The point is you don't publicly humiliate your young players like that. Ole was furious with how England handled Mason and rightly so.
So what's next for Sir Gareth Southgate?
- Thread starter Dirty Schwein
- Start date
Yea it probably is too harsh, and poor judgement. I had forgotten all about it tbh.
He also treated Chris Smalling rather oddly a few years ago, back when he was in good form and England had few CB options. He pinned his omission from the squad on his lack of ability on the ball, but still continued to pick out-of-form cloggers at centre back instead.
Delivered what? Against every good team we have faced we've been comprehensively outplayed. We've won nothing. It has helped us beat teams we would have mostly beaten anyway.
A good manager looks at his strengths and plays to them. A poor manager looks at the opponent's strengths and tries to stop them. I don't mind a bit of tactical naivety if he learned from it and moved on, but he didn't. It's Croatia 2018 all over again.
And his treatment of the youngsters was disgraceful. Last night will affect Saka for the rest of his career and puts a dark cloud over our new star signing.
For example I'd play 4-3-3 instead of 3-5-2 or it's other variants (3 CBs with 2 FBs).
Sterling Kane Sancho
Grealish Rice Phillips
Shaw Maguire Stones Trippier
That way you wont have only 1 game changer (Sterling) but three. Sterling, Sancho, Grealish. And instead of subbing defenders for more attacking players, you can sub underperforming attacking players with another one (Foden, Saka, Rashford, Bellingham, Mount).
Basically trying to outscore the opponent will be the gameplan from the start rather than waiting to sub defensive minded players with a more attacking ones. But thats just me. Im not saying Southgate doesnt know what hes doing because he clearly does. It's just that playing more defenders than necessary looks a bit weird to me considering the current England squad's best attribute is their attacking players. No other team has such a luxury when it comes into attacking options.
5 defenders is understandable. 6 or above is overkill.
Last edited:
I don't think I would fire Southgate, he has built a great atmosphere around the squad and I think firing him would do more damage than good at this stage.He handpicked Graeme Jones that tosspot as a coach. The man nearly got my beloved Luton relegated from the Championship a couple of years back and is now at Newcastle being as useless as ever. I didn't realize he's a part of the England setup and I choked on my drink when I saw him giving instructions to Southgate during the game. At that moment, I knew England is done.
Also, the sight of Atomic Kitten reuniting to sing lyrics like "Southgate you're the one, you still turn me on, football's coming home again" really tempted lady luck to regret all the help she's been giving England
But on a serious note, if you get rid of Southgate, who do you realistically get? Potter? Howe? None have really proven much and will get slaughtered if they don't get to the finals of the World Cup. You can go foreign again but that hasn't worked out well in the past...
There's not many options I can think of that are good enough or would even want the job.
Giggsy 'till the end of the next campaign?
Me I would bring in an experienced coach who could help him, someone like I dunno, Bryan Kidd or Zeljko Buvac.
Suggest that to the FA.
That's a fair logic, our strength is attacking players, so play to them. Our weakness is our midfield and ability to keep and move the ball. With your lineup you make use of our advantage and you will open up out weakness'. If we lost doing that we would be in the same position blaming Southgate. I think probably his choice has a bit of a higher chance of winning. We took it to pens and had an advantage in pens even.
The problem next World Cup will be that the media, pundits and fans will start expecting more.
It's one thing going in with minimal expectations but another ball-game going in as a favourite.
Whether Southgate can deliver under the heavy expectations past managers failed under will be very interesting.
It's one thing going in with minimal expectations but another ball-game going in as a favourite.
Whether Southgate can deliver under the heavy expectations past managers failed under will be very interesting.
I struggle to see what benefit we have retaining him for the WC because there's a real trend with us of not being able to overcome the better teams when it counts. That's basically what England have always struggled with bar Woy's terrible tenure. I keep seeing people bring up the fact we got to a semi and a final as a reason why we're doing well but, if you are going to use the stage of a tournament as a barometer of success, then you also have to factor in who we played in order to get there. This is our major tournament run for last WC and EURO:
Tunisia (2-1 W), Panama (6-1 W), Belgium (0-1 L), Colombia (won on pens), Sweden (2-0 W), Croatia (1-2 L), Croatia (1-0 W), Scotland (0-0), Czech Rep (1-0 W), Germany (2-0), Ukraine (4-0), Denmark (2-1 W), Italy (lost on pens). You can include the Belgium 3rd place playoff loss as well if you value that game, personally I don't.
