My thoughts exactly.
Is Gareth Southgate a shiite England manager?
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
My thoughts exactly.
I thought any of the creative #10s like Grealish, Foden or even Maddison behind Kane and another wide player on the left would have troubled France a lot more.
If you sack him, you’ll never make another major final in your lifetimes.
All academic because we aren't going to sack him. If he leaves, it's because he walks away.
2012 was even worse.
Joe Hart, Robert Green, John Ruddy. Defenders - Leighton Baines, Gary Cahill, Ashley Cole, Glen Johnson, Phil Jones, Joleon Lescott, John Terry. Midfielders - Gareth Barry, Stewart Downing, Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard, James Milner, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Scott Parker, Theo Walcott, Ashley Young.
Saw this yesterday V France Euro 2012 - rubbish team.
Hart
Johnson Terry Lescott Cole
Milner Gerrard Parker Ox
Young
Welbeck
Johnson Terry Lescott Cole
Milner Gerrard Parker Ox
Young
Welbeck
England wont win anything with Southgate.
Only reason England have gone far is beause of the quality of players not tactics from Southgate in my opinion.
Only reason England have gone far is beause of the quality of players not tactics from Southgate in my opinion.
Well we didn’t have much of a midfield when they scored there first goal… no one closed him down and just let him have all the space in the world.
You get knocked out because your captain missed a penalty and one of your CBS let giroud score a winner, in a match you were superior in, in which you sub's were actually effective but supposedly its your tactics at fault. This nonsense thinking is exactly why a number of England fans don't deserve success.
The experienced leader that has been found lacking is Southgate. He played pretty much the same team and setup againt Wales/Iran as he did against France.
He's too limited to win a tournament.
He's done a good job. National team football is hardly the field for revolutionary and intricate tactics. And when you have to play four "win or lose everything" matches to win a major tournament, i can only laugh at the notion that he - or anyone else, for that matter - should play like 1970 Brazil.
But he wasn't brave enough against Croatia and Italy: That's the style they play, they almost always give you the impression that they're there for the taking. It's an illusion. They're begging you to give them space to exploit. See what happened the one time Brazil were caught with their defensive line high, while 1-0 up, against Croatia the other day?
But he hasn't beaten the "big boys": There's truth to that. But it shouldn't be used as an argument to undermine England's wins in the knockouts. Denmark was a bloody good team with players on a mission. Colombia absolutely destroyed Argentina in the CA and they were unlucky the game went to penalties. Knockouts are weird games where the favourites have so much to lose and so much pressure to deal with.
But he constantly picks the same players and he has his favourites: That's the best thing he's done. These are the types of tournaments - with the players getting locked up in a hotel/training ground for a month and playing " a final" every 3-4 days - where togetherness, familiarity and a good dressing room is of the utmost importance. Argentina, Croatia and Morroco are prime examples of how good atmosphere and comaraderie can turn into belief. The one thing Deschamps fixed from the Euros last year was the French dressing room that looked like a version of Big Brother.
But he doesn't use his 5 changes to affect the course of the game: Did Deschamps? He made only one change and that when he was winning. Why change things when the main plan is paying dividends? How did it work out for Santos a few hours back? How did it work for Tite, who fecked up his entire frontline? Probably made things more complicated for both teams. Being able to change half of your outfield players is still a very fresh and absolutely MASSIVE change in the game of football. Even when it was introduced in the PL, the two great team-builders of our era rarely used it (and the Caf was laughing). It proposes an unfamiliar level of tactical intervention that is still under assessment, not from Gareth freaking Southgate, but from the best managers and their staffs.
He's done mistakes, he's made bad decisions and he had occasionally wet the bed, too. But the foundations, the basic principals and requirements around which a solid NT is built are there. There's the issue of fatigue, after so many years. It happens to everyone. There are only so many times you can convince your players and yourself to give it one more try. Maybe he'll stay and things will go south. Maybe another manager will finally win a tournament with a few crucial tweaks of his own here and there. But you are not in point zero to demand his head with such ease. Make the bad choice and you can easily go backwards.
As a neutral, i thought England were very good yesterday. It was a quality game, probably the best the European continent has to offer nowadays. And for the last couple of years, this is England's level. No trophy, i know, but no need for anger and self-flagellation. It's very tough to go all the way in these tournaments and it needs a certain amount of luck that you so desperately need. But you can't control that. All you can do is be in the whereabouts. And England have done that under Southgate.
Some people will scoff, but i think it was the best you've looked in WC knockouts since 1990. Granted, your good performances have been rather few since then, but it was a proper European derby last night.
