Respect to him for not blaming the ref. As I said, class guy. Just wish he was a better coach.
Is Gareth Southgate a shiite England manager?
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
Because to some people having criticisms of the coach is not supporting the nation. There are similarities of these people to the Ole supporters on here. Blind loyalty is more detrimental to the progression of the team than those who choose to challenge the current systems.Your posts would be exactly how I look at it.
Baffled why everyone trying to big him up. He keeps doing the bare minimum, nothing more than what you would hope.
Not one to big up Simon Jordan but he been spot on, beat who they are supposed too, and come massively short the other way.
Sterling sub was bonkers and sums him up.
Love to see it to be fair
I was a Ole man, he was superior to Southgate.......he also deserved to get sacked at the end of it all.......Im also not feeling that with the southgate in ladz who seem to be defending the performance at the end and the let's keep him to the euros...........so not really a fair comparison
That’s it, really (from the Guardian online): “I think whenever I’ve finished these tournaments I’ve needed time to make correct decisions because emotionally you go through so many different feelings and the energy that it takes through these tournaments is enormous,” Southgate said.“I want to make the right decision, whenever that is, for the team, for England, for the FA, and I’ve got to be sure whatever the decision I take is the right one. I think it’s right to take a bit of time to do that because I know in the past how my feelings have fluctuated in the immediate aftermath of tournaments.”
What? Are you fcuking insane?
He’s got a lot right but you can’t forget took entire media questioning why foden wasn’t starting to get him in over mount.
Still, the players like him and want to play for him and that can’t be underestimated. Yet, the favouritism and bad substitutions leave a lot of question marks over his head.
Was a lot of stoppages at the end but his subs basically disrupted any attacking fluidity. Saka was having gsme of his life out there and he replaced him with badly out of form Sterling. Was time to give the French more problems not less.
it is a lot like Ole. Almost good enough but at the end of the day that isn’t good enough.
I thought they both had a solid tourney?
Not sure how that's an insane opinion.
This is key. An English mate of mine sent me this earlier today:
Seems a bit off in my opinion. Pickford over Lloris, Foden over Dembele, Rice over Rabiot. Not saying they would all favour the French, but this seems rather one-sided and perhaps speaks to an overestimation of the English side. Maybe you would get a similar result when asking any set of national team fans, but I found it interesting.
That's normal, there's a video of Stuart Pearce and Ally Mccoist doing their combined 11s and Pearce had 3 French players and Mccoist had 4.This is key. An English mate of mine sent me this earlier today:
Seems a bit off in my opinion. Pickford over Lloris, Foden over Dembele, Rice over Rabiot. Not saying they would all favour the French, but this seems rather one-sided and perhaps speaks to an overestimation of the English side. Maybe you would get a similar result when asking any set of national team fans, but I found it interesting.
That's actually crazy to think about. I'm of the opposite opinion, I reckon only Walker, Kane and Bellingham would start in a combined 11. (Bear in mind France have 4-5 key players out).
EDIT: Here's the video. Idk how most pundits and fans can put a combined 11 of majority England players and then afterwards say we were underdogs but played well....
It's the exact same delusion of Arsenal fans on AFTV that always have majority Arsenal players in their 11 and then when they lose they say they were underdogs anyway...
Last edited:
This is key. An English mate of mine sent me this earlier today:
Seems a bit off in my opinion. Pickford over Lloris, Foden over Dembele, Rice over Rabiot. Not saying they would all favour the French, but this seems rather one-sided and perhaps speaks to an overestimation of the English side. Maybe you would get a similar result when asking any set of national team fans, but I found it interesting.
Hernandez over Shaw is the oddest one
My only issue with him going is who replaces him?
Howe could be ideal in a few years, but no chance of him leaving Newcastle now.
Never too keen on a foreign coach for the national side, but feel like that's the route we'd have to go down if Southgate decided to move on as there's no chance he gets sacked.
Howe could be ideal in a few years, but no chance of him leaving Newcastle now.
Never too keen on a foreign coach for the national side, but feel like that's the route we'd have to go down if Southgate decided to move on as there's no chance he gets sacked.
Time to change things up. He has proven he bottles it when we come against decent opponents. Thank you for bringing us this far but I do feel it’s because of the players you have rather than anything you have done tactically. I respect the fact you have brought the players together though.
Best way to put it, he's made us genuine contenders. But with the players we have, we should be genuine winners at some point.
I have actually somewhat seen sense in some of the criticisms of Southgate's prior losses in international tournaments. Against both Croatia and Italy, I think we were too passive after going ahead and it cost us.