If you consider Germany an elite team, which is generous, we have only beaten one elite team in tournament football under Southgate and been beaten by Belgium and Italy (arguably add Croatia in '18 as well at the peak of that generation). Our draws have been a real blessing as well - WC we avoided every single big team bar Spain and Croatia (Brazil, Argentina, Belgium, France, Portugal all on other side) & in the Euros we avoided every big team again (bar Germany). Contrast that to someone like Martinez with Belgium who we always think of as underperforming given the team he has but he's beaten England (WC), Brazil (WC) & Portugal (EUR) in tournament football and been knocked out by France (WC) and Italy (EUR) who both won the tournaments. Southgate has had massively favourable draws, home advantage and yet we always come unstuck against the first 'big' team we play.
Twice we have gone ahead early in knock out games against good teams and twice we have then sat back, ceded control of the game and lost - this is a mentality issue and it comes from a manager who is not experienced at the elite level (as a player or coach) and whose priority is to set us up with the aim of not conceding. Add that to the questionable game management last night and just think it's a waste of a tournament to leave him in control. Where's the harm in some fresh ideas and the new pressure/drive that a new coach brings?
Tunisia (2-1 W), Panama (6-1 W), Belgium (0-1 L), Colombia (won on pens), Sweden (2-0 W), Croatia (1-2 L), Croatia (1-0 W), Scotland (0-0), Czech Rep (1-0 W), Germany (2-0), Ukraine (4-0), Denmark (2-1 W), Italy (lost on pens). You can include the Belgium 3rd place playoff loss as well if you value that game, personally I don't.
If you consider Germany an elite team, which is generous, we have only beaten one elite team in tournament football under Southgate and been beaten by Belgium and Italy (arguably add Croatia in '18 as well at the peak of that generation). Our draws have been a real blessing as well - WC we avoided every single big team bar Spain and Croatia (Brazil, Argentina, Belgium, France, Portugal all on other side) & in the Euros we avoided every big team again (bar Germany). Contrast that to someone like Martinez with Belgium who we always think of as underperforming given the team he has but he's beaten England (WC), Brazil (WC) & Portugal (EUR) in tournament football and been knocked out by France (WC) and Italy (EUR) who both won the tournaments. Southgate has had massively favourable draws, home advantage and yet we always come unstuck against the first 'big' team we play.
Twice we have gone ahead early in knock out games against good teams and twice we have then sat back, ceded control of the game and lost - this is a mentality issue and it comes from a manager who is not experienced at the elite level (as a player or coach) and whose priority is to set us up with the aim of not conceding. Add that to the questionable game management last night and just think it's a waste of a tournament to leave him in control. Where's the harm in some fresh ideas and the new pressure/drive that a new coach brings?
Well playing with one holding midfielder rather than two in the qualifiers and playing more attacking in the qualifiers would be a good start so we are ready for the games against the top teams next November otherwise will be same old story
Yeah the fair weather fans will be jumping out in defence so not a prayer of him leaving the job
He’s not gonna get sacked so I hope he resigns. I know so many will talk of entitlement, and the idea of wanting rid of a finalist being ridiculous, but he’s too cautious and has benefitted from favourable draws in the last 2 tournaments.
Yeah very favourable indeed but the misty eyed ones won't have the guts to say it
Depends how you see the current squad on a personal level.
I see a lot of talent that went under utilised. I can see Gareths argument about playing a certain way (defensive in his case) but for me you play the way your squad is composed. If likes of Sancho, Grealish, rashford etc can tear teams a new one with pace etc then tear them a new one. It's not just about those 3 either I think we have attacking talent through out from Pickford tbh. I thinking his kicking being off was partly due to no one out there waiting to run. Even Kane being deep was indicative of Gareths style.
I don't agree he is a good man manager either. His not playing players isn't good management, putting them out in the last few seconds isn't good management. Putting a 19 year old newbie as 5th penalty taker isn't good management , despite the hugs and cuddles after the event. The damage done to players who missed penalties can be enormous. Not everyone becomes a becks.
But then I've never liked Southgate as manager. Even his interviews are cringey and look stage managed.
