Topic: Gareth Southgate: England's substitute teacher

[El Lobo]

England got to a major final where they were beaten on penalties having gone through the tournament unbeaten. Claiming it somehow doesn't count smacks of those people claiming our CL win would have been 'tainted' because we got an 'easy draw'. Obviously, Southgate isn't a top manager or the optimal long term choice, but he doesn't deserve to be sacked because of one bad result, especially without anyone better available to step in.

If we needed to play 7 games to win the CL and 6 of them were at Anfield, I think people would be justified in saying it was a little tainted

Even so, its not really the point whether it was an easy draw or not. It means fuck all if you don't get over the line, particularly if you've had that sort of advantage throughout the tournament.

[12C]

He’s absolutely petrified to play anyone with creativity or flair. In the Euro final the game was calling out for Grealish to come on to run at the Italian defenders and hold onto the ball but he stuck to his tried and tested players and tactics. He’s still largely ignoring him as well as Foden and Trent, he simply wants 8 men behind the ball and try to pinch a goal from a set-piece.

The first 15 of that final England ran Italy ragged with the wing backs pressing forward and putting in good balls. Then they scored and he panicked and went defensive. Ultimately he was playing for pens and his substitutions were disastrous.
I said at the time I hoped they wouldn’t bite him on the arse but ..

[Funky_Gibbons]

England got to a major final where they were beaten on penalties having gone through the tournament unbeaten. Claiming it somehow doesn't count smacks of those people claiming our CL win would have been 'tainted' because we got an 'easy draw'. Obviously, Southgate isn't a top manager or the optimal long term choice, but he doesn't deserve to be sacked because of one bad result, especially without anyone better available to step in.

We won every game home and away in the so-called 'group of death'.

Southgate's only notable victory is against an aging Germany team, on home soil.

[Ravishing Rick Dude]

Fucking hell Jamie, shut your gob lad.

[Sheer Magnetism]

No one has said it doesn't count or that it is tainted. All that is being said is that England's achievements in those tournaments doesn't make Southgate a good manager, which you've gone on to agree with.

I didn't say it did. Jogi Low couldn't get a decent club job and still can't, but he did all right for Germany by basically copying the Bayern template. Southgate could do better but he's done relatively well so far and I'd say the tournament placings are much more representative than a glorified friendly played by exhausted footballers who don't care about the outcome.

In a wider sense, it doesn't matter how good the players are if the manager can't get them to play. Southgate's England teams have played relatively well in tournaments because he's managed to motivate and organise them relatively effectively, while much more celebrated managers have seen their England teams fold and wither over the years because they haven't been able to get the mood right or find a way for the players to gel.

[Sheer Magnetism]

We won every game home and away in the so-called 'group of death'.

Southgate's only notable victory is against an aging Germany team, on home soil.

Beating the world cup finalists and a Czech team that put out the Dutch aren't notable victories? The team played well that tournament, won five out of seven games and conceded two goals in 690 minutes. I'm not a Southgate fan particularly, but there have been a lot of England teams with relatively easy draws that didn't get as far or simply played far worse.

[Jwils21]

Just a shame Southgate has an obligation to pick "Slabhead" after his 23 goals in the Euro's the other year and can't put Tomori & Stones together. Same goes with Pickford who didn't concede a single goal and saved a minimum of 2 penalties per game.

[S]

Fucking hell Jamie, shut your gob lad.

I pretty much agree with him in that it’s a very average England side. Player for player the 2006 starting eleven is so much stronger.

[Flaccido Dongingo]

Fucking hell Jamie, shut your gob lad.

Along with McManaman he's my least favourite homegrown Scouse Liverpool player ever, monumental gobshite.

[Funky_Gibbons]

Beating the world cup finalists and a Czech team that put out the Dutch aren't notable victories?

I said Germany was a notable victory, with the caveat of them being an aging team, out of form team/manager and we were on home soil. Czech Rep notable victory? Nah, England should be beating them.

The team played well that tournament, won five out of seven games and conceded two goals in 690 minutes. I'm not a Southgate fan particularly, but there have been a lot of England teams with relatively easy draws that didn't get as far or simply played far worse.

They beat teams they were expected to beat due to favourable draws, Ukraine in the quater finals and Denmark in the semi's!! He plays Hodgson-esque tactics which gets found out as soon as you play against any decent opposition with a good manager.   

[rushyman]

Fucking hell Jamie, shut your gob lad.

Can he get any more Sky

[Fromola]

I pretty much agree with him in that it’s a very average England side. Player for player the 2006 starting eleven is so much stronger.

