The Gareth Southgate Appreciation Thread (Warning may contain lots of words)

[Wullie]

Sorry my post was in response to triggs but I disagree that England's malaise over the last ten years was anything to do with club conflicts, that had absolutely nothing to do with the 0-0 draw with Algeria in 2010, or the defeat to Iceland, or finishing bottom of the group in 2014. The management of the England team at tournaments since Eriksson left hasn't just been poor, it's been absolutely atrocious.

 

Southgate deserves immense credit for things like making the camp a happy one. I can't remember any previous tournament where it wasn't reported that the England players were feeling totally miserable and didn't really want to be there. These things affect results.

[Guest firetotheworks]

 

 

He beat Sweden and two shite teams lads

 

Calm down Roy.

Doesn't dislike England

Does any mild criticism mean you dislike something like?

 

No, but consistent, needless criticism probably does.

[Dinho lad]

 

 

He beat Sweden and two shite teams lads

 

Calm down Roy.

Doesn't dislike England

Does any mild criticism mean you dislike something like?

 

No, but consistent, needless criticism probably does.

 

http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/sarcastic-thumbs-up-gif-3.gif

[Dinho lad]

Sorry my post was in response to triggs but I disagree that England's malaise over the last ten years was anything to do with club conflicts, that had absolutely nothing to do with the 0-0 draw with Algeria in 2010, or the defeat to Iceland, or finishing bottom of the group in 2014. The management of the England team at tournaments since Eriksson left hasn't just been poor, it's been absolutely atrocious.

 

Southgate deserves immense credit for things like making the camp a happy one. I can't remember any previous tournament where it wasn't reported that the England players were feeling totally miserable and didn't really want to be there. These things affect results.

 

Rio Ferdinand doesn't think so.

 

I agree those past failings have been mainly down to awful management, hence why I gave Southgate credit. However, the obvious truth is, your opposition or obstacles are the teams/players contesting you; not the past.

 

I still think the jury is out on this current crop of players (Southgate too).

 

 

 

 

[Beren]

Coach of the year because his predecessors set the bar horrifically low? Is there a credible argument for that after Rafa got a top 10 finish with Joselu and Gayle up up?

[Dinho lad]

Is this a question for me?

[Beren]

Nah

[triggs]

I was drunk and just taking the piss with that post last night fwiw I really haven't criticised England consistently either

[ohmelads]

Sorry my post was in response to triggs but I disagree that England's malaise over the last ten years was anything to do with club conflicts, that had absolutely nothing to do with the 0-0 draw with Algeria in 2010, or the defeat to Iceland, or finishing bottom of the group in 2014. The management of the England team at tournaments since Eriksson left hasn't just been poor, it's been absolutely atrocious.

 

Southgate deserves immense credit for things like making the camp a happy one. I can't remember any previous tournament where it wasn't reported that the England players were feeling totally miserable and didn't really want to be there. These things affect results.

 

Rio Ferdinand doesn't think so.

 

I agree those past failings have been mainly down to awful management, hence why I gave Southgate credit. However, the obvious truth is, your opposition or obstacles are the teams/players contesting you; not the past.

 

I still think the jury is out on this current crop of players (Southgate too).

 

Out of interest, which international teams do you think the jury is not out on?

[rgk_lfc]

From an outsiders perspective, I think England have a lot to be optimistic for. Kane is as good as it gets upfront. Your defense is solid and with Pickford you have found a very good Goalkeeper. But I think the main area for improvement for England would be in the middle.

 

Might not be the popular opinion around here but Henderson is a very good midfielder. Especially if you play tactics involving pressing. I have witnessed him develop over the last few years and love his attitude, determination, hard work, and attention to the coach's tactics and instructions. However, he has his limitations. I dont think he is going to develop further and he is a quite a bit below the level of Modric and Ratikic and you need that at the international level to win cups. Twice in three months, Modric ran rings around him and the second time Modric could barely move. Ox is much better at holding ball in tight spaces, dribbling and escaping tackles, and running with the ball in dangerous areas but he is not a controlling midfielder.

 

Second is upfront, Sterling needs to start contributing in goals for the national team. However, good his approach play is, 2 goals (Lithuania, Estonia) in 44 games is an incredibly poor record for an attacking player of his quality.

[Dinho lad]

Sorry my post was in response to triggs but I disagree that England's malaise over the last ten years was anything to do with club conflicts, that had absolutely nothing to do with the 0-0 draw with Algeria in 2010, or the defeat to Iceland, or finishing bottom of the group in 2014. The management of the England team at tournaments since Eriksson left hasn't just been poor, it's been absolutely atrocious.

 

Southgate deserves immense credit for things like making the camp a happy one. I can't remember any previous tournament where it wasn't reported that the England players were feeling totally miserable and didn't really want to be there. These things affect results.

