England

[MrRaspberryJam]

1 minute ago, Rod said:

We do this every time.  Big the team up when we win and crucify them when they lose.  A bit of perspective here.  By the way I thought England were excellent tonight.  We were excellent against .........Scotland.  We totally dominated ........ Scotland.  We scored three goals and it should have been more ....... against Scotland.  Get where I'm coming from?

Kick his ass Seabass

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, Rod said:

We do this every time.  Big the team up when we win and crucify them when they lose.  A bit of perspective here.  By the way I thought England were excellent tonight.  We were excellent against .........Scotland.  We totally dominated ........ Scotland.  We scored three goals and it should have been more ....... against Scotland.  Get where I'm coming from?

We've beaten or been penalties away from beating/going square with the very best teams in major tournaments, and beaten teams that have beaten the best teams. But when that happens it doesn't count or we should be beating them. So yeah I get where you're coming from, but I don't agree.

[Yorkie]

11 minutes ago, Rod said:

We do this every time.  Big the team up when we win and crucify them when they lose.  A bit of perspective here.  By the way I thought England were excellent tonight.  We were excellent against .........Scotland.  We totally dominated ........ Scotland.  We scored three goals and it should have been more ....... against Scotland.  Get where I'm coming from?

 

 

 

These lads, aye?

[Rod]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

We've beaten or been penalties away from beating/going square with the very best teams in major tournaments, and beaten teams that have beaten the best teams. But when that happens it doesn't count or we should be beating them. So yeah I get where you're coming from, but I don't agree.

That doesn’t make sense.

[Kid Icarus]

Yes it does 

[Rod]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

 

 

These lads, aye?

Scotland are crap.  Honest I've just witnessed it with my own eyes.  Oh aye, it was a friendly.

[Rod]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

Yes it does 

Doesn't.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Let's lower that heart rate, Rod. 

[Rod]

8 minutes ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

Let's lower that heart rate, Rod. 

Honestly, it's every time we win against a third rate team I keep hearing absolute knackers singing " it's coming home" and the dialogue is exactly that song on here.  England were excellent tonight, I've admitted that.  Then someone (biting my tongue here) puts the league up that Scotland are in.  Well that's me convinced, I think they are fu*King class.

[Rod]

33 minutes ago, MrRaspberryJam said:

Kick his ass Seabass

Gin & tonics before you ask.

[MrRaspberryJam]

8 minutes ago, Rod said:

Gin & tonics before you ask.

You’re honestly fucking class. 

[St. Maximin]

2 hours ago, Yorkie said:

 

I don't think you'll find many who'd argue against the idea that the loyalty to Henderson at this point is regressive, but on the whole he's been good for Southgate's England. He shouldn't start in the Euros though, basically everyone will agree with that, even Southgate. He didn't start in the opening group games at the World Cup. 

 

As for destroying sides; we routinely score 4, 5, 6 or more in qualifying and have had several very emphatic victories in all of the tournaments he's been the manager in, too. Incidentally that isn't routine in tournaments; even the World Champions lost to Saudi Arabia and only just squeezed past Australia in the knockouts. The likes of Portugal springs to mind too, who infamously won the thing after drawing three times in the group. 

 

I know he's got his faults, I just think a lot of the criticism is disproportionate. The 'England aren't attacking,' and 'England always just end up losing to anyone good,' are the two fundamentally flawed arguments that have always cropped up in the Southgate era imo.

I’m by no means Southgate’s biggest defender, but I agreed with all of this until the end. Isn’t that right we always end up losing to good times, having beaten ‘on paper’ weaker sides? Colombia in Sweden in 2018 were nothing special, though I’d actually cut Southgate some slack for Croatia as they were a strong side with a terrific midfield, so he definitely deserved to continue the role.
 

However, ‘2020’ we practically hosted and despite being ‘good’ sides, beating Germany and Denmark (perhaps with good fortune) at home are hardly incredible achievements. Then we lost to an Italy team on penalties, so very small margins, but it was still a failure to beat an arguably weaker side with a home crowd. Then for all the excitement of 2022, we were hardly challenged until the quarter-final, looked shocking against USA and the African champions missed their star man. France are a terrific side so again I’d cut him slack, but given injuries it still seemed a missed opportunity. 
 

