Southgate replacing ETH? Yes or No?

Well...

  • Total voters
    1,404
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The one upside of Southgate getting the job will be watching Goldfinch going full melt.
 
All this noise about United recruiting the best mind’s to run the football operations and then they collectively pick Gareth Southgate as their no.1 choice? Sounds unbelievable. Hope this is just media making stuff up.
 
If this happens then I take it as proof that Ratcliffe is secretly a Liverpool fan and willing to spend a part of his fortune ruining United. Otherwise it makes no sense.
 
CtrlAltDeLigt said:
Only positive for Southgate is that he can build some harmony apparently in the squad, given he’s English and has past relations with some figures at the club, players and executives.
Click to expand...

I think he'd sour a dressing room quick. The guy clearly has favourites, which might fly on international level where he can pick and choose his squad, it isn't going to work club level.
 
LDUred said:
Rashford is an unbelievably talented player, but he is allergic to defending and does not track back. At the highest level, you cannot carry anyone, even players who might grab you a goal.

For managers, there is always going to be a trust issue with attackers like Rashford who leave spaces in behind and who expose full backs as much as he does. Yes, you might get away with it against the mid-ranking teams, but in the crucial games against Italy and France, Marcus Rashford trotting about is suicidal.

Yes, in that tournament, Marcus Rashford looked in form and there was certainly a big argument for him starting games.

But after what we've seen this season with the way he just casually saunters and strolls about off the ball I can understand Southgate's reluctance to play him.
Click to expand...
Thing is he's never like this for England. He's actually quite the hard worker when he's in England colours
 
If he managed prime Zidane he would make him look pedestrian and void of any flair. How anyone can rate this guy as a top coach is beyond me. If Ineos appoint him i would seriously question their ability to make football decisions which is what they claimed they would do
 
astracrazy said:
I think he'd sour a dressing room quick. The guy clearly has favourites, which might fly on international level where he can pick and choose his squad, it isn't going to work club level.
Click to expand...

Especially as a majority of them aren't English and won't give a flying toss who he is. It'll most likely just lead to another dressing room of cliques.
 
Big no. Lets be fair, he's got England's best results in a long time in the last few tournaments, I think he gets credit as an England manager for that. However he's done that by being a very steady-eddie and avoiding risks, which will take you quite a long way in a knockout tournament. But despite having some crazy levels of quality available to him, he's never played the kind of risk taking, attacking football that good teams can produce when they need to turn a game around. This is why he keeps falling short in knockouts at the few hurdles, but its also why his style wouldn't work in the Prem. In a league where its 90+ points just to compete for the title, you need a team that can blow opposition away, and when the game is going against them, be prepared to take risks to get the 3 points. Southgate hasn't shown any of that.
 
I would welcome Gareth. In fact I would hand deliver a pizza, he likes pizza, however this pizza will be a claymore mine disguised as a pizza.
FFS, is this honestly being considered?
 
The man hasn’t managed a football club in 15 fecking years and his record at club level is relegation. I can’t have peace until this rumour is ruled out. Nightmare shit.
 
It's fecking grim. I don't have nothing personally against him, but I don't see anything about him what say, he is top manager.
 
If we appoint Southgate as manager, I'm done. Failing out of love with football so much in the last few years and think that might put me over the edge altogether.
 
He's done well for England, but there's no guarantee he'd do just as well for a club.
Managing clubs and national teams are two completely different things.
 
The thing that concerns me is this has been floating around for a while now.
 
I doubt Ashworth and Wilcox will consider Southgate, Tuchel, Poch, De Zerbi, Potter and even others are far more experienced than Southgate in club football, if the new management is actually considering Southgate, then we are doomed.
 
I wonder if Ratcliffe/Brailsford think Southgate is fantastic because of how morons/the media were raving about him after each tournament. Are they thick or something, obviously he’s shite.

This is the danger of hiring an all English backroom staff, they are bound to be incredibly bias to any English candidate, which is a fecking travesty. Coupled with Jim probably creaming himself at the thought of having a successful English manager at the helm of United, I wouldn’t be surprised if Southgate is the preferred choice.

I’d rather jump off a bridge, Potter, then Southgate.
 
LDUred said:
I agree. Southgate has definintely made mistakes. I just equally don't pander to this, 'Gareth Southgate is a terrible manager' brigade, because he can clearly manage to a decent level based on what he has achieved with England.

Yes, even taking into consideration the result today.

He's got a 56% tournament win record, second only to Sir Alf Ramsey.

Has he underachieved with the resources available? Probably has, yeah. But he's still done pretty well and uniting English club players to consistently reach latter stages is no mean feat.

