What makes them so good when they can barely make a semi final in half a century?
even Wales managed a semi final, a country with 3 million people who only qualified for one tournament
Is Gareth Southgate a shiite England manager?
- Thread starter VP89
- Start date
What makes them so good when they can barely make a semi final in half a century?
even Wales managed a semi final, a country with 3 million people who only qualified for one tournament
I’m sure Callum Wilson could have scored two away to City, probably got a hattrick. Good decision Gareth.
And it’s not like he could have dropped one of the other midfielders/attacking players because Henderson, Mount, Sterling, Gallagher have all been in such great form.
And it’s not like he could have dropped one of the other midfielders/attacking players because Henderson, Mount, Sterling, Gallagher have all been in such great form.
That’s the point, though - England’s history pre-Southgate was 1966. Apart from that, there were two SF defeats in the 90s and, otherwise, it’s QFs, last 16, group stage exits and sometimes not even qualifying. So it feels churlish to be too critical of someone who takes England to a SF and then a final. I also don’t think the players at his disposal are noticeably better than prior years (the quality of the centre backs in particular is poor compared to Rio, Terry, Campbell, Adams etc.). Southgate’s main problem is that he struggles to react to changing momentum in a game and is prone to trying to hang on to narrow leads without having Italy’s defence from the early 2000s. But after the likes of Hodgson, McClaren, Keegan, and even Capello and Sven, he has to be rated a success by England’s standards.
Yeah has sat on early leads in last two tournaments and ended up paying the price
Not a great manager.
His two runs in the World Cup and euros have heavily flattered him and essentially kept him in the job for this one. He could not have dreamt of easier routes in both tournaments.
England are shite until the second they get knocked out then everyone agrees they've massively under achieved.
Only one other England manager has ever got to a major final. He's one of only three to make it to a semi-final with the most recent coming with a nearly 30 year gap.
To dismiss that because the football is "boring" is the most 2022 fan thing there is.
Only one other England manager has ever got to a major final. He's one of only three to make it to a semi-final with the most recent coming with a nearly 30 year gap.
To dismiss that because the football is "boring" is the most 2022 fan thing there is.
Not a coincidence the other major final was with games all at Wembley or in England same as the Euro's Semi in 96.
Italia 90 and Russia 2018 both had major luck, two pens v Cameroon in 90 and an easy draw in 2018, Colombia and Sweden in knockouts, beat Tunisia and Panama in the groups.
If we had that draw with the golden generation surely make the Semi's too.
Because of course everyone else got to the final by playing Brazil 6 times
Amazing that people still need to be reminded of this. England is mostly a 2nd tier nation in football terms. Our 'successes' are the odd semi final. By that rationale, he's done as well as could be expected.
About to post something similar! Everyone other than England plays France, Argentina, Germany and Brazil in successive weeks to win.
As a Scotsman I totally agree.
However it looks like sacrificial offerings to the dark lord only gave him so much luck and his complete lack of managerial skill saved us in the end from another 50 years of nauseating punditry from all Englanders.
At least the luck now seems to be running out and the balance of nature restored.
Yes for a few reasons
1. Sets up too defensive
2. Bottles big games after early leads
3. Has too many favourites
4. Missed opportunities to look at players
1. Sets up too defensive
2. Bottles big games after early leads
3. Has too many favourites
4. Missed opportunities to look at players
Di Matteo says hi.
It's only a string of 6-7 matches. Luck and timing factor plays a bigger part the shorter the campaign
It's just like a guy winning lottery of billion dollars . Is he wealthy ? Yes of course. But does he know how to make money / manage business / invest ? Not really.
if by just like you mean absolutely nothing like it whatsoever then yes I agree
I disagree, I think stating that Southgate got England to a semi and a final without context is absurd. It’s patently obvious that England had draws in every round of both competitions that they were expected to win, and made hard work of some of them. About the only impressive result was the Germany result but even that ignores context.You "showed how is squad was capable of better performances"?
I don't need a counter (although I did in fact provide one, though you prefer to pretend otherwise). The facts speak for themselves, and your reasoning is blindingly, self-evidently absurd.
