Is Gareth Southgate a shiite England manager?

It comes down to one thing really. Do you believe this is a golden generation of English talent, or not?

Some people I speak to think we should be walking these tournaments, and the squad is being misused. Others, and I am in this camp, believe this is a slightly overrated and certainly flawed group that Southgate has available, so in that context a semi and a final is not too shabby.

Ironically, when he sets the team out how many seem to want him to, what usually follows is a poor performance
 
He’s got a lot of similarities with Ole in that he doesn’t trust anyone outside his preferred players, he likes sitting back and plays extremely boring football (or maybe is unable to coach attacking football other than quick counters), recent form doesn’t matter when selecting players etc etc, so it’s a no from me.
 
I think if we evaluate the actual starting XI and squad he has probably done well. We over-hype our players to obscene levels in this country - I don't think our centre backs are too special and nor is our midfield either apart from a couple of players. We never thought we would reach the semi and then the final of the WC and Euros, so it's hard to say he has been bad, even if the style of play is a tough watch at times.

I'm not holding out too much hope for the upcoming WC. We'll likely get out the group and get beaten by the first big team we face.
 
He's a completely underwhelming manager who has achieved as much as could be expected with this squad. Unless anyone actually believes England has the best group of players in Europe/ the world.
 
Bilbo said:
It comes down to one thing really. Do you believe this is a golden generation of English talent, or not?

Some people I speak to think we should be walking these tournaments, and the squad is being misused. Others, and I am in this camp, believe this is a slightly overrated and certainly flawed group that Southgate has available, so in that context a semi and a final is not too shabby.

Ironically, when he sets the team out how many seem to want him to, what usually follows is a poor performance
Click to expand...
There is a middle ground between a golden generation and a flawed group of players though. A manager who would get a team consisting of Rice, Bellingham, Foden, Kane, Saka and Rashford/Grealish/Sancho/Mount/other as their front six to play as a cohesive unit and slightly punch above their weight would have no trouble progressing deep into any tournament and playing very good football., despite the team on paper not necessarily being a “golden generation”.
 
Anustart89 said:
There is a middle ground between a golden generation and a flawed group of players though. A manager who would get a team consisting of Rice, Bellingham, Foden, Kane, Saka and Rashford/Grealish/Sancho/Mount/other as their front six to play as a cohesive unit and slightly punch above their weight would have no trouble progressing deep into any tournament and playing very good football., despite the team on paper not necessarily being a “golden generation”.
Click to expand...

Isn't that pretty much what Southgate has achieved though? I think we would all agree that our football isn't especially eye catching, but then for me Int'l football isn't about great football. The conditions are not the same as club where money can solve problems. Int'l football is solely about winning tournaments, which has always automatically elevated teams to greatness regardless of the circumstances.

I always thought the major, and undervalued, achievement from Southgate early on was to remove the feeling of fear and pressure that England have always carried into tournaments.
 
England's Ole. When you look purely at the results, he is not doing that badly to warrant a sacking etc. When you watch games though it makes you wonder what are they doing in training and there is this feeling they can play much better with the group of players they have. Park the bus and hope for the best tactics suit national teams much more so I predict he will stay for quite some time.
 
Can you change sh1!t to shite in the title for our Celtic brothers please.
 
Was good at the start until he lost his bottle. The Croatia loss really damaged him.
 
Anustart89 said:
He’s got a lot of similarities with Ole in that he doesn’t trust anyone outside his preferred players, he likes sitting back and plays extremely boring football (or maybe is unable to coach attacking football other than quick counters), recent form doesn’t matter when selecting players etc etc, so it’s a no from me.
Click to expand...

Southgate and Ole have a lot in common. Been saying it since Ole was hired full time.
 
do.ob said:
I'm sorry, but: :lol:

Rehagel is an all-time great. He won the league twice with Bremen, once with newly-promoted Kaiserslautern, he won the domestic cup three times and the cup winners cup once too. He also had his best time some 20 to 30 years ago, when winning was the only thing that counted and few people bothered about football philosophies.

And you're trying to compare him to Gareth Southgoat? Trying to compare Greece to England? Are you trying to argue that the English squad faces the same limitations as Rehagel's Greece?
Click to expand...
No, no, and no. I’m saying no one views that Greece team as anything but an anomaly, and they actually won something, while Southgate has won nothing with better players and people think he’s a good manager.
 
Bilbo said:
Isn't that pretty much what Southgate has achieved though? I think we would all agree that our football isn't especially eye catching, but then for me Int'l football isn't about great football. The conditions are not the same as club where money can solve problems. Int'l football is solely about winning tournaments, which has always automatically elevated teams to greatness regardless of the circumstances.

I always thought the major, and undervalued, achievement from Southgate early on was to remove the feeling of fear and pressure that England have always carried into tournaments.
Click to expand...
My point was that going deep and playing good football don’t have to be mutually exclusive, not to mention that good football is more likely to consistently take you further in tournaments without having to Greece your way through tournaments and relying on getting easy draws.

