Southgate: Episode IV - A New Hope

[skybluedave]

Trapattoni teams were always a hard watch tbf

[GunmaN1905]

4 minutes ago, skybluedave said:

Trapattoni teams were always a hard watch tbf

It's hillarious how fitting this conference is for Southgate's England.

[enigmatic]

2 hours ago, Baptista_8 said:

Erm...OK? Have all of those served up football as bad as this with so much talent?

We're obviously not going to agree.

Most of them, yes, so dull in fact that everybody's forgotten almost all the games.

If you add together all their knockout wins you still don't get as many as Gareth though...

 

[Rebs]

On 26/06/2024 at 16:34, iamjerome said:

2018 was a miracle our team wasn't even good and people forget our expectations were non existent. we were coming off embarrassing ourselves in 2014 and 2016 ffs but people want to bring up oh we didn't beat a good team - so what? our last tournament we went out to iceland the last wc we ended bottom of the group without a single win it was a run to be enjoyed and it was great to be able to see players enjoy themselves for england again. so obviously he deserved at least another tournament after that.

2020 we got to a final with home advantage which is better than we did in 1996. we got to a final which is better than we've done since 1966 even and we lost on pens. it would have been absolutely ludicrous to sack him after that.

2022 we were actually playing pretty well. we held our own against the world champions and were unlucky to go out. i think maybe he could have stepped away after this but the FA begged him to stay and i don't think it's insane he got another tournament because it seemed like it was just a tournament too early for some of our players and we would be really coming into our strength in 2024 so can he win it with more players in their actual prime.

2024 however i have no caveats or justifications. we should be on fire and with how the draw has played out - we should be making the final. anything short is a terrible underperformance now.  southgate needs to make some hard decisions and drop one of foden or bellingham - maybe even both to get gordon in on the left for sure and maybe palmer as well. keep mainoo in the middle too. actually have a balanced team instead of this insane system where we completely sabotage ourselves ignoring the entire left flank.

There isn't one single word of this post that I disagree with...superbly put.

[ceefax the cat]

6 hours ago, Baptista_8 said:

Erm...OK? Have all of those served up football as bad as this with so much talent?

We're obviously not going to agree.

Yyyyyyyep, you've nailed it! You've forgotten about all that awful football because your memories of past tournaments = the best performance + one or two goals if it went well, and near-total amnesia if it didn't.

You don't remember us getting absolutely nowhere against Spain and Switzerland in 1996. You don't remember us almost getting done by Scotland (see: MacAlister's freak penalty miss) because Gazza scored that goal. You don't remember the blocky, sideways dross that Sven's awesomely talented side served up over and over again, including struggling to get the ball off Ecuador in the last 16 of a World Cup and squeaking past Paraguay thanks to an own goal.

You don't remember the mind-numbing awfulness of the Italia 90 campaign, basically all the way up to the comeback against Cameroon, or how fortunate we were to dig out a last gasp winner v Belgium. You don't remember us totally failing to trouble Algeria in 2010 in one of the most aimless displays anyone can possibly ever have seen, from an England side featuring Ashley Cole, Terry, Lampard, Gerrard and Rooney. You don't remember going out with a whimper vs Iceland. Literally the refrain throughout this whole period has been, "How can these players, who light up the European stage with their clubs, look so leaden and clueless in England shirts?". Every tournament, absolutely without fail, since I can remember.

Really, this is nothing new. 

Edited June 27 by ceefax the cat

[Rob1981]

You forgot 2002. Which of course is condensed in the memory down to Beckham’s penalty, the Denmark win and then “Did-Ronaldinho-Mean-It!”

Not the goalless draw against a Nigeria side that were already out, the result of which meant we missed the chance to play Senegal and then Turkey to reach the semis.

[arenaross]

Like sure, but what will you condense Southgate down to? A couple of missed penalties, after a frankly stupid decision to sub on a couple of players for a shootout. A decent win against Germany and a plucky defeat against France at best? 