The Croatia and Italy games are where the focus should be, because they were the games where we faced good, but not great sides, and a better manager would have approached or adapted to the match much better than tunnel visioned Southgate
He's basically Ole-improved. Decent squad selections, doesn't play favorites and good man manager.
He has no idea what he's doing in terms of tactics. Can just set up a 3-4-3 and play on the counter. This can still be successful - not everyone needs to be Guardiola or Klopp but it needs a bit of nastiness or some other value add ala Simeone, Mourinho, Conte etc. and he just doesn't have that.
He has no idea what he's doing in terms of tactics. Can just set up a 3-4-3 and play on the counter. This can still be successful - not everyone needs to be Guardiola or Klopp but it needs a bit of nastiness or some other value add ala Simeone, Mourinho, Conte etc. and he just doesn't have that.
The campaign in international football is qualifying and then competing in a knock out competition and there are only two that count.
WTF are you talking about?
You count qualifying as England a serious match?
And spare the wtf please. Be polite on people simply engaging in comment
I don't know how many international tournaments you have followed but over the years there tends to be big name absentees that have failed to qualify normally in European groups.
This is what international football is about and how managers are judged and if their record is good in them ( refer my original post) then it would be foolish to call said manager shite.
When France made it to the final of Euro 2016 they had to play 54 games
Honestly the attacks are hilarious. Now Southgate can't be a good England manager because of the length of tournaments. Next it'll be because England haven't proven themselves over a 38 game season or on at a wet Wednesday in Stoke.
Narrow wins and strokes of luck en route to the final happen all the time. Playing less than stellar teams to get to the final happens all the time. Playing 3 knock out games to get to a final is usually quite standard too
It boils down to "I refuse to acknowledge a semi-final and final in two consecutive international tournaments because I find hid tactics boring". Owning it would genuinely come across better than blaming him for how international football has always worked.
Honestly the attacks are hilarious. Now Southgate can't be a good England manager because of the length of tournaments. Next it'll be because England haven't proven themselves over a 38 game season or on at a wet Wednesday in Stoke.
Narrow wins and strokes of luck en route to the final happen all the time. Playing less than stellar teams to get to the final happens all the time. Playing 3 knock out games to get to a final is usually quite standard too
It boils down to "I refuse to acknowledge a semi-final and final in two consecutive international tournaments because I find hid tactics boring". Owning it would genuinely come across better than blaming him for how international football has always worked.
He's lucked out 3 times now with the draw and has an enormous talent pool at his disposition. People tend to forget that. No country has that much depth. The England team arguably has the highest market value out of any international team. They should absolutely be winning things. And they almost did.
Having said that, England also has a fairly recent history of not making Euro 08, drawing with the US and Algeria at WC 2010 barely making the second round, going out of the WC group in 2014 and going out to Iceland in 2016. So i do think calling him shite is a bit of a stretch.
Having said that, England also has a fairly recent history of not making Euro 08, drawing with the US and Algeria at WC 2010 barely making the second round, going out of the WC group in 2014 and going out to Iceland in 2016. So i do think calling him shite is a bit of a stretch.
I never called him shite. Neither i called him a great manager.
When you're managing the big names such as England, Italy, spain or some other similar big calibre you're expected to win your qualifying group. Most of the times it's filled with cannon fodders like Andora, Lichtenstein and many other smaller nations. With all due respect.
Over the years we've had historically strong nation failed to make finals due to a myriad of reasons, mostly non technical reason or something that's beyond a manager scope of influence. We even had some manager whose normally successful failed to qualify. With England it happened under McLaren iirc. But most of the times, qualifying is never an issue, and most of the times getting out of your group is almost a given. But for the sake of argument, reaching a semi or final is normally a 3 match qualifying and last 32, 16, 8, 4, 2 that's like 8 total games to win the whole cup with the first 3 is normally considered an easy part...
So it's not out of the question that you can face a lucky draw playing against let's say Jamaica, or UAE, or even many other canon fodder that are spread around the groups due to seeding. A lucky draw means you had 1 free match to rest your players if you win your first 2, and comes to final 32 fresher than most.
So yes... As to my original comment, luck and many other factors played a bigger part in a considerably shorter tournament. It's hardly outrageous. We all know how the strongest team dont always wins tournament because they lost out when it matters. And he's not actually managing Andorra. He's managing England who's strong enough to handle 70-80% teams they faced, at least on paper.