Tonight I really don't know if I was watching the same game as some of you, though. At no point did it look like England were playing for a draw in this game. At 1-0 down, we played very well in search of the equaliser. Once we had equalised, the game became more even because France no longer had a lead to protect; it genuinely looked like it could go either way. We unfortunately got sloppy and conceded with very little time to go, and then one of the substitutes Southgate is getting panned for making almost immediately won us a penalty which Kane missed. All of this, by the way, against one of the best teams in international football.
I'm honestly seeing no coherent suggestions as to what Southgate should've done differently tonight. Most of it is just "It's a disgrace Rashford wasn't on sooner", but I'd really like to know what Rashford actually did in the 15 minutes or so that he was on which made you think he'd have changed the game had he been brought on sooner? I'm not even trying to knock the lad; he's in fine form but our attack was looking lively enough that it wasn't evident that any changes needed to be made.
As I say, I think in the past there have been legitimate criticisms of Southgate's approach to big knockout games. Tonight I don't think there have been many. We lost a very tightly fought game to one of the best sides in the tournament, conceding to a 25 yard belter which should've been chalked off for a foul and missing a penalty. It hardly seems to me like a massive inquest is necessary off the back of that.
Tonight I really don't know if I was watching the same game as some of you, though. At no point did it look like England were playing for a draw in this game. At 1-0 down, we played very well in search of the equaliser. Once we had equalised, the game became more even because France no longer had a lead to protect; it genuinely looked like it could go either way. We unfortunately got sloppy and conceded with very little time to go, and then one of the substitutes Southgate is getting panned for making almost immediately won us a penalty which Kane missed. All of this, by the way, against one of the best teams in international football.
I'm honestly seeing no coherent suggestions as to what Southgate should've done differently tonight. Most of it is just "It's a disgrace Rashford wasn't on sooner", but I'd really like to know what Rashford actually did in the 15 minutes or so that he was on which made you think he'd have changed the game had he been brought on sooner? I'm not even trying to knock the lad; he's in fine form but our attack was looking lively enough that it wasn't evident that any changes needed to be made.
As I say, I think in the past there have been legitimate criticisms of Southgate's approach to big knockout games. Tonight I don't think there have been many. We lost a very tightly fought game to one of the best sides in the tournament, conceding to a 25 yard belter which should've been chalked off for a foul and missing a penalty. It hardly seems to me like a massive inquest is necessary off the back of that.
Great post, he was rightly criticsed in the last 2 eliminations for being passive, but tonight seemed noticeably more attacking? Was no shame in tonight.
Is this some catch-22 argument?
The whole argument was that he should have been brought into the game when there was more opportunity for open play (when France was not leading).
Substitutions are can be a hindrance if they're not well timed.
I actually think he’s a good coach, England played good football against France. But he’s a crap match day manager. Doesn’t make those game changing starting 11 that surprises people and wins matches, doesn’t make genius in match tactical changes or subs.
Worse is the “he’s finished SF, Final,QF don’t you dare criticise him attitude” this is the best England squad in decades, maybe ever on a technical level.
Taking off Sakha was a strange sub
With Southgate`s England record over the past few years, he cannot be called `shit`. He certainly has done the job of getting the team together as a comfortable, unified group and has had respectable results without being able to deliver for real. He isn`t great tactically.
However, the fact that England cannot win silverware in international tournaments under him is part of the realities since 1966. Teams with less money have captured the trophies and won the World Cup. There`s a lot of truth to the view that while the English league is right up there for entertainment, it prioritises different skills to those that win international tournaments.
International teams built on far less money and affluence for the players win those trophies. Some years ago while George Best was alive and writing for the United mag, he sometimes made observations about teams in the Premier League and national team lacking English players `that can turn a game`. Perhaps that is what it`s really about. And when we do have skilled visionaries such as Paul Scholes, we don`t have the players around him to take advantage of his play-making.
However, the fact that England cannot win silverware in international tournaments under him is part of the realities since 1966. Teams with less money have captured the trophies and won the World Cup. There`s a lot of truth to the view that while the English league is right up there for entertainment, it prioritises different skills to those that win international tournaments.
International teams built on far less money and affluence for the players win those trophies. Some years ago while George Best was alive and writing for the United mag, he sometimes made observations about teams in the Premier League and national team lacking English players `that can turn a game`. Perhaps that is what it`s really about. And when we do have skilled visionaries such as Paul Scholes, we don`t have the players around him to take advantage of his play-making.
I covered that when I said "our attack was looking lively enough that it wasn't evident any change needed to be made".
I guess the most you could say was that Foden wasn't doing bucketloads on the left, but he was still causing enough problems when he did get the ball that it was entirely justified leaving him on the field in my view. If you're not subbing one of Foden or Saka for Rashford then you're subbing one of the midfielders, and then you lose control of the midfield which just seems silly when you've just scored and are starting to exert some level of control over the game.