I see a lot of talent that went under utilised. I can see Gareths argument about playing a certain way (defensive in his case) but for me you play the way your squad is composed. If likes of Sancho, Grealish, rashford etc can tear teams a new one with pace etc then tear them a new one. It's not just about those 3 either I think we have attacking talent through out from Pickford tbh. I thinking his kicking being off was partly due to no one out there waiting to run. Even Kane being deep was indicative of Gareths style.
I don't agree he is a good man manager either. His not playing players isn't good management, putting them out in the last few seconds isn't good management. Putting a 19 year old newbie as 5th penalty taker isn't good management , despite the hugs and cuddles after the event. The damage done to players who missed penalties can be enormous. Not everyone becomes a becks.
But then I've never liked Southgate as manager. Even his interviews are cringey and look stage managed.
Don't feed the trolls
He has 12 months to save his job as LUCKILY the world cup is next year. Our players are basically kids so we will be around for a while. If he doesn't buck his ideas up and find a way to make better use of our attacking talent this I don't know what to say. The pragmatic approach can get you so far and also requires to learn to counter attack
think he just has the next one. After a while people will start to see him as a nearly man and its rare to have the same dude for 4 tourneys
Arry
He'll need to evolve to another formation to get more of a consistent attacking threat.
During the WC, the squad relied on set pieces and primarily used a back 3. Hard to break down and picked their spots when attacking. This tournament saw a deep midfield double pivot, with Philips rarely moving forward to provide genuine attacking support. A lot of their play came from the left-hand side. But again, difficult to break down.
Think he needs to introduced a tighter, more cohesive midfield unit leveraging 3 players. Maybe a 4312/433 or 442 diamond.
Mount was a throw-in/auxiliary midfielder and his role wasn't clearly defined. Plus he was just ineffective because he wasn't part of a good pressing system, unlike at Chelsea.
The back four kind of picks itself, however a midfield 3 of Philips acting as a 6/8, Rice in the middle as the anchor 6, and Bellingham or Mount or Foden as the attacking 8/10 would be nice to see. Sterling and Kane need another supportive player to unlock a defense and keep oppositions honest. Think it should be between Sancho, Grealish, and Rashford.
During the WC, the squad relied on set pieces and primarily used a back 3. Hard to break down and picked their spots when attacking. This tournament saw a deep midfield double pivot, with Philips rarely moving forward to provide genuine attacking support. A lot of their play came from the left-hand side. But again, difficult to break down.
Think he needs to introduced a tighter, more cohesive midfield unit leveraging 3 players. Maybe a 4312/433 or 442 diamond.
Mount was a throw-in/auxiliary midfielder and his role wasn't clearly defined. Plus he was just ineffective because he wasn't part of a good pressing system, unlike at Chelsea.
The back four kind of picks itself, however a midfield 3 of Philips acting as a 6/8, Rice in the middle as the anchor 6, and Bellingham or Mount or Foden as the attacking 8/10 would be nice to see. Sterling and Kane need another supportive player to unlock a defense and keep oppositions honest. Think it should be between Sancho, Grealish, and Rashford.
He got you closer to winning the Euro's than any England manager in history. How is everyone thuis mad at him. It's not like you're Germany or France, no one expect you to be this good. He deserves a statue.
England is probably more talented than Germany now, aside from GK and their double pivot. And with Flick managing the national team, think they will improve.
England was a favorite this past tournament because of their WC and because they pretty much had a favorable path to the final (only one legitimate away match, semifinal versus Denmark in Rome).
They have reached their maximum level, which is a tournament final. But there's a significant tweak/change that needs to be done. Mancini did it with Italy and Luis Enrique did it with Spain.
Belgium and England have really good squads, similar to France. But I along with many others would rate Mancini, Luis Enrique, and Dechampes a whole lot higher than Roberto Martinez and Gareth Southgate. That's a tremendous gap between the former 3 managers and the latter 2. That's where the margins are different and that's where the doubts come from.
GS seems to like vanilla players, I guess it's more vanilla.
He doesn't learn from his mistakes. After taking the lead in the WC semi England started losing control of midfield and he didn't recognise it or was too scared to do anything until it was too late. Exactly the same thing happened last night, it was obvious we needed to try and take back control of the midfield yet he didnt have the balls to change it by making subs until after they had equalised. I have no doubt the same thing will happen at the world cup next year.
