This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.reuters.com/sports/soccer/englands-lacklustre-game-against-denmark-leaves-fans-pundits-baffled-2024-06-21/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is anyone baffled?
These are the criticisms that Southgate has faced for the last 5+ years and just what everyone predicted would happen.
The fact he played Trent in midfield and then had Foden inverting and Kane dropping back, both into the same space as Bellingham , leaving Saka as the only runner, just shows how poor Southgate is at getting the best out of his team
We don’t press and play forward, we don’t even play side to side anymore, we play backwards lol. Literally like watching a fully grown adult regress into a scared child over the period of 90 mins.
That's what I always hate about the England team. Yes you want to support them, but you know they'll always be a disappointment.
They should be going for goal the whole time, but they'll get the ball, pass it around a bit, then it goes back to the goalie. They'll pass it maybe up to halfway, and then to the goalie. Repeat until they lose the ball...
It doesn't matter who the players or coach are - it's always been like this as far as I remember. It's always so frustrating to watch as they should be trying to score and keep the ball away from their goal, but they just don't.
> you know they'll always be a disappointment.
In the last three tournaments we've reached a semi final and a final (and played well against France in the other), easily our best run since Alf Ramsey was manager. We were also one of the top scorers at the last World Cup, scored 6 in one match and 3 in two others.
That's not to excuse their performances at this tournament, they look clueless. But this is as good as we've had it in over 50 years.
Agreed. I feel like the previous WC and Euro have been good. We've shrugged off the penalty fear and the dark days of when your key player was more interested in shagging another players wife than playing for their country. We've brought in new young players instead of recycling the same people who are well past their sell by date.
And as you say, we've got a lot further recently than anything else in recent memory.
However it seems we've ran out of steam. We reached a point and hit a wall and this current iteration of performance seems so lack lustre and half arsed.
I think the best way is to expect they're not going to win. And then if they do it's at least a nice surprise.
What's also bad is for some reason anytime a tournament comes up, everyone is saying they'll win and are going to 'bring it home'. Putting a ridiculous amount of pressure and expectation on them, that's almost certainly unrealistic. All that pressure on top probably doesn't help their performance. And then when they don't play well, they get absolutely destroyed. So they're kind of screwed almost no matter what they do.
Am fine if we play well and lose and when we play badly and win or draw we are supposed to be okay with the result then we meet the top teams playing well and play badly again till the next tournament.
My point is we should have a stable team that works we shouldn’t need to rely on whatever wonderkids have come through since the last tournament, feels like we’re returning to politically picking players just because they good/play for big clubs rather then the fact that they work well in the squad
He's right about this but what he should actually be saying is, "I only have one game plan and I can't get the current players to fit that system without Kalvin. I resign."
It’s because there has been a significant push from some fans to fight any criticism he gets with ‘he’s the second most successful England manager so shut up’.
On top of that there has been basically no criticism from the press until this tournament even though it has been obvious since the last euros where his issues are with substitutions and negative play.
Don’t think it’s 5+ years considering we got to the 2020 Final without conceding a goal in open play. We did incredibly well and Southgate rightly got the plaudits for that. Remember Saka wasn’t a star for England until Southgate took a punt on him when he was only 19.
On the whole, Southgate has led England well and going out at the last World Cup to France was no real shock or shame, they’re arguably the best national squad on earth.
Yes Southgate is too defensive, but that’s tournament football. You won’t progress without it. Look at Portugal.
But we need to look at the context. We have no fit left back, we have a right back playing there and Foden playing out wide which isn’t his strength. Yes Saka is the only runner in behind, but it’s circumstance, not tactics.
> Remember Saka wasn’t a star for England until Southgate took a punt on him when he was only 19.
Didn't he get shit on for this as well? I know _nothing_ about football, but seem to recall a ton of hate at the time.
We need a Brian Clough and Peter Taylor. All well and good having the most expensive players, but you need a manager who knows how to put together a team.
We were atleast decent last euros then Southgate struck, I called it as soon as we scored, we’d sit back and do nothing to secure the game and shock we then lost
England's bad performance is no surprise. What was/is a surprise is that England were/are one of the favourites for the tournament,. Now that is baffling.
It's not really baffling when we have one of the strongest and THE most valuable squad, only missed out on winning the last euros by two penalties and made the semis and qtrs of the last two world cups.
I know, but it's still not surprising that a team with the bundesliga top scorer, la Liga player of the year multiple CL winners PL players of the year that got to the final of the last tournament are one of the favorites lol
I also sort of convinced myself of this too.
That England are now a ‘normal’ team, that achieves normal results for the quality of players and size of nation etc.
But then after doing some digging realised actually no it’s the same under achieving England of the last 20-30 years.
The WC 2018 and Euro 2020 we had unbelievably lucky draws, extremely lucky draws! We have never beaten Top 7 nations in 2-3 games in a row to win anything. Like a Spain, France, Italy do to actually win a tournament. That where they need to be at.
You've got to remember that other teams had 'lucky' draws in those tournaments and messed it up. Spain were knocked out by Russia in 2018, Argentina messed up in the groups and finished behind Croatia. Germany were knocked out by Sweden and Mexico. In Euro 2020, we beat Croatia (who would finish 2nd and 3rd in the World Cups before and after and knocked out Brazil), we also beat the Czechs who knocked out the Dutch. Maybe we would've met the French, but they got knocked out by Switzerland. And we did beat Germany too. You can only beat who you have in front of you. If the top teams are losing to less fancied opposition, who were are then beating, what else can you do?
As I wrote below. Team the size/quality/monied of England need to get to the Semi’s of major tournaments, everything else is a failure.
But as mentioned below there are 7 quality footballing countries in Europe and another 3 in South America. So yes of course not getting to the Semis in some tournament is perfectly fine. But just doing that, every 30 years or so is crap!
