Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

England v Spain: Euro 2024 Final, 14 July

11819212324

Comments

  • The whole debate about Trippier should start with the frustration that at the very highest level of football you get players unwilling to play even simple passes with either foot.  How is this even tolerated in academies?
  • England won the WC by not using the 4 "Wingers"in their squad in the knock out stages whereas the Spanish used Nico Williams and Lamine Yamal to utilise the space out wide over the full duration of the game and it paid off. 
    Shaw negated Yamal 1st half but the boy wonder improved as English defenders were stretched to breaking point in the 2nd half. Williams was excellent the whole match and his ability to be wide or central as needs must  and it culminated in a text book first goal by the MOM with the assist from Yamal as the 2nd half got underway.
     
    Spain are not the tippy tappy team that won back to back tournaments in the days of Iniesta and Xavi but they still had 65.1% of the possession in part because Bellingham, Mainroo, Foden and Rice didn't gel together on the night but in truth we were 2nd best and we went long from Pickford on many occasions and we didn't win the resulting header or challenge.

    I said we needed to have used all 5 subs by the 80th minute as we had too many tired legs and it may have helped to give momentum after Palmer's equaliser.

    The impressive Dani Olmo who took his chance after replacing the injured Pedri in the group games headed off the line to stop a desmond and ET.

    The hope that some CL members had that we would hurt the Spanish between the lines as they could be open never came to fruition and the game was never as close as 2-1 as Spain's easy on the eye football won it with the killer goal in the 85th minute from another good move as England's players were turned and lost shape.
  • The best team won. 

    Footballing wise it was a poor showing by England. Other than the first 45 against the Dutch, we didn’t really show up. 

    Too many of our players were below par or knackered. 

    Southgate should regret not making changes sooner. The squad had enough quality for him to do so. 

    We go again, but the pain is getting worse the older I get…
  • Fair result on the night. I think we lost it in that chaotic five minutes or so after half time. Other than that, we didn’t do a lot wrong. When we scored, we had Spain rattled for five minutes or so, but generally they never let us get on top.
  • The whole debate about Trippier should start with the frustration that at the very highest level of football you get players unwilling to play even simple passes with either foot.  How is this even tolerated in academies?
    Surely the Trippier debate should start with “Why didn’t we take another actual left back? Could’ve left Dunk at home.
    Dunk and Joe Gomez (sadly) never got a minute. 

    When we already have Walker and Trent, picking a 3rd RB as your second LB  was odd, especially as Shaw had been out for months.

    We also had an excess of wingers, seeing that Southgate barely played Gordon, Eze and Bowen.
  • JohnBoyUK said:
    I'm over it already.  A lot easier to accept this time round, we lost to the better team, unlike when we played the Italians.

    England looked leggy all tournament.  Too many players way below their best - Kane, Bellingham, Rice, Saka, Foden.

    As for Kane, he just doesn't look match fit to me.  I said at the start of the tournament, after a lay off he starts slow and takes him 2-3 games to get up to speed again but it never happened.  He looked like he was running in treacle.
    I don't think he was ever fit, looks like that injury against Real finished his season. 

    Kane needs runners by him, him with Sterling and Rashford worked a treat, and ended up with two players who are happy with it to feet and look for runners, Southgate or whoever takes over needs to square that circle 
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited July 15
    Gutted. I had briefly- this weekend - dared to dream. Kicked myself all weekend for living only four hours by train from Berlin and still missing the chance to be there. 

    But overall we simply lost to the better team, and before the tourno started I had us down as semis at very best. Everything else about last night has been said, so here's a general aside. 

    Both Kane and Bellingham disappointed in their different ways. It now seems common knowledge that Kane was carrying a back injury, while today I heard the R5 commentator saying that when Bellingham took off his shirt at the end last night, a strapped-up shoulder was visible.

    We are regularly told (but in a very informal, conspiratorial way) that footballers at every pro level take to the field patched up, that this has always been the case, and if we knew, we'd be horrified. Well, global football industry, is that really the right way to handle this? I fully get that a team wants to hide injury issues from up-coming opponents, but the problem is that players end up being criticised for performances which can partly be explained by carrying an injury. And then who has been responsible for such a player starting? Curbs has said you often have to trust the player if he says he's OK. But in his day the sports science wasn't at the level it is now.

    I don't have an answer, it's a multi-faceted problem, but when we discuss Harry Kane for example, it seems to me that now's the time for all concerned to come clean about what injury issues he had, and what the thinking was about starting him despite them.

    (P.S. Would we have won if we'd started with Watkins instead of Kane? Too easy to just believe that)


  • Walton, Gomez and Dunk didn't get a kick.
    If Chilwell was fit he should've been picked instead of Dunk. 
    Chilwell had a poor game in a friendly which sealed his fate for GS but with Shaw unfit for most of the Euro's that looked a poor decision and despite Trippier being a great competitor seeing him play as a left wing back was painful. 

    Walton appeared a left field pick and he ended up being a Walcott type choice taken just for the experience of being in a squad.

