So what's next for Sir Gareth Southgate?

Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Brilliant post. England are a top heavy team. Ample attacking players up top and in wide areas. No next to no creative center midfielders. Just functional ones and an average collection of center backs. If Southgate didn't play pragmatic results would spiral vs mid level european opponents who are deep defenders with a counter punch.
Click to expand...
I think the midfield is the key issue. England have lots of good central midfielders but none of them are excellent at progressing the ball from deep. Jordan Henderson is the best player we have in that regard and even he isn't regarded as being one of the outstanding players in world football for it.

It's why I think Maguire is such a pivotal player for England. He is, regardless of what people say, a really good centre back when it comes to ball progression. Even as bad as he's been this season for United, his ball progression numbers are still pretty good. It's also why I can see the logic in deploying a back three. England are quite heavily reliant on their centre backs (particularly Maguire) for central progression, and that's easier to work with whilst maintaining defensive solidity in a back three than a back four.

None of this is down to Southgate being a "shit manager"; we just don't have the type of midfielder required to play this more expansive style that people are craving. Or, at the very least, we don't have a wealth of proven players of this type.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Last night was a performance down to post season tiredness, to be fair. Not tactics. The midfield and attack was so heavy legged. It's hard to attack well when tired. Second, England fans need to droo the naive 'we can play far better football narrative'. Not when you are yet to produce a single deep midfield player who can dictate play from deep. On top of not having the best collection of center halves. The day England as it is equipped now becomes more risky in approach, plenty of embarrassing results will consistently crop up vs the hungary's and iceland's of this world. Yet with pragmatism, results of the kind are largely anomalies.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced. I’m well aware that England fans and the English media have always overrated the talent that’s available, but our centre halves are no worse than other countries’, and they don’t seem to have to field quite so many defensive players.

I do think it’s daft for players to have no chance to rest at the end of the domestic season though. That’s why the Home Internationals were scrapped all those years ago, yet here we are once again.
 
Revaulx said:
I’m not convinced. I’m well aware that England fans and the English media have always overrated the talent that’s available, but our centre halves are no worse than other countries’......
Click to expand...
The point is other top tier countries can get away with it because they have what you don't: Creativity in deep midfield. Which gives them control vs most teams and a clear edge vs weaker teams that all play a deep to midblock defensiveine. Which is the standard mode of play in international football. You open up when you dont have it. Not only will you struggle to open up mid range teams. They will surely hurt you on the counter because of the mid range quality of your available center half pairings. Yet most mid range teams carry an actual and potent threat on the counter People need to accept that in international football safety first yields loads of dividends.

The only thing anyone can fairly criticise Southgate for is not getting more consistency in the final 3rd from his final third players. But not for being pragmatic with the tools he has.
 
Last edited:
Mmm-Qatarian said:
I think the midfield is the key issue. England have lots of good central midfielders but none of them are excellent at progressing the ball from deep. Jordan Henderson is the best player we have in that regard and even he isn't regarded as being one of the outstanding players in world football for it.

It's why I think Maguire is such a pivotal player for England. He is, regardless of what people say, a really good centre back when it comes to ball progression. Even as bad as he's been this season for United, his ball progression numbers are still pretty good. It's also why I can see the logic in deploying a back three. England are quite heavily reliant on their centre backs (particularly Maguire) for central progression, and that's easier to work with whilst maintaining defensive solidity in a back three than a back four.

None of this is down to Southgate being a "shit manager"; we just don't have the type of midfielder required to play this more expansive style that people are craving. Or, at the very least, we don't have a wealth of proven players of this type.
Click to expand...
Precisely. Ialso feel The back 3 especially with Stones and Walker in it too increases the passing options from deep. Which some what mitigates the utter lack of creativity the center midfield shield. Which enable England to control games against most teams, then relying on the final 3rd players to win matches. I honestly believe until the likes of Belingham
Mmm-Qatarian said:
I think the midfield is the key issue. England have lots of good central midfielders but none of them are excellent at progressing the ball from deep. Jordan Henderson is the best player we have in that regard and even he isn't regarded as being one of the outstanding players in world football for it.

