So what's next for Sir Gareth Southgate?

mu4c_20le said:
Yes, they all deserved a shot, my point is I have no problem with giving young underqualified coaches a chance, the problem was keeping them well past their sell by date. Neither were serious candidates at the time, Southgate got the job because of the Big Sam scandal. And like ole he got a tune out of the players. But unlike us, England haven't come close to winning anything for decades, that's why getting to the final was considered decent for some fans.
Click to expand...
Not entirely sure that's true. England have always gone through iterations of possessing some serious talents, this generation happens to be another. So if anything they've been perennial underachievers, and hiring
Eckers99 said:
It's a lazy comparison. Southgate got a 2nd tier international team to the late stages of the 2 major tournaments. Ole lost a Europa League final as manager of one of the biggest, most successful clubs in world football.
Click to expand...
England are hardly second tier. Yes they've won feck all for almost 60 years, but considering the talent pool of this current generation, almost all of which play in the top league in the world, couple that to the fact they've had favourable draws and other favouring circumstances (e.g. playing at Wembley during the last Euros), then their achievements are hardly a testament to Gareth feckin Southgate.

Like Ole, Southgate seems to rely overly on moments of individual brilliance and hoping to hit teams on the break. He's hardly making use of the crop of talent available to him.
 
Kaos said:
Not entirely sure that's true. England have always gone through iterations of possessing some serious talents, this generation happens to be another. So if anything they've been perennial underachievers, and hiring

England are hardly second tier. Yes they've won feck all for almost 60 years, but considering the talent pool of this current generation, almost all of which play in the top league in the world, couple that to the fact they've had favourable draws and other favouring circumstances (e.g. playing at Wembley during the last Euros), then their achievements are hardly a testament to Gareth feckin Southgate.

Like Ole, Southgate seems to rely overly on moments of individual brilliance and hoping to hit teams on the break. He's hardly making use of the crop of talent available to him.
Click to expand...
The "team is not all that" line is often used as an excuse for underperforming managers.

I remember the same was being said about Lampard when it was becoming clear he (at that point in his career) took the team as far as he could then four months later the same players won the UCL passing Madrid of the pitch then going toe to toe with a Guardiola side.
 
Zehner said:
Just read his quotes on Musiala. And the treatment of Sancho.. Jesus, this guy is such a hateable idiot.
Click to expand...
The decision to leave Sancho out should be getting more heat. Nevermind mainstream media, even United fans are not really saying anything, even those who talk a good line about defending our players.

He has assisted and scored more than low-socks Grealish this season.

Feck Southgate.
 
Kaos said:
Not entirely sure that's true. England have always gone through iterations of possessing some serious talents, this generation happens to be another. So if anything they've been perennial underachievers, and hiring

England are hardly second tier. Yes they've won feck all for almost 60 years, but considering the talent pool of this current generation, almost all of which play in the top league in the world, couple that to the fact they've had favourable draws and other favouring circumstances (e.g. playing at Wembley during the last Euros), then their achievements are hardly a testament to Gareth feckin Southgate.

Like Ole, Southgate seems to rely overly on moments of individual brilliance and hoping to hit teams on the break. He's hardly making use of the crop of talent available to him.
Click to expand...
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
Completely disagree with this. Rice, Bellingham, and Foden is more than enough to outplay teams in midfield with Mount, Phillips, Ward Prowse, and Henderson as backups. The issue is the shape of the team and personnel up front and at the back. Saka has to start, and they need another runner on the opposite wing if playing Kane. Whether that is Rashford, Bowen, or bashing it into Sterling’s head to stop dropping deep is up the the staff.

The team has plenty of options and ways they could play, with good footballers in most every position barring CB. But Southgate sets up like he’s coaching Wolves to grind out a 1-0 victory and doesn’t seem to have a clue tactically as to how he can form a cohesive attacking side.
Click to expand...

I think maybe the point that poster was trying to make is England lack that playmaker and quick passer who can keep things ticking over but make things happen too
 
Eckers99 said:
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
Click to expand...
No, this is basically wumming, but you have achieved that well. Hope no-one even bothers biting.
 
