England

[Mike]

Just now, Hanshithispantz said:

Half a decade ago this would probably have been nailed on tbh

 

McLaren and fucking Allardyce man

 

The good old days, man.

[WillingtonMag]

Pardew is a better comparison got us to 5th and Palace to an FA Cup final. Does that make him a good manager? More credentials then Southgate anyways.

[wormy]

 These debates are about the only thing I find interesting when international breaks roll around. 

[Lazarus]

3 hours ago, The Prophet said:

I think he likes the Phillips-Rice partnership because it protects a really suspect Maguire. 

 

FYP.

[astraguy]

Us being 3rd favorites is laughable to me ,Hardly bothered with England since Southgate got the job and when i have i've been bored.The fa screwed up binning Capello imo or would of prefered Harry over Southgate

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, astraguy said:

Us being 3rd favorites is laughable to me ,Hardly bothered with England since Southgate got the job and when i have i've been bored.The fa screwed up binning Capello imo or would of prefered Harry over Southgate

So you had no interest in the last World Cup or Euros just because of Southgate? Boggles my mind even if people don’t rate him that like.

[astraguy]

14 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

So you had no interest in the last World Cup or Euros just because of Southgate? Boggles my mind even if people don’t rate him that like.

Watched a few when out in places but is was basically background noise to me,Sounds sad as if u go back 10 years or so back i wouldn't miss a England game 

[ilikenewcastle]

Just reading through the last few pages, there are a couple of things that some people class as facts that I'd like to dispute. This current England team is objectively one of the best in the world right now. Also our run to the Euro final was not especially easy (Croatia, Germany, Denmark are not bad sides and I'd say Italy's run was barely harder).

 

My feelings on Southgate are so mixed, I feel if we have an underwhelming World Cup he should definitely go. But people need to remember how terrible we were before Southgate. We constantly froze in pretty much every tournament game against even the worst opposition. You cannot deny things have changed dramatically at the last 2 tournaments - the frustration is that things could, and should have been even better.

[Guest]

I think Southgate has bought himself one average tournament. Unless it’s horrendous like going out bottom of the group, or losing in the Second Round to a relative minnow (like we did with Iceland) then he should get the next Euros.

[brummie]

Southgate has done alright.

 

England have never had problems putting together long unbeaten runs outside tournament finals, though, there's nothing new in that. The problems have always been when we come up against decent sides in the actual tournaments, we always fall slightly short.

 

My problem with Southgate is that although if you look scientifically at the results, he is doing well, he manages to make it so fucking boring in doing so.

 

Grealish is an example of his mindset. With us he had license to roam, to create, to run at people. With Man City he's a different player playing in a different way, where his main focus is not to lose the ball and his job is tightly defined.

All this is fine and understandable, but it is telling that Southgate was never really convinced by 'our' incarnation of Grealish, but he loves the somewhat sterile, bland Man City version (and I know he played more his natural game when he came on yesterday, but even so). 

[WillingtonMag]

21 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

I think Southgate has bought himself one average tournament. Unless it’s horrendous like going out bottom of the group, or losing in the Second Round to a relative minnow (like we did with Iceland) then he should get the next Euros.

So that's 4 tournaments on a manager who isn't good enough, just seems like massive missed opportunities to me. Don't see why we should celebrate semi finals and being runners up, should try and push on now and get a manager in who can turn a game not surrender it.

[Keggy_Keagal]

Never been 100% convinced by Saint Gareth. What's Southgate good at ? He picks his favourites, tries to maintain this Club England theme, cracks on like we're still a developing team rather than having a side with some of the best players in the World and Europe. and get's an easy ride from the press because he's re-established media privileges. His sides aren't set up for great attacking play and despite the conservative system are still sloppy at the back. We were a goal up against a side of Italian pensioners in a final and we conceded from a set play. Then he was lost as to how to change it. Croatia in the World Cup we're a goal up after 5 mins and again he doesn't know how to see it out or to build on it. We'll always be nearly men at best with him when I don't see a team with a better pool of players to pick from.

[geordie_b]

Dunno why but i never really see Southgate as a manger, more like a captain of a cricket team who doesnt play and is just another opinion within a group making the key decisions. Im not even sure he has a massive input of squads, the majority of time they are just the same players who have been involved at the different levels all playing a similar style and coached in the same way (See Dan Ashworths England DNA). Southgate is just a motivator and massive lacking when it comes to in game decisions.

[Fantail Breeze]

4 hours ago, PeepShow4life said:

People are saying Southgate must be good because of how far we got in the last two tournaments.

 

In both we had favourable fixtures, in the world cup we got easily beaten twice by Belgium, barely scrapped past Colombia and lost to an inferior Croatian team. Most of our goals came from set pieces and the football wasn't very good.

 

In the Euros, the Germany game aside which was very impressive, we had favourable fixtures again and couldn't beat a weak Italy side in the final.

 

I think I remember Bruce having a good cup run one year but we had the easiest draws ever and then once we came up against a good team, lost immediately. Does that make him a good manager then?

 

Southgate seems like a great guy but I don't rate him as a manager at all.

 

 

 

Minging football winning fuck all with one of the most talented attacking sides we’ve ever had in most of our lifetimes.

 

A decent manager and we’d have won the Euros. His tactical limitations fail us in the big games, this English side is good enough to beat a majority of the crap we’ve come up against by default.

 

Bizarre how much support he gets. Longer we keep him the less chance we’ll have of taking advantage of having such a decent squad. 
 

This team should walk into a QF/SF and easily will. That’ll be enough to keep him in a job and we’ll be stuck in this cycle forever.

