Euro 2024

Lounge
1393

There are times in business and other operational spaces where you have to be prepared to make changes – and I think this is one of them as:

1- England’s results in the pre-tournament games were relatively poor – and there was little/no suggestion that players/combinations were being experimented with – often England’s inability to create opportunities was the issue.

2- while England got to the final via a very favourable draw, the general standard of play has been poor – the stats bear this out. We’ve had ‘moments’ and penalties, and there haven’t been any material changes to the team e.g. Kane has soldiered on, often being isolated.

3- when players say they want a manager to stay after what is deemed under-performance, it’s a cliché to say this is precisely the time to change things, as it suggests things have become ‘too comfortable’. New ideas and plans are needed, with a fresh look.

3 Likes
1394

I can’t see where I said that the table is nonsense. I did not. The data within it is equally plainly accurate. I have no problem with your posting it. What it says is the problem.

The point I made is that it suggests multiple statistical differences between the 2 teams who contested the final and that England fans will use that to suggest that had those figures been different England would have been closer or ought to have won. I think equally plainly that is abject nonsense. If that wasn’t the purpose then it’s hard to see what other purpose one might suggest for the data.

It’s nonsense because only goals and your shot conversion rate matter. Possession doesn’t win games. None of the rest of those things, even when combined, win games. They night help. They might not. Yes Spain scored the most goals and won the ball the most in the last 3rd but an analysis of those goals, for example, shows they mostly didn’t come from winning the ball in the last 3rd so what exactly is proven. If you add on the complete data you see Spain were the team who also conceded the most attacks having won the ball in the opponents last 3rd. I’m not feeling enlightened by that.

You could just as easily argue that if England were 15th in winning the ball in the last 3rd but 8th in goals then they clearly played far more football than has been suggested or their long balls were incredibly successful. Again, round in circles.

Literally a table of data which gives precisely zero reasons why England made the final or lost by 1 goal of 3 4 minutes from the end. Sometimes you don’t win. Sometimes it happens more than once. Literally not one England fan here suggesting that their team did brilliantly to make the final but didn’t quite get the breaks. Stuff happens. It doesn’t require a scapegoat but some fans can’t cope without one.

1395

As said the FA love Southgate because he is a safe pair of hands after big Sam. Besides who’s better?. Eddie Howe, Harry Potter or Sean Dyche :face_with_spiral_eyes: Tuchel or Klopp possibly but opinion is for English coach
Agree that he’ll probably call it a day himself in due course

1396

Do we need an English coach/manager?

There are so few options to pick from that if being English is paramount we would probably be better sticking with GS and doing okay sort of.

But what if we looked at coaches from the continent, they have experience of alternative leagues and cultures and can bring something to the table that we don’t have at the moment.

It also needs to be taken into account that our players are now very used to having a foreign coach at club level, it could be that finding a continental coach with experience of English football could be the answer to our problems.

Or we could stick with Gareth.

1397

The Moyesiah is free. The Tartan Diego Simeone has won an international trophy with his former club West Ham, so he knows what he’s doing.

Just putting it out there…

image
image1700×1133 108 KB

4 Likes
1398

I don’t agree with the absence of Rodri in midfield: they probably put Kroos there out of respect and above all because he stops…

1399

Engerland, managed by a Jock?

Eh, naw, nae chance. :scotland: :rofl:

1 Like
1400

Maybe he could get the best out of Declan Rice?

:roll_eyes:

2 Likes
1401

Only Phillips can do that :wink:

1 Like
1402

Capello and Sven worked ever so well.

The problem is that there is literally no problem and certainly no problem with the manager. Idealising a manager as though, if you just had “that” all would be well, is nonsense. You win stuff through consistency and processes not through messianic figureheads.

England have come from being 10 to 20 years behind other nations on multiple fronts to finally compete on a level playing field inside of 8 years. That is remarkable and, as Steve Cooper points out today, Southgate is the force behind that. They have twice fallen short by the smallest of margins in finals but such is the arrogance of fans that they literally express no surprise at what has been achieved and by far prefer to characterise it as underachievement rather than being way ahead of expected progress. Sooner or later if they keep the current structure then that will change and they will win a major tournament. Take out the driving force on the weird basis that he’s taken them as far as he can and the rest of us will genuinely enjoy your Irish/Scottish/Welsh wilderness years.