Eckers99 said:
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is true at all. You can win tournaments with less depth and quality than England have - the issue is really a mirror of what United have generally been going through post SAF. Lots of decent players, lots of hype, poor managerial decisions and cowardly choices.

This is the FA that appointed Big Sam, just remember that.
 
Convinced the likes of Tomori & Toney will feel rejected by England due to Southgate and play for someone else
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
No. You just like him are using hindsight to make these claims. The reason they beat Argentina for example was because Argentina as per usual plain froze. They also never threatened Spain at all. Spain were pretty comfortable against them, which was no surprise because they weren't at that level yet. They were at the begining of their cycle in 2010. That is why 4 years later they matured into a winning team.
Click to expand...
Mmmm I dunno. I tend to agree with @Gio on this. That germany side was already pretty great, better than England all in all as it had fewer weaknesses and was more cohesive

England, as always, had nothing beyond Rooney

Southgate is not a great manager. But he isnt remotely shit either abd he has done very well.
Click to expand...
Thank you
People should stop pretending he has a generation as good as England's past 2 golden generations(1986-90) (2002-2010) and is "holding them back". (I.e the hoolaboo about TAA not playing often) His tactics have actually masked a lot of weaknesses that exist in the group. Its really funny how he gets so much abuse yet he lost a major tourney final on the lottery of a shoot out. Against an Italy side that actually dumped out better sides than England in the tournament and played the best football in the entire tournament all tournement long. Plus have a far higher big tournament final pedigree. Yet the way most talk on here. One would think he faced a truly rubbish opponent in the final that was a perrenial international tournament pretender.
Click to expand...
Agree with everything except for the bolded. I think the talent pool now is better than the 2002-2010 period. Much greater attacking depth now. The death of those England sides was the lack of anything at all beyond Owen and then Rooney. The moment one of them went down it became pathetically easy to stop England's attack. England did not have a high enough technical level to really dominate games and put Gerrard and Lampard into goalscoring positions often enough(Capello often bemoaned Scholes retirement and blames himself for ignoring Carrick)
 
Eckers99 said:
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
Click to expand...
How boring.
 
Reckon he goes after the WC. It's one thing to have bad results but the manner in which England play, the poor team selections and favouritism. Those are behaviours that suit domestic club football as opposed to nationals. The issue is who do the FA replace him with.
 
He’s had two excellent tournaments and delivered results. He was the right man for the job given the stage England were at. Now the same players have big experience behind them and they probably need to get a manager in who can build on the solid foundation. The problem is there aren’t many English upgrades out there and the best option (Potter) won’t be interested now. If you’re the FA you’re probably thinking of either keeping Southgate on the basis that he has delivered before and you have faith he can do it again, even if it isn’t until euro 2024. Or you look beyond English managers, which is generally an exceptional event.
 
Pickle85 said:
The comparison to Greece and Denmark is all the evidence that's needed tbh, with no disrespect to those nations.
Click to expand...

That's really not a comparison, just a statement of fact (number of titles). He's not writing that England as a football nation is comparable to DEN or GRE.
 
Kaos said:
Not entirely sure that's true. England have always gone through iterations of possessing some serious talents, this generation happens to be another. So if anything they've been perennial underachievers, and hiring

England are hardly second tier. Yes they've won feck all for almost 60 years, but considering the talent pool of this current generation, almost all of which play in the top league in the world, couple that to the fact they've had favourable draws and other favouring circumstances (e.g. playing at Wembley during the last Euros), then their achievements are hardly a testament to Gareth feckin Southgate.

Like Ole, Southgate seems to rely overly on moments of individual brilliance and hoping to hit teams on the break. He's hardly making use of the crop of talent available to him.
Click to expand...

The comparison is laughable - it works in one way and one way only, which is that some people have similar feelings about OGS and Southgate, and hence like to think they're similar.