It's why I think Maguire is such a pivotal player for England. He is, regardless of what people say, a really good centre back when it comes to ball progression. Even as bad as he's been this season for United, his ball progression numbers are still pretty good. It's also why I can see the logic in deploying a back three. England are quite heavily reliant on their centre backs (particularly Maguire) for central progression, and that's easier to work with whilst maintaining defensive solidity in a back three than a back four.

None of this is down to Southgate being a "shit manager"; we just don't have the type of midfielder required to play this more expansive style that people are craving. Or, at the very least, we don't have a wealth of proven players of this type.
Click to expand...
I agree. I also feel having a back of 3 ball players increases passers from deep. Some what mitigating the dearth of creativity in the center midfield. Enabling England to control weaker teams and not over get run by better quality. Whilst giving their final 3rd players a chance to win matches. On top of adding that extra layer of defensive safety.

I do believe England will finally be ready to be more expansive when the likes of Bellingham, Foden and possibly the returning Loftus cheek mature into players who can consistently run player from deep.
 
Last edited:
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Precisely. Ialso feel The back 3 especially with Stones and Walker in it too increases the passing options from deep. Which some what mitigates the utter lack of creativity the center midfield shield. Which enable England to control games against most teams, then relying on the final 3rd players to win matches. I honestly believe until the likes of Belingham

I agree. I also feel having a back of 3 ball players increases passers from deep. Some what mitigating the dearth of creativity in the center midfield. Enabling England to control weaker teams and not over get run by better quality. Whilst giving their final 3rd players a chance to win matches. On top of adding that extra layer of defensive safety.

I do believe England will finally be ready ti be more expansive when the likes of Bellingham, Foden and possibly the returning Loftus cheek mature into players who can consostently run players for deep.
Click to expand...

Sorry but Loftus Cheek is garbage and if he’s not matured at 26 going on 27 then he never will!
 
Gums said:
Maybe Maguire shouldn‘t be the player to build the defense around then. If the choice is to either try other CBs that may be more suitable for a more offensive setup, or to stick with Maguire but then be forced to play negative, defensive football, then I would hope to see the former.

Not sure how accurately I remember, but Smalling wasn‘t considered good enough with the ball at his feet and was replaced. Maguire doesn‘t seem to be good enough unless you protect him by having almost every other player shielding him.

I disagree with the stance of many here, that a semi-final and a final should be seen as positive signs. I‘m not going to kid myself and claim England has a fantastic squad and should be winning things. But I also don‘t buy into this whole narrative of „we only got that far by playing pragmatic“. I‘d rather see England crash and burn while trying to play positive, attacking football than still not win anything but in a passive, dull fashion.

I don‘t understand how anybody can realistically think England are going to win one of the real tournaments with this approach. Everything was already aligned as good as it‘ll ever get and it still wasn‘t good enough.
Click to expand...
You do realize with a better penalty taking strategy the recent Euros would have been England's thanks to that very approach?
 
Not looking forward to Gareth managing us in 2025, after the Ten Hag and Poch reigns are over.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
You do realize with a better penalty taking strategy the recent Euros would have been England's thanks to that very approach?
Click to expand...
As I already explained in my post, it was not just down to that approach. Everything aligned for England, from avoiding the best opponents to having a home advantage. With a more active, and a less negative, scared, defensive approach in the final we may well have won without needing to hope for a better penalty taking strategy. But we didn‘t. I don‘t understand how fans can choose to believe that it was a masterclass of Southgate that got us within penalties of a real trophy, without acknowledging the additional impact of very fortunate circumstances.

Let‘s see how the upcoming WC goes. I think Southgate has peaked (higher than he should have, leading to many fans buying into his negative setup, which imo will inevitably lead to more years of disappointment due to this false dawn), and he missed his only realistic chance to win a real tournament. Italy were there for the taking but he didn‘t have the courage to go for it. No penalty strategy in the world is going to be able to outweigh the enormous mental pressure England players face when stepping up for that kick. Southgate should be aware of that.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
You do realize with a better penalty taking strategy the recent Euros would have been England's thanks to that very approach?
Click to expand...
And one of the main reasons England lost the shootout was Southgate thinking it was a good idea giving someone who was clearly overwhelmed by the occasion the 5th penalty.