I don't think we'll be watching documentaries about this era in 20 years time. 

[VP.]

Judging Southgate on other managers failures does not make his achievements any harder to achieve.

In fact it appears to have made people think he's done a better job than he has when in reality he's met the minimum he should have when you take the players at his disposal and the extremely lucky fixtures he's had in the knockouts of tournaments into consideration.

[Rob1981]

Haha, yeah. Definitely don’t compare Southgate to any of his peers. And definitely don’t keep in mind that England had done literally nothing in years when he took over.

Just judge him by your arbitrary standard that says anything less than winning a tournament is an abject failure. Even though history is littered with international teams that have fallen just short and everyone still talks about how great they were.

I suppose he has been lucky with the fixtures though. Other managers haven’t had that.

Not Hoddle, when we met Argentina in the R16 but only because we had already lost to Romania.

Not Eriksson, when we failed to beat the aforementioned Nigeria side that were already out. And then had Denmark and Brazil standing between us and the semis, instead of Senegal and Turkey.

Not Capello. When we had the EASY group in 2010. A group that was so weak the tabloids were laughing about it. But we collided with that brilliant Germany team in the R16 when a path to the semis could have been Ghana followed by Uruguay. Why was that one again? Oh yeah, that was because THAT crop of world class players couldn’t beat either USA OR Algeria with a manager that was supposed to be the envy of the world. And because we held the ball in the corner against SLOVENIA and lost top spot in stoppage time because of a goal in the other game.

At least Hodgson didn’t have easy fixtures though, right?  No, he had the tricky group containing Russia, Wales and Slovakia. And then lost to the mighty Iceland.

Jesus.

Southgate has had some RELATIVELY easy knockout games because we have kept winning the ****ing groups. But it’s still “You haven’t played anyone good!” when it should be “Well done on winning the groups and giving us the best chance of success”.

It’s genuinely mad.
 

[Barnzy]

Southgate’s done a great job, the atmosphere around the England squad has totally changed and up until very recently it all felt cohesive. 
 

Having said that, I don’t think tactically he has what it takes to take us to that next level, it is time for him to go and bring in someone that can build on what he’s achieved. 

[arenaross]

If a Southgate team had drawn 0-0 with Nigeria you'd be telling us this was a tactical masterstroke to conserve energy for the knockouts, while also reminding us that Nigeria are no mugs and that there are no easy games at this level. 

[JJ72]

Yep well done Southgate. The other manages were crap and you've been a modicum better. Let's give a round of applause.

Why can't they all be crap?

[Rob1981]

6 minutes ago, arenaross said:

If a Southgate team had drawn 0-0 with Nigeria you'd be telling us this was a tactical masterstroke to conserve energy for the knockouts, 

Not if it cost us top spot in a group I wouldn’t.

[Pukey]

42 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Haha, yeah. Definitely don’t compare Southgate to any of his peers. And definitely don’t keep in mind that England had done literally nothing in years when he took over.

Just judge him by your arbitrary standard that says anything less than winning a tournament is an abject failure. Even though history is littered with international teams that have fallen just short and everyone still talks about how great they were.

I suppose he has been lucky with the fixtures though. Other managers haven’t had that.

Not Hoddle, when we met Argentina in the R16 but only because we had already lost to Romania.

Not Eriksson, when we failed to beat the aforementioned Nigeria side that were already out. And then had Denmark and Brazil standing between us and the semis, instead of Senegal and Turkey.

Not Capello. When we had the EASY group in 2010. A group that was so weak the tabloids were laughing about it. But we collided with that brilliant Germany team in the R16 when a path to the semis could have been Ghana followed by Uruguay. Why was that one again? Oh yeah, that was because THAT crop of world class players couldn’t beat either USA OR Algeria with a manager that was supposed to be the envy of the world. And because we held the ball in the corner against SLOVENIA and lost top spot in stoppage time because of a goal in the other game.