Southgate has done brilliant things gelling the England squad and reconnecting them with the fans, so I’m annoyed this gets often overlooked. However, I’d say over time there’s only so much patience we can afford. We have world-class players and one of the best squads around, so expectations should naturally be higher than even a few years ago and we can’t keep seeing the team is plucky underdogs. For a lot of people he’s taken us as far as he can get and outstayed his welcome, rather than bizarrely seen as a failure that some would have it. 

[RS]

I couldn’t give a fuck about the national team. No passion or feeling for them whatsoever. I’m d rather Newcastle win the league cup than England the World Cup. 

[Groundhog63]

Didn't watch it. Southgate, and his team, are boring. 

 

I'll wait until the proper games. 

[Tsunami]

9 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

To bring it closer to home, it's like Newcastle fans turning on Howe because he's not getting the best out of Schär, Joelinton, Almiron, and Wilson. That's how I see it.

 

None of it means I don't think there are better managers, but it does mean I think there are no likely replacements (refusing to believe Howe or Guardiola are likely) that will do better.

 

 

That’s really not comparable. Howe taking a team that were without a win and nailed on for relegation to where he where we are , getting the best out of failed/ average looking players is not the same as sticking with Henderson and Maguire while imo, somewhat stifling the progression of the team.

 

To me it’s almost like he sets out his stall out as though he’s still managing ‘boro or Villa. We’ve lost 2 semi finals and a final where we could have won all 3 and really shouldn’t have lost all 3. 
 

I absolutely agree he’ll stay the course, based on results and what we find acceptable. At some point, we might find ourselves in the same position with Howe. I hope not, I hope he brings trophies but, as the squad improves he will be moved on if he doesn’t deliver trophies. City and Lpool fans in particular are very vocal about next level managers.

 

I guess we’ll see where we get to in the next couple of years, glorious failure would be hailed as success by most. The women’s national side got it right; get the best manager you can.

[jack j]

Didnt realise Maguire had been in the team of the tournaments for the last 2 major tournaments mind

[joeyt]

Understand his reasons not to move but Maguire to West Ham would have made so much sense for his career

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Obviously Southgate isn't the most exciting manager, but there's almost complete certainty that his replacement will be worse.

 

International teams are generally coached by second-tier managers, and especially in England the older and semi-retired coaches are not very good. 

 

IMO I would try to enjoy it and just hope they squeak over the line to a trophy. They haven't been far off. 

[Yorkie]

7 hours ago, St. Maximin said:

I’m by no means Southgate’s biggest defender, but I agreed with all of this until the end. Isn’t that right we always end up losing to good times, having beaten ‘on paper’ weaker sides? Colombia in Sweden in 2018 were nothing special, though I’d actually cut Southgate some slack for Croatia as they were a strong side with a terrific midfield, so he definitely deserved to continue the role.
 

However, ‘2020’ we practically hosted and despite being ‘good’ sides, beating Germany and Denmark (perhaps with good fortune) at home are hardly incredible achievements. Then we lost to an Italy team on penalties, so very small margins, but it was still a failure to beat an arguably weaker side with a home crowd. Then for all the excitement of 2022, we were hardly challenged until the quarter-final, looked shocking against USA and the African champions missed their star man. France are a terrific side so again I’d cut him slack, but given injuries it still seemed a missed opportunity. 
 

Southgate has done brilliant things gelling the England squad and reconnecting them with the fans, so I’m annoyed this gets often overlooked. However, I’d say over time there’s only so much patience we can afford. We have world-class players and one of the best squads around, so expectations should naturally be higher than even a few years ago and we can’t keep seeing the team is plucky underdogs. For a lot of people he’s taken us as far as he can get and outstayed his welcome, rather than bizarrely seen as a failure that some would have it. 

 

The point I was (poorly) making about the 'England always lose once they meet someone good' argument wasn't so much that it's completely untrue. It's that it's disproportionate and an unfair stick to beat him with, given: the apparent rubbing-out of achievements prior to the defeat; the strength of the opposition we lost to; the ultra-fine margins in the defeats themselves; and given the context of previous England showings at tournaments.

 

Re the bit in bold, I think he's more than earned the chance for another crack at the Euros because it's still very much his team, despite what people will say about victories happening in spite of him. The argument seems to be that we have the players but we don't have the manager, as if replacing him means those ultra-fine margins suddenly swing in our favour. That's possible, but not probable imo. I'm not sure who we could recruit with an outstanding baseline and the time to implement their philosophy. 

 

The expectations should be great atm, I'll definitely admit that, because there are exceptional players everywhere in the side and we can win the next tournament. Hopefully the draw is kind and we meet the one team arguably better than us in the final and not before. 