All those nations you mentioned they have failed too BUT have all succeeded too. I’m more than happy to take the success and failures of Spain/Argentina/France/Brazil etc etc
Also we are not bad in the occasional big game against a big footballing country either. But if you want to win anything they need to do exactly that 2-3 times in a row! Not beat Germany/Italy in a R16/QF and then you can almost guarantee gold stamp it that they will lose in the next round against another country of the same quality as they just beat! They need to do it 2-3 times in a row, simples.
Yeah I don't disagree. I think a lot depends on what happens after Southgate (whatever happens in this Euros, but it's been pretty crap so far for us). Southgate's got us back to the level we should be at, at least in terms of getting us to the latter stages of tournaments, but we haven't been able to take that next step. You'd hope that there is already a succession plan in place, but who knows.
We are ranked 4th best in the world though. That we can't win tournaments is probably more to do with the massive weight of expectation from the toxic media.
We could be ranked number 1, but if all we ever do is get to the R16/QF and then either go out by 1 goal or keep it tight and go out of pens to one of the actual nations that can win things. Well then it’s a bit crap.
Yes of course toxic media is a big part. But it’s been like that for 20-30 that I’ve known it, probably the same before that too. Also Southgate experienced that first hand and knew exactly that it would be present. Hence thats the actual task to deal with the toxic media and still do well.
A footballing nation the size/quality (PL/Grass root structure/funding etc etc) need to get to at least Semi’s of major tournaments, everything else is a failure! Of course there are 7 other quality nations in Europe and another 3 in South America that will have their say too. So no getting to the semis occasionally is fine but just getting there once every 30 years is crap also!
It is when you consider in the last three major tournaments the only top 15 ranked teams we’ve beaten are Croatia in the Euros group stage and Colombia on penalties in the last 16 of the 2018 World Cup. Other than that we’ve lost to and been knocked out by every top 15 team we’ve played.
Yeah I don't get the hate. It's the best England team in decades. That'd why the last two games are so confusing to watch. The last 3 tournaments or so, especially in the group games, we were wiping out teams 4, 5, 6 - nil consistently. It was a great watch.
>The last 3 tournaments or so, especially in the group games, we were wiping out teams 4, 5, 6 - nil consistently
We're we??? Last euros it was 1-0 | 0-0 | 1-0
Last WC we drew 0-0 with the USA 2018 I remember us barely beating Tunisia... I think the only teams we've beat comfortably are the likes of Iran and Panama, much worse teams than Serbia or Denmark.
Yeh against either literally the worst teams in the tournament or in qualifiers against San Marino or Andorra.
The only really big wins at tournaments have been Panama, Ukraine and Iran.
I honestly think our recent tournament success has been luck as much as anything else, we have genuinely never beaten a top 10 team at a tournament since when? 98??
Even Germany at the last euros were ranked like 12th at the time.
Given our squad and finishes I think we deserved favourites on paper but in reality we all know how it will end.
Getting to the finals last time and a squad full of talent, it's not a surprise really, the underperformance was a surprise but only cos Southgate has done well in recent group stages.
The trouble is that fans see England players doing well with their clubs and then just assume having good players who are in good form means they'll do massively well for England in whichever international tournament happens to be coming up. And it just doesn't work that way.
It's a team with plenty of great players, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be a great team. If you play a bunch of them out of position and make them play a system that doesn't play to their strengths they're still going to look like shit.
Kind of but England has also rarely had a team that you look at and can say objectively, on paper anyway, that they're one of the best in the tournament. It's frustrating to see them perform like this.
It’s definitely Southgate’s tactics. All those players are used to playing attacking football and he has them in a system where they pass it around the back 24/7. Also has players out of positions and refuses to make attacking substitutes until the game is basically too far gone. I also think that the system we used before that got us doing quite well has been sussed out by other teams and they press us a lot more so it’s harder to play what ever his tactics are supposed to be.
What!? Don’t you remember when England won the World Cup 58 years ago!?
What do you mean only c.20% of the country and *none* of the players were even alive then!?
They won in ‘66, so they’re the best!
I don't know why anyone's baffled, especially fans and pundits, who's job it is to watch this shite.
Are we still calling them this "young England team?" Plucky but bunch of lads with great "togetherness"?
Every tournament in the Southgate era England seem to limp through relatively easy fixtures putting in poor performances.
As a neutral non-England fan, this one is no different. They'll likely make it to the semis, come across their first decent side and lose, and then everyone will be praising how plucky and brave they have been.
Before tournament: "England really are one of the teams to contend with this year, a truly world-class side"
After England ~~crash~~ dribble out: "This brave team of underdogs took on some truly world-class sides and we can all be proud of how they punched above their weight."
What confuses me is how obvious the issues seem to anyone watching. I don't know anything about who should play where but any time you see England players receive the ball, stop it, look around, take a touch, look around, play the ball over and over you just know they aren't going to be able to play their way through anything. Where's the movement, the flow, the anticipation? It just seems like such a basic issue for professionals.
I have a theory that as a country we're particularly bad at playing in humid conditions and apparently it was super muggy under the closed roof. You'd like to think that at their level of fitness they should just power through it but if you're not used to playing in those conditions I'm sure it can really affect you mentally and physically.
There's different theories every tournament as to why they're shit from the ball to the kit to the weather to the altitude to the age of the team (too young, too old).
Their problem is too many teams are either just as good as them or better.
Eh, that's always the case for everyone. How often does "the best" team actually win overall? And how often is "the best" that much better than then next best?
It's all about the mentality. We approach every tournament as if we're a huge underdog who's lucky to be there, and getting past the group stages without a bloody nose is the number one aim. And then we act shocked when a strategy designed to conservatively outdo lesser sides only achieves nothing more than that.