At least Hodgson didn’t have easy fixtures though, right?  No, he had the tricky group containing Russia, Wales and Slovakia. And then lost to the mighty Iceland.

Jesus.

Southgate has had some RELATIVELY easy knockout games because we have kept winning the ****ing groups. But it’s still “You haven’t played anyone good!” when it should be “Well done on winning the groups and giving us the best chance of success”.

It’s genuinely mad.
 

Tbf we got an easy run in 2018 because of finishing second in the group but I get the point you're making 

[Rob1981]

Just now, Pukey said:

Tbf we got an easy run in 2018 because of finishing second in the group but I get the point you're making 

Still can’t believe Adam Januzaj smashed that goal in for Belgium, even though we were the last group to play and everyone knew that finishing second gave you an easier path that finishing first  

2020, 2022 and 2024 we have won the groups though. And if we benefit from that, any sane observer would credit the manager with navigating their way into the knockouts and giving themselves the best chance. Instead we are almost blaming the guy for not messing up so that he can test himself against a better team.

[VP.]

55 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

Haha, yeah. Definitely don’t compare Southgate to any of his peers. And definitely don’t keep in mind that England had done literally nothing in years when he took over.

Just judge him by your arbitrary standard that says anything less than winning a tournament is an abject failure. Even though history is littered with international teams that have fallen just short and everyone still talks about how great they were.

I suppose he has been lucky with the fixtures though. Other managers haven’t had that.

Not Hoddle, when we met Argentina in the R16 but only because we had already lost to Romania.

Not Eriksson, when we failed to beat the aforementioned Nigeria side that were already out. And then had Denmark and Brazil standing between us and the semis, instead of Senegal and Turkey.

Not Capello. When we had the EASY group in 2010. A group that was so weak the tabloids were laughing about it. But we collided with that brilliant Germany team in the R16 when a path to the semis could have been Ghana followed by Uruguay. Why was that one again? Oh yeah, that was because THAT crop of world class players couldn’t beat either USA OR Algeria with a manager that was supposed to be the envy of the world. And because we held the ball in the corner against SLOVENIA and lost top spot in stoppage time because of a goal in the other game.

At least Hodgson didn’t have easy fixtures though, right?  No, he had the tricky group containing Russia, Wales and Slovakia. And then lost to the mighty Iceland.

Jesus.

Southgate has had some RELATIVELY easy knockout games because we have kept winning the ****ing groups. But it’s still “You haven’t played anyone good!” when it should be “Well done on winning the groups and giving us the best chance of success”.

It’s genuinely mad.
 

None of that makes what Southgate achieved any more or less impressive though. 

Nothing you or anyone can say will change my mind that Southgate had achieved the minimum of was expected during his time in charge. This would be the same whether it was Pep, Wenger or Mourinho managing the side too.

And a quick reply to your last post - We've all seen what happens when he tests himself agaijst a better or equally as good side, we lose

 

 

Edited June 28 by VP.

[Rob1981]

12 minutes ago, VP. said:

Nothing you or anyone can say will change my mind that Southgate had achieved the minimum of was expected during his time in charge. This would be the same whether it was Pep, Wenger or Mourinho managing the side too.

OK right   So absolute minimum expectation = reach semi final and a final.  Even though Robson and Venables and Eriksson are remembered fondly, despite never doing this for England with equally strong groups of players.  And even when Southgate has actually achieved your "minimum expectation", you still don't really think he's done a good job.

Just so I'm understanding it correctly.

Edited June 28 by Rob1981

[RTHerringbone]

My expectations are just that we play coherent football. I'm not fussed about comparing to prior tournaments or player pools. I just want us to look like we have a coherent system. If the system works, the performances follow.

[eenie]

21 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

So absolute minimum expectation = reach semi final and a final.  Even though Robson and Venables and Eriksson are remembered fondly, despite never doing this for England with equally strong groups of players.

