Having had time to reflect on Gareth Southgate's selection and his use of subs in that game against the 45th rated team in the world, I believe it was appalling and I'm not being churlish or anti Palace in saying we should've won that game as comfortably as the Swiss beat Italy.
This England team played with fear and trepidation for the 4th game in a row and why wait so long in putting another striker on ? It wasn't genius giving Toney 2 minutes of added time just like it wasn't clever in putting Gordon on in the 89th minute against Slovenia. The attacking subs need longer and I found it embarrassing.
Possibly 10 of the last 16 teams would've beaten England on that inept display and if Jude who else Bellingham was marked from that ball in then make that 11 teams because he wouldn't have been able to do an overhead kick without giving away a foul.
Maybe Gareth is just one lucky manager because his decision making is flawed.
Come on lads and lasses, it definitely picked up in the second half. Disallowed goal, Kane’s missed header, Rice hit the post - I always felt we’d score even though we left it late.
Mind you, we’ll lose to Switzerland if Southgate doesn’t shake thing up quite a lot.
You say disallowed goal like there was some doubt. Miles offside.
Two or three feet. But it was a good move spoiled by Foden going too early, unnecessarily.
Come on lads and lasses, it definitely picked up in the second half. Disallowed goal, Kane’s missed header, Rice hit the post - I always felt we’d score even though we left it late.
Mind you, we’ll lose to Switzerland if Southgate doesn’t shake thing up quite a lot.
Yep, we had one more shot on target in the second half than we did in the first. It came in the 95th minute.
Stats.
We played better, created a couple more opportunities. Why do England down when they improve? I knew we’d score and go on to win. It was pretty obvious tbh. Left it late though (I was just starting to get worried 😂)!
Come on lads and lasses, it definitely picked up in the second half. Disallowed goal, Kane’s missed header, Rice hit the post - I always felt we’d score even though we left it late.
Mind you, we’ll lose to Switzerland if Southgate doesn’t shake thing up quite a lot.
Yep, we had one more shot on target in the second half than we did in the first. It came in the 95th minute.
Stats.
We played better, created a couple more opportunities. Why do England down when they improve? I knew we’d score and go on to win. It was pretty obvious tbh. Left it late though (I was just starting to get worried 😂)!
You knew that, with 85 seconds to go did you? Assume you had a bet on it then?
I thought the ref dealt with the play acting at the end well. He should have sent a Slovakia player off for a second booking but refs normally don't. Guehi was a bit lucky the Slovakian scorer didn't go down as they would have had a penalty and he would have been sent off.
Come on lads and lasses, it definitely picked up in the second half. Disallowed goal, Kane’s missed header, Rice hit the post - I always felt we’d score even though we left it late.
Mind you, we’ll lose to Switzerland if Southgate doesn’t shake thing up quite a lot.
Yep, we had one more shot on target in the second half than we did in the first. It came in the 95th minute.
Stats.
We played better, created a couple more opportunities. Why do England down when they improve? I knew we’d score and go on to win. It was pretty obvious tbh. Left it late though (I was just starting to get worried 😂)!
Good for you having a positive mindset, but it definitely was not "pretty obvious" we would score and win the game right up until 95th minute.
One thing i don't understand is that the only 2 times we've moved the ball quickly in the last 2 games, both resulted in us cutting the opposition apart, and both times we 'scored'.
I say 'scored' because Saka v Slovenia and Foden last night were both disallowed for offside and neither goal stood, but it showed what can be done when the ball is moved quickly and players actually make runs. So the question is, why aren't we doing this more often (but try to stay onside of course)?
We have had 12 shots on target in 390 minutes of play, an average of 1 shot every 32.5 minutes., which is absolutely pathetic given the level of opponent we've faced. Spain had more than that in their game last night.
I thought the big difference was having Toney on. He stays up front and occupies defenders and wins duels so Kane can get more involved like he did for the winner
For the large part we controlled the game but had no cutting edge thankfully we have a player like Bellingham who can and does pull out moments of magic to win games
Agreed - been like watching Charlton with stockley up top on his own
For whatever reason playing Foden and Bellingham together doesn't work. I think dropping Foden for Toney would give Bellingham more room to operate and also give Kane better support up front. Certainly worth trying.