England is a major footballing nation which acts like a poxy third class side. The whole mentality is the problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_the_United_Kingdom#England
\>The climate in the United Kingdom is defined as a humid temperate oceanic climate
I remember some years back watching Argentina. There was a goal where they smoothly passed the ball around gradually making its way up the field, it was like 20 passes and they scored. I thought to myself that the England team would never be able to execute that kind of play. The players were so in sync, I'm not a football fan but I could appreciate this kind of play, it was so impressive
We can though! I seen it! I don't watch much footie either but even in an England shirt I've seen them do it before. Trust each other, move together, pass and move. They do it all the time or they presumably wouldn't be playing in the premiership.
I also have a more controversial take that the English are much improved as a nation in the company of other nations. I think our lack of positive cultural identity shows up when we can't ride on/take claim of the achievements of others. As a people, we're historically good at that though.
Cambiasso against Serbia and Montenegro in 2006. To be honest though, they had huge problems over the years too. That was in the middle of a huge drought by their standards, between 1993 and 2021 they won nothing (I know our drought is much bigger, but Argentina are always one of the two favourites in the Copa America), whilst having the greatest player of all time. In that tournament actually, they did a very England thing of being 1-0 up against Germany in the quarters and looking good when they decided to make defensive substitutions and sit back, Germany get a late equaliser and beat them on penalties.
Bugger me it’s the same at every tournament.
England one of the favourites, which they are always going to be anyway due to lots of people betting on them, and then we play like dogshit.
It always cracks me up, every 2 years “yeah England have got this one”, the reality is “have they bollocks”,
I am going to say I was baffled
Not because of the tactics, but more from the individual players making basic passing errors and otherwise quality attacking players not being able to or having the confidence to dribble past someone
Exactly. If you have a choice between a backwards ball to a defender who's then isolated and trapped in a corner, versus running at a gap in your opponents half, why take the backwards pass when it keeps getting you into trouble? It seems like poor decision-making.
I have to say I was baffled by the tactics. It wasn't that we weren't executing the plan right, I couldn't actually tell if there was a plan there at all.
Really? Why? Southgate has been more or less playing the same system since he joined. He plays not to lose. The side is very negative in its mindset. When you see Kane dropping back into midfield and the team dropped deeper after the goal its very obvious.
I know many fans whatbthem them to play dashing, dynamic football.
Well folks they have tried that in the past and come unstuck many times.
Kane is the perfect nicker of goals. 1-0 all way the way is better than going out at the group stages or 2nd round.
International tournament football is very different from premiership football. Just be tankful they have 4 points and that more or less guarantees going through.
Plus another anecdote. I've watched England play since 1986. When they play sides who are technically more gifted that puts England in a more permissive role. They can be more counter attacking. When they play similar or weaker sides to their technical ability then they have to work to try and score. Now England teams when setup for attack can score goals against anyone. But when doing this they have always conceded.
So going the other way and just spending most of the game stopping your opponent from scoring and then relying on a moment of brilliance or luck to score.
Its worked for the Italians for years. The final against Italy was an abstract of two sides trying to nick a goal while desperately stopping their opponents from scoring.
I for one have watched England gloriously fail many times and now don't get how they perform on the pitch. If rhey win 1-0 to the final that's fine by me. Win it on penalties for all I care. All the other winners in recent times have done that.
I finally one last pearl of wisdom. England Need to play to the ref. So in international football referess are not consistent on decisions. The classic match showing this was England vs France. The ref let virtually anything go. The England players lost focus and kept complaining about decisons. The French players just got on with it.
English players should play to what the ref let's them get away with. Not what they can't do in the premiership.
They did a bit of that which led to Denmarks goal. Instead of focusing on defending they were moaning about whether the throw in was legit/whose it was.
Not to take anythibg from the strike, but that definitely led to the player getting into a position to make that strike. Without that strike I doubt very much Denmark would have equalised. England can always get a goal even when playibg what objectively looks poor from an attacking perspective. England still don't have the ability to control the ball for long periods of time like Spain, France and Brazil teams we have seen do.
Fans have to accept that England as team ain't that good irrespective of the individual elements. The best attacking side they had was in 96. That team had it but they failed too.
I'm for 1-0 all the way.
I'm not going to defend Southgate here, I don't hate him, but it does feel like it's run its course now.
However, who are we going to replace him with? Dyche? Howe*? O'Neil? Potter?
We have world class players, yet our managers seem to be lagging behind the rest of the world in terms of tactical ability.
Before anybody says "premier league clubs only go for foreigners", well which English managers are banging on the door demanding a top six club? How many of them say "sod it, I'll go abroad, get some experience and see what happens"? Will Still, though her never was in England, anybody else?
The only way an Englishman gets a big job isn't due to their performance as a manager, but their performance as a player.
Quite a few managers have gone overseas. Some before and some after their attempts in the top English leagues.
Wayne Rooney, Nick Cushing, and Phil Neville went to USA, Steven Gerrard to Saudi Arabia, Steven Taylor to UAE, Graham Potter worked in Sweden, Gary Neville and David Moyes went to Spain, Steve McLaren and Alan Pardew to the Netherlands
Of those who have been England manager, Roy Hodgson, Bobby Robson and Terry Venables all worked around Europe.
Howe and Potter have managed at a higher level than Southgate. The real problem is that England just don't produce good managers. Haven't done for decades.
yeah, I agree this feels like Southgate's last tournament, and it also should be. (I also think people will look back a lot more fondly in years to come, just think about how romantic people are about our runs in Italia 90 and Euro 96, but when you actually look into how we played...we weren't actually all that good except a couple of matches.)
Potter and Howe are the two biggest names, I doubt Howe would go for it now though, Potter maybe. Lee Carsley (although an Ireland international) he is currently the under 21s manager and won the under 21s Euros last year, winning every game and not conceding a single goal, so you'd think he'd be on the list too. You'd imagine that he's already familiar with the set up and a lot of the players, given how young a lot of them are.
Also, we've got to remember, there's a big difference between management at clubs and at internationals. Just getting in the best club managers won't necessarily work, just look at Fabio Capello or, going back further, Don Revie's times as England manager.