At least until Rooney got crocked before the tournament and then Owen in the second game. England's attack in that Portugal game was Aaron Lennon, Joe Cole and an unfit Rooney. That hardly beats England's current crop.

All they really had was a very solid defence (only conceded 2 goals all tournament and both in a dead rubber group game) and top midfielders that couldn't play in the same team (i.e. Gerrard and Lampard). Paul Robinson in goal as well was very average (no different now admittedly).

That team was still better on paper but the standard of international football was better in general then. The Italy team that won it was far better on paper than Italy at the Euros. Del Piero, Pirlo, Totti, Buffon, Cannavaro, Nesta, Gattuso, De Rossi, Zambrotta (Chiellini played in both and was still the key man for Italy at 36).

[Port_vale_lad]

Makes me laugh the fawning people do over Southgate and the INGURLAAAAAND boys.

"Best coach we have hand for yonks, unlucky against Croatia, really unlucky got all the way to the semis"

People forget the absolute dross we played in that tournament and the fact we only played 2 good teams and lost 3 times.

[thaddeus]

At least until Rooney got crocked before the tournament and then Owen in the second game. England's attack in that Portugal game was Aaron Lennon, Joe Cole and an unfit Rooney. That hardly beats England's current crop.

All they really had was a very solid defence (only conceded 2 goals all tournament and both in a dead rubber group game) and top midfielders that couldn't play in the same team (i.e. Gerrard and Lampard). Paul Robinson in goal as well was very average (no different now admittedly).

That team was still better on paper but the standard of international football was better in general then. The Italy team that won it was far better on paper than Italy at the Euros. Del Piero, Pirlo, Totti, Buffon, Cannavaro, Nesta, Gattuso, De Rossi, Zambrotta (Chiellini played in both and was still the key man for Italy at 36).

Ferdinand and Terry as central defenders though.  I don't like either as individuals but as a central defensive pairing that's on a different stratosphere to what Southgate has at his disposal.

Southgate is probably an inherently defensive manager - I don't know much about his club management career - but the compact, safety first way we play is also almost certainly in part because he can't risk exposing his central defence.  The Maguire problem that Man U have is also present for England but less evident as Southgate compensates for it.

[Persephone]

The Maguire problem that Man U have is also present for England but less evident as Southgate compensates for it.

If Southgate had any balls or brains he'd drop a player that is woefully out of form. There are quite a few CB's who are better, any of Gomez, Stones, Tomori, or Guehi would be a superior fit than Slabhead. Southgate is a mediocre manager and he makes the same mistakes over and over, the WC will be another disappointment for England fans.

[4pool]

Give Southgate an extension. 

[Ghost Town]

Personally I think Carra's comments are absolutely on point, if it keeps Southgate in the job

[Ghost Town]

I didn't say it did. Jogi Low couldn't get a decent club job and still can't, but he did all right for Germany by basically copying the Bayern template. Southgate could do better but he's done relatively well so far and I'd say the tournament placings are much more representative than a glorified friendly played by exhausted footballers who don't care about the outcome.

There you go, then, that's where Southgate is going wrong. He needs to follow Jogi's example. Dye his hair, smoke 20 Rothmans during the match and eat his own bogies - or worse.

[afc tukrish]

There you go, then, that's where Southgate is going wrong. He needs to follow Jogi's example. Dye his hair, smoke 20 Rothmans during the match and eat his own bogies - or worse.

Worse? Southgate planning on assisting Klinsmann in the near future?

[El Lobo]

Ferdinand and Terry as central defenders though.  I don't like either as individuals but as a central defensive pairing that's on a different stratosphere to what Southgate has at his disposal.

Southgate is probably an inherently defensive manager - I don't know much about his club management career - but the compact, safety first way we play is also almost certainly in part because he can't risk exposing his central defence.  The Maguire problem that Man U have is also present for England but less evident as Southgate compensates for it.

The Maguire problem shouldn't exist for England.....because he's not contracted to England. If its a problem you know....don't pick him? Stones is a decent enough CB, Walker can play there if he's insisting on 3 at the back, Tomori just had a great season winning the title in Italy, I'm sure there's one or two others who are a fair amount better than Maguire. He's then got the immortal Declan Rice in midfield, who people keep telling me is amazing. Kalvin Phillips, who people keep telling me is great and actually we dont want him to go to Man City after all. He's got tremendous options at full back. Kane, Sterling, Saka, Foden, Abraham, Bowen, Harvey Barnes, Grealish, Mount, Maddison, Sancho, Rashford, Calvert Lewin, Watkins and Smith-Rowe is a LOT of attacking depth.