1 Like
1403

The next tournament is the World Cup in North America. The South Americans play football we can only dream of. Southgate’s not winning in North America & depending on the draw might not get out of the group (should we qualify). Steve Cooper plays horrific football so his opinion (for those of us who want excitement) can be ignored.

Wenger, Klopp, Pep, Poch, Jose etc changed English football, not Southgate. The players arrive at England camps finely tuned. They all go back to club managers superior to Southgate. There are much better managers than GS. The issue - would they take the job/would the conservative blazers back them?

And ignore stats & (so called) objectivity As a fan it’s perfectly acceptable to want the international team to excite, especially as they never win trophies. If you play boring football you have to win. Play exciting football and you get away with relative failure.

8 Likes
1404

I disagree, I see a manager who at this tournament was unwilling to change, do something different, for me some of his decisions were very strange.

Kane - Not Fit - Why rely on him? You’ve had a pop at me about using him as an impact player already but even GS admits that the Captain wasn’t fit. - So why play an unfit Kane from the outset. We could have got through the group stage utilising other players in Kane’s role giving him more time to get fit.

Saka - WTF, this guy maybe monumentally talented but I didn’t see much of it in the role he was given. When he played more central he had the ball in the net sadly ruled offside but he looked more effective. In final he was just a passenger from what I saw, I would have taken him off at half time or switched the system to bring him more into the game, but GS did neither.

Bellingham and Foden - It would seem that the real Jude and Phil had slipped away for an early holiday and their doppelgänger twins were at the tournament, where were the plays who made such an impact at Real Madrid and Manchester City this season? Are the roles they were given right for them or are we getting back to the Lampard Gerrard conundrum with Bellingham and Foden.

I could go on but no doubt I’ll be wrong about these as well.

Don’t get me wrong GS has dragged England up from the depths of despair with Big Sam and has very much improved the situation, he has achieved a lot in his time at the helm and this deserves due recognition.

But in sport you are judged not from where you started but on your results today, I question selections made by GS in the run up to the tournament and through the tournament, that we struggled to beat our round of 16 and QF opponents speaks volumes, we were better against the dutch (in parts) but fell away again against Spain.

Gareth should be applauded for what he has done for the England football team, reaching a final is good but we had the easier route to get there, Spain had Germany and France in QF and SF, we had Switzerland and Netherlands.

There is a huge belief in this squad that Gareth is the right man for the job, the players respect the boss, that goes the other way as well, but if England are going to end 60 years of hurt something has to change. We will not win any tournament playing the way we are at the moment.

If Gareth stays will we get more of the same in qualifying for the next World Cup or will he change the way that his teams play, we have brilliant players but they are not playing brilliantly.

6 Likes
1405

And we won’t even mention the 3 match experiment with Trent who when Southgate finally realised he was not being effective was then changed in the next match for Connor Gallagher who then only lasted 45 minutes before being subbed for Mainoo.
If that doesn’t tell you everything about Southgate then I don’t know what does

2 Likes
1406

The replacement for Kane was Toney. A player who came back from suspension part way through the season and who, despite his frustration at lack of game time, was no more fit than Kane. Watkins is a great player but he will never be the disruptive presence of a Kane or a Toney. Unfortunate but there we go.

I see little disagreement between us on Saka, Foden and Bellingham. They were passengers. We may have different takes on why but there’s no doubt they were.

As regards the manager being unwilling to change, I have to say it’s a comment which constantly bewilders me. Heard here all the time. Can you name one EPL manager who other than through sheer desperation would change their formation, tactics or drop a whole group of key players all at once? The last one I remember even remotely capable was Howard Kendall. Did any other manager of a big team heading out do it at this tournament? Of course not.

Overwhelmingly managers are successful because they devise a way of playing and get the players to deliver it or look at the players and devise a system they can play. At international level you’re trying to bring together 11 players who play entirely different ways, formations and tactics for their clubs. The most successful international teams are those who entirely mimic a hugely successful domestic team that everyone else has been influenced by. In Spain that would be Barca or Real at any given time. In England no-one is going to argue that Citeh, Liverpool, Arsenal play even remotely similar styles and yet international players have to be melded together despite the chances of them playing the same position or running into the same parts of the pitch being close to nil.