    We took 26 which is the max allowed with the 3 keepers. This should drop to 24 which allows for nearly everyone getting minutes in the tournament other than the two keepers if you go the distance and play 7 matches. If you want to press high and close down even more reason to utilise the squad before the 89th or 91st minute and leave it to chance that a player will score a wonder goal against Slovakia from the last throw and nod on of the match.
    That really wasn't genius from the manager even if was from Jude.


  • Family Wordle chat had a vote(we’re a bundle of laughs 🙄 ) and that’s where we lie 

    Can’t waste any luck on England … it’s all about The Addicks 
  • The whole debate about Trippier should start with the frustration that at the very highest level of football you get players unwilling to play even simple passes with either foot.  How is this even tolerated in academies?
    Surely the Trippier debate should start with “Why didn’t we take another actual left back? Could’ve left Dunk at home.
    Would England's results have been better if Dunk had played instead of Trippier in any of the games? 
  • Some players looked tired and the manager has opted against rotation and subs unless forced. It's not a great reflection of 'managing' your squad. 

    I like Southgate as a person, but as an on-field manager, he does remind me of Appleton! Owch.
  • edited July 15
    This England team has no identity. It doesn't even know what it's trying to be. Neither a possession team nor counter attacking nor pressing. It's just a big blob. We need a manager who can find what it is. 
  • edited July 15
    Chizz said:
    The whole debate about Trippier should start with the frustration that at the very highest level of football you get players unwilling to play even simple passes with either foot.  How is this even tolerated in academies?
    Surely the Trippier debate should start with “Why didn’t we take another actual left back? Could’ve left Dunk at home.
    Would England's results have been better if Dunk had played instead of Trippier in any of the games? 

    Results are determined  by many factors Mr Chizz but Chilwell who is a left footed left back would've  been able to have gone on the outside and not cut in on his right foot every time which then breaks the momentum of the attack which the gallant Trippier had to do. He did cross the ball once with his left foot but it went straight to the keeper in the semi final against the Netherlands.

    When fit James is a quality right back( Walker had a good tournament other than being out of position for the winning goal)

    Thank you for your question and hope AI was of service to you today.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Gutted. I had briefly- this weekend - dared to dream. Kicked myself all weekend for living only four hours by train from Berlin and still missing the chance to be there. 

    But overall we simply lost to the better team, and before the tourno started I had us down as semis at very best. Everything else about last night has been said, so here's a general aside. 

    Both Kane and Bellingham disappointed in their different ways. It now seems common knowledge that Kane was carrying a back injury, while today I heard the R5 commentator saying that when Bellingham took off his shirt at the end last night, a strapped-up shoulder was visible.

    We are regularly told (but in a very informal, conspiratorial way) that footballers at every pro level take to the field patched up, that this has always been the case, and if we knew, we'd be horrified. Well, global football industry, is that really the right way to handle this? I fully get that a team wants to hide injury issues from up-coming opponents, but the problem is that players end up being criticised for performances which can partly be explained by carrying an injury. And then who has been responsible for such a player starting? Curbs has said you often have to trust the player if he says he's OK. But in his day the sports science wasn't at the level it is now.

    I don't have an answer, it's a multi-faceted problem, but when we discuss Harry Kane for example, it seems to me that now's the time for all concerned to come clean about what injury issues he had, and what the thinking was about starting him despite them.

    (P.S. Would we have won if we'd started with Watkins instead of Kane? Too easy to just believe that)


    Good question, i was wondering that.

    Our midfield ran out of legs , Rice and Bellingham it looked like a game too far, they maybe should have been rotated during the tournament , to keep them fresher?
  • As a kid, even a younger man, I would immerse myself with wall charts, TV schedules and be transfixed on most games especially England. But 1990 was the last major tournament I actually got excited about, honestly yesterday I didn't really care one way or the other. 

    I think it coincides with me watching CAFC more regularly after I gave up playing the game seriously on Saturdays. Maybe I've only got room to be passionate about one team and that will always be Charlton. Got to say that the increased level of overt nationalism that goes along with following England in major tournaments turns me away from it a bit as well. 
  • edited July 15
    Gutted. I had briefly- this weekend - dared to dream. Kicked myself all weekend for living only four hours by train from Berlin and still missing the chance to be there. 

    But overall we simply lost to the better team, and before the tourno started I had us down as semis at very best. Everything else about last night has been said, so here's a general aside. 

    Both Kane and Bellingham disappointed in their different ways. It now seems common knowledge that Kane was carrying a back injury, while today I heard the R5 commentator saying that when Bellingham took off his shirt at the end last night, a strapped-up shoulder was visible.

    We are regularly told (but in a very informal, conspiratorial way) that footballers at every pro level take to the field patched up, that this has always been the case, and if we knew, we'd be horrified. Well, global football industry, is that really the right way to handle this? I fully get that a team wants to hide injury issues from up-coming opponents, but the problem is that players end up being criticised for performances which can partly be explained by carrying an injury. And then who has been responsible for such a player starting? Curbs has said you often have to trust the player if he says he's OK. But in his day the sports science wasn't at the level it is now.

