I’ve been a Southgate supporter for a while, as the results have largely outshone the performances with decent consistency across tournaments. It’s hard to watch this and defend it though. I guess the only defence is the fact that we haven’t lost and have topped the group.
Me too, I also think only taking Shaw at LB is absolutely inexcusable.
Substitutions have been utterly ridiculous too, he seems to have become even more stubborn.
In a squad of 26, most of whom won't get used anyway, you can probably afford to take 1 player who is a gamble, so i don't see taking Shaw as an issue. The problem is not taking any other naturally left sided full back, so we are now having to play Trippier and (for a few minutes last night) Trent there.
I'd be interested to know if Trent has ever played at left back in his life and if not then why does Southgate think a European championship is the time to try that? I'd honestly rather have taken someone like Mitchell at Palace or even Chilwell who at least know the role and won't slow play down by having to come back inside every time, than sticking right footed players there.
This is thrme main issue for me. Why no one else?
The problem is then exacerbated because Southgate had clearly decided on his front 4 and won't change that. It includes foden cutting in on the left and Saka providing width on the right. If that was the other way around then it would be fine as walker would be overlapping on the right providing width. Trippier just hasn't got a left foot at all so can't even once or twice a game get up the line and provide a threat. He always wants foden ahead of him. It's then made even further worse by Kanes fitness/style of play. He isn't gonna make those runs in behind to stretch the defence, Foden likes to play with the defence in front of him and its not really Sakas game. We need someone to make those runs and stretch defences.
Something has to change. I see the options as - Gordon starts on the left, Foden inside, Bellingham in CM - Switch Saka to the left (he's not been so good we can't move him) and Foden/Palmer to the right - switch to a back 3 with Walker at RCB, Trent RWB, Saka LWB (not ideal but again not like he's tearing up trees so we can't move him). This allows Foden and Bellingham to play off Kane and keep Rice & Mainoo in CM. - Walker LB, Trent RB. I'm less keen on this. He's not left footed but Walker might make a better go of it than Trippier and his pace will scare defenders. We still get to keep Trent in the side and the benefit of his long passing ability from a role where he doesn't have the responsibility of controlling the game.
All of those give us width and runners off Kane. Adapting mid tournament isn't ideal when you've spent all your prep working on one system but I think we've reached the point it has to happen.
I think only the first option is viable. Too much hassle to completely change system and formation with 4 days to the next game and we could end up looking even more lost than we currently do.
I think it's the personnel who are the issue not the formation. Southgate has tried playing all his best players and it hasn't worked, now he needs to play the players who are best for the formation.
I am a bit bored of the Southgate fans always saying "But he got us to a final and a semi", in all 3 previous tournaments under him we have only beaten one decent side, Germany in the Euros and they were dreadful at that point. Whenever we have come up against anyone decent we have gone out: Croatia + Belgium in 2018, Italy 2021, France 2022.
We get lucky draws and go through against really poor sides. Our knockout wins under Southgate have all been against poor sides bar Germany.
There is a reason that Southgate's only previous management job (bar u21s) was getting Middlesbrough relegated.
Palmer has to play and Gordon too but what was Ian Wright on about with Saka at left back? Play Gomez surely. As for Trippier does he have to take every corner and free kick.... Dreadful performance and we'd struggle to beat anybody in the knockout. As for Bellingham... Nuff said.
Saka is left footed. Defensively he would be weak, but at least it would give some genuine balance to the side, and a wide attacking threat down the left. Gomez, like Trippier, Walker, Trent and Konsa is right footed.
From a technical point of view we are setting up wrong against teams prepared to sit back against us. We are playing with players on both sides (Saka and Foden) whose instincts are to come inside. Trippier on the left has no real overlap potential. So we are playing narrow and with 3 of our 4 wide players instincts to cut in. We need more width, more runners behind stretching teams more out of shape than we currently are.
Our play is slow because there is not enough movement and width availability in front of the back four. It’s why we see so much shifting it left and right across the back four and defensive centre mid. It’s so easy for defensive teams to remain organised and retain their shape.
It’s slow, bland and then makes it pressurised on players to find something. They then seem to tense up and lose confidence when they don’t.
