No doubt fed up with the circus that comes with being England Manager
Constantly being told who he should be picking (He had a slight dig after the United States game about that) - Whilst many are just waiting for you to fail - The difference with Manager roles is the fact that Pep can lose to Fulham, and over the course of the season it shouldnt matter - Southgate loses one game to Senegal | France etc. and its all over.
All I ask him that if he wants to go, then he makes up his mind quickly.
We start our Euro 2024 Qualifying campaign in Italy in just three months, we should qualify regardless of who is in charge, but be better preparation if the new man has longer to get ready for this Qualifying campaign
The timing is wrong for Eddie Howe. He's about to achieve great things at a club with massive backing AND super passionate fans. Why would he leave that now?
The timing is wrong for Eddie Howe. He's about to achieve great things at a club with massive backing AND super passionate fans. Why would he leave that now?
Chance to manage your country is hard to turn down
The timing is wrong for Eddie Howe. He's about to achieve great things at a club with massive backing AND super passionate fans. Why would he leave that now?
I think Southgate will not stay on. He will be aware that his stock is very high at present, therefore being able to secure a very lucrative contract from a very big club. Time to cash in.
It’s quite telling that those who want him to go can never seem to generate a realistic name that will come in and do a better job.
There is definitely a bit of an agenda against him though from some areas - and I don’t think it is all football related. The anti-woke, anti-PC part of the English fanbase really have it in for him - to a level where no logic or common sense seems to come into the discussion.
I also think that as a country we really struggle with the notion that somebody is doing the job well, and therefore people will really scrape the barrel for reasons to still have a go and point the finger - even if the facts completely oppose it.
I genuinely don’t recall such division or anger when it came to the likes of Hodgson or Capello, even though the performances were considerably worse.
We’re just bit of a weird country when it comes to this stuff, and especially with the England team.
It’s quite telling that those who want him to go can never seem to generate a realistic name that will come in and do a better job.
There is definitely a bit of an agenda against him though from some areas - and I don’t think it is all football related. The anti-woke, anti-PC part of the English fanbase really have it in for him - to a level where no logic or common sense seems to come into the discussion.
I also think that as a country we really struggle with the notion that somebody is doing the job well, and therefore people will really scrape the barrel for reasons to still have a go and point the finger - even if the facts completely oppose it.
I genuinely don’t recall such division or anger when it came to the likes of Hodgson or Capello, even though the performances were considerably worse.
We’re just bit of a weird country when it comes to this stuff, and especially with the England team.
Probably doesn't help that Southgate came into the role with not the greatest of records when it came to Club Management - We have a strange fixation that to do well as England Manager, said person needs to have done an excellent job with a club beforehand.
The fact that we've done so well with Southgate, and so poorly with others, SHOULD give that opinion a wake up call... I doubt it will though.
I have to say, I listened to Simon Jordan taking on (and frankly totally skinning) Danny Mills on Talksport. And like many things he says I cant help but agree with him.
First up - I am pretty neutral on the England manager situation.
But Jordan has it spot on.
IF this happened..... IF Kane had scored....... IF the ref did X, Y or Z.......
Fact is that we lost. Again. Quarter Finals. Again. Do we want to be happy with that as a nation? In reality its the same story as last time - first time we play a decent team we get turned over. How ever you try and spin it, that's a fact.
But it’s knockout football. These people continually compare management of football as a whole and it’s not really fair. Pep fucked the CL final, he still had the league and domestic cups to fall back on. National management is a lonely place, you don’t get a second leg or turn your attention to other trophies. You lose by a tiny margin…done. For two years.
We have to be very careful because the money in club football means the attraction of international football, plus the pressure to deliver, makes it a job that not many people want.
I have to say, I listened to Simon Jordan taking on (and frankly totally skinning) Danny Mills on Talksport. And like many things he says I cant help but agree with him.
First up - I am pretty neutral on the England manager situation.
But Jordan has it spot on.
IF this happened..... IF Kane had scored....... IF the ref did X, Y or Z.......
Fact is that we lost. Again. Quarter Finals. Again. Do we want to be happy with that as a nation? In reality its the same story as last time - first time we play a decent team we get turned over. How ever you try and spin it, that's a fact.
i don't feel it was the same old same old in the sense that we clearly didn't get turned over. In fact, if anything we turned them over and they got pretty lucky with decisions and a penalty against with a lot of pressure on it (so no dig at Kane)
I actually think Morocco have a very decent chance if the likes of Mbappe etc play as lazy and the team as a whole play the way they did apart from maybe 2 or 3 few minute spells.
