Teja
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2014
- Messages
- 6,995
He has the players' respect and has them playing for him. Which is more than you could say of guys like Capello, Eriksson etc. That's about the only positive I can think of.
"More to do with" != "unrelated". I'm sorry you can't understand this.Apart from here where you quite clearly tried to separate it from the hypothetical you speculated about?
Why do you keep pretending you haven't said things when it's all literally right here?
That's quite funny. I haven't dodged anything. I just told you I find this back and forth really boring save for trying to see if how dedicated you are to getting the last word. I'm half-heartedly respondingJust trying to gauge what exactly makes a manager good in your view, and if not winning (or in Di Matteo's case, actually winning) a major final is definitely indicator of a manager's quality.
Quite telling that you've dodged the questions twice.
Cue the goalpost moving. Yawn.How about Chris Coleman?
He took a far worse Wales squad all the way to the semis of the Euros and was only beaten by the eventual winners. Topped a group containing England and beat Belgium (twice, if you include qualifying) on the way there too.
Is he a good manager?
What about Solskjaer? I love the man to bits, but I don't think it'd be particularly unfair to describe him as a limited manager, regardless of his accomplishments at United.
Couldn't agree more. A limited manager who punched above his weight at the Euros but bottled the finals with cowardly tactics.Southgate is a massive detriment to what can be fairly called a golden generation of talent for England. Other nations are in rebuild phases and England genuinely enter tournaments as top three to win on paper the last few years, and will do so again in 2024.
Other nations see things through to the end and capitalise on golden talent with the biggest trophy hauls they can get: Spain, Germany, France have all done just that and this is supposed to be England's turn before Kane's time at the very top is over. Southgate will ensure that doesn’t happen.
A shame and a waste.
"More to do with" != "unrelated". I'm sorry you can't understand this.
That's quite funny. I haven't dodged anything. I just told you I find this back and forth really boring save for trying to see if how dedicated you are to getting the last word. I'm half-heartedly responding
Cue the goalpost moving. Yawn.
Aren't you bored?
Bolded made me laugh. I'm impressed at your dedication to this schtick.I'm not moving any goalposts. I'm just providing you with a couple of other managers that I think compare to Southgate.
Again, quite telling that you've dodged the questions. Doing it by "half-heartedly responding" is still dodging them.
Are any of those mentioned good managers? And if not, what separates Southgate from them?
You can say this is boring and that I'm trying to get the last word in all you want, but I'm just trying to find out what it is you see in Southgate that most other football fans don't, particularly as these fans are apparently "arrogant" for not seeing it.
So far all you've mustered is "lost big matches", which isn't a great argument.
Bolded made me laugh. I'm impressed at your dedication to this schtick.
What makes him better than Venables for example?He's the best manager England have had since 66
Didn't dodge anything. Go on.Dodged again. Shall I just assume you think they're actually not that good?
Which, of course, extends to Southgate.
Didn't dodge anything. Go on.
The questions are changing with every pass and you argument style frankly sucks so I'm just passing time.You've refused to answer the questions posed to you about four times
The questions are changing with every pass and you argument style frankly sucks so I'm just passing time.
The first two were answered and the rest came after I answered the first two question and told you I'm not interested in this back forth past seeing your dedication to getting the last word.The questions have been the same for ages, you just keep refusing to answer them. It's incredibly obvious why you're doing that.
Anyway, here they are again:
Is Roberto Di Matteo a good manager because he won the Champions League?
Is Avram Grant a good manager because he only lost a Champions League final on penalties?
Is Chris Coleman a good manager because he guided Wales to the semi-finals of the Euros?
Is Ole Gunnar Solskjaer a good manager because he managed a second place finish in the Premier League as Manchester United manager?
If you think these have changed in any way since I originally asked them, explain how they're different.
The first two were answered and the rest came after I answered the first two question and told you I'm not interested in this back forth past seeing your dedication to getting the last word.
Go on.
Are we comparing a manager in charge for years to two interim managers? Ok.
but who is a great manager that would have managed england at that time ? cant think of anyone great who would have taken it. most national managers arent all time great club managers. whilst i laughed at the idea of southgate taking charge you cant deny he has done an incredible job. a final & semi. Are these players better than the players in the golden gereration? i dont think so. i would take rio and terry over stones and maguire for example. but what he has done is create a team england approach and its working.
that said, once england is over he wont get a top club in the PL
It's a silly comparison that should be obvious. Any sensible person would realize that.You didn't answer the first two questions.
You dodged them:
That isn't an answer.
The other two came after that because your excuse for dodging was that they were interim managers, so I gave two examples that weren't.
Again, why do you keep lying about what you've posted when it can very easily quoted back to you?
It's a silly comparison that should be obvious. Any sensible person would realize that.
Keep going.
Indeed you have. We can agree on that.You've had a mare.
Indeed you have. We can agree on that.
Two becomes four. Four becomes eight. I don't respond to browbeating and not a single lie was told. Therefore not interested in a real discussion with you.You can't even answer four simple yes/no questions because doing so will expose your "he reached a cup final" reasoning for him being anything above a limited manager as total bollocks.
All you have is ridiculous a penchant for lying about what you've posted and increasingly childish deflection tactics.
We've just reached, "I know you are, but what am I?", so I'm interested to see what you can come up with next.
Two becomes four. Four becomes eight. I don't respond to browbeating and not a single lie was told. Therefore not interested in a real discussion with you.
OkI've literally been able to quote you contradicting yourself on multiple occasions
We've also established that two became four because you tried dismissed the first two as being "interim managers".
In fact, claiming to have answered those first two was one of your lies.
Di Matteo, Grant, Coleman, Solskjaer. Good managers? Go. You can do it.
OkMate, just give me an answer. The questions haven't changed.
You think Southgate is a good manager because he reached a Euros final with England.
Avram Grant reached a CL final with Chelsea. Di Matteo won one. Coleman took Wales to the Euros semis. Solskjaer finished 2nd in the league. Are they good managers or limited managers?
OkThe thread is about whether Southgate is underrated.
You seem to think he is because he got to the final of the Euros.
I don't believe that's true and have presented you with what I feel are comparable examples other managers and their accomplishments, and asked if you think they're good managers because of those accomplishments.
Answer the questions, and we can move on with the discussion.
OkA truly embarrassing display of petulance because you've backed yourself into a corner with a daft stance on Gareth Southgate, of all people.