Roberto Mancini says Hi!
England would have won the Euros if he just played a normal game in the final. England haven’t been the same since and I felt like the national team should have freshened things up thereafter.. It’s a bit like our Europa League final loss.
Exactly that, no manager before him has had the luxury of the routes he's had. He's won one of the three major tests he's had and that was against Germany, who were in a transition period.
Croatia was a 50/50, the players they had we were equally as good as each other so I can forgive him that, it was an opportunity missed but shit happens. The Euros though, UEFA couldn't have done more to give it us, home soil the whole tournament, semi final against a side that travelled they could barely run from 60 minutes onwards.
Then final at home against a hard working average Italy side. If you believe what you read we had 100k in that stadium, 90k seated 10k running wild.
He didn't even give it a go, he didn't fall on his sword or fight for it. Saka on for Trippier and Grielish were as adventurish as it got. He lost us that final, nothing that I can be told will tell me otherwise.
Verdict - Shit manager, but lucky.
The group this year prove that.
What’s most frustrating is the Italy performance in the final. In extra time Italy were on their knees exhausted. He could have thrown on the likes or Rashford with pace to get after them. Instead he just played cautious till penalties and brought Rashford and Sancho on just to take a pen.
The knowledge of how international tournaments work is lacking. Look at Portugals route to the final in 2016. Look at the group France were given in 2018 overcoming the Denmark and the mighty Peru and Australia. Croatia played Denmark, Russia and an England team with a "shit manager" to reach the final.
Portugal won the previous Euros by playing Wales and Poland before reaching the final barely coming through a group of Hungary, Iceland and Austria.
Pretending England somehow are uniquely fortunate is childish. This is text book "I dislike this team therefore I'll invent churlish reasons to argue that their achievements aren't really that good" shit that makes football fans look ridiculously petty
"That team i dislike got to the final but it was just luck"
Pretending it's anything other than that is adorable. You can put the same criticisms of luck and fortune of the draw and outcomes (and spurious claims that any good team they did face somehow didn't count that time because: reasons) can be levelled against the vast majority of teams who have ever won or got to the final of any international competition ever.
Portugal won the previous Euros by playing Wales and Poland before reaching the final barely coming through a group of Hungary, Iceland and Austria.
Pretending England somehow are uniquely fortunate is childish. This is text book "I dislike this team therefore I'll invent churlish reasons to argue that their achievements aren't really that good" shit that makes football fans look ridiculously petty
"That team i dislike got to the final but it was just luck"
Pretending it's anything other than that is adorable. You can put the same criticisms of luck and fortune of the draw and outcomes (and spurious claims that any good team they did face somehow didn't count that time because: reasons) can be levelled against the vast majority of teams who have ever won or got to the final of any international competition ever.
Last edited:
Southgate is no coach, but he’s done an admirable job. Nonsense about easy draws and penalties is exactly that: nonsense. At the end of the day, Southgate has kept his nose clean, fostered a positive environment, qualified for tournaments with ease, and reached a major final for the first time in fifty years. Some of this, people might argue, should be par for the course, but history has proven that’s not the case.
But as I said in my opening, he’s no coach. The football is tedious and his indecision cost us against Croatia and Italy. It will be his undoing again this tournament and the calls for him to call it a day will grow.
But as I said in my opening, he’s no coach. The football is tedious and his indecision cost us against Croatia and Italy. It will be his undoing again this tournament and the calls for him to call it a day will grow.
Fair. The indecision is his biggest flaw. I just struggle with the narrative of others that a side nobody gave a chance to prior to the competition somehow under achieved by nearly winning it.
The Caf switched from ripping the piss out of anyone who gave England a chance to overnight suggesting beaten finalists represented an embarrassing underachievement.
Unless he wins it, and I don't think he will, this should be his last tournament.
He's been very good. He's taken a far inferior squad compared to the past to a WC semi final (extra time) and a Euros final (close on pens) Has he been lucky with fixtures in the lead up? Yes but so did others. Is his football attractive? No but tournament football is about being solid at the back.
The criticism he gets is ridiculous when you compare him to previous managers who couldn't get out of a group, or even qualify. He comes across as a nice, smart man, which helps. My biggest criticism of his is not playing Foden. Should be the first name on the team sheet.