That's the problem, England should be just as good, but historically they are very inferior to these, so this is deemed as some sort of success.
Usual reaction by England fans. Yes I’m disappointed about last night. Yes I think he could play more attacking football. Yes the penalty takers was an odd decision but we were a penalty shootout away from winning a trophy.
But we had easy fixtures? We lost to Iceland in the last Euros. As an England manager he’s won penalty shoot outs, beaten Germany in a knockout game, got to a semi final and final.
At the end of the day he’s got England to it’s first major final in 55 years. We are not an international powerhouse so I don’t know where the expectation comes from. It’s gone from he should be winning games to he should be winning games with decent football. Usual arrogance that leads to teams going backward as they don’t accept their limitations.
It becomes a blame game when a few days ago he was a God to most. The one thing I didn’t like was all the players and manager singing Sweet Caroline after the Semi final win. Just gave an immediate acceptance that making the final was enough, akin to PSG celebrating big wins in the Champions League like they have won the entire tournament . England need to sort out their mentality for these bigs games, including the fans. Wembley was silent with nerves once we scored.
But we had easy fixtures? We lost to Iceland in the last Euros. As an England manager he’s won penalty shoot outs, beaten Germany in a knockout game, got to a semi final and final.
At the end of the day he’s got England to it’s first major final in 55 years. We are not an international powerhouse so I don’t know where the expectation comes from. It’s gone from he should be winning games to he should be winning games with decent football. Usual arrogance that leads to teams going backward as they don’t accept their limitations.
It becomes a blame game when a few days ago he was a God to most. The one thing I didn’t like was all the players and manager singing Sweet Caroline after the Semi final win. Just gave an immediate acceptance that making the final was enough, akin to PSG celebrating big wins in the Champions League like they have won the entire tournament . England need to sort out their mentality for these bigs games, including the fans. Wembley was silent with nerves once we scored.
He should go or be sacked. Period. A former defender and defensive manager. I won't say a coward, but certainly not brave. We are wasting the generation of Rashford, Kane, Sterling, Sancho, Foden and Grealish with the likes of Rice and Phillips in midfield without a proper AMF/SS (Foden/Sterling). That 5-2-3 for the final with SEVEN defensive players was a disgrace. And he's worse than Ole when it comes to a decisive penalty shootout.
England won't win the WC 2022 with Southgate, simple as that. Out.
England won't win the WC 2022 with Southgate, simple as that. Out.
While I agree England weren't as good or attacking as the material suggests they could be, getting a final while knocking out Germany and just barely losing on penalties to the best side in the tournament is hardly the stackable offense it's being made out to be.
France won the last World Cup playing extremely dull football with one of the most stacked national teams I remember. Southgate managed to nearly replicate that achievement (albeit at the Euro's).
I think the reason England is usually less good than the sum of their parts is also in part to English football culture. A lot of English football fans hugely prefer their clubs over the national team and perhaps this trickles down into the players. I can especially imagine the likes of Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes being partly influenced by the huge rivalry they had on a club level.
Southgate probably won't win the golden whatever golden thing the best manager wins, but he's no Steve McClaren.
You just said it.
But I do agree, he should move on.
No I didn't. Not brave is not necessarily a coward. He won't take any risks.
It was sarcasm, jeeeeeeeeeez, people are so tense after the thing went to Rome.
Boudica lost again, eh? That Southgate fella, a bad general.
France is stacked all over the pitch but also played to their strengths of central midfield. They have a lot of egos/characters to deal with too.
But I agree in that Southgate shouldn't be sacked and that it was a very entertaining and proud tournament for England.
That next step is clear and either Southgate learns and changes from the final loss experience or someone else will.
Not even good enough for that level. He was awful at Boro and football has moved way past his rubbish tactics.
Watching England is like Stoke under Pulis or West Brom under Megson. Even Dyche plays better football with Burnley. If any of them was managing England and they played such negative stuff and launched every free kick within 40 yards into the box, there'd be no end to the complaints.
I saw a stat that showed they were among the fewest chances created from open play but the most from set pieces.
When I look at the difference it made to Italy when Chiesa went off it makes me wonder what the scoreline would have been if they had Sancho & Grealish for that game. They'd probably have stuck 3 past us. Southgate should go but he'll get the next 2 tournaments and we'll waste half the players in yet another 'golden generation'.