[The Prophet]

Discussions about Southgate are always in such black and white terms. It's OK to acknowledge Southgate is tactically limited, while thinking his time as England manager has been a success.

 

I appreciate his selection of tried and trusted players is becoming frustrating. Particularly when we have plenty of young talent coming through the ranks, but it doesn't mean we have to frame past performances as Southgate has held us back.

 

England's class of 2018 was pretty average. We had some top players but Young, Jones, Cahill, Dier, Rose, Lingard, Welbeck, etc were still in and around the squad. As the talent pool has grown and we've added the likes of Bellingham, Foden and Saka the expectation on him as grown, but that doesn't negate him being one of England's most successful managers.

 

Is it time for a change? Possibly. History teaches us far more talented squads have achieved far less in major tournaments. In terms of style, international tournament football is generally about preserving fitness levels and risk averse football, it's never been particularly exciting.

 

On the other hand Southgate really does look out of his depth against tactically switched on managers. His unwillingness to try changes in personnel or tactical tweaks in pressure free friendlies is strange. Whatever way you look at it though, his legacy is solid and he's laid a brilliant foundation for whoever comes next. 

[Kid Icarus]

6 hours ago, Tsunami said:

That’s really not comparable. Howe taking a team that were without a win and nailed on for relegation to where he where we are , getting the best out of failed/ average looking players is not the same as sticking with Henderson and Maguire while imo, somewhat stifling the progression of the team.

 

To me it’s almost like he sets out his stall out as though he’s still managing ‘boro or Villa. We’ve lost 2 semi finals and a final where we could have won all 3 and really shouldn’t have lost all 3. 
 

I absolutely agree he’ll stay the course, based on results and what we find acceptable. At some point, we might find ourselves in the same position with Howe. I hope not, I hope he brings trophies but, as the squad improves he will be moved on if he doesn’t deliver trophies. City and Lpool fans in particular are very vocal about next level managers.

 

I guess we’ll see where we get to in the next couple of years, glorious failure would be hailed as success by most. The women’s national side got it right; get the best manager you can.

The comparison has nothing to do with player selection really, it's about how we see the overall transformation in hindsight. This has ended up being a long post so apologies in advance.

 

In my lifetime England have nearly always been far less than the sum of their parts at tournaments regardless of how prestigious the manager was and how incredible we knew the players were for their clubs.

 

Who, if they got out of their group, made it an absolute chore in terms of results and performances, and put in regularly shocking performances against teams who on paper had far less quality. Bombing out or failing to qualify at the hands of the likes of:

 

• Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in the '90s
• Romania, Portugal, Macedonia, Israel, Russia, and Croatia in the '00s.
• Germany (a good team but it was a thrashing), Costa Rica, Russia, Slovakia, and Iceland in the '10s.

 

Even when we did qualify, either for the tournament or from the group stage, aside from a few notable performances like vs Netherlands in '96, we never really turned it on. 

 

This was for the most part with a team full of really good or world class players as well.

 

In 2016 the 'Golden Generation' were gone and it was generally agreed that this new generation coming through were nowhere near the same level as those that had gone. That was the undeniable context imo. That team at Euro '16 drew with Russia and Slovakia, then immediately got beaten by Iceland, a team from a country with a population around the size of Newcastle's.

 

So by this point it should be established that England and 'teams we should be beating' don't necessarily mix.

 

This is the point where everything before it feels like people have incredibly short memories.

 

So then Southgate comes in and at his first tournament, World Cup '18, we have a favourable group. At this point cast your mind back to our group in 2010 that the 'Golden Generation' under serial trophy winner Capello made a meal of. It was an arrogant headline, but not out of keeping with the sentiment of the perception of the group in England.

 

"
England 

Algeria 

Slovenia

Yanks

"

 

So then we beat Colombia and Sweden. Then lose the semi final to Croatia after going 1-0 up a mere 2 years after arguably England's lowest ebb in the modern era.

 

A nation's pride in England is restored, with Southgate's team getting results and performances at a tournament, reaching the semi-final with a team that for once was bigger than the sum of its parts and not the other way around.

 

Southgate is championed for reconnecting England with its supporters after years of disconnect and underperformance.

 

<---By comparison this is similar to where I think Eddie Howe is now. --->

 

Fast forward to Euro '21 and that's when things start to flip imo. Suddenly the fact that England had failed for decades previously, stumbling against 'teams we should be beating' cast aside, previous generations of players downgraded, current England players upgraded, and the lack of game time for certain players questioned.