Everyone says their manager doesn’t look to have a plan B. Absolutely correct. That’s exactly why they’re successful. The only next step available for an England manager is for the FA to push for a national style to be replicated at all levels. Doubt you’d be enjoying the EPL quite so much if that were to be the case. It isn’t going to happen and there isn’t going to be a manager to take England to that next level who will be able to persuade the FA to take that step bar the one in place who has 8 years of increasing success behind him.

1407

Then why take them?

Both Watkins and Toney are scoring goals for their clubs, and they’re fit. Toney had as you rightly say played less games than the others, so he wasn’t tired from 50+ games over the season.

Harry wasn’t fit, he was a passenger for much of the tournament, it showed in every game. When GS added HK to the team sheet England were playing with 10 players against 11.

How do you find the next Harry Kane? You play those hoping to take the role. England could have got through the group stages without HK, given him rest and time to get fit or fitter than he was, played W&T in his place given them the chance to shine.

Based on your comments I presume that you were happy that an unfit out of sorts player was on the pitch in place of one who may have caused problems from the oppositions defence?

1408

Are you Barney Ronay in disguise Mike? You’ll be asking for Klopp next

2 Likes
1409

Isn’t this the whole point, we were desperate, the system wasn’t working, we needed to do something, but did nothing.

The object of taking a squad of players to a tournament is to have options, try something different, use the resources you have available to you.

I understand that managers have to have belief in their decisions, belief that what they have decided to do is the right thing to do, but I also know from 30 years of managing people that you have to be prepared to change if it isn’t working.

1410

The finest insult thrown at me for some time. Thanks :slight_smile:

1 Like
1411

If it were as simple as taking English players who score then you could have taken a very small number indeed. It’s not that simple though is it. On goals you’d take Macauley Langstaff. Unproven at the highest level but following your logic he’s the man for the job. Sadly the logic is flawed. Strikers score in a system designed for them to do so. Changing an entire system mid tournament is laughable. You won’t/don’t find it done at international level at all. The squad you take reflects the need to have one player as a straight sub for all 11 positions and several who can play several positions.

I’m Welsh so I don’t care whether Kane was a passenger or not in that sense. I just find the reactions hilarious. Yes he was a passenger in at least 2 games but most teams carry at least 1 such player per game. Spain carried 5 or 6 in a couple of games. `easy to forget that the “passenger” shared the golden boot so even fit players weren’t out scoring him.

The idea that England were “desperate” is exactly the entitled stuff I’ve been talking about. You lost the final 4 minutes from the end to a brilliant goal. Similarly the idea that you “did nothing” deserves ridicule. How many times does it need to be pointed out that all the “proactive” managers didn’t make the final? Most of the England subs worked. End of. You could spend the rest of your life on the “Yes, but…” elements bur the fact is that Palmer worked. Watkins worked. That’s a good return. Almost no other managers in the tournament can say that.

I’ve been a manager for 38 years. I also manage a football team. There is little overlap between the two.

In essence England came within 4 minutes of taking it further. Ultimately it was down to one brilliant move and some tiredness. It was the luck you need to win on a fine margin. The hand wringing and manager bashing in that context is absolutely entitled and hilarious albeit apparently sincere. As noted earlier, the turnaround Southgate has enacted off the pitch in 8 years is extraordinary. Treating this as the end of the journey rather than the end of the beginning will prove to be a major error.

Wales lost the semis of the Euros not so long ago. We were good enough to win it. We lost one player for the semi and the consensus is that that’s why we didn’t turn up. There’s some truth in that but actually, as someone there on the night, the truth is we lost pretty much every fine margin issue in that game from front to back and that may have happened had our missing player been there.

The English attitude was “ah but you never expected to win it” which misses the mark by some miles. At the point of the semi the belief was that we could beat anyone. We just didn’t and it was all down to an injury, a suspension. The Welsh indulged in no period of self-indulgent angry self-reflection lashing out at players, managers or tactics. Had we changed formation for the semi we could have done some interesting things. We could have also got thrashed. English fans (not aimed at you) and media rea;ly do lack massive understanding, insight and appreciation of where you are and what you’ve just achieved. Rob Page and Steve Clarke would kill for your “desperate” circumstances.

1412

This just getting repetitive and boring now a bit like Southgate’s England.

4 Likes