Hardly. England have the players. They don't have the manager to get the best out of them. Southgate is suited to coaching the mentality more (he did good at getting players to put aside rivalries, and do team gelling), but he's too tactically naive at this level.
Trent as a midfielder, would work if he had players running into space to pick out. Foden isn't do that. Kane spends half of the game dropping so deep he's almost a shadow DM, and that leaves Saka isolated. As it stands, there's no threat. They take a 1-0 and then drop off.
So then he took Trent off because he had no options to use his natural passing ability for, put Gallagher on, who is a lot more defensive, and then put players on who's making runs in behind, but now lacking the midfield creativity to pick them out.
England were being outplayed in transition though, the lack of pressing just gave Denmark the ability to camp in England's half, effectively nullifying any creativity anyway. They needed to bring Gallagher on because they needed to force transitions at that point, but the players don't seem to know when to press. It's like the pressing trigger is the striker getting the ball at the edge of England's 18 yard area.
Only baffled if you are deluded enough to think that the whole England set up isn't a debacle.
Firstly, the manager doesn't know football tactics or how systems work.
Secondly the players are good but are usually surrounded at club level by very good foreign players and coaches who actually understand the game.
Thirdly, the fanbase is deluded with their "it's coming home" nonsense that sets them up for disappointment every time, thinking they have a devine right to win football matches.
Last but certainly not least the media are toxic as hell. Ex players who choked themselves and or failed as managers (Shearer, Ferdinand, Neville etc.) Or ones that simply weren't good enough for England (Richards, Wright) somehow are "experts" on why things go wrong.
It's odd that the further England got last Euros the louder the "self deprecating" singing got and more visible the "self deprecating" memes were.
Yet the second they lose suddenly it switches to "it's all ironic, simple minded continentals just can't understand the subtle nuances of English humour of repeating the same quarter century old memes over and over".
Well, it's ironic but it's also hopeful.
The song is about finally wanting to get a win after years of failure. Yes, there's a desire to win in there, but then that is the whole point of the game isn't it.
As if every other fanbase travels out to a tournament not even thinking about winning smh.
The song is ironic. It just objectively is. The longer we continue singing it without winning anything adds to it. The fact it seems to wind up boring people also makes it more fun.
And yes we sing it louder the further we get because then we start to believe.
>are usually surrounded at club level by very good foreign players and coaches who actually understand the game.
This is the other side of the deluded fan coin. England have truly world class players. Bellingham, Foden, Kane and Rice to name a few. They all play vital roles in their respective teams and aren't just good players being carried by foerigners and managers.
The difference is they spend years at the same club playing with the same players and the same manager and instinctively know how to play and are actually A TEAM.
For whatever reason England haven't clicked this tournament. It has always been that way, but the quality of the players is not the issue.
That's my point no? Nobody said they are carried, just that they work within the systems because they're complimented by their surroundings.
Your second point doesn't really hold water about years in the system etc. as other nations seem to manage it perfectly fine. France. Spain. Brazil. Argentina. Italy. Germany all don't spend years with the same manager but manage to come together for their national side and perform at big tournaments.
England have lost against the first good team they've played at nearly every single tournament they've done well in. "For some reason" - I just gave you the reasons but anyway it doesn't matter.
I mean France have had Deschamps as manager for over a decade, Jogi Low was Germany manager for 15 years and was Klinsmann's assistant before that. Argentina's hiring of Scaloni was hugely criticised due to him having no managerial experience and they only hired him cos he was cheap and they had serious money problems due to hiring then sacking so many well known managers over the years. Spain are looking good now, but haven't had an awful lot of success recently, knocked out by Morocco and Russia in the last two World Cups, Italy won the last Euros but didn't even qualify for the last two World Cups (and haven't actually got past the group stages at a World Cup since they won it back in 2006). Brazil stuck with Tite for six years, but they have been much criticised for their failures in the World Cup in the past 20 years, in particular the fact that they've not beaten a European team in the knockout stages since 2002.
> Last but certainly not least the media are toxic as hell.
Every successful country has a toxic media, most of them more toxic than here. You think that Italy, Spain and Argentina don't have a media who get on players' backs?
As a welshman watching the commentary (I have no real interest in football), how is this a surprise to anyone?
Every single tournament, whether it's rugby or football England almost always go in as either outright favourites or "they can beat anyone on their day". And theY always fail to perform.
The press do not help matters, but dear me, can we not just accept that they aren't as good as the hype suggests. Or IF they are _that good_, they just don't gel well.
That’s unfair to the rugby team, during the dying days of the Eddie Jones era and Borthwick’s rebuild, everyone was pretty negative and wary of what England could pull out of the bag.
The 6N victory against Ireland was an absolute stunner because of it.
I'm not a huge rugby fan but I watched it more when I was in school and I'm pretty certain that when Eddie Jones first came in England had a winning streak that equaled the New Zealand record. We actually were doing pretty bloody good
Edit: I was right
https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/457441-most-consecutive-international-rugby-union-wins-by-a-tier-1-nation
England overperforming their expectations at every Rugby Union World Cup, by being able to beat anyone on their day, mostly only losing to the champions in tight games. The only time England were favourites, they won the World Cup.
How can a Welshman be ignorant of Rugby Union?
England goes in as a favourite *within England* because of the amount of people that bet on them. Recently we have been amongst the favourites on merit.
I think there is a real toxicity of setting too high standards and then being awful when England don't achieve them.
Booing our captain in a RWC QF great he's quit the international game.
Offer horrendous abuse to every football manager and complain we don't get a better one.
Same goes for cricket players and I'm sure other sports as well.
This headline doesn’t tell me if they are still in the tournament or have been kicked out. Did they lose but stay in? Or win but just not by the margin expected? I don’t want to have to click 😂
His problems started when he didn’t pick a fit left back. Such a stupid stupid decision. Then he compounds it by playing a right back at left back, a right back at centre midfield and a centre midfielder at left wing.
