England - The Southgate Years

[Adam]

I don't have any definitive answers but I don't think Southgate will be manager, and Kane may no longer be an automatic starter.

No clue who will be in the team. 12 months ago how many of us had heard of Cole Palmer or Kobbie Mainoo? The next big star may currently be sat in Villa or Liverpool's U18 squad.

[Lineker]

11 hours ago, Mad Jack said:

So, two years time, opening game of the 2026 World Cup, three questions for England:
1. Who's the manager?
2. What style/formation are they playing?
3. Who's in the team?

4. Does Harry Kane have to leave England to win trophies?

[stokeriño]

1 hour ago, Lineker said:

4. Does Harry Kane have to leave England to win trophies?

This is the most important one to address tbh.

[Gazz]

I don't think 2023/24 Golden Shoe and Euro 2024 Golden Boot winner Harry Kane is the problem.

Problem is the system not being set up to play to his strengths and create chances for him. Everywhere he's played and being successful is because he's had runners either side of him to stretch the pitch and create space. The combination of the left side tucking inside and the slow pace of England's progression up the pitch has absolutely fucked him because it gives tonnes of time for the opposition centre backs to sort out which one is marking him and which is covering, the space in the final third disappears and the passing lanes into him get shut down.

Easy to say in hindsight too, but it was absolute madness to go back to a flat back four that hadn't worked all tournament immediately after our best performance of the tournament using a back three. That's where Southgate's tactical naivety / stubornness has cost us once again.

[Bobfoc]

Apparently, Kane was carrying an injury as well.

[therockbox]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it comes out over the next week or two that Kane's been carrying quite a significant injury. I've been critical of him over the last few weeks but he just seems off. Not just out of form or struggling with the setup, but just finding it difficult to even run half the time.

[stokeriño]

All these points about Kane's scoring record and injuries and factors elsewhere on the pitch etc. are failing to address the very real possibility that Kane has absorbed the full power of the Tottenham Trophy Curse and the only way forward for England is a full exorcism.

[King Ellis]

It's probably a combination of us still being the jilted ex, England's boring football and admiring Uruguay's swashbuckling style from afar but there have been people in Leeds circles wanting Biesla to replace Southgate. 

Luke Shaw would love a bit of murderball.

[Colly]

10 minutes ago, stokeriño said:

All these points about Kane's scoring record and injuries and factors elsewhere on the pitch etc. are failing to address the very real possibility that Kane has absorbed the full power of the Tottenham Trophy Curse and the only way forward for England is a full exorcism.

Let's not forget that we lost the only game where there wasn't a single Newcastle player on the pitch.

[Gazz]

9 minutes ago, Colly said:

Let's not forget that we lost the only game where there wasn't a single Newcastle player on the pitch.

Turns out Mikel Merino's nan was a witch.

[DavidMarrio]

I think it's the same old argument that the tactics limit the players England have at their disposal, not using/hardly using certain players but also some players just not performing. 

I will keep arguing that you've got one of the best passers in world football sitting on the bench cause apparently Walker is an amazing defender. Watkins hardly had any minutes and Palmer was just a bench option yet when the two of them would be on the pitch it looked like something would happen. Some players only kept starting or playing across the tournament not based on merit. 

England's best half performance came against a team who in previous years wouldn't have advanced cause they weren't good enough to get out the group. They've had fortunate draws in competitions and yeah you can only play who you get but when they play someone good they get beat. 

Don't get me wrong. Made up England got beat but they can't surely appoint another dull, inoffensive dinosaur as manager

[Hobo]

14 hours ago, Mad Jack said:

So, two years time, opening game of the 2026 World Cup, three questions for England:
1. Who's the manager?
2. What style/formation are they playing?
3. Who's in the team?

1. Roy Hodgson

2. 4-4-2

3. Paul Konchesky

[Mad Jack]

44 minutes ago, DavidMarrio said:

They've had fortunate draws in competitions and yeah you can only play who you get but when they play someone good they get beat. 

Is who is good being based on who is actually good though? Like England played Switzerland, who knocked out Italy and were 90 seconds away from beating Germany (and who, in their last 5 tournaments before this one have wins over France and draws with Brazil, Argentina and Spain), Netherlands, who had their best tournament in years and knocked out Turkey, who knocked out Austria who topped the group that had France and Netherlands in.

People talk about England getting easy draws, but that only happens because at least one of the so-called 'good' teams keeps fumbling the bag.

[gunnar hendershow]

It's hard for me to look at England as continually lucky with their draws. Under Southgate, every team that's beaten them in a major tournament has finished 3rd or better. That's more than luck, though fair to discuss is how much of that is Southgate vs how much is the shear level of talent on the squad.

[Chris2K]

1 hour ago, Mad Jack said:

Is who is good being based on who is actually good though? Like England played Switzerland, who knocked out Italy 

This is not an achievement of note.