People talk about England 'golden ages' but when we had those golden ages, we had good depth in maybe two positions (attack in the 90s, CB and CM in the 00s) and absolute dross elsewhere. Like proper, proper dross.

[Elzar]

The Maguire problem shouldn't exist for England.....because he's not contracted to England. If its a problem you know....don't pick him? Stones is a decent enough CB, Walker can play there if he's insisting on 3 at the back, Tomori just had a great season winning the title in Italy, I'm sure there's one or two others who are a fair amount better than Maguire. He's then got the immortal Declan Rice in midfield, who people keep telling me is amazing. Kalvin Phillips, who people keep telling me is great and actually we dont want him to go to Man City after all. He's got tremendous options at full back. Kane, Sterling, Saka, Foden, Abraham, Bowen, Harvey Barnes, Grealish, Mount, Maddison, Sancho, Rashford, Calvert Lewin, Watkins and Smith-Rowe is a LOT of attacking depth.

People talk about England 'golden ages' but when we had those golden ages, we had good depth in maybe two positions (attack in the 90s, CB and CM in the 00s) and absolute dross elsewhere. Like proper, proper dross.

I agree with this on the whole. Maguire isn't an issue unless you pick him. Stones and Tomori, with Guehi, White, Dier (who had a solid season) and Gomez all as options, then as pointed out, in a back 3 Walker and James able to slot in to a position. They are all capable of playing in a team that is well coached.

England in 04 and 06 had a really good first 11 but nothing backing them up.

Robinson, Neville, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole, Hargreaves, Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, Rooney, Owen

On paper, that's better than any other first 11 England have put together since 2000. The problem being, as you said, they had to bring on Downing, Jenas, Crouch or Lennon to help the attack if they were struggling. Dross.

This current team has so many options, and while it doesn't sound as good with the players they put out, they can produce a much higher quality balanced team if they had the correct person in charge. I'd say international football as a whole is weaker now too. England should go into every tournament with this "generation" thinking they can get to the semi final at least with a decent draw. Even without a decent draw they'd still only need to beat maybe 1 top team in the knockouts to progress far. I don't think Southgate is the person that can take the extra step in making them win it though.

When his idea of putting out a experimental team is having Reece James at left back, something is going wrong.

[disgraced cake]

Inclined to agree with Carragher on the squad point. I don't think it is better than a couple of crops they've had in the past. There's definitely less 'star quality' than they had in the 2000s where they albeit achieved nothing but neither has this side. Even though they clearly struggle to score against teams who aren't San Marino or Andorra they've got a few decent attacking options but they have nothing in midfield and play clowns like Pickford, Maguire, Shaw etc at the back.

[stewy17]

England is an average nation with delusions of grandeur and an empire complex.

Its football team reflects that.

[-Willo-]

How does Carragher think hes over achieved, whilst at the same time recognising the draws were favourable, makes no sense.

Fact is England should have got to the final of the world cup, and beat italy at home in the euros, he under achieved in both cups.

If Liverpool got knocked out by Villareal then we'd have under achieved in Europe because of the draw, removing the draw then a semi-final is great, but why would you remove it, thats where ALL the context lies.

[El Lobo]

England is an average nation with delusions of grandeur and an empire complex.

Its football team reflects that.

Nah it really doesn't need to be some deep, wider issue.

They've got numerous players who are amongst the best in the world in their position, certainly amongst the best young players in the world in their position. They should play better football, and the two tournaments we've 'done well' in we should actually have done better in, considering the draw and considering the home advantage. There's nothing deeper than that.

[Scottymuser]

I agree with this on the whole. Maguire isn't an issue unless you pick him. Stones and Tomori, with Guehi, White, Dier (who had a solid season) and Gomez all as options, then as pointed out, in a back 3 Walker and James able to slot in to a position. They are all capable of playing in a team that is well coached.

England in 04 and 06 had a really good first 11 but nothing backing them up.

Robinson, Neville, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole, Hargreaves, Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, Rooney, Owen

On paper, that's better than any other first 11 England have put together since 2000. The problem being, as you said, they had to bring on Downing, Jenas, Crouch or Lennon to help the attack if they were struggling. Dross.