I think the glaring issue that everyone can see is that there is no width on the left. Trippier has to cut back onto his right every time and Foden keeps drifting inside.
Most England fans could see this after the first game, so why it still hasn't been addressed after 4 games is incredible. I mean surely Southgate and his coaching staff can see it? To do the same for 2 games i can understand in case it clicked, but doing it for 3 games is stupid and for 4 games is simply madness.
Look at Germany for example, they have been miles better than us, but Nagelsmann could see that Wirtz wasn't working on the left, and switched him to Sane for their last 16 game. Good managers make changes and tactical adjustments, Southgate has done absolute nothing. We are in the quarters in spite of him, not because of him.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
For whatever reason playing Foden and Bellingham together doesn't work. I think dropping Foden for Toney would give Bellingham more room to operate and also give Kane better support up front. Certainly worth trying.
Possibly, but only if Citeh sign Toney before Saturday.
The second half was much better. The first half was dreadful. I am thinking of the offside goal which Foden needed to delay his run by half a second, the Kane header which he scores from 8 times out of 10, hitting the post and the goal itself. These were all top notch chances. Slovakia got it right at the beginning of the half, being defensively minded yes, but having an attacking outlet and continuing to press but as the game wore on they sat deeper and deeper and when they did get it forwards they were starved of support.
These are the tactics of international football, but they gave England a chance and we took it. The question is, was it them or was it us. It was probably a bit of both but I liked it when Saka played on the left. Look it isn't ideal but he is a decent option there where options are severely limited and we have a player like Palmer who can play his original role. I thought Gordon should have come on with at least 25 minutes to go. We are not going to see Bellingham or Kane substituted until they are dead on their feet. This is probably a good thing and they showed the reasons why yesterday.
I am not gutted Guehi misses the next game. He looks to me like he has a mistake in him and slows down our play although to give him credit, it was his flick that set up Bellingham and those are the flicks that wrong foot defences. Southgate only reminded us how stubborn he is and we are not going to see him change. We are probably going to continue to see England stumble through this tournament under him but they do have ability so anything is still possible. If he gets more balance on the left it might make a big difference. You have to pose problems for opponents accross the park and you can't have areas where opponents feel too comfortable.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
Yeah but you still only need 26-players...
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
When Southgate and the players are interviewed after games they keep talking about the performance like it was a different game. Bellingham tonight said “it was a good performance up until the goal and even after”. WTF?
NO IT FUCKING WASN’T.
From where I sat, the majority of the game went: 1) pass the ball around the back four for five minutes 2) give ball away cheaply. 3) Have a narrow escape 4) Repeat until 5) Let in goal 6) Return to step 1)
An embarrassing performance. Totally undeserved win. Appalling.
I thought the commentary at the start of the second half was amusing when Lee Dixon said that, Gareth's bound to have made tactical changes - it's too early to see them though.
Two minutes later he added, I can’t see any changes. And another two minutes on a rather more confident, and incredulous, there aren't any changes.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
America, China, Russia, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria?
Come on lads and lasses, it definitely picked up in the second half. Disallowed goal, Kane’s missed header, Rice hit the post - I always felt we’d score even though we left it late.
Mind you, we’ll lose to Switzerland if Southgate doesn’t shake thing up quite a lot.
Yep, we had one more shot on target in the second half than we did in the first. It came in the 95th minute.
Stats.
We played better, created a couple more opportunities. Why do England down when they improve? I knew we’d score and go on to win. It was pretty obvious tbh. Left it late though (I was just starting to get worried 😂)!
You knew that, with 85 seconds to go did you? Assume you had a bet on it then?
I was being a bit tongue in cheek in that post, obvs, but after the offside ‘goal’ I said what I said - we were in a bar in Crete with about twelve England fans in total.