The knock out brackets got screwed around a lot by teams playing weakened line-ups in the third group game with their qualification already confirmed, another by-product of the third-placed teams advancing mess.

Based on the first two group games, or even just the players available, surely 999 out of 1000 people would prefer to be in the Netherlands, Turkey, Switzerland, Slovakia, Austria, Romania, empty husk of Italy bracket, instead of the bracket with the hosts Germany, the World Cup runners-up France, the unanimously agreed best team Spain, everyone's dark horse Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Slovenia (one of these two would be replaced by England) and plucky underdogs Georgia. 

It was one of the most one-sided brackets I've seen in an international tournament.

[Bobfoc]

Unusual things can happen in international tournaments. You're working with a squad full of knackered players who may or may not adapt well to being together for a month and putting aside club rivalries.

Spain and Portugal lost to Morocco in the last World Cup. Does that mean France were lucky to face Morocco in the semi-finals? Perhaps, but then Morocco clearly deserved to be there. On the other hand, if Argentina had lost the penalty shootout against the Netherlands in the quarter-finals, you'd have people calling them bottle jobs who aren't fit to wear the shirt.

I remember when France and Argentina came into the 2002 World Cup as the two favourites, only for both of them to go out in the group stage. They just didn't turn up, for whatever reason. Does the fact that Brazil then had a fairly nice run of Belgium, England, South Korea and a relatively weak Germany on the way to the trophy taint their victory? Not really, because it's not their fault France and Argentina made a mess of things.

[Jimmy]

3 hours ago, Gazz said:

I don't think 2023/24 Golden Shoe and Euro 2024 Golden Boot winner Harry Kane is the problem.

Problem is the system not being set up to play to his strengths and create chances for him. Everywhere he's played and being successful is because he's had runners either side of him to stretch the pitch and create space. The combination of the left side tucking inside and the slow pace of England's progression up the pitch has absolutely fucked him because it gives tonnes of time for the opposition centre backs to sort out which one is marking him and which is covering, the space in the final third disappears and the passing lanes into him get shut down.

Easy to say in hindsight too, but it was absolute madness to go back to a flat back four that hadn't worked all tournament immediately after our best performance of the tournament using a back three. That's where Southgate's tactical naivety / stubornness has cost us once again.

I got slaughtered for saying pre-tournament that I'd drop Foden for a left sided winger who will run in behind (Gordon / Rashford), because it's the way you get the best out of a striker whose scored 50 odd goals this season and is also an elite creator. 

That said, he was definitely carrying an injury and we had good depth up top. Ultimately, we managed to play a system which couldn't get the best out of any of our world class front 4. 

[Mad Jack]

6 minutes ago, Chris2K said:

This is not an achievement of note.

The knock out brackets got screwed around a lot by teams playing weakened line-ups in the third group game with their qualification already confirmed, another by-product of the third-placed teams advancing mess.

Based on the first two group games, or even just the players available, surely 999 out of 1000 people would prefer to be in the Netherlands, Turkey, Switzerland, Slovakia, Austria, Romania, empty husk of Italy bracket, instead of the bracket with the hosts Germany, the World Cup runners-up France, the unanimously agreed best team Spain, everyone's dark horse Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Slovenia (one of these two would be replaced by England) and plucky underdogs Georgia. 

It was one of the most one-sided brackets I've seen in an international tournament.

But France were only in that position because they fumbled their own group - they were top on 4 points going into game three, and then drew with Poland. Win that game and they stay top and get Netherlands. And given that France were in Group D, three sets of final matches had already happened by that point, and they'd have all been operating under the reasonable assumption that France would've been in the bottom half of the draw, rather than the top half.

[DavidMarrio]

1 hour ago, Mad Jack said:

Is who is good being based on who is actually good though? Like England played Switzerland, who knocked out Italy and were 90 seconds away from beating Germany (and who, in their last 5 tournaments before this one have wins over France and draws with Brazil, Argentina and Spain), Netherlands, who had their best tournament in years and knocked out Turkey, who knocked out Austria who topped the group that had France and Netherlands in.

People talk about England getting easy draws, but that only happens because at least one of the so-called 'good' teams keeps fumbling the bag.

And England have fumbled the bag on multiple occasions (much to my delight) 

Italy have been shite either side of the Euro win last time around. Switzerland knocking out Italy isn't a major bonus point. And it took pens to beat Switzerland. 

Holland finished 3rd in their group no matter how you brush it up they only had a chance to advance cause UEFA decided lets add more teams in. 

Bellingham pulled an absolute worldy out his arse when Slovakia should have advanced in normal time. 

England drew against Slovenia and Denmark. 

Like you can sugar coat this as England getting a final but they've been extremely fortunate to get to the final. They got found out by a far better team and it took a special goal by Palmer to basically give England a lifeline cause other than that they did fuck all last night. 

[METALMAN]

Even Scotland drew against Switzerland.