also to see how he lines up. The key point (and issue with England) seems to come down to this:

Zehner said:
In essence, England were too static. It seems the team wasn't selected in a way that they "naturally fit together" and complement each other intuitively but there were also no tactical instructions to fix these issues.
Click to expand...

You need to field players who fit each other well and can play a role that they are used to from their clubs, so that they can click with each other without much training time. And when you defined those roles and know that you have assembled the right players to fulfill the roles, you can just say "go outside and play football" as a manager.

And England doesn't look as if Southgate understands which roles his team should consist of and which players could fulfill it. Too many players getting in each others play, too few (or none at all) players to balance that.
 
The Purley King said:
If Southgate picks the same team again we are sunk, maybe not in this game, but for future prospects in the tournament, certainly.
It won't surprise me in the slightest if he does though, he is way out of his depth.
Click to expand...
To defend Southgate, he has changed things at times mid-tournament. If Trent doesn't play well today, there's a good chance he mixes things up. At the last Euros we changed formation vs Germany. In terms of personnel, he was quite fluid in the RW position, Foden started the first 2 games of the Euros and didn't start again. Saka took his spot in the final game, played well and ended up starting the German (R16) and Denmark (QF) games. In what was a bit of a surprise, Sancho started RW vs Ukraine (QF) and Sterling started on the right in the final vs Italy.

We didn't go as far in the WC, but ignoring the Sterling situation, Mount started the first two games of the tournament, didn't impress and for the rest of the tournament it was a midfield three of Rice, Bellingham and Henderson.
 
Did the England "band" not feck off at one point? 20 years of Faraging over any and every attempt at getting an atmosphere going as they relentlessly plough through their set list.

"Shhh lads with your spontaneous chantng, we're at 'Great Escape v24'
 
stefan92 said:
Yes, but that doesn't seem to be what Southgate does, that's the problem why he could be an obstacle. In that sense I found it quite interesting to see how open Nagelsmann talks about how he adjusted to the job of managing a national team and how different it is to managing a club team, and therefore also to see how he lines up. The key point (and issue with England) seems to come down to this:



You need to field players who fit each other well and can play a role that they are used to from their clubs, so that they can click with each other without much training time. And when you defined those roles and know that you have assembled the right players to fulfill the roles, you can just say "go outside and play football" as a manager.

And England doesn't look as if Southgate understands which roles his team should consist of and which players could fulfill it. Too many players getting in each others play, too few (or none at all) players to balance that.
Click to expand...
I think Shouthgate did good in the previous tournaments, not fantastic by any means but as I said, you don't need fantastic - england were ultimately unmade by individual mistakes and unlucky bounces -

This one has just began so I reserve judgement until the end. But as I said, I don't get why he would repeat lineup now. The time for experiments is ending, rather than insist on something that didn't work, why not explore your other options
 
I am surprised they are going with the exact same lineup.

Foden has struggled in the setup England uses …always (one of my favorite players, but he would fit in better with Spain)

Is Saka injured? He looked like someone not at 100.

On TV they are talking about it being too late to experiment with Bellinghams position… but did he play a 10/second striker role prior to Madrid? I remembered him as a complete box to box guy

And TAA is not a midfielder.

If even Alexei Llalas can see it looks like England are trying to force things to find ways to get certain players on the field … you know it’s obvious.

I would love to see Watkins brought on earlier if Kane is still sluggish and “off” a bit.
 
Southgate is a moron. Make no mistake - when we win, it's despite the dickhead.
 
I think part of the reason for the unchanged side is it's not a huge challenge. We'll likely win even if we don't play our best players. That said, I can't wait to see Maino and Palmer in this 11 with Bellingham and Kane.
 
giorno said:
You could win with a rock in charge. International football is about players and luck. Managers come a distant 3rd. Guys like Mancini, Scaloni, Rehagel or Lippi(and in his case it was the environment that made him matter) are a rarity. More often than not it's the Scolari, Del Bosque, Low, Santos, Deschamps winning. The create a good environment, send your best out and get out of their way types

Repeating the team in game 2 does seem stupid though. These are the games to experiment but there's only 3 of them, so not a lot of time to try stuff
Click to expand...
I agree that luck and the players themselves are more important in international football compared to club, but the manager is still very important. Just because you don't need to be the best doesn’t mean you can have anyone in charge. We have a manager that makes decisions that cause self-inflicted wounds every tournament, and no amount of luck and quality players can make up for that.

There's been two sides to Southgate during his tenure. Let's say the first third was excellent. He finally united the country, made the England squad harmonious, and overperformed at the 2018 with an average squad.

The other two thirds of his tenure after that have been poor. He showed he could get an average squad to overperform, but once he got a quality a squad, he was out of his depth. It's nothing new. We've all seen managers like that. Problem is, unsurprisingly, we then give him another two tournaments to waste when it was obvious his time was up in 2021.

This tournament now is going exactly how the majority of us expected. His decisions are negatively impacting us again. We're just fortunate that we're in a relatively easy group, so we will still qualify for the knockouts, but after that we all know what happens.
 
I'm finding the inclusion of TAA in the squad increasingly baffling with each game (even more baffling that he's starting them). Literally not good enough to play in his preferred position of right-back, so rather than being dropped, he's being shoehorned into the midfield based on the false notion that he's some sort of creative dynamo. A reputation he seems to have developed from a single corner and a few good seasons spamming crosses in for Liverpool from, err... right-back.
 
I think you greatly exagerate his faults in the previous tournaments but don't care to get into this again

That said this might be one tournament too many actually

Or maybe you just lack fitness. That would be way worse than whatever screw ups Southgate might make(or you might imagine him make)
 
Why is Bowen even in the squad. He's good for West Ham but don't remember him ever doing anything of note in an England shirt.
 
giorno said:
I think you greatly exagerate his faults in the previous tournaments but don't care to get into this again

That said this might be one tournament too many actually

Or maybe you just lack fitness. That would be way worse than whatever screw ups Southgate might make(or you might imagine him make)
Click to expand...

The last World Cup was one tournament too many. It was clear after the France game (if it wasn't already) that he just doesn't have it.
 
Alex99 said:
The last World Cup was one tournament too many. It was clear after the France game (if it wasn't already) that he just doesn't have it.
Click to expand...
The game in which you outplayed France and Kane missed a penalty to send it to extra time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.