And yes, I was getting a bit nervous towards the end. 😬
But I’m trying to do what my German mate tells me German fans do. They were rubbish before the tournament, but the collective consciousness is that it doesn’t matter, and they’ll still win the tournament. He’s a dual national, and supports England as well, and his German positivity is rubbing off on me slightly. He tells me that the positivity is in their culture, and it’s one of the reasons (or even the main reason) why they win more tournaments than we do.
Collective positivity, versus our collective negativity.
I think he’s got a point. It may also be why Southgate is so negative, it’s part of the same collective negative mentality. We’ll only be positive after we’ve won a tournament, so we’re trapped in a negative feedback loop.
When Southgate and the players are interviewed after games they keep talking about the performance like it was a different game. Bellingham tonight said “it was a good performance up until the goal and even after”. WTF?
NO IT FUCKING WASN’T.
From where I sat, the majority of the game went: 1) pass the ball around the back four for five minutes 2) give ball away cheaply. 3) Have a narrow escape 4) Repeat until 5) Let in goal 6) Return to step 1)
An embarrassing performance. Totally undeserved win. Appalling.
I thought the commentary at the start of the second half was amusing when Lee Dixon said that, Gareth's bound to have made tactical changes - it's too early to see them though.
Two minutes later he added, I can’t see any changes. And another two minutes on a rather more confident, and incredulous, there aren't any changes.
There weren't any changes.
Very much Melchett in Blackadder. To paraphrase “They won’t expect us to do the same thing after it’s failed so often, so we’ll surprise them by doing just that”. https://youtu.be/rblfKREj50o?si=k1ZfFaEvY5mnBm0k
I know what this team is missing; it's England flags on cars. There are usually loads, but I haven't seen any this tournament. What's going on? Was it just a fad that's run it's course? Are people worried that they'd be misidentified as Farridge Fans? Or, is there just not the level of excitement about this team?
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
Yeah but you still only need 26-players...
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
Am actually hoping I'm being whooshed!!
No whoosh intended. To take it to another extreme would you expect San Marino to be able to pick 26 capable players or even Scotland with about 4 million to pick from?
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
Yeah but you still only need 26-players...
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
Am actually hoping I'm being whooshed!!
No whoosh intended. To take it to another extreme would you expect San Marino to be able to pick 26 capable players or even Scotland with about 4 million to pick from?
It makes no sense to work out footballing talent from a countries population.
In the top 10 (maybe even top 15) of populated countries, I'd imagine only Brazil are there as a football powerhouse.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
Yeah but you still only need 26-players...
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
Am actually hoping I'm being whooshed!!
No whoosh intended. To take it to another extreme would you expect San Marino to be able to pick 26 capable players or even Scotland with about 4 million to pick from?
Or Iceland with 500,000
I mean a country with a lower population will have less chances of winning on a consistent basis, because their chances of finding 26-players are a lot less than a country with more
I imagine we'll see that with Croatia once they lose their Golden Generation - But if they find their 26-players good enough, population becomes irrelevant.. Even less relevant in a one off game.
We have really struggled to beat 2 countries with populations of 6 million. Next we are playing a country with a population of 8 million and have to beat them. Is there anything that suggests we can improve enough to contest a big country if we ever get to play them, Germany, Spain or France? Because I have seen nothing to suggest we will.
Are you being serious lol!... thinking the overall population has an impact on the game?
We should have a bigger pool of better players to pick from. There are exceptions but the countries with large population do win more. Brazil, Germany, France, Italy, Spain Argentina.
Yeah but you still only need 26-players...
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
Am actually hoping I'm being whooshed!!
No whoosh intended. To take it to another extreme would you expect San Marino to be able to pick 26 capable players or even Scotland with about 4 million to pick from?
It’s a reasonable position, providing there’s a culture of that sport in that country. Look at NZ at rugby, Uruguay at football, tiny populations that hit well above their weight.
Comments
This England team played with fear and trepidation for the 4th game in a row and why wait so long in putting another striker on ? It wasn't genius giving Toney 2 minutes of added time just like it wasn't clever in putting Gordon on in the 89th minute against Slovenia.
The attacking subs need longer and I found it embarrassing.