[Kid Icarus]

Seriously are all of you people claiming we have the best players we've seen in our lifetime on smack?

 

I'm sure you believe it for whatever reason, but unless you're like 12 years old the idea that this set of players are the best in our lifetimes is a proper joke like.

[Fantail Breeze]

3 hours ago, Ste said:

Both the Croatia and Italy games, we suffered from not taking our chances. I thought both games we started well and had a good first 45, then seemed to shrink in stature. To be expected with all the pressure, particularly that Italy game where you could feel the nervous energy from the stands. 

 

The entire Euros up to that point, aside from a spell in the Germany game where Pickford appeared to lose his nerve, we controlled most games and conceded 2 goals, 1 from open play. We played the tournament perfectly for me. 

 

It's far easier to get your team solid defensively and maintain a shape in the little time you have than to get them to play open and expansive attacking football.

 

Individual moments let us down more than anything Southgate does. The comparison to Bruce is ridiculous. Sacking Southgate couldn't be further from my mind currently, him and his team had me enjoying football while Bruce was capping off an utterly dreadful 14 years of Mike Ashley.

 

Love some fake facts to justify Southgate. Sort of stuff we used to ridicule people for about Bruce.

 

We were battered by Italy. Was it 20-odd shots to about 3 over 120 minutes at a Wembley final? Only shot on target was a goal in the first five minutes.

 

Just refreshed my memory of the Croatia game and that was exactly the same.

 

2 shots on target in 120 minutes, Croatia with twice the amount of shots. Less possession.

 

If anything we were fortunate we didn’t lose more heavily, rather than in ET and pens.

 

[Fantail Breeze]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Seriously are all of you people claiming we have the best players we've seen in our lifetime on smack?

 

I'm sure you believe it for whatever reason, but unless you're like 12 years old the idea that this set of players are the best in our lifetimes is a proper joke like.

 

In comparison to the opposition it certainly is and my point was regarding the attacking talent.

 

We don’t have to fight with impossible teams like Brazil and Spain who were exceptional at times when we’ve had other impressive sides.

 

Our squad is one of the best in the world. We’re lucky Belgium are thick and are persisting with Martinez.

[Hanshithispantz]

He was horrific against Italy, no doubt and hopeflly he's learned from it, but it's canny mad suggesting Croatia should have beat us by more like, we were pretty unlucky. Pretty sure Kane missed an absolute sitter an all. 

[ilikenewcastle]

2 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

Love some fake facts to justify Southgate. Sort of stuff we used to ridicule people for about Bruce.

 

We were battered by Italy. Was it 20-odd shots to about 3 over 120 minutes at a Wembley final? Only shot on target was a goal in the first five minutes.

 

Just refreshed my memory of the Croatia game and that was exactly the same.

 

2 shots on target in 120 minutes, Croatia with twice the amount of shots. Less possession.

 

If anything we were fortunate we didn’t lose more heavily, rather than in ET and pens.

 

I'm no Southgate apologist, but anyone who watched the Croatia and Italy games without just looking at stats cannot say we were battered (possibly towards the end of extra time v Croatia). I struggle to remember Italy having chances against us (yes I know we didn't create much either).

[Fantail Breeze]

Just now, Hanshithispantz said:

He was horrific against Italy, no doubt and hopeflly he's learned from it, but it's canny mad suggesting Croatia should have beat us by more like, we were pretty unlucky. Pretty sure Kane missed an absolute sitter an all. 

Was that the famous social media effort where he was actually offside?

 

Read a match report from the game, we started brightly, scored a goal and then completely faded. It was pretty much one way traffic from then on in.

 

It was a very similar performance to the Italy one. He didn’t learn much from that.

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, Fantail Breeze said:

 

In comparison to the opposition it certainly is and my point was regarding the attacking talent.

 

We don’t have to fight with impossible teams like Brazil and Spain who were exceptional at times when we’ve had other impressive sides.

 

Our squad is one of the best in the world. We’re lucky Belgium are thick and are persisting with Martinez.

 

We have a cracking set of right backs, and a truly world class striker. Foden's getting there and Sterling's hit form under Southgate. Beyond that, making a case for the likes of Pickford, Stones, Maguire, Rice, Phillips as being equal or better than their equivalents across the other teams out there is a huge stretch.

 

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[WillingtonMag]

13 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Seriously are all of you people claiming we have the best players we've seen in our lifetime on smack?

 

I'm sure you believe it for whatever reason, but unless you're like 12 years old the idea that this set of players are the best in our lifetimes is a proper joke like.

Think we had the best team at the Euros like can't remember being able to say that before.

[Fantail Breeze]

2 minutes ago, ilikenewcastle said:

I'm no Southgate apologist, but anyone who watched the Croatia and Italy games without just looking at stats cannot say we were battered (possibly towards the end of extra time v Croatia). I struggle to remember Italy having chances against us (yes I know we didn't create much either).

 

“Italian side on the back foot until they suddenly gained a foothold in the closing phase of the first half. 

Italy dominated possession, and it was no surprise when they restored parity, then looking the more likely winners as Southgate's side, so full of running early on, started to labour“

 

Our own media are willing to accept Italy were miles the better team, why can’t you? We were battered in the sense that we didn’t have the football, didn’t create chances and provided fuck all.

 

As I said earlier, almost identical to the Croatia game which he clearly took a lot of learning from.

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, WillingtonMag said:

Think we had the best team at the Euros like can't remember being able to say that before.

 

You honestly can't be serious man. That's absolutely ridiculous

[WillingtonMag]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

 

You honestly can't be serious man. That's absolutely ridiculous

Who had better? France would be the only argument I think?