 

Rio Ferdinand doesn't think so.

 

I agree those past failings have been mainly down to awful management, hence why I gave Southgate credit. However, the obvious truth is, your opposition or obstacles are the teams/players contesting you; not the past.

 

I still think the jury is out on this current crop of players (Southgate too).

 

Out of interest, which international teams do you think the jury is not out on?

 

Is it about how many teams England are ahead or behind of, or is it about how far behind from the top team(s) they are??

 

In my opinion this tournament, if anything, have showed how far they are behind the top teams. (It didn't show us anything new in that England are better than a lot of the other international teams)

 

 

 

 

[Dinho lad]

From an outsiders perspective, I think England have a lot to be optimistic for. Kane is as good as it gets upfront. Your defense is solid and with Pickford you have found a very good Goalkeeper. But I think the main area for improvement for England would be in the middle.

 

Might not be the popular opinion around here but Henderson is a very good midfielder. Especially if you play tactics involving pressing. I have witnessed him develop over the last few years and love his attitude, determination, hard work, and attention to the coach's tactics and instructions. However, he has his limitations. I dont think he is going to develop further and he is a quite a bit below the level of Modric and Ratikic and you need that at the international level to win cups. Twice in three months, Modric ran rings around him and the second time Modric could barely move. Ox is much better at holding ball in tight spaces, dribbling and escaping tackles, and running with the ball in dangerous areas but he is not a controlling midfielder.

 

Second is upfront, Sterling needs to start contributing in goals for the national team. However, good his approach play is, 2 goals (Lithuania, Estonia) in 44 games is an incredibly poor record for an attacking player of his quality.

 

True, at the back they have long-term quality in Maguire, Stones and, hopefully Lascelles, and I'm sure few others like the Liverpool RB (Have no idea what his name is still).

 

Kane is obviously world class and Sterling is someone who has world class ability, but for whatever reason, he's not showing it for England. (Alli too),

 

Apart from that, where are the midfielders that would dominate the match? The Ox and RLC possibly. Even then... will they ever reach the heights of Pogba, Modric, Kross, etc? because those are the standard bearers and therefore it's not an unfair question to ask. 

 

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

 

 

From an outsiders perspective, I think England have a lot to be optimistic for. Kane is as good as it gets upfront. Your defense is solid and with Pickford you have found a very good Goalkeeper. But I think the main area for improvement for England would be in the middle.

 

Might not be the popular opinion around here but Henderson is a very good midfielder. Especially if you play tactics involving pressing. I have witnessed him develop over the last few years and love his attitude, determination, hard work, and attention to the coach's tactics and instructions. However, he has his limitations. I dont think he is going to develop further and he is a quite a bit below the level of Modric and Ratikic and you need that at the international level to win cups. Twice in three months, Modric ran rings around him and the second time Modric could barely move. Ox is much better at holding ball in tight spaces, dribbling and escaping tackles, and running with the ball in dangerous areas but he is not a controlling midfielder.

 

Second is upfront, Sterling needs to start contributing in goals for the national team. However, good his approach play is, 2 goals (Lithuania, Estonia) in 44 games is an incredibly poor record for an attacking player of his quality.

 

You're not English? Didn't know that, where are you from?

 

In total agreement re Henderson like. He's starting to get noticed for what he brings to England and Liverpool now, which is really pleasing after years of people just repeating 'he just plays it sideways' and hoping that it still applies to how he plays.

[rgk_lfc]

 

 

From an outsiders perspective, I think England have a lot to be optimistic for. Kane is as good as it gets upfront. Your defense is solid and with Pickford you have found a very good Goalkeeper. But I think the main area for improvement for England would be in the middle.

 

Might not be the popular opinion around here but Henderson is a very good midfielder. Especially if you play tactics involving pressing. I have witnessed him develop over the last few years and love his attitude, determination, hard work, and attention to the coach's tactics and instructions. However, he has his limitations. I dont think he is going to develop further and he is a quite a bit below the level of Modric and Ratikic and you need that at the international level to win cups. Twice in three months, Modric ran rings around him and the second time Modric could barely move. Ox is much better at holding ball in tight spaces, dribbling and escaping tackles, and running with the ball in dangerous areas but he is not a controlling midfielder.

 

Second is upfront, Sterling needs to start contributing in goals for the national team. However, good his approach play is, 2 goals (Lithuania, Estonia) in 44 games is an incredibly poor record for an attacking player of his quality.

 

You're not English? Didn't know that, where are you from?

 

In total agreement re Henderson like. He's starting to get noticed for what he brings to England and Liverpool now, which is really pleasing after years of people just repeating 'he just plays it sideways' and hoping that it still applies to how he plays.

 

Based in US.