I don’t think it’s because we are set up wrong, I think it’s because the back four are too static and are either passing the ball to each other too much or only to somebody 5 yards in front of them who has no other option than to pass it back to them again. That holding the ball in that back line for far too long means the midfield and consequently the attack has to come back to them and in doing so draws the opposition forward. As a result everyone bar the opposition goalkeeper is squeezed into a much narrower band of the pitch and the whole game is stifled.
whats then missing is nobody is taking advantage of it by pumping the ball over the heads of the opposition defence for somebody to chase, mainly because neither Foden or Saka play that way. Replace those two with Palmer and Gordon and tell the back four that they need to avoid making more than 3 passes between themselves at any one time too often if they want to stay in the team
I am a bit bored of the Southgate fans always saying "But he got us to a final and a semi", in all 3 previous tournaments under him we have only beaten one decent side, Germany in the Euros and they were dreadful at that point. Whenever we have come up against anyone decent we have gone out: Croatia + Belgium in 2018, Italy 2021, France 2022.
We get lucky draws and go through against really poor sides. Our knockout wins under Southgate have all been against poor sides bar Germany.
There is a reason that Southgate's only previous management job (bar u21s) was getting Middlesbrough relegated.
Because our KO wins prior to Southgate in the last 20-years were any better, nor do I buy the easy draws excuse... Its lazy!! - Other than Brazil in 2002 and Germany in 2010, and Italy in 2012 when have we lost to teams we really should have done?
Portugal in 2004 and 2006 were no better than us, and we struggled to get past Ecuador in the RO16 in 2006
Iceland in 2016 certainly wasn't.. Whilst 2010 we'd have had an easier route had we taken the Group Stages a little bit easier instead of having the arrogance of "EASY" etc.
If anything the one factor Southgate has benefited from is the expansion of the Euros, as the RO16 does make winning a KO game easier... The only KO game pre-him were we have really played well was Denmark in 2002 when we beat them 3-0. Apart from 2018 it's ridiculous to be moan Southgate for his luck with easy draws, that year we did it deliberately, albeit on paper our squad was shite, not our fault that France haven't won their Group for example.
Yes we should have taken advantage of it better, we were one lottery of a shootout from achieving that - But I don't get this entitled approach either, we've no more right now to win something than anyone else.
Says a lot as well that someone with his Management record has achieved a lot more than those with Domestic and Continental honours - But loving the fact that we went out against France, because of him, rather than a penalty miss or Maguire not picking up Giroud quick enough... No let's focus on subs which could have made even less difference to the result
I am a bit bored of the Southgate fans always saying "But he got us to a final and a semi", in all 3 previous tournaments under him we have only beaten one decent side, Germany in the Euros and they were dreadful at that point. Whenever we have come up against anyone decent we have gone out: Croatia + Belgium in 2018, Italy 2021, France 2022.
We get lucky draws and go through against really poor sides. Our knockout wins under Southgate have all been against poor sides bar Germany.
There is a reason that Southgate's only previous management job (bar u21s) was getting Middlesbrough relegated.
Because our KO wins prior to Southgate in the last 20-years were any better, nor do I buy the easy draws excuse... Its lazy!! - Other than Brazil in 2002 and Germany in 2010, and Italy in 2012 when have we lost to teams we really should have done?
Portugal in 2004 and 2006 were no better than us, and we struggled to get past Ecuador in the RO16 in 2006
Iceland in 2016 certainly wasn't.. Whilst 2010 we'd have had an easier route had we taken the Group Stages a little bit easier instead of having the arrogance of "EASY" etc.
If anything the one factor Southgate has benefited from is the expansion of the Euros, as the RO16 does make winning a KO game easier... The only KO game pre-him were we have really played well was Denmark in 2002 when we beat them 3-0. Apart from 2018 it's ridiculous to be moan Southgate for his luck with easy draws, that year we did it deliberately, albeit on paper our squad was shite, not our fault that France haven't won their Group for example.
Yes we should have taken advantage of it better, we were one lottery of a shootout from achieving that - But I don't get this entitled approach either, we've no more right now to win something than anyone else
But that's the point - 9 times out of 10 we lose to the first decent side we play, and Southgate is the same, he's just had some easier draws.
Eriksen gets so much stick, he lost to Brazil, Portugal, Portugal. Capello Germany, Hodgson Italy, and Italy and Uruguay in the groups, who were good sides.
The only anomaly was Iceland.
And yes we struggled past Ecuador but Southgate needed penalties to beat Columbia.
I'm not saying any of that was good, but Southgate getting further in tournaments hasn't been as much as an improvement on the results front as some would suggest. You could argue he's basically the same as what we've had before.
We have managed to score a total of 2 goals against 3 really poor sides, all whilst having some of the best attacking players in the world - if that isn't down to the manager's negative set up and style that I don't know what is.
We also looked just as poor against Bosnia and Iceland in the warm up games.