A random football fan (me) called Saka missing if he got one as early as the hour mark so how the hell did it go over his head?
 
Dancfc said:
And one of the main reasons England lost the shootout was Southgate thinking it was a good idea giving someone who was clearly overwhelmed by the occasion the 5th penalty.

A random football fan (me) called Saka missing if he got one as early as the hour mark so how the hell did it go over his head?
Click to expand...
Same way it gets over most fans and pundits heads you don't ever let your best penalty takers take the first 3 penalties. Starting with your best and Leaving the fodder for the last 2
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
Same way it gets over most fans and pundits heads you don't ever let your best penalty takers take the first 3 penalties. Starting with your best and Leaving the fodder for the last 2
Click to expand...
Grealish, Shaw, Stones, Walker, Henderson and Sterling should have all stepped up before Saka was even glanced at in the pecking order. Infact he should have been one of the players took off for that Sancho/Rashford switch (not that that in and of itself was the best idea either as also proved).

When we are in penalty shootouts Alonso, Azpi and (when he was here) Luiz always stepped up and took one. Experienced players regardless of position should step up before a kid in these situations, especially one who was quite evidently overwhelmed by the occasion.
 
I think Southgate gets a bad rap in general and has a lot of the qualities required from an international manager. 75% of the job is finding the best overall balance (on and off the field) for the team based on the players available.

Southgate IMO does this very well. People like to criticise him for not using this so-called golden generation of attacking players to the fullest, but every time he tries to make England more expansive we look poorer for it. For me, while it doesn't always translate to the beautiful front-foot football we'd all love to see, his approach is for the most part the right one for this squad, and will continue to be for as long as we lack midfielders that can dictate a game of football.

He's never going to be a high level club manager because he isn't an elite tactician, but I don't think he necessarily needs to be to win international tournaments. IMO he gives us as good a chance of success as anyone else who would want this job, so there's really not enough compelling reasons out there to replace him.
 
Bilbo said:
I think Southgate gets a bad rap in general and has a lot of the qualities required from an international manager. 75% of the job is finding the best overall balance (on and off the field) for the team based on the players available.

Southgate IMO does this very well. People like to criticise him for not using this so-called golden generation of attacking players to the fullest, but every time he tries to make England more expansive we look poorer for it. For me, while it doesn't always translate to the beautiful front-foot football we'd all love to see, his approach is for the most part the right one for this squad, and will continue to be for as long as we lack midfielders that can dictate a game of football.

He's never going to be a high level club manager because he isn't an elite tactician, but I don't think he necessarily needs to be to win international tournaments. IMO he gives us as good a chance of success as anyone else who would want this job, so there's really not enough compelling reasons out there to replace him.
Click to expand...

I agree that the requirements for an international manager are different but Southgate is still so terrible tactically and with some of his selection choices that it just really hurts the side. You can pretty good at the 75% but if you're scoring close to 0 in the other 25% you've still got a problem. You may ride your luck for a while but eventually you'll run into a team and manager with a clue and then you'll be at a big disadvantage. England's best win under Southgate is probably the 2-0 against Germany and they took five shots all game. Its a classic case of people over-interpreting results in a very small sample (He got pretty far in two straight tournaments!) and not giving enough weight to process (The team creates nothing every match and largely progressed because the draws were very favorable).

I also don't think England lack the midfield talent to play with the ball more. Any decent manager would figure out how to deploy Rice, Phillips, and Bellingham in some combination to make the midfield functional enough for the rest of the team to flourish. He just has no imagination whatsoever in terms of how he could set up his team and no willingness to adapt his ideas to the form and abilities of his squad. He found some players and some defensive tactics in 2018 who delivered a few results for him and he is going to stick with them until the bitter end. The idea that you'd go into this tournament and still the odds on favorites to be in the starting XI include Maguire, Sterling, Pickford, Stones, and Trippier is just indefensible.