Southgate is the only England manager who has ever reached the top 4 in consecutive tournaments. If you put OGS achievements in the context of all previous Utd managers, are you seeing something to equal that?
 
justsomebloke said:
That's really not a comparison, just a statement of fact (number of titles). He's not writing that England as a football nation is comparable to DEN or GRE.
Click to expand...
Come on now, you're being willfully obtuse. It's a clear wum. Why not use Netherlands or Portugal as points of comparison, in that case?
 
Rooney in Paris said:
What did he say about Musiala?
Click to expand...

Nothing too bad actually, just pretty small time and passive aggressive. He was pissed off that German internationals allegedly talked a young player into playing for Germany (calling it a "disgrace") and was then asked what he expects from Musiala in the future, answering "I don't care about Musiala's future"
 
So fecking what? It's just a factual statement.
Pickle85 said:
Come on now, you're being willfully obtuse. It's a clear wum. Why not use Netherlands or Portugal as points of comparison, in that case?
Click to expand...

It's not a clear wum just because you don't like hearing it! The point is basically valid, and the statement is factually correct.
 
Zehner said:
Nothing too bad actually, just pretty small time and passive aggressive. He was pissed off that German internationals allegedly talked a young player into playing for Germany (calling it a "disgrace") and was then asked what he expects from Musiala in the future, answering "I don't care about Musiala's future"
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure what's wrong with that?

I mean, I actually do find him unlikeable in general, but it was a stupid question and a genuine answer. Pretty touchy if this is what leads you to believe he's a "hateable idiot".
 
I mostly agree with those who argue that Southgate hasn't been insanely underwhelming in terms of getting the most out of the players available to him. Some (several) of those players are vastly overrated by those who make the argument that he's failed to take advantage of a golden-ish generation of English footballers.

The problem with him is that he just doesn't look like a top manager. The comparisons with Ole are fair enough in that regard. He hasn't produced insanely bad results - it's just a bit meh all things said and done, and why not try to improve on "meh" if you actually have ambitions?
 
Chesterlestreet said:
I mostly agree with those who argue that Southgate hasn't been insanely underwhelming in terms of getting the most out of the players available to him. Some (several) of those players are vastly overrated by those who make the argument that he's failed to take advantage of a golden-ish generation of English footballers.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily make that claim, I think this idea of golden generation is always a bit warped. What I do think though is that the current generation is much more technically proficient than previous generations, and that it's quite stacked with attacking talent, and yet it mostly plays boring, conservative football. That's on him, and while it can work ok in tournament competitions, it's a shame considering what could be done with this batch of players.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
I mean, I actually do find him unlikeable in general
Click to expand...

Yeah, same.

I hear people talking him up as likeable all the time but I don't quite get it.

I don't find either him or the team as such particularly likeable.

Why not? I dunno exactly. He isn't obviously unlikeable either, just a bit dull. I suppose some people see something either a bit awkward or a bit "humble" in him that they find likeable...but I don't quite see that myself.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
That's on him, and while it can work ok in tournament competitions, it's a shame considering what could be done with this batch of players.
Click to expand...

I think it's clear as day that a more - call it what you will - progressive manager could get more out of certain players and improve the overall style of play (looking less dire and workmanlike).

Possibly, though, without improving results greatly. But then again, he hasn't won anything with his ultra pragmatic approach, so why not try something a bit more adventurous.
 
Eckers99 said:
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
Click to expand...
If that really is our "ceiling" then all the more reason to make the games more fun. It's utter nonsense to suggest what Southgate is serving up is the only way to be competitive, relatively or otherwise.
 
Rooney in Paris said:
I'm not quite sure what's wrong with that?

I mean, I actually do find him unlikeable in general, but it was a stupid question and a genuine answer. Pretty touchy if this is what leads you to believe he's a "hateable idiot".
Click to expand...

I think it's generally a really bitchy answer since he's attacking a 19 year old player. Not really appropriate for the head coach of such a big football nation. I would definitely expect a classier answer from Flick or Löw before him. If you want to criticize someone, criticize the association not the player.