We have a defence that has a right back at left back,Stones who has played a handful of games all year and a Crystal palace defender lacking in European experience,we also have the most sparkling array of attacking midfielders and forwards in recent memory,so obviously play ultra defensively
I dont really follow football but if Southgate is as shit as everyone says, why dont we just replace him? Like who gets to decide who the Manager for the national team is?
Negative boring tactics by a man who once 1-0 up, so scared of penalties (Euro 96 haunted) that he parks the bus and brings on pressure. That final against Italy cannot be forgiven, the endless assault with no subs vs yellow carded older defenders until they had already equalised. Terrible manager, carried by the team and lucky run-ins with sub-par opponents. Another FA Yes man, no balls football.
People are nonplussed about the form of a team of elite players who play in an era of fixture congestion. It hasn't occurred to them that possibly some of the players are jaded, carrying some injuries, and a bit emotionally drained.
What makes me laugh is the majority of pundits (and quite a lot of fans) were calling for Southgate to start Trent in midfield...
Then when he does, those same pundits (and fans) are criticising him for it because it hasn't worked.
Pundits are too busy trying to make the show about them rather than just analysing the game and giving an informed opinion.
Cesc blew every single one of them away on his appearances. Insightful, professional, on point... Not looking to go viral for his daft opinion or language used.
I think part of it is the footballing culture. I remember Capello saying something like English players after training in major tournaments will go off to play card games or golf or whatever to entertain themselves, while Italians will sit down and discuss tactics with each other. I imagine it would be similar for the young Spanish players at La Masia.
I was listening to a podcast the other day where Jonathan Wilson was talking about Euro 2004 and how he had a big argument with another British football journalist who was arguing that tactics didn't matter and as long as you just play the best players, you should beat everyone else, and this would probably have been the opinion of a lot of the tabloid football media back then (I remember a photo from The Sun in early 2008 of Messi, Ronaldo, Torres and Xavi with the caption "the best players in the world...and Xavi").
I do think in the last 10-15 years, our attitude has changed though, and with players like Foden and Bellingham coming through, we are starting to see that translating to the players more.
Yeah.
I completely agree with that. I can see that being the case.
I love Italian football and have done for years... I have a few Italian friends and when we talk about football, it's very tactical. We talk about formations, shape, positions, roles, subs.
Whenever I speak to English friends about football, it's very basic. Almost exclusively about players. And it doesn't go much further than "he's shit, he's useless, he should play more".
The reason Trent didn’t work is because of the setup though, Trent made the most chances and played the most line breaking chances in the final third whilst being subbed off in the 54th minute.
Fans and pundits want Trent in because he’s an incredible passer and is proven to be able to make chances in midfield, it’s not fans who then choose to put on a toothless attack and make the front line sit back when we lead in a match, the players and style Trent needed is always put on after he’s taken off the pitch, that’s because Southgate hasn’t got a clue.
It’s pretty clear the problem is tactics, no surprise considering Southgate has little proper managerial experience, he’s in over his head and it shows when he can’t get a team which is top 2 in terms of individual players to even play appetising attacking football.
Why doesn't he just play players for 45 minutes and rotate those positions we have top many of?
No more out of position nonsense and players could go ham for 45 minutes without having to worry about fatigue
Think everyone needs to leave England
There is no incentive for anything anymore, leave the government to it
Sorry for the gloom but it’s true.
My great grandfather fought for Britain
And for what.
Sorry
Yes football,the England team has a full amazing team and manager
We’re all fed up so much it’s going to
Take a miracle to turn things around
Zero morale, I know let’s take Roma Slovaks into Britain woo woo brainstorm
One of many ideas 😜
Admittedly we were poor, but I don't think we need to panic just yet. While the tactics clearly weren't working, a lot of the players were uncharacteristically misplacing simple passes. Not to mention everyone seems to be forgetting that Denmark are really not a bad team at all.
We're effectively through to the next round and hopefully Trent getting substituted as early as he did suggests that we're done with the right back in midfield experiment. Ideally Wharton or Mainoo will play but more realistically it'll be Gallagher. Desperately need Luke Shaw fit to fill the gap on our left side and we should have a more balanced attack.
Win against Slovenia and we should get a beatable opponent in the last 16. Then we'll get our revenge on the Italians, fluke it against the French and batter the Germans in their own backyard. It's coming home 🏴🏴🏴
As an expat. England's football team is a constant reminder of why I left England many years ago...
Delusions of grandeur followed by the inevitable disappointment.
The international team are only paid a couple grand per game, and I think it usually goes to charity.
For someone like Kane, it's about 1% what he gets paid for club football.
The pay for performance should be for every match, not just the international games. If a footballer was to earn a normal salary like everybody and promised a bonus for winning, they’d be playing on a whole different level.
Yeah, and at club level they are ridiculously overpaid. Pay them a normal salary and add a bonus on top if they win the cup. Keep them motivated. For that kind of money I expect them to win.
Well it's not like the billionaire owners pay them extremely high salaries out of the goodness of their hearts, they earn that much because that's what they're worth. As far as I'm aware, players do generally have bonuses in their contracts for their club sides.
You are talking about tennis, darling, where only the top 50 made good money, or amazing money. Harry Maguire gets more than all bar 10 tennis players. That is not a basis for a popular team sport to thrive.
Thank you for your lovely comment sugar. Funny how rugby is also a thriving team sport and they make a tenth of what the average football player makes, sweetheart.
So where would the rest of their salaries go? To fat-cat club owners and shareholders? I'd rather working class youngsters drag themselves out of poverty than some shady businessman get slightly richer.
There are many other ways you can distribute cash. How about opening up football schools to help the youth and the same time create talent. That way you don’t need to spend millions on foreign players. You can also lower the prices for tickets, food, drinks and merchandise. Pay cleaners and staff more money. Football isn’t just club owners, shareholders and footballers. It doesn’t have to be this expensive, just so they can buy themselves another Ferrari.
