FA confirm Southgate will stay on until after Euro 2024 (p 101)

[Phil1]

The reaction from the worlds press is that it was the game of the tournament, England and France were the two best sides left, England played well and were really unlucky to lose, but it happens sometimes.

I’ve seen that in German, Spanish, American and French press.

If you don’t want to trawl through it all yourself the telegraph translated all the French coverage

'A battle royal' – how the world reacted to England's defeat to France

Despite the defeat the reaction was positive for Gareth Southgate's side with many arguing that they edged the match against the French

www.telegraph.co.uk

So why is it that impartial observers of the game and even the French think England played well, we’re arguably the better side and would be stupid to make major changes, and the people who have been angry at Southgate since he took the job in 2016 are calling for him to be fired.


Could it be that you’re so biased that you’ve lost all sense of partiality?

Or is the rest of the world wrong?

I didn’t think we played well for the reasons I’ve mentioned already. I’m not alone so hardly the rest of the world opposing my opinion.
That’s not to say I think they were terrible, I just don’t see the greatness that some are pushing.
I also don’t disagree that they were unlucky to lose. The chances were there and who knows what would have happened had the pen gone in.
I’ve not watched every game but if the worlds press are saying it’s been the game of the tournament then who am I to argue.

 

[Postman Pep]

This sums up my frustrations with Southgate. You can argue about his substitutions as much as you like but the issue for me is that, as per, they were essentially like for like.

Bring on Rashford in the 85th minute fine but why not sacrifice a defender and go 3 at the back? If he thought Phil had run his race bring on Wilson aswell. Bring on TAA to ping some diagonals into the box to try to rattle them like the Dutch did on Friday.

Sure it could have backfired but we will never know because even amidst the familiar sense of inevitability about the way the game is going he refuses to roll the dice.

 

[domalino]

How much more time should Southgate be given?

I think the entire concept of a giant countdown clock hanging over the England manager as soon as he takes the job is stupid but 18 months time when his contract ends seems natural.

I think they showed progress in this World Cup, if not in terms of finishing place (although we’ve been told for the last 4 years that’s meaningless by his detractors anyway) in terms of finding a team, bringing through the new generation, making them believe they can play at this level.

Euro 2024 seems like the stopping point, he’ll have been in charge of 2 cycles, and the new generation will be fully established by then.

 

[Bluemoonadam]

Southgate’s record thus far:

2018 World Cup: Semifinal
2019 Nations League: Third Place
2020 Euros: Runners Up
2021 Nations League: Relegated to League B
2022 World Cup: Quarterfinal

His record is getting worse I suppose when you look at it.

 

[Corky]

View attachment 63269
Even if you factor in the Euros I doubt it looks much better. A fading Germany last year in the last 16 ?

Compare to Italy's 1 win.

 

[Grassland Blue]

Yes but this was a French team with 5 first choice players missing. I think it's more about the way we are coached, for example at one point in the match the commentator pointed out that Walker had tried to go forward to support an attack and the manager ushered him back.

For me that summed up Southgate completely - more worried about what the opposition might do if they got the ball than what we can do when we have it. It's obvious this is how they're being told to play. The problem is it doesn't work and he doesn't learn from the mistakes. He either won't change it or doesn't know how to.

Or he is taking instructions from the F.A. suits....

 

[SebastianBlue]

I think the entire concept of a giant countdown clock hanging over the England manager as soon as he takes the job is stupid but 18 months time when his contract ends seems natural.

I think they showed progress in this World Cup, if not in terms of finishing place (although we’ve been told for the last 4 years that’s meaningless by his detractors anyway) in terms of finding a team, bringing through the new generation, making them believe they can play at this level.

Euro 2024 seems like the stopping point, he’ll have been in charge of 2 cycles, and the new generation will be fully established by then.

I wasn’t implying a countdown clock but I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask someone aggressively defending Southgate (who has yet to win any tournament during his tenure and actually seems to be regressing in results) how much more time he should be given to achieve the goal of his position.

 

[Kinkybyname]

The reaction from the worlds press is that it was the game of the tournament, England and France were the two best sides left, England played well and were really unlucky to lose, but it happens sometimes.

I’ve seen that in German, Spanish, American and French press.

If you don’t want to trawl through it all yourself the telegraph translated all the French coverage

'A battle royal' – how the world reacted to England's defeat to France

Despite the defeat the reaction was positive for Gareth Southgate's side with many arguing that they edged the match against the French

www.telegraph.co.uk

So why is it that impartial observers of the game and even the French think England played well, we’re arguably the better side and would be stupid to make major changes, and the people who have been angry at Southgate since he took the job in 2016 are calling for him to be fired.


Could it be that you’re so biased that you’ve lost all sense of partiality?

Or is the rest of the world wrong?

we've been so 'unlucky' for so long – and how can anyone be angry at someone who accepted a job and salary way above his CV or talents merited - don't blame him one bit. At least Keegan had the balls to admit he couldn't do the job.

 

[Gazza]

His record is getting worse I suppose when you look at it.

Maybe the first decent team we play is coming earlier in each tournament and therefore we go out earlier.