Would be pretty harsh on Venables to criticise him for not reaching a semi final and a final when he only had one tournament

[Rob1981]

1 minute ago, eenie said:

Would be pretty harsh on Venables to criticise him for not reaching a semi final and a final when he only had one tournament

Fair point.  May have to defer to @JJ72 here for a verdict on Venables... it was he who said all the other managers were "crap".

[The_jagster]

48 minutes ago, VP. said:

And a quick reply to your last post - We've all seen what happens when he tests himself agaijst a better or equally as good side, we lose

 

 

This is the only bit I disagree with, he has beaten decent teams in the Nations League and beat Germany and Croatia in the last Euros. We are then into every team beaten by England cannot be any good because England beat them circular logic.

[Rob1981]

27 minutes ago, RTHerringbone said:

My expectations are just that we play coherent football. I'm not fussed about comparing to prior tournaments or player pools.

Don't get me wrong.  I would absolutely take a R16 exit with some good football, over grinding to a QF but every game being horrible.  I said the other day: people remember 1998 a lot more fondly than 2006, even though they went out a round earlier.  Because we played well at times and there were big talking points in the games and we had a likeable team.

All the same, if you want to be objective about any international manager...  Southgate or anyone... England or someone else... the measure has to be:

• How has this manager done, relative to other managers who have gone to tournaments with similarly good groups of players?

Not:

• Has he got the elusive trophy win or the spot in the final that I wanted to see?  Because history should tell you that doesn't usually happen, even when teams are stacked.

[iamjerome]

49 minutes ago, VP. said:

None of that makes what Southgate achieved any more or less impressive though. 

Nothing you or anyone can say will change my mind that Southgate had achieved the minimum of was expected during his time in charge. This would be the same whether it was Pep, Wenger or Mourinho managing the side too.

And a quick reply to your last post - We've all seen what happens when he tests himself agaijst a better or equally as good side, we lose

 

 

haha oh this is absolutely great 

you expected semi finals in 2018? as a minimum? after not making semi finals since 1996? after going out to iceland to 2016? after ending bottom of the group in 2014 without a single win?

and THEN despite everyone thinking we made even that as a fluke and and despite not even managing to beat a single good team in 2018...

you really expected us to miraculously improve so much that as a MINIMUM we should have made the final in 2020? something we hadn't done in a tournament since 1966? with a defence that featured harry maguire? 

no doubt you thought our squad was clearly better than france's or belgiums pre tournament too. 

ACHIEVED THE MINIMUM!!!!    

despite a lifetime probably of having lived through england having actually even better teams who achieved much less.

THIS WAS ALL THE MINIMUM HE EXPECTED!

and this lad is proudly saying

nothing ANYONE can say can convince him the big brain football fan that southgate had only achieved THE MINIMUM    

what's particularly funny about this is i have lived in 3 different countries during southgate's era and the one consistent thing i would get bant about from people in these countries - or other international people i would hang out with in them - are english football fans are entitled and i always conceded. i might screenshot this post and save it for the next time i hear it so i can give them a wonderful example of that to laugh at next time. 

THE MINIMUM  

 

[ceefax the cat]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/jun/27/austria-are-everything-england-are-not-and-never-have-been-euro-2024

I think there is a very good point in there

re England's 'minimum expectations', I don't feel there's much need to add to the righteous pasting VP has already received but... yeah.

4 hours ago, arenaross said:

Like sure, but what will you condense Southgate down to? A couple of missed penalties, after a frankly stupid decision to sub on a couple of players for a shootout. A decent win against Germany and a plucky defeat against France at best? 

I don't think we'll be watching documentaries about this era in 20 years time. 

This tournament aside, people will remember coming within a couple of penalties of winning the Euros, the win against Germany, being in a World Cup semi and putting on a decent display against France, yep. A better legacy than almost any other England manager, in terms of memories, but memories take a while to become legends.