Possibly 10 of the last 16 teams would've beaten England on that inept display and if Jude who else Bellingham was marked from that ball in then make that 11 teams because he wouldn't have been able to do an overhead kick without giving away a foul.
Maybe Gareth is just one lucky manager because his decision making is flawed.
Southgate gets paid a collosal amount to do a mediocre job for a post that could be part time. He is a 'lucky' manager.
Lets hope Gareth doesn't feel that his tactics worked and we are treated to more of the same.
I say 'scored' because Saka v Slovenia and Foden last night were both disallowed for offside and neither goal stood, but it showed what can be done when the ball is moved quickly and players actually make runs. So the question is, why aren't we doing this more often (but try to stay onside of course)?
We have had 12 shots on target in 390 minutes of play, an average of 1 shot every 32.5 minutes., which is absolutely pathetic given the level of opponent we've faced. Spain had more than that in their game last night.
I think dropping Foden for Toney would give Bellingham more room to operate and also give Kane better support up front.
Certainly worth trying.
Most England fans could see this after the first game, so why it still hasn't been addressed after 4 games is incredible. I mean surely Southgate and his coaching staff can see it? To do the same for 2 games i can understand in case it clicked, but doing it for 3 games is stupid and for 4 games is simply madness.
Look at Germany for example, they have been miles better than us, but Nagelsmann could see that Wirtz wasn't working on the left, and switched him to Sane for their last 16 game. Good managers make changes and tactical adjustments, Southgate has done absolute nothing. We are in the quarters in spite of him, not because of him.
These are the tactics of international football, but they gave England a chance and we took it. The question is, was it them or was it us. It was probably a bit of both but I liked it when Saka played on the left. Look it isn't ideal but he is a decent option there where options are severely limited and we have a player like Palmer who can play his original role. I thought Gordon should have come on with at least 25 minutes to go. We are not going to see Bellingham or Kane substituted until they are dead on their feet. This is probably a good thing and they showed the reasons why yesterday.
I am not gutted Guehi misses the next game. He looks to me like he has a mistake in him and slows down our play although to give him credit, it was his flick that set up Bellingham and those are the flicks that wrong foot defences. Southgate only reminded us how stubborn he is and we are not going to see him change. We are probably going to continue to see England stumble through this tournament under him but they do have ability so anything is still possible. If he gets more balance on the left it might make a big difference. You have to pose problems for opponents accross the park and you can't have areas where opponents feel too comfortable.
I mean going by the World Population; Spain - Argentina are 33rd and 34th respectively. Sorry I cant think of a more terrible take, its genuinely laughable
What about the difference between males / females in those figures? - Age brackets?
Am actually hoping I'm being whooshed!!
I thought the commentary at the start of the second half was amusing when Lee Dixon said that, Gareth's bound to have made tactical changes - it's too early to see them though.
Two minutes later he added, I can’t see any changes. And another two minutes on a rather more confident, and incredulous, there aren't any changes.
There weren't any changes.
I was being a bit tongue in cheek in that post, obvs, but after the offside ‘goal’ I said what I said - we were in a bar in Crete with about twelve England fans in total.
And yes, I was getting a bit nervous towards the end. 😬
But I’m trying to do what my German mate tells me German fans do. They were rubbish before the tournament, but the collective consciousness is that it doesn’t matter, and they’ll still win the tournament. He’s a dual national, and supports England as well, and his German positivity is rubbing off on me slightly. He tells me that the positivity is in their culture, and it’s one of the reasons (or even the main reason) why they win more tournaments than we do.
Collective positivity, versus our collective negativity.
I think he’s got a point. It may also be why Southgate is so negative, it’s part of the same collective negative mentality. We’ll only be positive after we’ve won a tournament, so we’re trapped in a negative feedback loop.
-Prof Seed. (lol)
I mean a country with a lower population will have less chances of winning on a consistent basis, because their chances of finding 26-players are a lot less than a country with more
I imagine we'll see that with Croatia once they lose their Golden Generation - But if they find their 26-players good enough, population becomes irrelevant.. Even less relevant in a one off game.