We have managed to score a total of 2 goals against 3 really poor sides, all whilst having some of the best attacking players in the world - if that isn't down to the manager's negative set up and style that I don't know what is.
We also looked just as poor against Bosnia and Iceland in the warm up games.
So Foden was under instructions not to hold his run last night?
Having been a football geek since I was knee high to a grasshopper what upsets me is the folk who aren't football fans but will watch England every two years in Euro's and WC's and then say why are we so boring ! I have a group of friends who aren't into football but into literature ( I wandered lonely as a cloud) and I have to be the apologist every 2 years when even when we go deep into a tournament, fail to excite.
As I said last week Bobby Robson would have been sacked now, after the Euro's in 88 with conceding 7 goals in the group games and collecting nil points to ROI, Holland and Soviet union. He wasn't sacked and we made the semis in 90.
Despite gaining 5 points, being in the weakest group many of us feel lower than a dachshund's testicles. The lost to Iceland in the last friendly seems to have affected Southgate more than it should with the young talents like Gordon, Mainroo and Palmer not being given more minutes after that flat performance.
I had gone for a Jimmy Riddle at the conclusion of the match so didn't realize that Southgate got booed and possibly had beer and cups of piss jettisoned in his direction. I came back for the interview and he sounded discombobulated with the response of many in the English Crowd. I now realise what he meant by "unusual environment" and it's nothing to do with climate change.
Are England fans, ex players and casual observers being a tough crowd or are we just fed up with talent not being let off the lease earlier ?
To be fair if you'd paid to travel over to Germany and watch that wouldn't you be annoyed? I don't think they were being a tough crowd at all.
But he was watching over his wifes shoulder at a dinner party.
Been mentioned elsewhere, but It really has the feel of Italia 90.. Shocking in the group with players and manager especially coming under some real unfriendly fire.
Expect a borefest for 89mins against the Netherlands and Bellingham to score a last minute Platt-esq worldy .....and lift off!
(I don't think my ticker could take another Cameroon though!)
Just play bellingham in the 8, foden in the 10 and gordon/palmer on the left. Every fan and pundit across the country has been screaming for it since the start of the tournament but Southgate has this weird stubbornness that will ultimately see him fail again.
We have arguably the best squad of players in the world at the moment but the sum of our parts is far less than the whole, we don't play well as a team, no coherent strategy, gameplan or style and that has to be down to the manager.
It’s not stubbornness. It’s because Southgate and his coaches don’t think it will work (for the record I don’t think it will either - Foden and Kane cannot play together). You think he’d rather not win games to try and make a point?
He resisted playing Trent in midfield for years when everyone was calling for it because he’s so good at passing and would create so many chances...
Now he‘s tries it for a few games and surprise surprise it didn’t work. And now he’s getting pelters from people acting like they knew it wouldn’t work all along.
Heard a stat on the US commentary last night that through two and a half games, Foden connected with Kane for only one pass throughout the tournament so far. Foden and Pickford, two passes.
It doesn’t really help when two of our main attacking threats are playing on different planets.
Heard a stat on the US commentary last night that through two and a half games, Foden connected with Kane for only one pass throughout the tournament so far. Foden and Pickford, two passes.
It doesn’t really help when two of our main attacking threats are playing on different planets.
Whilst we don't seem to play the same with Watkins on the pitch, seeing a few calls (not necessarily on here) to play him instead of Kane.
He just doesnt seem to link up with the rest of the team whenever he's played for England.
Be like the French as well calling for Thuram to start over Mbappe prior to yesterday, because the latter has never scored in the Euros
It shows where the game has gone that the modern way is to deliberately play wide players who cut inside rather than take a full back on the outside but we still require the full back to be on their "correct footed" side in order to create the width. It is ironic that Saka is now being talked of at playing at full back/ wing back but only once in a blue moon will he try to get to the by-line when playing on the right. If only we had a Lahm at full back. Or a two footed winger like Ginola. Yes I am aware that the inverted winger creates the space for the overlapping full back but it would still be good if the wide player could go both ways more often than not. Which, of course, begs the age old question. Why aren't all our top international footballers equally comfortable on both feet? Be that full backs or wingers.
I am a bit bored of the Southgate fans always saying "But he got us to a final and a semi", in all 3 previous tournaments under him we have only beaten one decent side, Germany in the Euros and they were dreadful at that point. Whenever we have come up against anyone decent we have gone out: Croatia + Belgium in 2018, Italy 2021, France 2022.
We get lucky draws and go through against really poor sides. Our knockout wins under Southgate have all been against poor sides bar Germany.