This current team has so many options, and while it doesn't sound as good with the players they put out, they can produce a much higher quality balanced team if they had the correct person in charge. I'd say international football as a whole is weaker now too. England should go into every tournament with this "generation" thinking they can get to the semi final at least with a decent draw. Even without a decent draw they'd still only need to beat maybe 1 top team in the knockouts to progress far. I don't think Southgate is the person that can take the extra step in making them win it though.

When his idea of putting out a experimental team is having Reece James at left back, something is going wrong.

You forgot Defoe (a better striker than any non-Harry Kane player we have today), Crouch you are massively underrating for the national team (easily as good as, if not better than, DCL/Rashford/Abraham/Watkins). 

Also, our strength in depth in midfield is *awful* nowadays - I'd even go so far as to state that people likely to be starting for England are the equivalents of Jenas in mid 00s sides in terrms of ability - but they play better as a unit.  Our midfield in the 00s had so much strength that Scholes retired early as he was not getting any games, and Carrick only got 30-odd caps.  Midfield is much more where games can be both won AND loss too.  Ditto CB - Ferdinand/Terry/Campbell/Carra/Woodgate/King are all as good as the best option we have available today;' and even at FB it was spread more evenly (hate them like we all do, but you can't deny that Neville/Cole were a very good well balances pair, with Bridge/Neville as decent backups), compared to our current situation of having  3/4 very good RB options, and barely a LB who can kick a ball (Chilwell is maybe the best LB, but can't get a game for Chelsea with Alonso playing well for them)

[PaulF]

People forget the absolute dross we played in that tournament and the fact we only played 2 good teams and lost 3 times.

There aren't actually that many good international teams in world football. And it's fair to say one pair will draw each other. You don't need to beat many good teams to win a major cup.

Thinking now. who are good teams?
Argentina and Brazil always to be feared, and Germany you never write off. Italy aren't even there.  Portugal rise and fall, but would expect us to be favourites. Not sure where Spain are at right now. Nobody outside of Europe or South America should be a concern.

[Walshy nMe®]

Bring back El Tel. Get Teddy Sheringham on board.

Class of 94 96 in full swing!

[lobsterboy]

England is an average nation with delusions of grandeur and an empire complex.

Its football team reflects that.

This all day.
Always the most overrated team in any tournament they feature.

[stewy17]

Nah it really doesn't need to be some deep, wider issue.

They've got numerous players who are amongst the best in the world in their position, certainly amongst the best young players in the world in their position. They should play better football, and the two tournaments we've 'done well' in we should actually have done better in, considering the draw and considering the home advantage. There's nothing deeper than that.

Yeah they've got a couple of good players, some elite (and three of them all play right back), most nowhere near it.

I'm not saying it's a wider issue, I'm just saying the team reflects the country. Few good eggs but on the whole, shite.

[El Lobo]

Yeah they've got a couple of good players, some elite (and three of them all play right back), most nowhere near it.

I'm not saying it's a wider issue, I'm just saying the team reflects the country. Few good eggs but on the whole, shite.

It doesn't 'reflect the country' remotely (and that seems a tad racist, but I appreciate towards England/English is generally allowed). There's numerous players who have played big roles in some of the best teams in Europe over the last few seasons (Trent, Hendo, Gomez, Foden, Stones, Sterling, Mount, James) some other good players who play for decent teams (Kane, Saka, Smith-Rowe, Grealish before he went to City, Bowen, Rice etc.). The shite is pretty much predominantly in two of three positions, and thats because the manager refuses to pick others as he's shit scared of dropping United or Everton players.

[Fromola]

How does Carragher think hes over achieved, whilst at the same time recognising the draws were favourable, makes no sense.

Fact is England should have got to the final of the world cup, and beat italy at home in the euros, he under achieved in both cups.

If Liverpool got knocked out by Villareal then we'd have under achieved in Europe because of the draw, removing the draw then a semi-final is great, but why would you remove it, thats where ALL the context lies.

It would be like Tottenham beating a load of EFL teams to get to the Fa Cup semi final, losing it to Leicester and then say well he did so well to get there.

[Ravishing Rick Dude]

Yeah they've got a couple of good players, some elite (and three of them all play right back), most nowhere near it.

I'm not saying it's a wider issue, I'm just saying the team reflects the country. Few good eggs but on the whole, shite.

Why you're making this political? What you're saying doesn't make any sense.

[thaddeus]

England is an average nation with delusions of grandeur and an empire complex.

Its football teamfans reflects that.

Probably not the thread for it but nationalism and rose-tinted trumpeting of empire days are definitely a problem with England fans.  The undertones of "invasion" and "conquering" that goes with England fans travelling to tournaments is a never-ending embarrasment.