 

[Jazzman]

Southgate’s record thus far:

2018 World Cup: Semifinal
2019 Nations League: Third Place
2020 Euros: Runners Up
2021 Nations League: Relegated to League B
2022 World Cup: Quarterfinal

I think the problem is it could have been better. He has a lot of good footballers at his disposal, yet does not use them well. His spine is Maguire, Henderson and Kane. 2 donkeys and 1 ageing forward. It is just stoneage for me.

 

[citymad]

Bringing on Sterling for one of best players summed up Southgate's ability to be smart.As for bringing on Grealish so late that was just desperate and clueless.
Look up Southgate on Wikipedia and you'll see too nice, no tactical nouse. A coach that got an England team relegated just before a major tournament and alway seems to fail in the big games.
It's time to sign up someone with real pedigree for big tournaments or a young manager who can make key changes and play progressive football.

 

[Bluemoonadam]

Maybe the first decent team we play is coming earlier in each tournament and therefore we go out earlier.

Yes certainly looks that, way out of his depth once he comes up against one of the big teams.

 

[Pell]

This sums up my frustrations with Southgate. You can argue about his substitutions as much as you like but the issue for me is that, as per, they were essentially like for like.

Bring on Rashford in the 85th minute fine but why not sacrifice a defender and go 3 at the back? If he thought Phil had run his race bring on Wilson aswell. Bring on TAA to ping some diagonals into the box to try to rattle them like the Dutch did on Friday.

Sure it could have backfired but we will never know because even amidst the familiar sense of inevitability about the way the game is going he refuses to roll the dice.

Agree with that. I thought England generally played well in the second half, but didn't really create too many clear cut chances from open play, Lloris didn't have much to do. Foden was too much on the fringes, Grealish should have come on instead of Sterling and so should have Maddison.

 

[paulchapo]

The FA will probably be more than happy with what he’s done. His remit is get England to a tournament and then out of the group stages. It all puts money in their coffers every two years when the public starts getting silly that England could win a the World Cup or Euros. They got stung paying big money for Capello and Sven and didn’t produce any more results than what Southgate has. If Southgate had failed in the group stages maybe they would have got rid.

Yes Sven was a quarter final manager and Capello was useless. I also think we have a tendancy to over hype our players. While they are very good I'm not sure they're the world beaters some think they are. With better tactics and organisation though I feel we could do better.

 

[Postman Pep]

Compare to Italy's 1 win.

Not sure what you are getting at tbh, but whatever it is I take it you are excluding 2006.

 

[citymad]

I think the problem is it could have been better. He has a lot of good footballers at his disposal, yet does not use them well. His spine is Maguire, Henderson and Kane. 2 donkeys and 1 ageing forward. It is just stoneage for me.

Good point, all three are slower than molasses.

 

[domalino]

I wasn’t implying a countdown clock but I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask someone aggressively defending Southgate (who has yet to win any tournament during his tenure and actually seems to be regressing in results) how much more time he should be given to achieve the goal of his position.

You are dealing entirely in result based thinking, which is the worst possible way to run any football team.

Why has Pep failed to win the CL for 9 consecutive seasons? Is he a worse manager than everyone who did? No. Football doesn’t work like that.

As I see it the difference in opinion here is one of expectation. You think England not winning means England have failed.

I think the best countries in the world (Brazil, Germany, Italy) lose 80-95% of tournaments they enter, and job of the England manager is to get the side to a point where they’re good enough that they have a good chance of winning. You do that for long enough and eventually you win. That’s what will happen with City and the Champions League.

It’s an incredibly high variance competition. Luck, the draw, and unmitigated circumstances dominate.


So with that said...IMO England are good enough to win a major tournament now, which means Southgate is doing his job. They weren’t good enough quality wise or mentally in the 90s or 00s or the 10s and the managers were failing.

There was IMO major progress between the Euro final last year, where he went with the back 5 out of fear and the team clammed up for 60 minutes, and yesterday where they played well.

So I don’t feel the need to rip everything up. If he chooses to leave and they manage to get Tuchel, I won’t be unhappy, he will probably be good enough to carry on Southgate’s progress, but he doesn’t *need* to go, and there are very few genuine candidates who would do better.

 

[domalino]

I think the problem is it could have been better. He has a lot of good footballers at his disposal, yet does not use them well. His spine is Maguire, Henderson and Kane. 2 donkeys and 1 ageing forward. It is just stoneage for me.

Why is Maguire the spine and not John Stones?

Why Henderson (who's been in and out of the side) and not Rice & Bellingham, who start every game?

Can you not at least pretend to discuss this in good faith?

 

[Jazzman]

Good point, all three are slower than molasses.

Did you notice in the 2nd half when Henderson suddenly pressed like mad, but all alone, and when he realized it he gave Foden a bollocking? I mean, I liked the pressing, but it appeared totally uncoordinated. Almost as if there were no plan, and each player just did what he was used to from his club. England need a playing identity, a game plan. It is not enough to just select 11 players from different systems and let them get on with it.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

Bringing on Sterling for one of best players summed up Southgate's ability to be smart.As for bringing on Grealish so late that was just desperate and clueless.
Look up Southgate on Wikipedia and you'll see too nice, no tactical nouse. A coach that got an England team relegated just before a major tournament and alway seems to fail in the big games.
It's time to sign up someone with real pedigree for big tournaments or a young manager who can make key changes and play progressive football.

It's easy to say bring in (insert particular type of manager...) but name one with the credentials you say is required?