For all the kids who were 12 - 20 years old in the summer of 2021, smashing Germany and Ukraine en route to an agonising final defeat at Wembley will be their Euro '96. When they grow up some of them will become comedians, TV presenters and pop stars who will appear as talking heads on cheap BBC montage shows, waxing lyrical about Pickford saying 'No problem' before Jorginho's penalty, or Harry Maguire and the Love Train, Gareth's waistcoat, etc etc. They'll nostalgically play Olivia Rodrigo and Ed Sheeran over the top of it all and you will feel even older than you do right now.

Edited June 28 by ceefax the cat

[VP.]

34 minutes ago, iamjerome said:

haha oh this is absolutely great 

you expected semi finals in 2018? as a minimum? after not making semi finals since 1996? after going out to iceland to 2016? after ending bottom of the group in 2014 without a single win?

and THEN despite everyone thinking we made even that as a fluke and and despite not even managing to beat a single good team in 2018...

you really expected us to miraculously improve so much that as a MINIMUM we should have made the final in 2020? something we hadn't done in a tournament since 1966? with a defence that featured harry maguire? 

no doubt you thought our squad was clearly better than france's or belgiums pre tournament too. 

ACHIEVED THE MINIMUM!!!!    

despite a lifetime probably of having lived through england having actually even better teams who achieved much less.

THIS WAS ALL THE MINIMUM HE EXPECTED!

and this lad is proudly saying

nothing ANYONE can say can convince him the big brain football fan that southgate had only achieved THE MINIMUM    

what's particularly funny about this is i have lived in 3 different countries during southgate's era and the one consistent thing i would get bant about from people in these countries - or other international people i would hang out with in them - are english football fans are entitled and i always conceded. i might screenshot this post and save it for the next time i hear it so i can give them a wonderful example of that to laugh at next time. 

THE MINIMUM  

 

WC 2018 we played Tunisia, Panama, Belgium, Colombia, Sweden, Croatia. Losing to Croatia in the semi final which I would expect to be the minimum achievement after that set of fixtures.

EC 2020 we played Croatia, Scotland, Czech Rep, Germany, Ukraine, Denmark, Italy. Yes some tougher matches but all except for the Ukraine game were played at Wembley stadium (if I remember right) so this was and will be our best chance at winning a tournament for some time.

WC 2022 we played Iran, USA, Wales, Senegal and France. Once again like 2018 we achieved the minimum expected with that set of fixtures then lost as soon as the opposition got tougher.

Really don't understand what is so hard to see there lad? Though I'm sure it'll give you 'bant' none the less.

Clearly my expectations of what this nation should be capable of doing on a football pitch is a lot higher than yours.

 

Edited June 28 by VP.

[titchuk]

3 hours ago, arenaross said:

Like sure, but what will you condense Southgate down to? A couple of missed penalties, after a frankly stupid decision to sub on a couple of players for a shootout. A decent win against Germany and a plucky defeat against France at best? 

I don't think we'll be watching documentaries about this era in 20 years time. 

I think I said earlier in this thread but 2018 under Southgate was the first time I've actually liked watching England and that's got to count for something (not making me happy, making the country happy!).

That Colombia penalty shootout is worthy of a documentary by itself, surely. 

[iamjerome]

yes that is precisely my point. my expectations are grounded in the reality of how england has performed in major tournaments over 50 years.

 

2018 featured the first time we won on pens in decades. 2020 featured first time we beat germany in knockouts since 66 wasn't it? 

 

all the achievements that were made are being glossed over for expectations based on what, your own fantasy that england are competent and high performing footballing nation?

to be clear i am speaking about the past - i actually went into this tournament with the highest expectations i had since maybe 2006 coming off a very promising 2004. just like i thought we should be kicking on from promising 2020/22 now) and of course we haven't been great or even good so far and i think most criticisms have been fair. although i do think the idea some have suggested that we should drop our best striker or move out best winger into left back are insane but that's a separate point.

 

but 2018/2020 and even 2022? 