The criticism he gets is ridiculous when you compare him to previous managers who couldn't get out of a group, or even qualify. He comes across as a nice, smart man, which helps. My biggest criticism of his is not playing Foden. Should be the first name on the team sheet.
I don't think it's a case of it being an embarrassing underachievement, more that Southgate's approach in those types of matches is entirely uninspiring and he doesn't resemble anything close to what you'd expect of a good coach. The opportunity was there for him to win an international tournament, he went 1-0 up early on by pinning Italy back, then he proceeded to make a group of decent attacking players sit back behind the ball for the rest of the game. It was cowardly, and if you lose with that approach it's bound to attract criticism.
The Nations League matches have also shown him up a bit. Some won't attach any importance to that competition, but failing to win any matches from 6 and losing 4-0 to Hungary isn't a good look. I've seen no evidence of Southgate being able to change a game when things aren't going his way, which is a pretty important trait at international level.
As a Scotsman I totally agree.
However it looks like sacrificial offerings to the dark lord only gave him so much luck and his complete lack of managerial skill saved us in the end from another 50 years of nauseating punditry from all Englanders.
At least the luck now seems to be running out and the balance of nature restored.
I don't know if it was luck. They seem really well set up for International Football, solid, boring, some great attackers, no real upheaval or scandal despite the usual best efforts of the English media. They will be at the business end again I'd say.
That second paragraph totally nails it
Yeah had it in the palm of his hand and learnt absolutely nothing from Croatia in 2018
I think it's impossible to ignore context.
IMO, Southgate is a shit coach but was good at man managing a very talented group to the point where they won games they should win, but the second they faced a tougher side (with the right circumstances, i.e the circumstances for the denmark tie were ridiculously skewed towards England), they would come up short. But, the man management has now run stale and you can only push through this with top level coaching to prove yourself, which he doesn't have.
Coaches can be carried through individual competitions by great squads. It happened with Low and Germany, happened with Santos and Portugal, and while not shit, it happened with Deschamps and France. All of these won their cups despite their managers, not because of them IMO. England reached the semi and the final despite Southgate, not because of him. Most of the battle in the past has been just getting a good atmosphere and a talented group. BUT - it's international football. The vast majority of the time, they are average at best/past it managers/coaches. I don't think that's the case this year, and elite coaches like Enrique/Flick/Van Gaal will prove their worth IMO.
IMO, Southgate is a shit coach but was good at man managing a very talented group to the point where they won games they should win, but the second they faced a tougher side (with the right circumstances, i.e the circumstances for the denmark tie were ridiculously skewed towards England), they would come up short. But, the man management has now run stale and you can only push through this with top level coaching to prove yourself, which he doesn't have.
Coaches can be carried through individual competitions by great squads. It happened with Low and Germany, happened with Santos and Portugal, and while not shit, it happened with Deschamps and France. All of these won their cups despite their managers, not because of them IMO. England reached the semi and the final despite Southgate, not because of him. Most of the battle in the past has been just getting a good atmosphere and a talented group. BUT - it's international football. The vast majority of the time, they are average at best/past it managers/coaches. I don't think that's the case this year, and elite coaches like Enrique/Flick/Van Gaal will prove their worth IMO.
Southgate is the inoffensive man the FA needed after Fat Sam and the centerpiece to the glorious management coaching at St George. The problem is, he has never been a good manager and hes done nothing to get to where he is, except nod and agree with everything the FA says.
Tactically he used copy and paste from Contes tactics and now he has been found out you can see how inept he cannot adjust and evolves them.. because they were never his tactics to begin with.
The story of the wet blanket is simply one of luck and being in the right place at the right time.
Tactically he used copy and paste from Contes tactics and now he has been found out you can see how inept he cannot adjust and evolves them.. because they were never his tactics to begin with.
The story of the wet blanket is simply one of luck and being in the right place at the right time.
I thought he seemed pretty decent and sensible, but then they drew Germany and the guy started talking about WW2 and the blitz, goose stepping around the conference room
Now has more wins at major tournaments than any other England manager in history. I don’t particularly like his style of play but it’s hard to argue with the results.
Strange selection and substitutions today.