It’s the same as with Ole for me. It’s very obvious that England aren’t going to be a very good side under Southgate no matter which players are at his disposal so the question is if you accept being decent and nothing more or if you take a chance on getting someone who can actually make you good? It’s the same situation we were in for Ole’s last year (and especially since the EL final loss) before the implosion at the beginning of last season which made a change necessary. But many of us on here were arguing long before that that we were going nowhere under Ole.
 
Hasn't he done better than most results wise? Not entirely clear on English national team history.
 
To line up like he did against Italy was obscene considering how defensive they were and how little of an attack they had. To let them come at England was stupid.

reminds me of what people say of Pep over thinking a big game, I imagine Southgate figured they were so defensive that hitting on the counter was better.

Three cbs, two wingbacks and two dms? Lost them the game. Graham Potter would have won the World Cup with the current lot.

that being said, at least you can’t say he did poor in the transfer market.
 
Defensive, conversative, relies on moments or set pieces. Yeah i don't think he's a great football manager but he's gotten good results (from an England NT perspective) playing that way so the debate is definitely worthy. This is a results driven business after all.
 
Anustart89 said:
My point was that going deep and playing good football don’t have to be mutually exclusive, not to mention that good football is more likely to consistently take you further in tournaments without having to Greece your way through tournaments and relying on getting easy draws.
Click to expand...

Your point above goes without saying really, but who we would actually be able to land as a coach, and whether they'd have enough training ground time to get their ideas in place, I'm skeptical about.

We've had bigger name coaches with far better CVs before, and some of those had IMO a better squad available to them, and results have been worse - or perhaps not worse but following a similar theme of losing to the first top team we faced in a tournament.

For me the Southgate formula of making us hard to beat and relying on individuals to win us matches is probably the same one that many would follow, and gives us the best chance of going deep in competitions.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Hasn't he done better than most results wise? Not entirely clear on English national team history.
Click to expand...
Results-wise he's probably the 2nd best England manager of all time, with a squad that literally nobody regards as one of the WC favourites (acc the other thread). If he gets to another final with this bunch he'll still get shiite from all angles.

I do find him a dull, uninspiring manager but I'm not in the 'I wish we'd failed more spectacularly' group.
 
Anustart89 said:
My point was that going deep and playing good football don’t have to be mutually exclusive, not to mention that good football is more likely to consistently take you further in tournaments without having to Greece your way through tournaments and relying on getting easy draws.

It’s the same as with Ole for me. It’s very obvious that England aren’t going to be a very good side under Southgate no matter which players are at his disposal so the question is if you accept being decent and nothing more or if you take a chance on getting someone who can actually make you good? It’s the same situation we were in for Ole’s last year (and especially since the EL final loss) before the implosion at the beginning of last season which made a change necessary. But many of us on here were arguing long before that that we were going nowhere under Ole.
Click to expand...

Graelish-Kane-Saka
Foden
Rice- Bellingham

Shaw-Stones-Tomori, White maybe?)- James

you sure that’s not a very strong side?
 
He may be a good people people manager but shit tactically. Even his people skills seem overstated as he just picks the same people now no matter what

A proper manager (one who actually has a tactic other than defend and lump it to Kane/hope our wingers do something) will do much better with this potential squad. Think England are blowing another decent generation and it's easier for this generation to win than it was for the the previous one
 
It's weird. I don't think he's shite. I also don't think he's making the best use out of the talent we do have in the squad. That being said, I also don't think the squad as a whole is as good as some people say. The forwards we have are very good, but we're lacking in midfield. The fullbacks are top class, but CB is also lacking. The spine of the team is an issue, and probably one major reason why even with a better manager, I still think we would struggle against the best teams.

We had a much better squad during the late 90's to late 00's. Those squads ended up winning nothing. Didn't even get close to a final. With superior managers, too. It feels wrong to complain after England got to a final for the first time in 50 years. It does seem like the level at international level is lower now than it was 10 years ago. We also had a great draw in Euro 2020. We played most of our games at Wembley. I don't think England will ever get a better/easier chance to win a trophy than that.

I don't think we will do that well at the World Cup. The performances and results during our Nation League games have been dreadful.
 
TheRedHearted said:
Graelish-Kane-Saka
Foden
Rice- Bellingham

Shaw-Stones-Tomori, White maybe?)- James

you sure that’s not a very strong side?
Click to expand...
You probably misunderstood me. I think that is potentially a very, very good football team despite not being labelled a “golden generation” by people. Which is why I think that Southgate is a rubbish manager for having those players and opting to play shit on a stick football (or failing to implement anything else than that).
 