 

i'll defend those all day because i am confident in the simple logic that i have entire lifetimes of results to compare against in plenty of tournaments we also faced plenty of poor teams.

[The_jagster]

2 minutes ago, titchuk said:

I think I said earlier in this thread but 2018 under Southgate was the first time I've actually liked watching England and that's got to count for something (not making me happy, making the country happy!).

That Colombia penalty shootout is worthy of a documentary by itself, surely. 

Because we got through it the narrative is warm and fluffy, but as Switzerland and Spain showed at Euro 2020 a lot of it is down to fortune really, Dier's pen was atrocious.

[JJ72]

1 hour ago, Rob1981 said:

Fair point.  May have to defer to @JJ72 here for a verdict on Venables... it was he who said all the other managers were "crap".

I've watched England for a long time. We've only looked good in 2 tournaments. Under Sir Bobby Robson when the hand of god ****ed us over and under Venables when football was coming home but it didn't. It was still enjoyable though. Every other tournament from 1980 onwards has been dour and drab. Several times we've gone in thinking we have the players this time to challenge and we've failed miserably and the manager has gone as a result. For many years we didn't have the players in the 80s and 90s particularly, certainly not the depth that we have this time. Kane, Foden, Bellingham have been this season 3 of the best players in the world, throw in Saka, Palmer, Rice, Stones and yes, even Walker and you've got the core of an amazing team. Since the premiership was established, England have failed to make proper use of their resources.

However this time, we have probably the best squad of players I've ever known, yet we're dragging our knuckles along the floor with no ambition or purpose other than let's scrape a win and 2 draws against mediocre opposition. We made Eriksen look world class ffs. Southgate is a defensive, negative, boring coach who has picked the wrong squad of players to have a balanced team and is digging his heels in rather than deciding to change his mind. We should have coasted into the round with lots of goals, great confidence and a rosy feeling that this year is ours. We're the exact opposite and that's fully on the manager.

His limitations have been seen before in previous tournaments and yet we persevered with him, that's on the FA's head.

[ceefax the cat]

8 minutes ago, JJ72 said:

probably the best squad of players I've ever known

8 minutes ago, JJ72 said:

picked the wrong squad of players to have a balanced team

Hmmmmmm sooooo

I think the brand new, untested centre back pairing (featuring a Crystal Palace player with 14 caps), mysterious gap in central midfield and total lack of a left back instantly make it an inferior squad to some of our previous ones
 

Edited June 28 by ceefax the cat

[titchuk]

5 minutes ago, The_jagster said:

Because we got through it the narrative is warm and fluffy, but as Switzerland and Spain showed at Euro 2020 a lot of it is down to fortune really, Dier's pen was atrocious.

I don't think you can have the attitude of saying 'well we could've lost' when we win and then saying 'well we lost' when we lose.

[The_jagster]

Just now, titchuk said:

I don't think you can have the attitude of saying 'well we could've lost' when we win and then saying 'well we lost' when we lose.

True, but it's why I don't think Eriksson was that much of a failure, losing twice on pens to good Portugal sides.

[iamjerome]

this squad is not better than the era when we had the likes of 

rio terry sol for centre half

gary neville and ashley cole as full backs 

beckham gerrard scholes lampard hargreaves carrick joe cole for midfield

rooney owen up front 

[Rob1981]

Just now, The_jagster said:

I don't think Eriksson was that much of a failure, losing twice on pens to good Portugal sides.

But he had all these world class players that were doing it for their clubs! 

And rather than manage the egos and play a balanced team he tried to field them all and it didn't click.

It's EXACTLY what Southgate is doing at the moment.  This year he has randomly drifted away from the principles of established partnerships and 'England regulars' that got us results.  Now he is just trying to work out a new style on the hoof.  Because the players have all kicked on at club level and it's difficult to leave any of them out.

So... Southgaate is wasting our best chance of a trophy but Eriksson wasn't "much of a failure".  Even though Eriksson's players were even better.  Got it.