England will probably get bounced out by the first good team they face, probably in the R16 or quarterfinals and then everybody will be like "Oh well, we had to give Southgate a shot given his past results but maybe we should get a real manager now" and it will be a wasted opportunity because they are probably one of the 2-3 most talented sides in the world right now.
 
B20 said:
Late midfield bloomers.
Click to expand...

Ahh okay. Possibly although I don’t see much in RLC

I guess it was the comment about him maturing and placing him in the young player bracket when infact he’s approaching his peak and in my opinion has been quite stagnant for some time.

Are you a fan?
 
If England want to play defensive negative football, why not get Jose or Big Sam? They are better than Southgate, for sure. This is stone age football tactic. One of the world best national team shouldn't be playing this tactic in modern day.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Get to a semi final and a final in 4 years and apparently he’s crap because of 1 loss in the nations league that no one actually gives a feck about anyway.

The CAF ladies and gentlemen. The CAF.
Click to expand...
Let's not look at the teams he faced in those runs, coming undone by Croatia and then Italy. He's the most negative defensive minded manager we've had in ages and he's going to waste a generation of talented players.
 
Powderfinger said:
I agree that the requirements for an international manager are different but Southgate is still so terrible tactically and with some of his selection choices that it just really hurts the side. You can pretty good at the 75% but if you're scoring close to 0 in the other 25% you've still got a problem. You may ride your luck for a while but eventually you'll run into a team and manager with a clue and then you'll be at a big disadvantage. England's best win under Southgate is probably the 2-0 against Germany and they took five shots all game. Its a classic case of people over-interpreting results in a very small sample (He got pretty far in two straight tournaments!) and not giving enough weight to process (The team creates nothing every match and largely progressed because the draws were very favorable).

I also don't think England lack the midfield talent to play with the ball more. Any decent manager would figure out how to deploy Rice, Phillips, and Bellingham in some combination to make the midfield functional enough for the rest of the team to flourish. He just has no imagination whatsoever in terms of how he could set up his team and no willingness to adapt his ideas to the form and abilities of his squad. He found some players and some defensive tactics in 2018 who delivered a few results for him and he is going to stick with them until the bitter end. The idea that you'd go into this tournament and still the odds on favorites to be in the starting XI include Maguire, Sterling, Pickford, Stones, and Trippier is just indefensible.

England will probably get bounced out by the first good team they face, probably in the R16 or quarterfinals and then everybody will be like "Oh well, we had to give Southgate a shot given his past results but maybe we should get a real manager now" and it will be a wasted opportunity because they are probably one of the 2-3 most talented sides in the world right now.
Click to expand...

I have no issues with Southgate taking us into the next World Cup. Football fans love to be hyper-analytical and hyper-critical whenever possible. He isn't the sexiest name out there and he doesn't have a great CV, so he's an easy target. We all think we know football better than the average bloke and being an armchair manager is half the fun of it, I get that.

Having said that, there has to be some allowance given for fact over opinion. He has delivered a World Cup semi-final and a penalty shootout loss in a Euro final, which is an outstanding record when compared to his peers in this role. Second highest win percentage overall. There really aren't many metrics where we could look at what he has achieved and be critical. Based on his record he absolutely has done enough to warrant another tournament at least. Replacing him right now would be an extremely brave decision.

Numbers aside though I would agree that on field performances aren't always where we want them to be. Then again I don't go into these expecting too much because I don't think many Int'l teams play great football really. It's often a 'make the best of it while blooding new players and making sure you qualify' type of deal, and then the tournaments where we put ridiculous amounts of pressure on the team. Not a great foundation for care-free tactics and flowing football. I also don't think this squad is as strong as most seem to. It doesn't have the overall quality that Hoddle & Eriksson had available to them IMO.

If he fails at this World Cup we could reasonably say it's time for someone new to have a go, but right now we are broadly 2nd or 3rd favourites for it and that's probably about right to me. A semi final spot should be our expectation and then who knows from there.
 
Bilbo said:
I have no issues with Southgate taking us into the next World Cup. Football fans love to be hyper-analytical and hyper-critical whenever possible. He isn't the sexiest name out there and he doesn't have a great CV, so he's an easy target. We all think we know football better than the average bloke and being an armchair manager is half the fun of it, I get that.