But he wasn't brave enough against Croatia and Italy: That's the style they play, they almost always give you the impression that they're there for the taking. It's an illusion. They're begging you to give them space to exploit. See what happened the one time Brazil were caught with their defensive line high, while 1-0 up, against Croatia the other day?
But he hasn't beaten the "big boys": There's truth to that. But it shouldn't be used as an argument to undermine England's wins in the knockouts. Denmark was a bloody good team with players on a mission. Colombia absolutely destroyed Argentina in the CA and they were unlucky the game went to penalties. Knockouts are weird games where the favourites have so much to lose and so much pressure to deal with.
But he constantly picks the same players and he has his favourites: That's the best thing he's done. These are the types of tournaments - with the players getting locked up in a hotel/training ground for a month and playing " a final" every 3-4 days - where togetherness, familiarity and a good dressing room is of the utmost importance. Argentina, Croatia and Morroco are prime examples of how good atmosphere and comaraderie can turn into belief. The one thing Deschamps fixed from the Euros last year was the French dressing room that looked like a version of Big Brother.
But he doesn't use his 5 changes to affect the course of the game: Did Deschamps? He made only one change and that when he was winning. Why change things when the main plan is paying dividends? How did it work out for Santos a few hours back? How did it work for Tite, who fecked up his entire frontline? Probably made things more complicated for both teams. Being able to change half of your outfield players is still a very fresh and absolutely MASSIVE change in the game of football. Even when it was introduced in the PL, the two great team-builders of our era rarely used it (and the Caf was laughing). It proposes an unfamiliar level of tactical intervention that is still under assessment, not from Gareth freaking Southgate, but from the best managers and their staffs.
He's done mistakes, he's made bad decisions and he had occasionally wet the bed, too. But the foundations, the basic principals and requirements around which a solid NT is built are there. There's the issue of fatigue, after so many years. It happens to everyone. There are only so many times you can convince your players and yourself to give it one more try. Maybe he'll stay and things will go south. Maybe another manager will finally win a tournament with a few crucial tweaks of his own here and there. But you are not in point zero to demand his head with such ease. Make the bad choice and you can easily go backwards.
As a neutral, i thought England were very good yesterday. It was a quality game, probably the best the European continent has to offer nowadays. And for the last couple of years, this is England's level. No trophy, i know, but no need for anger and self-flagellation. It's very tough to go all the way in these tournaments and it needs a certain amount of luck that you so desperately need. But you can't control that. All you can do is be in the whereabouts. And England have done that under Southgate.
Some people will scoff, but i think it was the best you've looked in WC knockouts since 1990. Granted, your good performances have been rather few since then, but it was a proper European derby last night.
Spot on. The growth of the team in each major tournament since the current boss took over is striking.
The Sterling and Mount changes killed him. They made no sense other than Southgate reverting back to old reliable when the pressure was on. That’s not really safety first but a manager who froze.
How he managed Rashford was a joke. Imagine having Kane drop deep and not giving him an option that runs in behind to hit. That’s what you saw on the second half, Kane taking himself out of the box with nobody filling in to stretch the play so they lose a goal threat for no reward. It’s as if England played with 3 number 10s across their front 3. Rashford was right there, he’ll Maddison was right there as well who does Kanes 10 impression better than Kane does. Let Kane get on the end of Maddison’s through balls but he brings on Mount!
It’s a very good squad, particularly in the forward positions but you’ve still only got Walker, Bellingham and Kane that would get in that French side at this moment in time I reckon.
People do need to get some perspective when they talk about how amazing the squad us. Our defence and midfield struggle to even play a forward pass.
So with that being said, last night was definitely not anything to be ashamed of.
People do need to get some perspective when they talk about how amazing the squad us. Our defence and midfield struggle to even play a forward pass.
So with that being said, last night was definitely not anything to be ashamed of.
That's a rather basic way of looking at it. It seems you haven't assessed Southgates in game management and lack of plan B.
Haha that is because Rashford missed a crucial penalty in the shootout against Italy and obviously coach will hold a grudge against him. Plus sterling is known for getting penalties although in the end,it was 2 other players who earned the penalties for England.
Harry Kane seldom score in open play for England in knockout stages. In fact, he hardly score in open play against big teams.
England is effectively playing without a striker. Kane is a provider. Thus can't score. Need to depend on penalties.
England is effectively playing without a striker. Kane is a provider. Thus can't score. Need to depend on penalties.