[JJ72]

15 minutes ago, ceefax the cat said:

Hmmmmmm sooooo

I think the brand new, untested centre back pairing (featuring a Crystal Palace player with 14 caps), mysterious gap in central midfield and total lack of a left back instantly make it an inferior squad to some of our previous ones
 

I said we have the core of an amazing team.  Gap in central midfield is down to the ***** selected there. Bellingham, rice with mainoo is an excellent 3, I've not seen anything of Wharton but people seem to rate him too.

Leftback is the issue in the squad of course. Which squad is it inferior to then? Bellingham alone is the best player we've had. What other Englishman has torn it up at Real like he has this season. Yet he's being played in a different way.

Edited June 28 by JJ72

[Rob1981]

13 minutes ago, titchuk said:

I don't think you can have the attitude of saying 'well we could've lost' when we win and then saying 'well we lost' when we lose.

It's a shame people still don't give McClaren the respect he deserves.  After all he could have won Euro 2008 if he'd qualified and then beaten all the other teams.

[The_jagster]

1 minute ago, Rob1981 said:

But he had all these world class players that were doing it for their clubs! 

And rather than manage the egos and play a balanced team he tried to field them all and it didn't click.

It's EXACTLY what Southgate is doing at the moment.  This year he has randomly drifted away from the principles of established partnerships and 'England regulars' that got us results.  Now he is just trying to work out a new style on the hoof.  Because the players have all kicked on at club level and it's difficult to leave any of them out.

So... Southgaate is wasting our best chance of a trophy but Eriksson wasn't "much of a failure".  Even though Eriksson's players were even better.  Got it.

Why are you quoting other people's opinions at me like a gotcha?

The France match surprised me because it was the first time a Southgate side had actually had a go at a decent team in a tournament, the performance versus Germany was pretty crap, but we got the win.

Give me Eriksson sides over the 2008-2016 teams and performances any day

[ceefax the cat]

Just now, JJ72 said:

I said we have the core of an amazing team

You said we had probably the best squad of players you've ever known

[JJ72]

Just now, ceefax the cat said:

You said we had probably the best squad of players you've ever known

Shams he didn't select them then

[Rob1981]

1 minute ago, The_jagster said:

Why are you quoting other people's opinions at me like a gotcha?

I don't know

The pressure is getting to me, I won't lie.  Can't believe the game isn't for another two days.

[ceefax the cat]

2 minutes ago, JJ72 said:

Shams he didn't select them then

"The best squad of players I've ever known... well, if you include the ones who aren't in the squad"

What 


The left back issue alone makes it inferior to every other squad Southgate has taken to a tournament, as far as I'm concerned.

Edited June 28 by ceefax the cat

[RTHerringbone]

15 minutes ago, iamjerome said:

this squad is not better than the era when we had the likes of 

rio terry sol for centre half

gary neville and ashley cole as full backs 

beckham gerrard scholes lampard hargreaves carrick joe cole for midfield

rooney owen up front 

I agree with this point, but I also think this IS exactly the point.

We've messed up in the past trying to shoehorn all the "best" players into a system and suffered as a result. We're doing exactly the same in this tournament.

As I said earlier, I don't have any preconceived ideas about what we should or shouldn't achieve, but I would expect any decent international manager to put out a balanced system. The whole can be greater than the sum of its parts.

[Rob1981]

I think there is still plenty of time for us to stumble on a winning formula through trial and error.

Mainoo into CM or Bellingham dropped deeper.  Then Foden dropped or moved and a proper left winger brought in.  It can all change.

But I am still mystified as to why we wasted two games with TAA in midfield, even though we already knew that Southgate wouldn't risk him there against a top team.  Just a waste of two games when we could have been bedding in combos we were more likely to be relying on later.  And the absence of another left back is unforgiveable really.