Having said that, there has to be some allowance given for fact over opinion. He has delivered a World Cup semi-final and a penalty shootout loss in a Euro final, which is an outstanding record when compared to his peers in this role. Second highest win percentage overall. There really aren't many metrics where we could look at what he has achieved and be critical. Based on his record he absolutely has done enough to warrant another tournament at least. Replacing him right now would be an extremely brave decision.

Numbers aside though I would agree that on field performances aren't always where we want them to be. Then again I don't go into these expecting too much because I don't think many Int'l teams play great football really. It's often a 'make the best of it while blooding new players and making sure you qualify' type of deal, and then the tournaments where we put ridiculous amounts of pressure on the team. Not a great foundation for care-free tactics and flowing football. I also don't think this squad is as strong as most seem to. It doesn't have the overall quality that Hoddle & Eriksson had available to them IMO.

If he fails at this World Cup we could reasonably say it's time for someone new to have a go, but right now we are broadly 2nd or 3rd favourites for it and that's probably about right to me. A semi final spot should be our expectation and then who knows from there.
Click to expand...

Fair post in all respects.

At this point it is a done deal anyway. He was never going to be replaced after the Euros and certainly not this late in the cycle. I just hope that if the team disappoints in this World Cup - with results coming more into line with how they have played - the FA has the guts to make a change, rather than rationalizing giving him yet another tournament.
 
TheReligion said:
Ahh okay. Possibly although I don’t see much in RLC

I guess it was the comment about him maturing and placing him in the young player bracket when infact he’s approaching his peak and in my opinion has been quite stagnant for some time.

Are you a fan?
Click to expand...
Not especially. But with the right coach I think he could still be something.
 
Now Southgate is talking about England fans.

Meanwhile the Argentina manager only talks about football, his squad is 100% committed, they look focused, no doubt theyre huge favourites in Qatar.

This Southgate man isnt serious, i feel bad for this England squad, looks like its gonna be wasted in the hands of the yes, PR man.
 
Dancfc said:
Grealish, Shaw, Stones, Walker, Henderson and Sterling should have all stepped up before Saka was even glanced at in the pecking order. Infact he should have been one of the players took off for that Sancho/Rashford switch (not that that in and of itself was the best idea either as also proved).

When we are in penalty shootouts Alonso, Azpi and (when he was here) Luiz always stepped up and took one. Experienced players regardless of position should step up before a kid in these situations, especially one who was quite evidently overwhelmed by the occasion.
Click to expand...
We are in agreement that senior players should step up. But it's still the manager's fault to have a strategy where his best takers go 1-3. A Kane for example should have been taking number 4 or 5. The real pressure penalties
 
Yakuza_devils said:
If England want to play defensive negative football, why not get Jose or Big Sam? They are better than Southgate, for sure. This is stone age football tactic. One of the world best national team shouldn't be playing this tactic in modern day.
Click to expand...
They did get Big Sam...
 
Murphy is a cretin. A pillock. Pure noise.
 
In fairness, Germany have a far better squad right now. Look at the comparative benches. This talk of a golden generation for England is a load of shit. Some of that is probably Southgate’s fault or players being out of form, but still, that back four and keeper shouldn’t be anywhere near major tournament finals.
 
Honest question - besides Jose, has a cowardly manager with lots of talent to work with ever won a World Cup/Euro/Copa?
 
Dan_F said:
In fairness, Germany have a far better squad right now. Look at the comparative benches. This talk of a golden generation for England is a load of shit. Some of that is probably Southgate’s fault or players being out of form, but still, that back four and keeper shouldn’t be anywhere near major tournament finals.
Click to expand...
England finished well the game in my opinion, it showed they have quality options on the bench but is really Pickford the best keeper in England?
 
Southgate might have a lot of talent to work with, but it's not necessarily evenly spread through the squad. I think that gets forgotten a bit and you have to consider it when we say England should be doing this or that or producing amazing performances and that the manager is the sole reason they are not.

Yes the forward and wing areas are very strong, right back is great, but there's not a lot going on in goal, centre half or central midfield. That's a significant part of the spine of a side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.