I just think this is a classic case of outcome bias. We lost a tight game which could very easily have gone either way, and because we lost it's really obvious that Southgate should've done XYZ differently. My view is that Southgate made the subs pretty much at the point you'd expect him to; we just went behind again at a very unfortunate point when there wasn't much time for them to impact the game. Even then, one of his substitutes was responsible for winning our second penalty.
To be honest, I've no real problem with people like yourself who seem to be making an entirely reasonable case that substitutes could've been made earlier. What irks me is the people who are going kneejerk "Southgate is a moron because he didn't make the substitutes earlier", as I think this is an argument entirely devoid of nuance.
No shame in the loss. That was as good as I've seen England play against a tournament favorite and reigning champion in my lifetime.
Southgate has done good things for England. Has he reached his celling, perhaps. Should England go with a new manager? Given the new young talent coming up, absolutely.
Southgate has done good things for England. Has he reached his celling, perhaps. Should England go with a new manager? Given the new young talent coming up, absolutely.
The English Ole. England should have hired the right manager to take them to the next level after the Euros. It’s still not too late.
Embarrassing tweet.
I’m utterly perplexed by the take that England was the better side. Sure, Saka was lively and posed plenty of troubles to the French defense, yet England created no genuine chance aside from the Maguire header, and at a push, the freekick at the end, whereas the French scored two goals from open play, had Giroud missed a great chance just before his header and another one where Rabiot volleyed tamely at Pickford. They conceded two penalties from a mistimed challenge and some daft thinking by Hernandez (Mount was getting nowhere near threatening with that ball). If being lucky that your opponent shits the bed at the back is being better, then sure, England was better, but other than that the French deservedly went through.
If Kane scored and England won on penalties does that make him a better manager I don't think it does ergo this result doesn't actually change all that much either way, same as I don't think it's an endorsement of Deschamps either even though he won and he might win his x2 WC.
England xg 2.41 France xg 1.01
England xg 2.41 France xg 1.01
If the Rabiot shot counts as an opportunity then so must the Kane and Bellingham efforts from a similar range, both of which were better chances than the Tchouameni goal. And then you've also got the Kane chance in the first half which brought probably the best save of the game from Lloris. And then you weirdly dismiss set pieces as if they don't count for some reason when the reality is they're every bit as important as the rest of the game and there were 3 clear penalties in the game, 2 given so 2 chances, the Rashford & Shaw free kicks and obviously the two Maguire headers in the second half. You've picked a weird point to focus on in chances created if you want to say France deserved the win.
He has exceeded all expectations surely?
100% this and all this
agree with everything here pal
No fault imo lays at Southgates feet from last nights result
Why did he take Saka off for Mount?? Doesn’t matter as he was Immediately vindicated as Mount won a penalty practically straight away, that substitution aided us an immediate goal scoring opportunity to level it, the penalty was missed, hardly Southgates fault
Nor was it Southgates fault their first goal clearly shouldn’t have stood not the fact we should have had an earlier penalty with Kane
Had Kane score that pen, I believe we’d have been favourites
He has done well in these last few tournaments but just don't think he can take us that final step. Problem is I just don't know who is the right person to replace him.
if English fans are not so fixated on English manager only, there are quite a few foreign options.
How about Tuchel ? surely he is better than Southgate on the tactical level ?
Has this coward resigned yet?
I can't believe he didn't do it in the presser.
fecking knows if he leaves he will likely never manage this calibre of player again.
I can't believe he didn't do it in the presser.
fecking knows if he leaves he will likely never manage this calibre of player again.
Playing Foden on the left instead of Rashford and not playing Foden centrally just leads to tougher games.
Foden is only a winger to him because that’s where he has only played this season? Well he hasn’t played LW either.
Foden is only a winger to him because that’s where he has only played this season? Well he hasn’t played LW either.
Oh puleease. England players are so good they would be contenders with any coach… honestly. I still believe leaving Rashford on the bench and Sancho out of the team is nuts… as much as I selfishly prefer Sancho be left out.
This is what ruined it.
Rashford and Kane has the ability to be the English Son & Kane - but he hardly played it and played a CAM like Foden instead.
I'm guessing it's a joke? If not then that's some cult of personality level bollocks
So tired of this coward.
Most of us have been saying it for years now. Its just become tiring.
fecking wasted generation.
Agree with this. Barring a tentative start, England played positive football, when many of us probably expected Southgate to set up more negatively.
He's progressed in the role in that sense. Not sure either way on the subs- I'd have left Saka on and my heart sank a bit when Mount came on, given how ineffectual he's looked.
Maybe Southgate can't take us to the next level (only one England manager has ever), maybe the squad just isn't good enough (man for man France had a better squad, even if England edged it imo on the night).
No idea who would take over from him though.