There is a reason that Southgate's only previous management job (bar u21s) was getting Middlesbrough relegated.
This with knobs on. This isn’t just a disgruntled Jock speaking as I genuinely want England to do well (sorry Dad you must be spinning….) but yet again England have (in relative terms given the resources available) stunk the place out and ended up with the jammiest draw possible. It never fails to happen. And yet again the odds are that they will eff it up. Common denominator? Much as I like the guy and admire the job he’s done in terms of Comms etc it’s too much of a recurring them for the manager not to be to blame. Sir Bobby bless him had change forced upon him by injury in 1990 and had to change his outlook and nearly won the whole thing as a result. I can’t foresee circumstances other than injury that is going to wobble Southgate’s head this time round. Or maybe, just maybe this group of players is vastly overrated? I’m sticking with the first theory but it wouldn’t be the first time the sum of the parts doesn’t add up to much. Go on lads, prove me wrong. Like Scotland's abortive attempts to get out of the group, you’ll never have a better chance! Don’t screw up by continuing this negative approach.
Can someone explain the process of who we are likely get in the next game? . I can’t get my head around it .
I know it will be Netherlands or the team that finishes third in this afternoon’s group but how is the choice between those two decided ?
I wouldn't worry about it too much mate, we'll no doubt lose whoever it is.
I actually think we’ll beat the Dutch . The way they play will suit us perfectly. The likes of Romania , Slovakia and Ukraine will be just like the last three games and we’ll struggle with Southgate’s team and formation .
Can someone explain the process of who we are likely get in the next game? . I can’t get my head around it .
I know it will be Netherlands or the team that finishes third in this afternoon’s group but how is the choice between those two decided ?
I wouldn't worry about it too much mate, we'll no doubt lose whoever it is.
I actually think we’ll beat the Dutch . The way they play will suit us perfectly. The likes of Romania , Slovakia and Ukraine will be just like the last three games and we’ll struggle with Southgate’s team and formation .
Dunno... We beat Ukraine 4-0 in the last Euros, so this squad will be under pressure to repeat that if we get a similar result.
Defending a 0-0 for 120mins doesn't necessarily get you into the next round like it did for Slovenia last night either - At some point, the opposition will need to attack.
Hope we dont face Romania, they've been a bit like Austria, and been dark horses this Tournament.
Can someone explain the process of who we are likely get in the next game? . I can’t get my head around it .
I know it will be Netherlands or the team that finishes third in this afternoon’s group but how is the choice between those two decided ?
UEFA has a list of combinations prepared before the tournament to cover all 15 possibilities. Whether you’re the best third placed team or the fourth best third place team is irrelevant to where you end up for the knockout round - it’s the combination of four (currently ACDE but could change after today) that determines it.
The idea being to keep teams that qualified out of the same group as far apart as possible. For example, England are in the bottom quarter, Denmark are in the top quarter and Slovenia can be placed in either of the middle two quarters depending on who qualifies today.
To think of it another way, England’s quarter was set up to have teams from Groups A (Switzerland), B (Italy) and C (England) in it before the tournament started, so the third placed team for that quarter could come from D, E or F. All combinations for F to be in that quarter are off the table now so it’s D or E only.
Can someone explain the process of who we are likely get in the next game? . I can’t get my head around it .
I know it will be Netherlands or the team that finishes third in this afternoon’s group but how is the choice between those two decided ?
I wouldn't worry about it too much mate, we'll no doubt lose whoever it is.
I actually think we’ll beat the Dutch . The way they play will suit us perfectly. The likes of Romania , Slovakia and Ukraine will be just like the last three games and we’ll struggle with Southgate’s team and formation .
Dunno... We beat Ukraine 4-0 in the last Euros, so this squad will be under pressure to repeat that if we get a similar result.
Defending a 0-0 for 120mins doesn't necessarily get you into the next round like it did for Slovenia last night either - At some point, the opposition will need to attack.
Hope we dont face Romania, they've been a bit like Austria, and been dark horses this Tournament.
It is all based on what the third place teams do. Basically to avoid the dutch our best chance is for the Czechs to beat Turkey altough if they do we won't play either of them.
Just play bellingham in the 8, foden in the 10 and gordon/palmer on the left. Every fan and pundit across the country has been screaming for it since the start of the tournament but Southgate has this weird stubbornness that will ultimately see him fail again.
We have arguably the best squad of players in the world at the moment but the sum of our parts is far less than the whole, we don't play well as a team, no coherent strategy, gameplan or style and that has to be down to the manager.