 

Despite all that, we win the group beating Croatia, then beat Germany, Ukraine, and Denmark to get to the final, our first in 55 years.

 

But now these are all 'teams we should be beating' including international tournament powerhouses Germany. It seemingly being forgotten that England don't have the best record against 'teams we should be beating'.

 

We lose the final on pens and there's understandable frustration at the tactics, but beyond that, that's when things flipped from:

 

• Southgate getting more than the sum of its parts from a squad with less quality than in previous years

 

to

 

• Southgate isn't getting enough out of the best England generation ever.

 

 

Discounting '66 and sticking with my lifetime, the likes of Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole, Beckham wholesale demoted to being seemingly not as good as the likes of Rice, Phillips, Mount, Maguire, Stones, Sterling all because of, ironically, their performances for England under Southgate vs the underperformance of those previous players under the likes of trophy winners Eriksson and Capello.

 

That's the part I find incredible and I think is a bit foreboding re Howe.

 

I have little problem with the criticisms of Southgate's in-game management in crunch games, mainly because the result hugely dictates whether the decisions have been right.

 

I agree that Maguire, Phillips, and especially Henderson's inclusion is wearing thin, but there were complaints about them even when they were performing for England. Pickford can also be thrown in as a player Southgate is inexplicably criticised for starting as well.

 

It's that flip I mentioned earlier that I still find the most incredible. Even if I agree that these are position-by-position, the best English players ever, which for the most part I definitely don't, we still have decades of failure with excellent players that should have taught us that amazing players are no guarantee of success on their own, let alone if the players and the team are performing but there are also other absolutely quality national teams around who are themselves absolutely stacked with quality. 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Kid Icarus
grammar

[Lush Vlad]

I didn't even see the game.  But I have no idea why Southgate keeps persisting with Maguire and then moaning about it afterwards.  He barely plays for Man U and is then ridiculed when he does make the odd cameo, he has been crap for England for a while and his confidence is totally shot to bits.

 

It is admirable that he is standing by him up to a point.  But then I would also put some blame on Southgate himself.  When he keeps picking him, when he has no business being in the team and just keeps making error and gives more ammo to the media and the boo boys.   

[Mikky]

20 minutes ago, Lush Vlad said:

I didn't even see the game.  But I have no idea why Southgate keeps persisting with Maguire and then moaning about it afterwards.  He barely plays for Man U and is then ridiculed when he does make the odd cameo, he has been crap for England for a while and his confidence is totally shot to bits.

 

It is admirable that he is standing by him up to a point.  But then I would also put some blame on Southgate himself.  When he keeps picking him, when he has no business being in the team and just keeps making error and gives more ammo to the media and the boo boys.   

I mean I can sort of understand why Southgate picks him as he has generally done ok for Eng BUT at the same time if England have aspirations to put themselves in contention then you need to have a squad of players who are playing regularly (some may be rotated like a Foden) 

 

Maguire is totally frozen by Man U - losing game time with every passing week

 

Stones - Guehi should be the pairing - then Dunk, Tomori next in line - with the likes of Mings, Colwill, et al competing when available 

[Mikky]

Hopefully Kelvin Phillips can get more game time too - Think Phillips - Rice is the combo needed to let Bellingham (Foden/Maddison) loose as the 10s

[KaKa]

Didier Deschamps in my opinion is a depressingly negative manager that manages to make the talent in that French team look disjointed and ugly in footballing terms. However he has a major X factor in Mbappe that produces moments of if exceptional brilliance that often bails them out. Of course when he didn't start yesterday they lost to that awful German team that have been flopping badly.

 

Southgate is a version of Deschamps but without a player the level of Mbappe that can come through for England in big moments. Maybe Bellingham can be that guy playing in more advanced areas like he did yesterday. If so, then England might win something in the near future.

 

Think both managers are very limited though and do not get anywhere near the most of the talent they have available to them.

 

Would love to have seen Wenger manage the French team at some point but not looking like that will ever happen. Zidane probably gets the gig next, which would be far more interesting.

 

For England, they have an extraordinary level of talent in the forward areas at the minute that is just not being capitalised on. At best they will likely continue to get quite close under Southgate, because currently a number of European teams are just not at their previous levels, but ultimately when the chips are down at key moments he'll play it safer and it will not go England's way.