I would argue that Shaw is better than either Hernandez and Upemecamo is vastly overrated, not even convinced he is better than Maguire, so Stones would have a shout to partner Varane. Full strength France with Benzema, Kante and a fit version of Pogba would have been the clear and obvious favourites for the tournament, but given who each country had available I think England pretty comfortably had the strongest squad.
Definitely need to restructure midfield to get Foden into more of a playmaking role, make the most of the link up with Bellingham, but one of the issues there might be Kane more and more dropping into the deeper spaces, might need a striker to stay high, occupy defenders to allow the space for Foden to operate.
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
Its actually really irritating how he keeps getting praise and credit for the players stepping up.
He hasn't improved England tactically in the 5 years he's been in charge. They don't have a style or pattern of play. He doesn't set up to play to his players strengths.
He is juat like Ole for me. He does a good job being Mr nice guy and getting players on his side, but as an actual football team coach or manager he's completely inept.
He shows never ending loyalty to players even if it means leaving better ones out of the team or sabotaging his teams chances by relying on people whove been out of form for years. He'd have picked sterling for every game if he could have.
The frustrating part for me is that Jordan Henderson and Sterling wouldn't be getting near that France squad, where as Grealish or an in form Rashfird would. Yet there we are playing them and he's bringing Sterling on.
I'm actually dumbfounded how anyone can defend stuff like that. If a United manager managed their team in this way the servers on here would still be crashed now due to the sheer outpouring of rage.
Instead Southgate gets credited purely on the fact other England managers have been an even bigger disaster amd used to have a team full of out of control egos to deal with.
There's no shame in getting to a quarter final, but there's no real credit either in thrashing Iran amd Wales because you have far better players than them, then surrendering the game against your first decent opposition because you preferred to bring on your mates rather than make tactical changes or use your better/in form players. At club level or with any other big national team that would fairly swiftly get you the sack.
He's not shite but there's been no improvement since he took over as he has only won big tournament games against decent opposition when at home.
The problem remains that England simply cannot beat teams of a similar calibre and last night was a prime example - an injury depleted French team were there for the taking but they showed the big game nous to get the result, a trait that remains beyond England - who easily had the best squad in the quarter finals.
The problem remains that England simply cannot beat teams of a similar calibre and last night was a prime example - an injury depleted French team were there for the taking but they showed the big game nous to get the result, a trait that remains beyond England - who easily had the best squad in the quarter finals.
This is like reading the Ole thread. The same sanctimonious bollocks from the same culprits on their high horse too.
Pickford, Stones (or Maguire), Shaw and Saka would all definitely get in the French team. The first three are positions where France have blatant weaknesses and Saka is consistently better than Dembele. It’s 7-4 England and, frankly, that’s how the match played out yesterday. It’s football through, so sometimes the better team doesn’t win.
Southgate can be frustrating - Rashford on earlier on the LW should have been a no brainer. However, he gets a lot right and I wouldn’t be confident a new manager would do better.
Let’s see if Kane gets dropped next England game then for missing a crucial penalty that could have helped us progress.
And this is why we'll continue to fail.
Unfortunately, that was a good World Cup by England standards and this group of players shouldn’t be expected to progress past France in a Quarter Final.
Southgate is quite easily the most successful England manager since Ramsey. He’s not shite but he’s not a winner either. Cost us the Euros as a player and coach.
Southgate is quite easily the most successful England manager since Ramsey. He’s not shite but he’s not a winner either. Cost us the Euros as a player and coach.
Woke up still angry 
Those subs will haunt me for a long long time. Which never happens to me, I basically haven't thought about England at all since 2006 since we've always had crap teams. But this game was there to be won, and we had the players on the bench to do it. Urgh.
Those subs will haunt me for a long long time. Which never happens to me, I basically haven't thought about England at all since 2006 since we've always had crap teams. But this game was there to be won, and we had the players on the bench to do it. Urgh.
For me he’s not the manager we need to go that extra step.
bringing on Grealish with 1 minute to go?… Bringing on Sterling instead of Rashford bearing in mind Rashford was in great form and Sterling had done nothing up to that point and had just had a 10 hour flight too…and taking off Saka who argueably was our best threat at the time.
His subs always baffle me.
I have been impressed with him - we played well and we’re unlucky to lose. But I don’t think we can go that next step with him. When we come up against teams at a similar level to us they beat us - yes we beat those under us which didn’t always happen in the past- but we can’t seem to take that next step.
There's an argument to be had there though, there's no point in getting rid of somebody who will reliably get us to the latter stage of tournaments if the replacement takes us back again. History says we're completely useless at picking managers to take us through big tournaments.
