It is totally rational for him to want to play Foden in his club position, the same as he expects from his other players.
England lost against France because France are a better team, and the defending champions and because Kane fluffed it.
Is Gareth Southgate a shiite England manager?
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
England lost against France because France are a better team, and the defending champions and because Kane fluffed it.
I think Southgate's Ok, but also feel perhaps he's found his level with these players and there's no going beyond.
A few odd choices last night - playing against France who would attack, not sure why Rashford didn't start, and even when he came on, unsure why it was at the 85th minute.
Saka had those folks running scared and he took him off for Sterling
A few odd choices last night - playing against France who would attack, not sure why Rashford didn't start, and even when he came on, unsure why it was at the 85th minute.
Saka had those folks running scared and he took him off for Sterling
I don't want to just be competitive,he will never have it against the big teams EVER
No he won't be sacked because FA is bunch of cowards. He should take the initiative of other losing coaches like Enrique,Tite and step down
He's gone as far as he can. England need to move up another level to actually compete for the big pots and they need a coach capable of getting them there. Southgate has hit his ceiling.
Praise the lord someone can see it too
Yeah zero ambition in too many is a problem
He's been a very good manager for England, and under him they've consistently been among the best teams on the tournaments with a real chance to win. I think that winning a WC/Euro is as much about luck as anything, so consistently being really good tournament after tournament should give you a decent chance of eventually winning. On top of that, managing national sides is very different from club football and there's no real way to tell whether even a great club manager like Tuchel would fare in the job, assuming he's even interested. So changing a manager who has clearly done a very good job, is beloved by the players and has the team consistently among the real contenders is a massive risk
But on the other hand this was his 3rd tournament and the luck still hasn't broken his way, so....At this point if he's not fully convinced of continuing and Tuchel wanted the job, I'd probably roll the dice with him
Unless Zidane is available. Then England should just get Zidane.
But on the other hand this was his 3rd tournament and the luck still hasn't broken his way, so....At this point if he's not fully convinced of continuing and Tuchel wanted the job, I'd probably roll the dice with him
Unless Zidane is available. Then England should just get Zidane.
I’m not sure England have another level. Their level usually about the quarter finals although in two recent tournaments they have over achieved
They could have with a manager who isn't afraid to make subs at crucial times,for instance when it was 1-1 yesterday.
Yeah a Germany at the end of the Loew era and boy did it show those last couple of tournaments
I give Southgate a lot of credit for getting England back in the mix, but it feels like it would be best for both parties to go in a different direction.
Subs too late in the big games,honestly you would think that should tell him I haven't got it at the sharp end and best to let someone else come in.
What's worse especially in the case of Enrique is that he can be considered a world class manager. Southgate is not even close and has to assess what the end game is.
He never uttered once about winning the tournament. Irrespective if it's realistic or not, most elite sports is determined by mentality alone the higher levels of sport it's what distances winners from runners up. England have to look at Roberto Martinez and Belgium. Their golden generation (in form Hazard, Lukaku, KDB, Carrasco, Thibaut Courtois) has nothing to show for it, Martinez should have gone when they lost to Italy and now their prime players have aged further or regressed (Hazard).
Similar to Southgate it's managers who have not actually displayed winning pedigree. They have shown to have a lack of capability in invigorating winners.
He is absolutely horrible. We knew this from Euros, if you paid attention to team's playing quality and not just the results, but it was painfully obvious in the last game against France.
His team selection, not starting Rashford, his substitutions of not bringing Rashy until the very end of 85th minute, only bringing Grealish for 2 minutes, but brining in Sterling who had not played or trained for a week...
The guy is an idiot. England could have totally advanced under a good manager. Southgate is not good enough to even manage a decent Championship side, let alone anything more serious
His team selection, not starting Rashford, his substitutions of not bringing Rashy until the very end of 85th minute, only bringing Grealish for 2 minutes, but brining in Sterling who had not played or trained for a week...
The guy is an idiot. England could have totally advanced under a good manager. Southgate is not good enough to even manage a decent Championship side, let alone anything more serious
Yeah I fully expected to log on here yesterday and see him being ridiculed for not taking advantage of that 20 minute or so window of opportunity (as well as the fact you caught France on a bad day with a bunch of their players out) where you could have won yourself a Semi final vs Morocco and a potential final vs Argentina/ Croatia but the majority (I think?) seem to not think it's that big of an issue.