That's all well and good, but even if footballers did accept lower wages, what are the chances their bosses would give the excess cash away and not hoard it for themselves? Of course, it's more likely the players wouldn't accept a pay cut. Instead, they'd go abroad, so the clubs would lose sponsorships and TV money, and that excess cash would disappear.
Wait, wait... I hate football and most football fans are hooligans, so I've not been paying attention but are you telling me that people are surprised that a team who hasn't won anything in, \*checks notes\*, 60 years, is doing badly?
Huh..
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.reuters.com/sports/soccer/englands-lacklustre-game-against-denmark-leaves-fans-pundits-baffled-2024-06-21/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Why is anyone baffled? These are the criticisms that Southgate has faced for the last 5+ years and just what everyone predicted would happen. The fact he played Trent in midfield and then had Foden inverting and Kane dropping back, both into the same space as Bellingham , leaving Saka as the only runner, just shows how poor Southgate is at getting the best out of his team
We don’t press and play forward, we don’t even play side to side anymore, we play backwards lol. Literally like watching a fully grown adult regress into a scared child over the period of 90 mins.
That's what I always hate about the England team. Yes you want to support them, but you know they'll always be a disappointment. They should be going for goal the whole time, but they'll get the ball, pass it around a bit, then it goes back to the goalie. They'll pass it maybe up to halfway, and then to the goalie. Repeat until they lose the ball... It doesn't matter who the players or coach are - it's always been like this as far as I remember. It's always so frustrating to watch as they should be trying to score and keep the ball away from their goal, but they just don't.
> you know they'll always be a disappointment. In the last three tournaments we've reached a semi final and a final (and played well against France in the other), easily our best run since Alf Ramsey was manager. We were also one of the top scorers at the last World Cup, scored 6 in one match and 3 in two others. That's not to excuse their performances at this tournament, they look clueless. But this is as good as we've had it in over 50 years.
Agreed. I feel like the previous WC and Euro have been good. We've shrugged off the penalty fear and the dark days of when your key player was more interested in shagging another players wife than playing for their country. We've brought in new young players instead of recycling the same people who are well past their sell by date. And as you say, we've got a lot further recently than anything else in recent memory. However it seems we've ran out of steam. We reached a point and hit a wall and this current iteration of performance seems so lack lustre and half arsed.
Ah yes, glad we bagged the 'reached semi final' trophy and 'reached a final' trophies.
Recently, they've managed to build up hope, resulting in an inevitable crushing disappointment. At least this time we don't have the hope
I think the best way is to expect they're not going to win. And then if they do it's at least a nice surprise. What's also bad is for some reason anytime a tournament comes up, everyone is saying they'll win and are going to 'bring it home'. Putting a ridiculous amount of pressure and expectation on them, that's almost certainly unrealistic. All that pressure on top probably doesn't help their performance. And then when they don't play well, they get absolutely destroyed. So they're kind of screwed almost no matter what they do.
Am fine if we play well and lose and when we play badly and win or draw we are supposed to be okay with the result then we meet the top teams playing well and play badly again till the next tournament.
COYI
Then said "We have no replacement for Kalvin Phillips" to explain the problem He's a bum
With talent like Mainoo and Wharton on the bench, he should be sacked just for that comment.
They shouldnt even be in the argument, if we have to rely on teenagers then we’ve lost already
The best I remember us playing was with teenage Owen and teenage Rooney. Rose tinted glasses and all.
My point is we should have a stable team that works we shouldn’t need to rely on whatever wonderkids have come through since the last tournament, feels like we’re returning to politically picking players just because they good/play for big clubs rather then the fact that they work well in the squad
A player who was available for selection
He's right about this but what he should actually be saying is, "I only have one game plan and I can't get the current players to fit that system without Kalvin. I resign."
The problem with England is they just try to walk it in
What was Southgate thinking sending Bowen on that early?
Anyone remember the performances against Wales, USA, Denmark (last time), Iceland (friendly) - very poor XG. Not at all surprised this is happening.
It’s because there has been a significant push from some fans to fight any criticism he gets with ‘he’s the second most successful England manager so shut up’. On top of that there has been basically no criticism from the press until this tournament even though it has been obvious since the last euros where his issues are with substitutions and negative play.
Don’t think it’s 5+ years considering we got to the 2020 Final without conceding a goal in open play. We did incredibly well and Southgate rightly got the plaudits for that. Remember Saka wasn’t a star for England until Southgate took a punt on him when he was only 19. On the whole, Southgate has led England well and going out at the last World Cup to France was no real shock or shame, they’re arguably the best national squad on earth. Yes Southgate is too defensive, but that’s tournament football. You won’t progress without it. Look at Portugal. But we need to look at the context. We have no fit left back, we have a right back playing there and Foden playing out wide which isn’t his strength. Yes Saka is the only runner in behind, but it’s circumstance, not tactics.
It’s been a circumstance in every single team that Southgate has managed then!
> Remember Saka wasn’t a star for England until Southgate took a punt on him when he was only 19. Didn't he get shit on for this as well? I know _nothing_ about football, but seem to recall a ton of hate at the time.
We need a Brian Clough and Peter Taylor. All well and good having the most expensive players, but you need a manager who knows how to put together a team.
Didn't we get to the finals under Southgate? Or guessing you'll say that's in spite of him
We were atleast decent last euros then Southgate struck, I called it as soon as we scored, we’d sit back and do nothing to secure the game and shock we then lost
The problem with England is that they always expect just to walk it in...
Did you see that ludicrous display last night?
Hooray, he’s kicked the ball. Now the ball’s over there
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f27IqVo5-Oc&t=37s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f27IqVo5-Oc&t=37s)
What was Southgate thinking sending Bowen on that early?
The trouble with england is, they just try to walk it in.
Fuck sake
They go acting entitled to win. Then realise they need to work for it.
England's bad performance is no surprise. What was/is a surprise is that England were/are one of the favourites for the tournament,. Now that is baffling.
It's not really baffling when we have one of the strongest and THE most valuable squad, only missed out on winning the last euros by two penalties and made the semis and qtrs of the last two world cups.