It’s not stubbornness. It’s because Southgate and his coaches don’t think it will work (for the record I don’t think it will either - Foden and Kane cannot play together). You think he’d rather not win games to try and make a point?
He resisted playing Trent in midfield for years when everyone was calling for it because he’s so good at passing and would create so many chances...
Now he‘s tries it for a few games and surprise surprise it didn’t work. And now he’s getting pelters from people acting like they knew it wouldn’t work all along.
He had plenty of time to trial it before a major tournament but he was obsessed with playing Henderson at every opportunity instead.
Heard a stat on the US commentary last night that through two and a half games, Foden connected with Kane for only one pass throughout the tournament so far. Foden and Pickford, two passes.
It doesn’t really help when two of our main attacking threats are playing on different planets.
The two of them appear incapable of playing together for whatever reason.
Comments
Pickford
Walker Stones Guehi Gomez
Rice Bellingham
Palmer Foden Gordon
Kane
I think it's the personnel who are the issue not the formation. Southgate has tried playing all his best players and it hasn't worked, now he needs to play the players who are best for the formation.
We get lucky draws and go through against really poor sides. Our knockout wins under Southgate have all been against poor sides bar Germany.
There is a reason that Southgate's only previous management job (bar u21s) was getting Middlesbrough relegated.
whats then missing is nobody is taking advantage of it by pumping the ball over the heads of the opposition defence for somebody to chase, mainly because neither Foden or Saka play that way. Replace those two with Palmer and Gordon and tell the back four that they need to avoid making more than 3 passes between themselves at any one time too often if they want to stay in the team
Portugal in 2004 and 2006 were no better than us, and we struggled to get past Ecuador in the RO16 in 2006
Iceland in 2016 certainly wasn't.. Whilst 2010 we'd have had an easier route had we taken the Group Stages a little bit easier instead of having the arrogance of "EASY" etc.
If anything the one factor Southgate has benefited from is the expansion of the Euros, as the RO16 does make winning a KO game easier... The only KO game pre-him were we have really played well was Denmark in 2002 when we beat them 3-0. Apart from 2018 it's ridiculous to be moan Southgate for his luck with easy draws, that year we did it deliberately, albeit on paper our squad was shite, not our fault that France haven't won their Group for example.
Yes we should have taken advantage of it better, we were one lottery of a shootout from achieving that - But I don't get this entitled approach either, we've no more right now to win something than anyone else.
Says a lot as well that someone with his Management record has achieved a lot more than those with Domestic and Continental honours - But loving the fact that we went out against France, because of him, rather than a penalty miss or Maguire not picking up Giroud quick enough... No let's focus on subs which could have made even less difference to the result
Eriksen gets so much stick, he lost to Brazil, Portugal, Portugal. Capello Germany, Hodgson Italy, and Italy and Uruguay in the groups, who were good sides.
The only anomaly was Iceland.
And yes we struggled past Ecuador but Southgate needed penalties to beat Columbia.
I'm not saying any of that was good, but Southgate getting further in tournaments hasn't been as much as an improvement on the results front as some would suggest. You could argue he's basically the same as what we've had before.
Fails and everyone gets to wank off how right they were
Rinse and repeat whoever replaces him
We also looked just as poor against Bosnia and Iceland in the warm up games.
Expect a borefest for 89mins against the Netherlands and Bellingham to score a last minute Platt-esq worldy .....and lift off!
(I don't think my ticker could take another Cameroon though!)
He resisted playing Trent in midfield for years when everyone was calling for it because he’s so good at passing and would create so many chances...
Now he‘s tries it for a few games and surprise surprise it didn’t work. And now he’s getting pelters from people acting like they knew it wouldn’t work all along.
It doesn’t really help when two of our main attacking threats are playing on different planets.
He just doesnt seem to link up with the rest of the team whenever he's played for England.
Be like the French as well calling for Thuram to start over Mbappe prior to yesterday, because the latter has never scored in the Euros
Defending a 0-0 for 120mins doesn't necessarily get you into the next round like it did for Slovenia last night either - At some point, the opposition will need to attack.
Hope we dont face Romania, they've been a bit like Austria, and been dark horses this Tournament.
The idea being to keep teams that qualified out of the same group as far apart as possible. For example, England are in the bottom quarter, Denmark are in the top quarter and Slovenia can be placed in either of the middle two quarters depending on who qualifies today.
To think of it another way, England’s quarter was set up to have teams from Groups A (Switzerland), B (Italy) and C (England) in it before the tournament started, so the third placed team for that quarter could come from D, E or F. All combinations for F to be in that quarter are off the table now so it’s D or E only.