Deschamps is absolutely elite and IF he ever considered leaving France when Zidane takes over we should be fully interested. I also don't see a massive issue with him not speaking English either before someone pipes up.
Ugh 18 months of hell incoming
I completely agree that Southgate did what was rational, and fully expected, but given the talent level he had in the squad, for England to have won the WC he needed to stop playing it safe, rational and completely predictable. He did exactly what everyone expected and England crashed out, as expected, once it faced a seriously competitive opponent.
Kane was nowhere near his top form of a a season or two ago. Southgate should have adapted, but he played it safe and the players are all back in England now.
Disagree. We are a better team than Morocco, Croatia, Netherlands and probably on equal grounds with nations like Argentina. Definitely should be aiming for top 4 in every competition. Beyond that it does take a bit of luck.
He is elite but his style of football is absolutely terrible, our fans would revolt seeing that at the club level for more than a season or two. France could barely string a pass or two for most of the match and it's not like they don't have talent in midfield.
Let me guess Southgate in
He's a winner though at the highest level of international football (WC & Euros as player and WC as manager too). How on earth can our dumb FA ignore someone who is so proven.
Last edited:
And Southgate's style is - what exactly?
Big game bottler
The lack of elite top level English managers is astonishing. There are only 4 English managers in the Premier League right now - Lampard, Potter, Howe and O'Neil - none of whom have really won anything of significance. Compare that to 13 Spanish managers in La Liga, 13 German managers in Bundesliga, 17 Italian managers in Seria A & 12 French managers in Ligue 1. What's more interesting is there are no English managers in any of the Spain, German, Italian & French league clubs.
Either England should hunt outside or stick with Southgate.
Either England should hunt outside or stick with Southgate.
England were rampant for a spell. When they were down a goal, that was the moment for the manager to make the big calls, to dice with death, a mad go-for-broke scheme so crazy it just might work. In short, playing pragmatically when you needed a goal was shortsighted, and in retrospect obviously not the right call.
Sterling, once he left camp, should have been out of the equation. If GS truly thought Rashford and Grealish were game winners, he should have given them enough time to influence proceedings. That would mean a change of shape, a different set of tactics, sacrificing a defender for an attacker. Many things he could have done. Now it’s just a case of “what if” when he should have made a bold move to win it.
England were the better team. GS should have figured out a way to thwart Griezmann because he was at the heart of every good French move. Man mark the feck out of him if you have to. Leave Saka on. Go 3 at the back. We should be sat here thinking “well we gave it our all and we just weren’t good enough” instead of “we definitely were good enough but we didn’t play with the urgency required “.
Sterling, once he left camp, should have been out of the equation. If GS truly thought Rashford and Grealish were game winners, he should have given them enough time to influence proceedings. That would mean a change of shape, a different set of tactics, sacrificing a defender for an attacker. Many things he could have done. Now it’s just a case of “what if” when he should have made a bold move to win it.
England were the better team. GS should have figured out a way to thwart Griezmann because he was at the heart of every good French move. Man mark the feck out of him if you have to. Leave Saka on. Go 3 at the back. We should be sat here thinking “well we gave it our all and we just weren’t good enough” instead of “we definitely were good enough but we didn’t play with the urgency required “.
Last edited:
Rashford was in form. That’s enough to get him on early.
Honestly I think it’s because English players have it too easy at club level, which doesn’t ignite a fire in them, coupled with a manager with zero tricks up his sleeve. Look at Morocco: those players went into every match like their hair was on fire. They looked like they left everything on the pitch. They had some bite to them, they weren’t looking for style points. How many crunching tackles did England put in? One player total had been booked before the French game, which means they were playing within themselves when they needed to have the needle pinned in red. Morocco played like every game was their last while England played like they needed to reserve some energy.
Ah you guys are talking about England, for some reason thought you were talking about United (but makes sense in the context of the thread). Ya, he'd be better than Southgate for England, would take money to tempt him for the job though.