I think this group of players are actually quite modest though when you look at their talents and what they've achieved at club level and, by-and-large, at international level.  I don't really recall much tub-thumping bravado in the interviews I've heard from the players or manager.  Liverpool are under-represented in the England team and that maybe skews some opinions on them but man-for-man the squad is as good as any in world football.

[El Lobo]

Probably not the thread for it but nationalism and rose-tinted trumpeting of empire days are definitely a problem with England fans.  The undertones of "invasion" and "conquering" that goes with England fans travelling to tournaments is a never-ending embarrasment.

I think this group of players are actually quite modest though when you look at their talents and what they've achieved at club level and, by-and-large, at international level.  I don't really recall much tub-thumping bravado in the interviews I've heard from the players or manager.  Liverpool are under-represented in the England team and that maybe skews some opinions on them but man-for-man the squad is as good as any in world football.

Its got fuck all to do with 'invasions' and 'conquering'. I'm pretty sure some scrotty little thug decked out in Stone Island gear isn't lobbing chairs through restaurant windows in Germany because he's channelling his inner 'British Invasion of Martinique 1809'. We've got a Tory government enabling a selfish, racist, sexist, homophobic undertone which isn't just an English problem but a worldwide one. We played Hungary t'other day who had a crowd of 30,000 kids booing black players. I expect the truth is also that most international football fans aren't big clubs fans (obviously you're not going to get many Liverpool fans following England, but I suspect when they go abroad you also don't get many United/Arsenal/Spurs/City/Newcastle etc fans there). Its more your Millwall, Port Vale, Shrewsbury fans who 'go big' because following their own team is pretty crap.

[Fromola]

Probably not the thread for it but nationalism and rose-tinted trumpeting of empire days are definitely a problem with England fans.  The undertones of "invasion" and "conquering" that goes with England fans travelling to tournaments is a never-ending embarrasment.

I think this group of players are actually quite modest though when you look at their talents and what they've achieved at club level and, by-and-large, at international level.  I don't really recall much tub-thumping bravado in the interviews I've heard from the players or manager.  Liverpool are under-represented in the England team and that maybe skews some opinions on them but man-for-man the squad is as good as any in world football.

Very few international squads with a better group or roster as strong as England's though overall. The standard of international football is not good. The Italy team that won the Euros wouldn't do much in the CL for example (how many would get a game for us or City?) and a big downgrade player for player on their 2006 squad. Italy were still comfortably thr best there.

Theres no international team who are strong from 1 to 11 either. They all have weaknesses.

[Ghost Town]

Its got fuck all to do with 'invasions' and 'conquering'. I'm pretty sure some scrotty little thug decked out in Stone Island gear isn't lobbing chairs through restaurant windows in Germany because he's channelling his inner 'British Invasion of Martinique 1809'. We've got a Tory government enabling a selfish, racist, sexist, homophobic undertone which isn't just an English problem but a worldwide one. We played Hungary t'other day who had a crowd of 30,000 kids booing black players. I expect the truth is also that most international football fans aren't big clubs fans (obviously you're not going to get many Liverpool fans following England, but I suspect when they go abroad you also don't get many United/Arsenal/Spurs/City/Newcastle etc fans there). Its more your Millwall, Port Vale, Shrewsbury fans who 'go big' because following their own team is pretty crap.

Have to disagree with you a bit on this. The whole war/invasion/conquest-tinted subtext is very much present and noticeable among a large minority of England fans. It's not a reflection upon the ordinary people of the country, I agree, but it is present in the international fanbase to some degree. It's noticed by people here in the UK (esp, but not only, non-white communities who feel anxious about it and wary about getting involved in international fandom) and also by perplexed watchers abroad, who often comment upon it in puzzlement.

I think it might come from an identification by certain fans with the glamour of the armed forces and their own often innacurate perceptions about days of military superiority and empire (though selfsame individuals might well run a mile rather than actually serve in such capacities). The rag media has also tended to play up on this a bit in the past (no idea if they still do as I never even look at that shite now)

It's certainly true that racism and thuggery is not just the province of England fans and there's a tendency to pigeonhole and stereotype international fans from many countries too quickly.

The latter point about the international fanbase being largely made up of fans of 'lesser' teams is one I've seen mentioned quite often, and I'd be interested in knowing whether any studies have been done on this. Even if true I'm not sure it should in any way link into exhibited behaviour

[PaulF]

I wonder if conscription would change opinions.