    I don't have an answer, it's a multi-faceted problem, but when we discuss Harry Kane for example, it seems to me that now's the time for all concerned to come clean about what injury issues he had, and what the thinking was about starting him despite them.

    (P.S. Would we have won if we'd started with Watkins instead of Kane? Too easy to just believe that)


    Good question, i was wondering that.

    Our midfield ran out of legs , Rice and Bellingham it looked like a game too far, they maybe should have been rotated during the tournament , to keep them fresher?


    We were never in a position to rest anyone as we left it to the last group game and took most of our matches down to the wire with late goals.

    People applaud Southgates tactics of keep it tight and nick it at the end but, thats the result, you're having to keep your preferred starters on for a long ol' time.
  • As others have said, this doesn't sting quite as much as the final against Italy. 2021 was the chance of a lifetime for England. Wouldn't be surprised to see Spain dominate the next few World Cups and Euros now. 

    Kane pops up with goals but ultimately his time as an England starter is done. It was like playing with 10 men last night. Foden just doesn't do it for England, too, and shouldn't have started every game. 

    In a parallel universe we start with Watkins and Palmer over Kane and Foden and perhaps it's a different result. Who knows.

    Still undecided as to whether I want Southgate to remain. Whatever happens, he's transformed this England squad and mentality. He also rebuilt the connection between players and fans and has given all of us so many great moments/memories over the past few tournaments. He deserves a huge amount of credit and will rightly go down as one of England's best ever managers.
  • The problem we had was that Foden and Bellingham are two very good attacking players but both are best playing in the same space and ended up negating each other. Then Kane dropping deep puts him also in that same area of the pitch and being slow/injured/both there's no one to use the service or benefit from the play in the build-up so we end up stalling about 2/3 of the way up the pitch.

    I've been critical of Southgate but it is a very tough call to make and he at least got it right by leaving out Grealish who would have just compounded the issue. 
  • Well I went into this tournament without a huge amount of confirdence and what there was was damaged by the group games. But after the Netherlands game I stupidly allowed myself to believe, and when we equalised last night I honestly thought we might go on and win it - we had good enough players to allow us to dream. but Spain came back, and the win went to the team who played better and scored more goals and today feels like a repeat of the Italy game in 2021 or the semi finals against Germany in 1990 or 1996. 
    Southgate has turned England around since he took over, but a part of me feels he isn't getting the best out of this team. Spain put us under seige at times, and after their first goal, there were periods where the second Spain goal looked so much more likely than an equaliser. So if Southgate stays, I will be behind him, and I have a fear of what the FA might dredge up to replace him if he resigns. They though Hodgeson would be a good choice ffs. So I'm very wary of what comes next. But it is worth pointing out that a lot of us who criticised Southgate wouldn't get a job coaching Charlton's under 12's, and if we got the job, we'd last a week or two only. We all enjoy talking football, and a lot of what's been written on here is pretty accurate, but they aren't expert opinions, and we all need to be careful what we wish for - Appleton is unemployed still!
    Just to add, if Kane was injured (he looked elderly at times) it really wasn't clever to play him last night. I doubt Spain would have done that - they trusted their youngsters. But the next step will be Southgate and then the FA deciding what happens next. 
  • Heard a lot of talk about lethargy in the squad.
    Couple of stats to maybe back that up.
    Firstly, out of the 12 players that have played the most minutes in the whole tournament prior to the final, 7 were from England.

    Also in the last 6 major tournaments w/c and euros the team that played their semi final first went onto win in the final.
  • People talk about how England should be able to play fast attacking football but any team that does that effectively does so with control of the midfield. That's our problem, for all the brilliant, quick wingers and attacking midfielders we've brought through in recent years we're still unable to produce a midfielder who can control a game. Bellingham isn't it, he's all silky dragbacks and beating his man with skill and not much else. Rice grew into a different player than we'd thought, instead of being a midfield pivot he's a box to box player who is best driving with the ball at his feet. Mainoo had a good tournament overall but he was totally out of his depth last night and was a passenger in a team that didn't see much of the ball. Gallagher is a terrier but he's reactive and Trent is somehow worse as a midfielder than he is as a full back. Wharton might go on to be what we're looking for but odds are we'll keep searching forever. We don't have a Rodri or a Kroos or a Modric or even a Pogba to take control of the middle and drag teams around the place, we're reliant on hard working triers, always have been. That's why France struggled more than usual this time as well, a midfield of Kante, Rabiot and Tchouameni provided steel but no control and they couldn't make the most of the pace and guile out wide. There's a reason Southgate choose to play with as much cover as possible and it's because we never win the midfield battle and we just don't have the players to do it. If anything what killed us yesterday was he took Saka off tracking back duty and for both goals Walker got caught out by overloads. Bringing in a more attacking manager to make the most of Palmer, Saka and Gordon isn't going to change our lack of ability to produce a midfielder who can set a tempo
    The Conor Coventry slander has got to end soon
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!