The biggest problem Southgate has had is in beating the big sides, but that is a problem England have always had in recent times, no matter the quality of players like Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Ferdinand, Campbell, Beckham, Owen, Shearer, and now the current crop of hopefuls, they have all failed up to this point. Who exactly could put that right? The elite level managers, like Pep Guardiola, will probably never even come into the reckoning.

As many people have pointed out, England's achilles heel is the mentality of the players. Generally speaking, they have bottled the big moments.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't entirely disagree that there's two sides to the coin, but also the bar for managing England has been set incredibly low by some of his predecessors.

Some things other recent England managers have achieved:
1) Suggesting disabled people are being punished by god
2) Being in charge for 1 game and then being caught being corrupt and sacked.
3) Allowing some kind of player mutiny in the middle of a world cup
4) Losing to Iceland (check)
5) Failing to even qualify for major tournaments.
6) Having a racist who slept with one of the other squad member's wives as the captain of the country (I mean ffs)

Success has become to just avoid doing these things, making Southgate the most successful England manager of the modern era, by simply not being a complete and utter buffoon. He has also had the best squad, quite easily, since the golden era. He hasn't had to rely on the combination of Andy Carroll and Danny Welbeck, or a midfield consisting of an injured Gareth Barry.

Your last two sentences are just disingenuous. Southgate had his players deliberately play for a penalty shootout in a European Championship final, on their own ground, and then subbed on two players just to take penalties, who both missed. That's very bad managing. Comically bad really. Particularly from someone who's career is most remembered for missing in a penalty shootout for England. His management in the France game in the subsequent world cup was equally bizarre. Shifting all the blame onto the players every time the manager fecks up isn't a defence for the manager fecking up. Things happen in a tournament or a game that the manager can't legislate for (e.g. if Rooney decides to stamp on Ronaldo or Gerrard decides to head the opposition through on goal), but we're not discussing the players. We're discussing the manager.
 
Managing england is very different to managing a football club.

If its him or ten hag I'd stick with ten hag, simply because there is no improvement there, and at least not swapping the manager will save a few million in costs.
 
On this form England won't get through their group, so he should be available pretty quickly for United now.
 
How anyone can watch his style of football with the players at his disposal and think him worthy of any job is beyond me. Surely INEOS aren't that stupid.
 
If this happens, I’d laugh my asss off and proceed to go through the stages of grief.
 
When we hired top managers we expected to play good football but they turned out to be shit. Maybe Southgate is here to reverse it, hire a manager who plays shit football and it will turn out the opposite. Classic Brailsford pushing human psychology to the limit like what he did with swimming.
 
OmarUnited4ever said:
I doubt Ashworth and Wilcox will consider Southgate, Tuchel, Poch, De Zerbi, Potter and even others are far more experienced than Southgate in club football, if the new management is actually considering Southgate, then we are doomed.
Click to expand...

Yeah liking the Dad's Army reference there
 
Maybe their plan is to bring in a manager that is more of a bureaucrat manager, that will then be accompanied by high quality coaches around him.
Dan Ashworth, Jason Wilcox and the new manager will work on how they want United to move forward. Then bring in staff, coaches and players to suit that. If they later decide they want a different approach, then they can bring in a new type of coach with some new ideas (like how Sir Alex brought in Carlos Queiroz).

Most managers are perhaps more comfortable, and more suitable, in having authority on coaches, playing style and players. They would like to be in complete control rather than being told or having other people intervene about that stuff. But if it doesn’t work out and the club needs to fire that manager, then that leads to massive changes on their hands. That’s been one of big problems ever since Moyes took over. It’s commonly known that most thought he should have kept the coaches and not changed an already well working workspace. But since he made that choice we’ve been following that road every time a new manager comes in. Never getting back to that well working cog wheel.

In terms of getting a top tier manager in, then there are better alternatives than Southgate. Keeping ten hag being one of them. But perhaps Ineos are trying a different arrangement, and they fancy Southgate in that new role. Maybe the early rumours about Gary O’Neil being approached was about having one of the big coaching roles. Maybe McKenna as well, but neither of them fancied it.

If Ineos can create a stable platform, with a sporting director, a technical director and a team manager, but then twist things up by bringing in coaches that are either top quality or up-and-coming (but not quite ready for a managing role), then I can see the potential in the direction they want to take the club in.
 
I cant wait for the English media to blame United's interest on why Gareth fecked up another banker championship
 
Done with the club if they sack Erik for Southgate. Rather find an NFL team to follow than accept that level of incompetence.
 
In a summer where De Zerbi and Tuchel are available without having to pay compensation, it would be nuts to go for Southgate. Not only is he shit but he’s also probably not available until mid July. Too much ground lost when we’re already struggling. Has to be a non runner
 
Status
Not open for further replies.