I'm genuinely surprised that the whole 'people telling him who to pick must be annoying' thing is even a thing to him. I doubt there's a national team job on the planet where that's not applicable. Hell, I doubt there's a match thread on this forum where the Charlton managers are not told who to pick. I'm really not convinced that Southgate pays the slightest bit of attention to it, and I don't think any manager should be remotely aware of a clamour for a player to be included. I heard one reporter say that Southgate and given in to the public or press by picking Foden to start. But I think that says more about how self-important sports 'journalists' are than anything else.
The irony of this defeat is that I think we were the better team. Tactically and man-for-man, if not entirely than the majority. I just don't think he did much wrong on this one.
Colombia…1-1 Pens Won Sweden…2-0 Won Croatia…1-2 ET Lost Germany…2-0 Won Ukraine…4-0 Won Denmark…2-1 ET Won Italy…1-1 Pens Lost Senegal…3-0 Won France…1-2 Lost
Colombia…1-1 Pens Won Sweden…2-0 Won Croatia…1-2 ET Lost Germany…2-0 Won Ukraine…4-0 Won Denmark…2-1 ET Won Italy…1-1 Pens Lost Senegal…3-0 Won France…1-2 Lost
Sven: Beat Ecuador and Denmark, lost to Portugal (twice on pens so learnt no lessons), lost to Brazil McClaren: Didnt even get us to a Tournament Capello: Didnt even get us out of the Groups Hodgson: Lost to Italy (on penalties), lost to Iceland
But it’s knockout football. These people continually compare management of football as a whole and it’s not really fair. Pep fucked the CL final, he still had the league and domestic cups to fall back on. National management is a lonely place, you don’t get a second leg or turn your attention to other trophies. You lose by a tiny margin…done. For two years.
We have to be very careful because the money in club football means the attraction of international football, plus the pressure to deliver, makes it a job that not many people want.
Another factor to consider: every country is having the same debate about their national team manager, even the French and the Brazilians.
The nature of international, knockout football means that putting a leash on your most creative players and playing not-to-lose is actually the strategy that wins you tournaments.
Their team has won things and even the French fans have the same gripes about Deschamps as English fans do about Southgate: "why won't he let the creative players play their natural game?", "why are the formations so negative?"
It's because that's how you win tournament football matches. Southgate is the first England manager to understand this and is performing better than anyone that came along in the decades before him because of it.
But it’s knockout football. These people continually compare management of football as a whole and it’s not really fair. Pep fucked the CL final, he still had the league and domestic cups to fall back on. National management is a lonely place, you don’t get a second leg or turn your attention to other trophies. You lose by a tiny margin…done. For two years.
We have to be very careful because the money in club football means the attraction of international football, plus the pressure to deliver, makes it a job that not many people want.
Another factor to consider: every country is having the same debate about their national team manager, even the French and the Brazilians.
The nature of international, knockout football means that putting a leash on your most creative players and playing not-to-lose is actually the strategy that wins you tournaments.
They're team has won things and even the French fans have the same gripes about Deschamps as English fans do about Southgate: "why won't he let the creative players play their natural game?", "why are the formations so negative?"
It's because that's how you win tournament football matches. Southgate is the first England manager to understand this and is performing better than anyone that came along in the decades before him because of it.
That's the trouble - everyone thinks they should win like they are Brazil in the 70's and fail to realise that was the exception and not the rule - even Brazil in '94 nearly got found out for that against the ultra defensive Italy - and then they did in '98 with Desailly, Petite and co
I have to say, I listened to Simon Jordan taking on (and frankly totally skinning) Danny Mills on Talksport. And like many things he says I cant help but agree with him.
First up - I am pretty neutral on the England manager situation.
But Jordan has it spot on.
IF this happened..... IF Kane had scored....... IF the ref did X, Y or Z.......
Fact is that we lost. Again. Quarter Finals. Again. Do we want to be happy with that as a nation? In reality its the same story as last time - first time we play a decent team we get turned over. How ever you try and spin it, that's a fact.
Just proves what we all know deep down, as a nation we are top 6-10, but not consistently in the top 3 or 4 Nations (France, Brazil, Argentina at the moment, probably followed by Portugal and Spain who both succumbed to Morocco)
I'd then put us, Croatia, Belgium, The Netherlands and Italy all roughly on a par, depending on form and pressure.