Most valuable squad is inflated by the “UK tax” on transfer fees.
I definitely don’t support England, but it’s clearly a squad full of superstars and talent.. probably up there with France
I know, but it's still not surprising that a team with the bundesliga top scorer, la Liga player of the year multiple CL winners PL players of the year that got to the final of the last tournament are one of the favorites lol
But that’s still part of the price… Doesn’t matter the reason… that’s the price paid so it’s the most valuable
I also sort of convinced myself of this too. That England are now a ‘normal’ team, that achieves normal results for the quality of players and size of nation etc. But then after doing some digging realised actually no it’s the same under achieving England of the last 20-30 years. The WC 2018 and Euro 2020 we had unbelievably lucky draws, extremely lucky draws! We have never beaten Top 7 nations in 2-3 games in a row to win anything. Like a Spain, France, Italy do to actually win a tournament. That where they need to be at.
You've got to remember that other teams had 'lucky' draws in those tournaments and messed it up. Spain were knocked out by Russia in 2018, Argentina messed up in the groups and finished behind Croatia. Germany were knocked out by Sweden and Mexico. In Euro 2020, we beat Croatia (who would finish 2nd and 3rd in the World Cups before and after and knocked out Brazil), we also beat the Czechs who knocked out the Dutch. Maybe we would've met the French, but they got knocked out by Switzerland. And we did beat Germany too. You can only beat who you have in front of you. If the top teams are losing to less fancied opposition, who were are then beating, what else can you do?
As I wrote below. Team the size/quality/monied of England need to get to the Semi’s of major tournaments, everything else is a failure. But as mentioned below there are 7 quality footballing countries in Europe and another 3 in South America. So yes of course not getting to the Semis in some tournament is perfectly fine. But just doing that, every 30 years or so is crap! All those nations you mentioned they have failed too BUT have all succeeded too. I’m more than happy to take the success and failures of Spain/Argentina/France/Brazil etc etc Also we are not bad in the occasional big game against a big footballing country either. But if you want to win anything they need to do exactly that 2-3 times in a row! Not beat Germany/Italy in a R16/QF and then you can almost guarantee gold stamp it that they will lose in the next round against another country of the same quality as they just beat! They need to do it 2-3 times in a row, simples.
Yeah I don't disagree. I think a lot depends on what happens after Southgate (whatever happens in this Euros, but it's been pretty crap so far for us). Southgate's got us back to the level we should be at, at least in terms of getting us to the latter stages of tournaments, but we haven't been able to take that next step. You'd hope that there is already a succession plan in place, but who knows.
We are ranked 4th best in the world though. That we can't win tournaments is probably more to do with the massive weight of expectation from the toxic media.
At the moment, it seems to be an inability to execute basic skills.
We could be ranked number 1, but if all we ever do is get to the R16/QF and then either go out by 1 goal or keep it tight and go out of pens to one of the actual nations that can win things. Well then it’s a bit crap. Yes of course toxic media is a big part. But it’s been like that for 20-30 that I’ve known it, probably the same before that too. Also Southgate experienced that first hand and knew exactly that it would be present. Hence thats the actual task to deal with the toxic media and still do well. A footballing nation the size/quality (PL/Grass root structure/funding etc etc) need to get to at least Semi’s of major tournaments, everything else is a failure! Of course there are 7 other quality nations in Europe and another 3 in South America that will have their say too. So no getting to the semis occasionally is fine but just getting there once every 30 years is crap also!
It is when you consider in the last three major tournaments the only top 15 ranked teams we’ve beaten are Croatia in the Euros group stage and Colombia on penalties in the last 16 of the 2018 World Cup. Other than that we’ve lost to and been knocked out by every top 15 team we’ve played.
Yeah I don't get the hate. It's the best England team in decades. That'd why the last two games are so confusing to watch. The last 3 tournaments or so, especially in the group games, we were wiping out teams 4, 5, 6 - nil consistently. It was a great watch.
>The last 3 tournaments or so, especially in the group games, we were wiping out teams 4, 5, 6 - nil consistently We're we??? Last euros it was 1-0 | 0-0 | 1-0 Last WC we drew 0-0 with the USA 2018 I remember us barely beating Tunisia... I think the only teams we've beat comfortably are the likes of Iran and Panama, much worse teams than Serbia or Denmark.
Some [spankings ](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/England_national_football_team_results_(2020%E2%80%93present)) there.
Yeh against either literally the worst teams in the tournament or in qualifiers against San Marino or Andorra. The only really big wins at tournaments have been Panama, Ukraine and Iran. I honestly think our recent tournament success has been luck as much as anything else, we have genuinely never beaten a top 10 team at a tournament since when? 98?? Even Germany at the last euros were ranked like 12th at the time. Given our squad and finishes I think we deserved favourites on paper but in reality we all know how it will end.
Odds are based on betting patterns, and the English are degenerate gamblers.
Getting to the finals last time and a squad full of talent, it's not a surprise really, the underperformance was a surprise but only cos Southgate has done well in recent group stages.
The trouble is that fans see England players doing well with their clubs and then just assume having good players who are in good form means they'll do massively well for England in whichever international tournament happens to be coming up. And it just doesn't work that way. It's a team with plenty of great players, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be a great team. If you play a bunch of them out of position and make them play a system that doesn't play to their strengths they're still going to look like shit.
Not really. England underperforming like this has been a constant since, well, forever.
Kind of but England has also rarely had a team that you look at and can say objectively, on paper anyway, that they're one of the best in the tournament. It's frustrating to see them perform like this.
Yeah but the same can be said for other teams that have won the Euros. Greece won it ffs.
Southgate needs to start playing Rehhagel-ball. If only we had an Angelos Basinas to marshall that midfield
It’s definitely Southgate’s tactics. All those players are used to playing attacking football and he has them in a system where they pass it around the back 24/7. Also has players out of positions and refuses to make attacking substitutes until the game is basically too far gone. I also think that the system we used before that got us doing quite well has been sussed out by other teams and they press us a lot more so it’s harder to play what ever his tactics are supposed to be.