However, Southgate has history for saying stupid and dumb things which makes it even worse. He has that aura of nationalism surrounding him. So yeah, I think he's a very hateable bloke. And not the sharpest tool in the shed on top of it.
 
Eckers99 said:
It's a nation with the same number of major tournament wins as the likes of Greece and Denmark. Getting to semis and finals is the ceiling. No manager is coming in and turning a reasonably talented squad with a fair amount of dross into free-flowing artistes and tournament favourites. Historically that just isn't England's level, but some people just can't accept it, which is why we're always having the same conversations, regardless of what year it is.

If Gazza/Shearer/ Rooney/Gerrard hit form, we've got a chance...

If Beckham/ Rooney recover from their injuries we've got a chance...

If we get rid of Eriksen/ Capello/ Hodgson/ Southgate we've got a chance.

This is England.
Click to expand...

So it's never coming home?
 
What club would employ Southgate if/when he leaves England?

I'd say he'd get a chance a mid-table Premier League clubs. Palace, Aston Villa, Southampton, etc
 
Rooney in Paris said:
I don't necessarily make that claim, I think this idea of golden generation is always a bit warped. What I do think though is that the current generation is much more technically proficient than previous generations, and that it's quite stacked with attacking talent, and yet it mostly plays boring, conservative football. That's on him, and while it can work ok in tournament competitions, it's a shame considering what could be done with this batch of players.
Click to expand...
Yep. I think even with a 3atb formation there's a team more than capable of playing front foot football.

James/Chilwell on form is one of the most exciting/productive wingback combos there is. Walker, Stones and Tomori have won titles in front foot systems and are a more than capable back three. Phillips and Bellingham are capable of playing in midfield in progressive systems as are a front three consisting of any Sancho, Kane, Grealish, Sterling, Mount, Rashford, Saka (at the risk of ridicule I would add CHO to the mix if he keeps up his good form at Bayer).

Less talented sides than that are being competitive in the PL and winning multiple head to heads vs top six sides playing open expansive football, it's nonsense to suggest this England team aren't capable.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Yeah, same.

I hear people talking him up as likeable all the time but I don't quite get it.

I don't find either him or the team as such particularly likeable.

Why not? I dunno exactly. He isn't obviously unlikeable either, just a bit dull. I suppose some people see something either a bit awkward or a bit "humble" in him that they find likeable...but I don't quite see that myself.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way - though I don't think he's actually all that humble, I think he thinks quite highly of himself in reality.
Chesterlestreet said:
I think it's clear as day that a more - call it what you will - progressive manager could get more out of certain players and improve the overall style of play (looking less dire and workmanlike).

Possibly, though, without improving results greatly. But then again, he hasn't won anything with his ultra pragmatic approach, so why not try something a bit more adventurous.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. Watching boring football over 7 games to be able to say "ah well we made it to the semis or final", meh. Especially against "smaller" sides. But he always has the same gameplan, it's boring.
Zehner said:
I think it's generally a really bitchy answer since he's attacking a 19 year old player.
Click to expand...
Except he's absolutely not attacking a 19yo player. You're being overly sensitive about a fair response to a dumb question.
 
giorno said:
Mmmm I dunno. I tend to agree with @Gio on this. That germany side was already pretty great, better than England all in all as it had fewer weaknesses and was more cohesive

England, as always, had nothing beyond Rooney


Thank you

Agree with everything except for the bolded. I think the talent pool now is better than the 2002-2010 period. Much greater attacking depth now. The death of those England sides was the lack of anything at all beyond Owen and then Rooney. The moment one of them went down it became pathetically easy to stop England's attack. England did not have a high enough technical level to really dominate games and put Gerrard and Lampard into goalscoring positions often enough(Capello often bemoaned Scholes retirement and blames himself for ignoring Carrick)
Click to expand...

Funnily enough, I think our best chance of a tournament win was '98. That side was pretty well balanced compared to other England teams. It was certainly better than 2002 and I think there is an argument that the starting XI was more balanced than 06; although the 06 side had more depth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.