To state the obvious, Southgate has achieved results that no other England manager has matched in the history of English football, and were two penalty kicks removed from winning England's first major international title since 1966. Given that, you'd think it would be absurd to have a discussion about whether he's "a shiite manager". Still, here we are. Ludicrous.
 
justsomebloke said:
To state the obvious, Southgate has achieved results that no other England manager has matched in the history of English football, and were two penalty kicks removed from winning England's first major international title since 1966. Given that, you'd think it would be absurd to have a discussion about whether he's "a shiite manager". Still, here we are. Ludicrous.
Click to expand...
I think it's ludicrous that people point to this without considering the opponents they had on the way. To outright ignore the ridiculous amount of luck he had in the quality of teams faced is hilarious, especially when you consider one of the tournaments was on his home turf.
 
Ole's level.

Ole losing the final to the Spanish team and Southgate losing to Italy exactly the same way really makes me siiiiiiiiiiiiick.
 
Yes and no? Its a results business and he’s had decent ones. However I do think with the talent he has he could be far braver with his tactics/team selection.
 
VP89 said:
I think it's ludicrous that people point to this without considering the opponents they had on the way. To outright ignore the ridiculous amount of luck he had in the quality of teams faced is hilarious, especially when you consider one of the tournaments was on his home turf.
Click to expand...

Luck Schmuck. England didn't fail to reach final 4 in consecutive tournaments through its entire football history because of the luck of the draw and not playing at home.
 
Hard to tell although he does appear to have his favourites. I just wish he’d be a bit braver with his tactics, and please drop that a god awful 3-5-2 formation, the defenders we have are too vulnerable.
 
I don't rate Southgate, but @Dion is spitting facts in here. It's not always a binary good or bad. He's a pretty average manager, but he's done an objectively decent job with this England team and is much better than other managers in my lifetime. This doesn't mean we shouldn't change the manager, but it does mean he deserves respect for what he's done. It was the same black/white debate with Ole out/in debate that made this forum so tedious.
 
justsomebloke said:
Luck Schmuck. England didn't fail to reach final 4 in consecutive tournaments through its entire football history because of the luck of the draw and not playing at home.
Click to expand...
"luck schmuck" is an excellent rebuttle.

Southgate scraping Colombia on pens, bundling over Sweden, needing ET to get over Denmark on his own turf, throwing away a 1-0 lead in a WC Semi with 15 mins to go with the squad at his disposal is nothing less than shite in my books.
 
RopersReturn said:
Hard to tell although he does appear to have his favourites. I just wish he’d be a bit braver with his tactics, and please drop that a god awful 3-5-2 formation, the defenders we have are too vulnerable.
Click to expand...
Huh? The 3 at the back is there precisely for the reason he doesn't trust any two individual centre backs. That's my reading of it anyway. I don't know if it's the right thing for the whole team but it's not clear to me it's the main problem defensively, I think that comes down to individual quality which is sorely lacking.
 
weizxx said:
Ole's level.

Ole losing the final to the Spanish team and Southgate losing to Italy exactly the same way really makes me siiiiiiiiiiiiick.
Click to expand...

....Seriously? Did you really think that through, on any level?

If Ole had achieved consecutive European finishes that no United manager had ever achieved before him, or gone to the CL semi-finals one season and then lost the CL final on penalties the following year, then you could have made that comparison.

TrustInJanuzaj said:
I don't rate Southgate, but @Dion is spitting facts in here. It's not always a binary good or bad. He's a pretty average manager, but he's done an objectively decent job with this England team and is much better than other managers in my lifetime. This doesn't mean we shouldn't change the manager, but it does mean he deserves respect for what he's done. It was the same black/white debate with Ole out/in debate that made this forum so tedious.
Click to expand...

"objectively decent"? Objectively, if by that you mean results, he has outperformed every England manager in history save one. That's more than "decent". Unless you think of it as an aberration from nature whenever England doesn't win, in which case every England manager (save one) has been shite.

But you raise an important point here: "Southgate is a shite manager" and "Southgate should be replaced" is not the same issue. It is hard to feel very confident about England's prospects in this tournament, given how they've been performing for a while now. And it does not look like Southgate has the solution. Which doesn't take away previous achievements (which he would not have pulled off had he been a shite manager, and so on). It probably doesn't help matters either that the team has to live in a world where consecutive top 4 finishes principally makes their supporters even angrier than usual, because it's nothing really and they shouldn't play so boring and anyone could have done that with that sort of draw and playing at home don't you know. It is mental.
 
VP89 said:
"luck schmuck" is an excellent rebuttle.

Southgate scraping Colombia on pens, bundling over Sweden, needing ET to get over Denmark on his own turf, throwing away a 1-0 lead in a WC Semi with 15 mins to go with the squad at his disposal is nothing less than shite in my books.
Click to expand...

That's "rebuttal". And it's as good as your argument deserves.

But okay. Says more about you than it does about Southgate though.
 
justsomebloke said:
That's "rebuttal". And it's as good as your argument deserves.

But okay. Says more about you than it does about Southgate though.
Click to expand...
I listed the teams he bundled over and showed how is squad was capable of better performances.
Your counter was evident you have no legs to stand on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.