As an Irishman I dearly hope Ole Gunnar Southgate stays on for another few years at the every least.
Sounds like he is actually thinking about resigning
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63939239
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63939239
He deserves to be booted and never given a job in football again. Bringing Sterling on before Rashford and Sterling was away for a week in London?!!
He’s far too safe an option for the FA given the disasters they’ve had under previous managers to let him go. Just look at the lack of fallout from yet another early tournament exit under him, there’s almost none.
Oh blame manager if your designated penalty taker balloon the ball to moon when the match is on the line to score from the penalty spot.
It's mental thing that England need to overcome. From world Cup semi penalty loss to euro final penalty loss to world Cup quarter final penalty loss. What's common there. Mentally weak players who could not able to score from penalty spots didn't deserve to win anything.
It's mental thing that England need to overcome. From world Cup semi penalty loss to euro final penalty loss to world Cup quarter final penalty loss. What's common there. Mentally weak players who could not able to score from penalty spots didn't deserve to win anything.
I do think it's interesting to look at the teams he has beaten and not beaten at World Cups.
Wins: Tunisia, Panama, Sweden, Iran, Wales, Senegal
Draws: Colombia (Penalty win), USA
Losses: Belgium 2x, Croatia, France
Point being, that if you look purely on the bottom line, he has failed to beat any of the quality sides that England has met. It doesn't look very impressive.
Wins: Tunisia, Panama, Sweden, Iran, Wales, Senegal
Draws: Colombia (Penalty win), USA
Losses: Belgium 2x, Croatia, France
Point being, that if you look purely on the bottom line, he has failed to beat any of the quality sides that England has met. It doesn't look very impressive.
Euro results -
Wins: Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Ukraine, Denmark
Draw: Scotland
Loss: Italy
Only game they didn't play at Wembley was the Ukraine game but a better result for them. Croatia have shown that they're difficult to beat and Denmark were excellent at the Euros so that's two positive results. The Germany game, while historically a big side isn't that impressive if you consider their two WC runs between that Euros.
The real question is: does English football deserve Gareth Southgate?
He built the best England team of the past 50 years, but who could blame the manager if he walks away from needless hostility?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/dec/11/gareth-southgate-england-world-cup-qatar
He built the best England team of the past 50 years, but who could blame the manager if he walks away from needless hostility?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/dec/11/gareth-southgate-england-world-cup-qatar
I’d love him to stay and win something for us. It’s just it seems unlikely to happen with the stuff he decides to do in crunch games. Sterling made no sense in the France game. Out of form, been away from squad. We just wilted away when he came on. What concerns a lot of fans is that the rationale for that change seems to be ‘Sterling has been a great player for us and got us over the line before’ and that’s it. Rashford was electric in the wales game and in great form for club and so if it’s pace you’re after it’s Rashford right?
Think the concerning thing is out of the options he had; grealish, Rashford, Maddison, Sterling. Sterling was probably the worst choice. All the others have attributes that would have worked better. Maddison a no 10 playmaker and free kick threat. Rashford, pace, in form, scoring, motm vs Wales. Grealish, may not do damage but never gives the ball away and helps sustain pressure. Sterling is the least creative of those lot, does predictable stuff but in past does this very well. Current form not doing much well, baffling.
Think the concerning thing is out of the options he had; grealish, Rashford, Maddison, Sterling. Sterling was probably the worst choice. All the others have attributes that would have worked better. Maddison a no 10 playmaker and free kick threat. Rashford, pace, in form, scoring, motm vs Wales. Grealish, may not do damage but never gives the ball away and helps sustain pressure. Sterling is the least creative of those lot, does predictable stuff but in past does this very well. Current form not doing much well, baffling.
Fair to include the Euro results, but as you say with the major caveat that England played almost exclusively at home. Not only did they have the home support, but they also didn't have to travel around as much. The Danish team was knackered for the semi-final, having travelled three times and played in the heat of Baku. And yeah, the Germany team has been in disarray during this period, so not massively impressive.
Anyway, I still think that even looking at the results at World Cups and Euros, he has done just 'OK'. People get very hung up on England reaching a semi-final and a final, but if you look beneath the surface, both of those simply aren't that great.