That's not saying we shouldn't be looking to replace him and we can do better tactically, but we definitely shouldn't do it until we have a plan and the person we want is available and pretty much signed-up.
I personally think he will go in a week or two anyway, he seems pretty honest about what he thinks he can do and may decide he's taken it as far as he can.
And this is why we'll continue to fail.
Where would he be going anyway? Not as if he's going to leave and walk into another job of any stature.
Tbh I'm not even sure I want him out. Ideally they'd put someone with guts and tactical nous in and leave Southgate as the figurehead.
Each to their own, but I don’t think Southgate is a great manager. I don’t think he or england have won too many games that they were 50/50 or second favourites to win.
Favourable qualifying groups. Favourable final stage groups and with the Euros, a favourable run to the final.
This was their best chance with the host of quality National sides out (or not there, in Italys case).
First decent team they have come up against and it’s all over.
Plus, a captain that has no experience of winning (delivering results). All a challenge.
Saying that, if Southgate goes…. Who is next/a better prospect.
Favourable qualifying groups. Favourable final stage groups and with the Euros, a favourable run to the final.
This was their best chance with the host of quality National sides out (or not there, in Italys case).
First decent team they have come up against and it’s all over.
Plus, a captain that has no experience of winning (delivering results). All a challenge.
Saying that, if Southgate goes…. Who is next/a better prospect.
This is as toxic as Ole. If he doesn’t leave this will end like Belgium.
England need another CM. Henderson is dog shit - I think even a 2021 version of Phillips would've been quite useful for England yesterday
I genuinely wonder what they meant in that tweet and what has changed in your team in terms of national pride and masculinity. I get it that GS has better relationship with players than most managers around, but how is that anything more than just being a good man manager?
That's a rather basic way of looking at it. It seems you haven't assessed Southgates in game management and lack of plan B.
He seems to just be ghosting over them parts, and thinking he done a stellar because the camp is happy or some other niche Southgate meant to excel at.
He's a band average coach.
This is a very fair summary. I don’t think anyone else who is readily available would do a much better job. Heck look at the 2 best coaches in this tournament, Flick and Enrique. Tournament football requires a very specific balance of team chemistry, defensive solidity and ruthlessness in front of goal.
England need to find ways to win the crucial moments in these knockout games. 1-0 up vs Croatia, 1-0 up vs Italy, 1-1 last night with the game at their mercy and they’ve lost all 3 games.
I also think if Southgate does stay on, he needs to move beyond some of his favourites. It’s pretty clear there’s a glass ceiling for England if they stick with the likes of Maguire/Stones, who are largely responsible for England losing those decisive moments.
Look, he brought on his mate Sterling, even though he hadn't attended a single training session in the build up to the game and is hopelessly out of form. That isn't even being an idiot. It's being completely and utterly unprofessional.
This wasn't a pre season kick about or qualifier against San Marino. It was a world cup quarter final against France, where you need every element of your team to be functioning to the highest possible level. While that is exactly what our players did, we have a manager who is willing to sabotage that in order to behave like he's managing a Sunday league kids side and wants to give the struggling kids a chance rather than use the ones that might win the game.
I'm dumbfounded how anyone defends him at this point. What previous managers have done is irrelevant. They didn't have this set of players and you shouldn't accept incompetence just because the last person was also incompetent. We're wasting the best crop of players and run of fortune we will ever have on a manager who just isn't fit for purpose and has a track record of being a terrible manager.
France didn’t even get out of second gear, Southgate didn’t cause them enough problems and was too scared to open up and attack.
I think England will win one of the next few tournaments with or without Southgate, they’re producing too many players not to win something surely. Probably more a euros than a World Cup though. He might as well stay, he’ll never have it as good at club level
I'm not going to defend him tactically, but there's also some who want him out whatever the cost which seems equally crazy to me. We're better off than we have been in years, the squad is working as a team and we're consistently getting to the latter stages of tournaments. That's better than we've been for decades. This squad is looking good, but I think there's a lot of overestimation going on, there's far too many holes and players who naturally take each others positions for that and there's obvious weaknesses all through the team.
We now need to take the next step, and I agree that Southgate doesn't seem to be the one for that. We either need to change the coaching staff to help him or look at a better manager. The important thing is that they're better though, if we rush into a decision now that might not happen.
I'm not even saying he should stay - but I'm nervous about replacing him and going back to what we've had before.
Correct. Southgate has had an excellent tournament (again).