But it’s knockout football. These people continually compare management of football as a whole and it’s not really fair. Pep fucked the CL final, he still had the league and domestic cups to fall back on. National management is a lonely place, you don’t get a second leg or turn your attention to other trophies. You lose by a tiny margin…done. For two years.
We have to be very careful because the money in club football means the attraction of international football, plus the pressure to deliver, makes it a job that not many people want.
Another factor to consider: every country is having the same debate about their national team manager, even the French and the Brazilians.
The nature of international, knockout football means that putting a leash on your most creative players and playing not-to-lose is actually the strategy that wins you tournaments.
They're team has won things and even the French fans have the same gripes about Deschamps as English fans do about Southgate: "why won't he let the creative players play their natural game?", "why are the formations so negative?"
It's because that's how you win tournament football matches. Southgate is the first England manager to understand this and is performing better than anyone that came along in the decades before him because of it.
That's the trouble - everyone thinks they should win like they are Brazil in the 70's and fail to realise that was the exception and not the rule - even Brazil in '94 nearly got found out for that against the ultra defensive Italy - and then they did in '98 with Desailly, Petite and co
Brazil in 94 where also very negative, by their standards. Italy only had one player in their squad numbers 1-11 that wasn't a defender or goal keeper.
Comments
It's likely that he probably has had enough.
The England job is possibly an overwhelming pressurising mental strain.
He probably wishes he could have 18months off and then maybe get back into it
Although I suspect club management is more so.
I reckon he might go now while he's in credit and not have the stress of getting battered by the tabloids if he overstays his welcome etc.
Constantly being told who he should be picking (He had a slight dig after the United States game about that) - Whilst many are just waiting for you to fail - The difference with Manager roles is the fact that Pep can lose to Fulham, and over the course of the season it shouldnt matter - Southgate loses one game to Senegal | France etc. and its all over.
All I ask him that if he wants to go, then he makes up his mind quickly.
We start our Euro 2024 Qualifying campaign in Italy in just three months, we should qualify regardless of who is in charge, but be better preparation if the new man has longer to get ready for this Qualifying campaign
We need to hurry with getting a new reliable consistent No10 goalscorer
There is definitely a bit of an agenda against him though from some areas - and I don’t think it is all football related. The anti-woke, anti-PC part of the English fanbase really have it in for him - to a level where no logic or common sense seems to come into the discussion.
We’re just bit of a weird country when it comes to this stuff, and especially with the England team.
The fact that we've done so well with Southgate, and so poorly with others, SHOULD give that opinion a wake up call... I doubt it will though.
First up - I am pretty neutral on the England manager situation.
But Jordan has it spot on.
IF this happened..... IF Kane had scored....... IF the ref did X, Y or Z.......
Fact is that we lost. Again. Quarter Finals. Again. Do we want to be happy with that as a nation? In reality its the same story as last time - first time we play a decent team we get turned over. How ever you try and spin it, that's a fact.
I actually think Morocco have a very decent chance if the likes of Mbappe etc play as lazy and the team as a whole play the way they did apart from maybe 2 or 3 few minute spells.
we've lost a good few when we were favourites
Whilst had never won a KO game in the Euros, not without relying on penalties (Spain '96)
If it was so easy, why did it take until Southgate to achieve it?
The irony of this defeat is that I think we were the better team. Tactically and man-for-man, if not entirely than the majority. I just don't think he did much wrong on this one.
Colombia…1-1 Pens Won
Sweden…2-0 Won
Croatia…1-2 ET Lost
Germany…2-0 Won
Ukraine…4-0 Won
Denmark…2-1 ET Won
Italy…1-1 Pens Lost
Senegal…3-0 Won
France…1-2 Lost
McClaren: Didnt even get us to a Tournament
Capello: Didnt even get us out of the Groups
Hodgson: Lost to Italy (on penalties), lost to Iceland
The nature of international, knockout football means that putting a leash on your most creative players and playing not-to-lose is actually the strategy that wins you tournaments.
Their team has won things and even the French fans have the same gripes about Deschamps as English fans do about Southgate: "why won't he let the creative players play their natural game?", "why are the formations so negative?"
It's because that's how you win tournament football matches. Southgate is the first England manager to understand this and is performing better than anyone that came along in the decades before him because of it.
I'd then put us, Croatia, Belgium, The Netherlands and Italy all roughly on a par, depending on form and pressure.