[JJ72]

32 minutes ago, ceefax the cat said:

"The best squad of players I've ever known... well, if you include the ones who aren't in the squad"

What 


The left back issue alone makes it inferior to every other squad Southgate has taken to a tournament, as far as I'm concerned.

I've answered this already but the forum is messing me around on my mobile. A squad of players to choose from was definitely thr best we've ever had. The squad he actually chose has limitations. 

There's a reason the rest of Europe has us down as favourites. Or should I say had. They're baffled as to why we're so poor.

[JJ72]

24 minutes ago, Rob1981 said:

I think there is still plenty of time for us to stumble on a winning formula through trial and error.

Mainoo into CM or Bellingham dropped deeper.  Then Foden dropped or moved and a proper left winger brought in.  It can all change.

But I am still mystified as to why we wasted two games with TAA in midfield, even though we already knew that Southgate wouldn't risk him there against a top team.  Just a waste of two games when we could have been bedding in combos we were more likely to be relying on later.  And the absence of another left back is unforgiveable really.

He took a risk in bringing Shaw and it didn't pay off but he should've taken another left footed left back to mitigate the risk. It was foolish and will maybe cost him. 

[TalkSport]

47 minutes ago, iamjerome said:

this squad is not better than the era when we had the likes of 

rio terry sol for centre half

gary neville and ashley cole as full backs 

beckham gerrard scholes lampard hargreaves carrick joe cole for midfield

rooney owen up front 

It is for me. Defensively at CB and LB is fair, but the depth in terms of rotating out the quality is so much higher. Literally got a squad where likes of Rashford/Grealish haven’t been called up. The benchmark for attacking talent has risen so much over past decade.

Even got likes of Gomes / Edwards playing abroad who are forgotten men. Decades ago they would be in squads easily. 

[iamjerome]

21 minutes ago, TalkSport said:

It is for me. Defensively at CB and LB is fair, but the depth in terms of rotating out the quality is so much higher. Literally got a squad where likes of Rashford/Grealish haven’t been called up. The benchmark for attacking talent has risen so much over past decade.

Even got likes of Gomes / Edwards playing abroad who are forgotten men. Decades ago they would be in squads easily. 

yes attacking talent depth is better

 

but the starting quality talent is not anywhere near as balanced as back then

 

rooney lamps gerrard were amongst the best in the world during mid to late 00s like kane foden bellingham are today

 

beckham and joe cole certainly as good as the rest of the wide options we have. 

 

but then the starting quality everywhere else practically is much worse.

 

much worse at centre half, not even close. miles and miles worse. 

 

much worse at left back, not even close. our back up then in wayne bridge is better than what we have today.

 

worse also CMs although we didn't use scholes or hargreaves or carrick well at all but they were all world class or not far off.

 

actually i will say we do have good starting quality and depth at right back now  but gary neville and carragher as stand in were no mugs

 

 

[iamjerome]

1 hour ago, RTHerringbone said:

I agree with this point, but I also think this IS exactly the point.

We've messed up in the past trying to shoehorn all the "best" players into a system and suffered as a result. We're doing exactly the same in this tournament.

As I said earlier, I don't have any preconceived ideas about what we should or shouldn't achieve, but I would expect any decent international manager to put out a balanced system. The whole can be greater than the sum of its parts.

i totally agree with you on every point here mate btw 

 

southgate has to course correct from this or this will be the one where i leave a.c southgate defenders and join pitchforks at gareth united 

[Pukey]

The LB issue is so bad that I'm starting to think the sticker book had it right selecting Luke Thomas. 

[EdBed]

I've not read all of the above, but... lost in the nostalgia of Italia'90 and Euro'96 are things like; not really being that good in the group stage and requiring a late winner against Egypt to avoid the drawing of lots, a very late winner against a weak Belgium, relying on indicipline by Cameroon; a dissappointing draw with Switzerland, being a Uri Geller away from having Scotland equalise, and a perfectly good Spanish goal being ruled out by offside that would have put them 1 up.