England

[Cf]

18 hours ago, Yorkie said:

 

What's that based on? The one time Potter stepped up to a big job he had a nightmare whereas Southgate is the most successful England manager in generations. 

 

Is he? What have we won under him?

 

He's got good records in terms of going deep in competitions and whilst you can only beat what's in front of you he's had massively favourable draws and i'd argue we've achieved on the lower end of expectations given that apart from that one game against Germany we've fallen down as soon as we've come against any half decent side.

[Kimbo]

We’ll likely get to at least the QF’s this summer without playing a good side.

[Yorkie]

43 minutes ago, Cf said:

 

Is he? What have we won under him?

 

Nothing, he's 0 for 2 in terms of winning a competition where there was a realistic chance of doing so. But that doesn't mean he isn't the most successful manager in generations; getting to the Euros final is statistically the best achievement of any manager since '66.

 

I've never, ever bought the favourable draws angle and never will. Anyone can beat anyone at that level, and England have historically underachieved - until Southgate, where we've performed at Par or better. Not to mention we were knocked out by Iceland the competition before he came in. 

[The College Dropout]

Potter plays boring football. Wouldn’t want him at all. He left and his team went up another level.   

[joeyt]

A bit of a left field suggestion but what about Kieran McKenna at Ipswich?

[TheBrownBottle]

16 hours ago, Yorkie said:

 

I've never, ever bought the favourable draws angle and never will. Anyone can beat anyone at that level, and England have historically underachieved - until Southgate, where we've performed at Par or better. Not to mention we were knocked out by Iceland the competition before he came in. 

Southgate has the benefit of a group of young players who won the U-17, U-20 WCs and U-19 Euros.  He’s won knockouts against Colombia, Sweden, Denmark, Ukraine, Senegal and the worst German team since the 1940s - that’s about as favourable as you can get.  As soon as we played a genuinely top side - Croatia, Italy, France - we don’t win.  Absolutely 100% par for the course in terms of England’s history.

 

England have not historically underachieved - they’ve pretty much always performed broadly to par.  They generally reach the knockouts of major tournaments, before losing to the first top side that they meet.  They’re middleweights not heavyweights in international football.  
 

The difference at the moment is that England have possibly the best available selection in forward positions in world football, yet to watch a Southgate team you’d never know it.

 

That 2016 Iceland team finished above Holland and Turkey in qualifying, and above Portugal in the group stage.  They weren’t muppets; that doesn’t mean England played well, but they hardly deserve the implicit disrespect. 

[Kid Icarus]

Ah we're doing this nonsense again

[TBG]

£129.99 for that England jacket

 

 

 

[St. Maximin]

18 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

Ah we're doing this nonsense again

If we’re talking about Southgate’s record of typically beating weaker teams and losing to the better teams in big tournaments, then I’m not sure what’s nonsensical about it. He’s our second most successful manager but you move the goalposts based on the standard of the squad and opposition. Colombia and Sweden sides missing their star players and Germany and Denmark sides at Wembley (all inferior sides) have been the biggest big tournament challenges he’s succeeded in. 

[triggs]

Didn't even really beat Colombia missing James Rodriguez

[TheBrownBottle]

6 hours ago, St. Maximin said:

If we’re talking about Southgate’s record of typically beating weaker teams and losing to the better teams in big tournaments, then I’m not sure what’s nonsensical about it. He’s our second most successful manager but you move the goalposts based on the standard of the squad and opposition. Colombia and Sweden sides missing their star players and Germany and Denmark sides at Wembley (all inferior sides) have been the biggest big tournament challenges he’s succeeded in. 

Yep.  And it’s no different from what’s went before - the difference being that in the past, the tournaments weren’t as bloated with so many beatable sides.  The Euros are a joke at this point.  Here’s England’s KO record post-1966:

 

1968 Yugoslavia (L)

1970 W Germany (L)

1986 Paraguay (W), Argentina (L)

1990 Belgium (W), Cameroon (W) W Germany (L)

1996 Spain (W) Germany (L)

1998 Argentina (L)

2002 Denmark (W) Brazil (L)

2004 Portugal (L)

2006 Ecuador (W) Portugal (L)

2010 Germany (L)

2012 Italy (L)

2016 Iceland (L)

2018 Colombia (W), Sweden (W), Croatia (L)

2020 Germany (W), Ukraine, (W), Denmqrk (W), Italy (L)

2022 Senegal (W), France (L)

 

England in that entire period have beaten major nations twice in KO football - Spain at Euro 96, Germany at Euro 20.  Both at Wembley, which likely isn’t coincidence - and that Germany side was utterly shite (Spain at Euro ‘96 weren’t much better).

 

Yugoslavia at Euro ‘68 and Iceland at Euro ‘16 are the only fixtures on that list where the result didn’t go the way most would have expected.  We don’t beat better teams, and nothing has changed under Southgate. 