When your 3rd preferred Centre Back is a Right Back then perhaps looking to utilise your attacking talent more is the answer.
He’s risk averse in his nature so in the later stages of the competition he’ll favour the 5-3-2 & hope for moments of brilliance.
Italy should be a blueprint for how we go about things, changing their entire front 3 was brave. The had a system & played it throughout.
Having Sterling [good tournament, anonymous game] on the pitch after 120 minutes when he wasn’t even in the Top 5 penalty takers last night was malpractice.
He’s risk averse in his nature so in the later stages of the competition he’ll favour the 5-3-2 & hope for moments of brilliance.
Italy should be a blueprint for how we go about things, changing their entire front 3 was brave. The had a system & played it throughout.
Having Sterling [good tournament, anonymous game] on the pitch after 120 minutes when he wasn’t even in the Top 5 penalty takers last night was malpractice.
He has more talent to pick from than Germany, Holland, and yes - Italy too, arguably a similar level side to France, and yet sets us up in a 7-2-1 formation. That's why people are complaining. How many Italy players would you have at Man Utd over the players England have? Chiesa is a good player, but Grealish, Sancho and Rashford are better. He left some players at home that would have been really interesting options. He was SCARED to attack Italy in extra time.
And we played -just about every match- in England bar the one game against the Ukraine. Home advantage was absolutely massive, and England should honestly have EXPECTED to get to the final, given every game was played at Wembley.
He has to go. This team with a very good manager could be an excellent team. Who should replace him though? Any ideas?
5 defenders, 2 holding mids, 1 attacking mid who tends to track back a fair bit and a striker who keeps coming deep.
That's 9 of the 10 outfield players pretty much defending with only Sterling on strike against two of the most experienced CBs.
England need to be managed in a way that reflects their squad. Attacking. Instead, they're managed like that are Greece, looking to defend all game and steal a goal.
I don't think Kane even touched the ball in Italy's box except when taking the penalty.
If they keep Southgate because they believe he has some attachment to these players, they need to convince better coaches to surround him with. Basically a shadow manager like Lowe was under Klinsmann.
That's 9 of the 10 outfield players pretty much defending with only Sterling on strike against two of the most experienced CBs.
England need to be managed in a way that reflects their squad. Attacking. Instead, they're managed like that are Greece, looking to defend all game and steal a goal.
I don't think Kane even touched the ball in Italy's box except when taking the penalty.
If they keep Southgate because they believe he has some attachment to these players, they need to convince better coaches to surround him with. Basically a shadow manager like Lowe was under Klinsmann.
The good news is we only have 1 year until the world cup (if we qualify!) so with the squad still young, if he fails there, he can resign and someone else can take the reigns. However if he can succeed then great but he needs to change his approach for that.
There is a clear expectation now on England due to their success in back to back international tournaments, surely you'd agree with that. They have young talent and leaders among the group. There is a clear core of players who have the requisite talent and leadership to drive deep into major tournaments.
Reaching a major final after 55 odd years is an accomplishment, however you have to learn how to lose in the biggest occasions before winning in those biggest occasions. That goes to Southgate just as much as the players. I think the players are going to be fine because they're good people and there's a belief within them. Just that Southgate has to evolve for the World Cup and it will be a tougher task with the timing of the tournament and the team will not be shielded with St. George headquarters.
There's the realization of actually getting to the finals and the realization that Italy had a tougher road and had the battle hardened players. Italy were going to own the England midfield and they did. If you cannot win the midfield battle, it's going to be a long game. England got the early goal and played well in the last 10 minutes of extra time. Everything between then kind of played itself out with Italy dominating because they won midfield and kept Kane and Sterling pretty much on an island, aside from a few times for Sterling.
The belief and expectation of going deep into tournaments with the expectation of yes, we can win the whole thing if we do what is required is the bare minimum. So getting into the quarterfinals (out of the group stage and winning your first knockout game, opposition depending) should be bare minimum and then you take your chance with the draw after that. Knockout tournaments - luck of the draw helps and it has done so for the past two international tournaments for England. I expect that they will not be able to depend on that moving forward, but that their quality squad will put them in good positions to win something within the next 4 years.