 

 

Edited March 30 by TheBrownBottle

[St. Maximin]

2 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Yep.  And it’s no different from what’s went before - the difference being that in the past, the tournaments weren’t as bloated with so many beatable sides.  The Euros are a joke at this point.  Here’s England’s KO record post-1966:

 

1968 Yugoslavia (L)

1970 W Germany (L)

1986 Paraguay (W), Argentina (L)

1990 Belgium (W), Cameroon (W) W Germany (L)

1996 Spain (W) Germany (L)

1998 Argentina (L)

2002 Denmark (W) Brazil (L)

2004 Portugal (L)

2006 Ecuador (W) Portugal (L)

2010 Germany (L)

2012 Italy (L)

2016 Iceland (L)

2018 Colombia (W), Sweden (W), Croatia (L)

2020 Germany (W), Ukraine, (W), Denmqrk (W), Italy (L)

2022 Senegal (W), France (L)

 

England in that entire period have beaten major nations twice in KO football - Spain at Euro 96, Germany at Euro 20.  Both at Wembley, which likely isn’t coincidence - and that Germany side was utterly shite (Spain at Euro ‘96 weren’t much better).

 

Yugoslavia at Euro ‘68 and Iceland at Euro ‘16 are the only fixtures on that list where the result didn’t go the way most would have expected.  We don’t beat better teams, and nothing has changed under Southgate. 

 

 

 

Yeah I’d say in his defence, losing to the best teams isn’t a new thing for England (and there are plenty of things I maintain he deserves praise for). I don’t think you can argue he’s had favourable draws though (Sweden and Ukraine in particular as quarter-finals). I get the argument anyone can beat anyone at that level, but surely it becomes a theme when you typically beat the weaker teams and lose to the better ones over a few years. 
 

I’m all for humble pie if he can lead us to victory this summer mind. 

[The College Dropout]

England have never beaten a top international side in the KO rounds outside of Wembley. 
 

Im Not going to give Southgate credit until he does that. 
 

He should’ve won the Euros. We lost at home to a generationally weak Italian team. The difference was they had one of the best managers in the competition and that winners mentality thing of getting the job done.  Beat Belgium, Spain and England away to win the tournament.  Southgate’s beaten Germany at home, Colombia and a few Scandi teams. I can’t rate his achievements that highly.  

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

England have never beaten a top international side in the KO rounds outside of Wembley. 
 

Im Not going to give Southgate credit until he does that. 
 

He should’ve won the Euros. We lost at home to a generationally weak Italian team. The difference was they had one of the best managers in the competition and that winners mentality thing of getting the job done.  Beat Belgium, Spain and England away to win the tournament.  Southgate’s beaten Germany at home, Colombia and a few Scandi teams. I can’t rate his achievements that highly.  

 

By this logic, no England manager in history deserve any credit?

[Magpie]

Got to be this for me. Maguire will probably start if he's fit however.

 

[Fezzle]

1 hour ago, Magpie said:

Got to be this for me. Maguire will probably start if he's fit however.

 

Unless pep gives him a pity start tomorrow or in the final stones will have started one competitive game in 3 months by the time the tournament starts. Could be a very rusty, unfit CB partnership 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Magpie said:

Got to be this for me. Maguire will probably start if he's fit however.

 

You got a link to where I can create one of these?

[Fezzle]

2 minutes ago, Jack27 said:

You got a link to where I can create one of these?

I'd start on the BBC sport site

[54]

Would go with this personally, Maguire's form has been good this season and he already has that relationship with Stones.

 

LB, honestly, fuck knows, if Shaw was in any way fit, he'd start. But it's easily our weakest position.

 

[Guest]

[Fezzle]

1 minute ago, 54 said:

Would go with this personally, Maguire's form has been good this season and he already has that relationship with Stones.

 

LB, honestly, fuck knows, if Shaw was in any way fit, he'd start. But it's easily our weakest position.

 

Seeing as his ultra defensive safetynet is out the window with Phillips/Henderson I can easily see Gordon start over Palmer. Southgate will want his energy and work rate I'd imagine. Did Palmer actually feature in those friendlies?

[Astroblack]

Gonna say it and I don’t care if anyone agrees but my front six for England is Rice Mainoo Bellingham, Gordon Kane Saka 

 

Foden the lightweight powderpuff can hold bench. Never seen him take a player on like Gordon can does. System player to run into space. Perfect for Pep, not for Gareth. 
 

yes Gareth is shit and should be able to find a role for Foden but since he is shit what’s the point of putting him on the left where he won’t contribute. Gordon’s a better player out there. 

[Tiresias]

9 minutes ago, Astroblack said:

Gonna say it and I don’t care if anyone agrees but my front six for England is Rice Mainoo Bellingham, Gordon Kane Saka 

 

Foden the lightweight powderpuff can hold bench. Never seen him take a player on like Gordon can does. System player to run into space. Perfect for Pep, not for Gareth. 
 

yes Gareth is shit and should be able to find a role for Foden but since he is shit what’s the point of putting him on the left where he won’t contribute. Gordon’s a better player out there. 

 

I see your point that Foden does not suit Southgates style as much as Gordon, definitely true but also, 27 goals and 12 assists...hard to really get past that

[Astroblack]

But when he plays for England, he wont have that free role. What’s Foden’s position? LW? The screamer he scored against Man U was on the right side. He’ll be battling against full backs for England, something he’s not accustomed to. Gordon thrives on that. Foden will be physically smothered if he’s stuck on the left. 

[leffe186]

3 hours ago, Astroblack said:

But when he plays for England, he wont have that free role. What’s Foden’s position? LW? The screamer he scored against Man U was on the right side. He’ll be battling against full backs for England, something he’s not accustomed to. Gordon thrives on that. Foden will be physically smothered if he’s stuck on the left. 

Also feels right at those times when Kane drops back to not have Foden in that space. Kane will have Gordon and Saka beyond him to hit, along with Bellingham motoring past.