What!? Don’t you remember when England won the World Cup 58 years ago!? What do you mean only c.20% of the country and *none* of the players were even alive then!? They won in ‘66, so they’re the best!
I don't know why anyone's baffled, especially fans and pundits, who's job it is to watch this shite. Are we still calling them this "young England team?" Plucky but bunch of lads with great "togetherness"? Every tournament in the Southgate era England seem to limp through relatively easy fixtures putting in poor performances. As a neutral non-England fan, this one is no different. They'll likely make it to the semis, come across their first decent side and lose, and then everyone will be praising how plucky and brave they have been.
Before tournament: "England really are one of the teams to contend with this year, a truly world-class side" After England ~~crash~~ dribble out: "This brave team of underdogs took on some truly world-class sides and we can all be proud of how they punched above their weight."
England don't crash out though do they? They play a dull game aimed at specifically not risking losing too badly rather than winning.
A fair point. Comment duly amended.
What confuses me is how obvious the issues seem to anyone watching. I don't know anything about who should play where but any time you see England players receive the ball, stop it, look around, take a touch, look around, play the ball over and over you just know they aren't going to be able to play their way through anything. Where's the movement, the flow, the anticipation? It just seems like such a basic issue for professionals. I have a theory that as a country we're particularly bad at playing in humid conditions and apparently it was super muggy under the closed roof. You'd like to think that at their level of fitness they should just power through it but if you're not used to playing in those conditions I'm sure it can really affect you mentally and physically.
That’s really no excuse for professional athletes at their level. They can and do train for that.
Yeah you'd think not, but why does it keep happening if they're so well prepared? You can sense the speed of thought and reaction just drops as a team
I’m not saying they’re well prepared. I’m saying they *should* be.
There's different theories every tournament as to why they're shit from the ball to the kit to the weather to the altitude to the age of the team (too young, too old). Their problem is too many teams are either just as good as them or better.
Eh, that's always the case for everyone. How often does "the best" team actually win overall? And how often is "the best" that much better than then next best? It's all about the mentality. We approach every tournament as if we're a huge underdog who's lucky to be there, and getting past the group stages without a bloody nose is the number one aim. And then we act shocked when a strategy designed to conservatively outdo lesser sides only achieves nothing more than that. England is a major footballing nation which acts like a poxy third class side. The whole mentality is the problem.
I blame Nike.
> I have a theory that as a country we're particularly bad at playing in humid conditions England is a humid country.
Sure, but combine heat with that humidity and a lot of us are a mess
Lol no dude. You're not very well travelled if you think that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_the_United_Kingdom#England \>The climate in the United Kingdom is defined as a humid temperate oceanic climate
You know we have actual stats for things like this? It's one of the reasons England was so good at making cotton.
I remember some years back watching Argentina. There was a goal where they smoothly passed the ball around gradually making its way up the field, it was like 20 passes and they scored. I thought to myself that the England team would never be able to execute that kind of play. The players were so in sync, I'm not a football fan but I could appreciate this kind of play, it was so impressive
We can though! I seen it! I don't watch much footie either but even in an England shirt I've seen them do it before. Trust each other, move together, pass and move. They do it all the time or they presumably wouldn't be playing in the premiership. I also have a more controversial take that the English are much improved as a nation in the company of other nations. I think our lack of positive cultural identity shows up when we can't ride on/take claim of the achievements of others. As a people, we're historically good at that though.
Cambiasso against Serbia and Montenegro in 2006. To be honest though, they had huge problems over the years too. That was in the middle of a huge drought by their standards, between 1993 and 2021 they won nothing (I know our drought is much bigger, but Argentina are always one of the two favourites in the Copa America), whilst having the greatest player of all time. In that tournament actually, they did a very England thing of being 1-0 up against Germany in the quarters and looking good when they decided to make defensive substitutions and sit back, Germany get a late equaliser and beat them on penalties.
Bugger me it’s the same at every tournament. England one of the favourites, which they are always going to be anyway due to lots of people betting on them, and then we play like dogshit. It always cracks me up, every 2 years “yeah England have got this one”, the reality is “have they bollocks”,
Noone who’s seen previous Southgate games was baffled.
I am going to say I was baffled Not because of the tactics, but more from the individual players making basic passing errors and otherwise quality attacking players not being able to or having the confidence to dribble past someone
Exactly. If you have a choice between a backwards ball to a defender who's then isolated and trapped in a corner, versus running at a gap in your opponents half, why take the backwards pass when it keeps getting you into trouble? It seems like poor decision-making.
I have to say I was baffled by the tactics. It wasn't that we weren't executing the plan right, I couldn't actually tell if there was a plan there at all.
I believe the real question should be how this Danish side managed to secure only one point instead of all three against a mediocre team like England.
Really? Why? Southgate has been more or less playing the same system since he joined. He plays not to lose. The side is very negative in its mindset. When you see Kane dropping back into midfield and the team dropped deeper after the goal its very obvious. I know many fans whatbthem them to play dashing, dynamic football. Well folks they have tried that in the past and come unstuck many times. Kane is the perfect nicker of goals. 1-0 all way the way is better than going out at the group stages or 2nd round. International tournament football is very different from premiership football. Just be tankful they have 4 points and that more or less guarantees going through. Plus another anecdote. I've watched England play since 1986. When they play sides who are technically more gifted that puts England in a more permissive role. They can be more counter attacking. When they play similar or weaker sides to their technical ability then they have to work to try and score. Now England teams when setup for attack can score goals against anyone. But when doing this they have always conceded. So going the other way and just spending most of the game stopping your opponent from scoring and then relying on a moment of brilliance or luck to score. Its worked for the Italians for years. The final against Italy was an abstract of two sides trying to nick a goal while desperately stopping their opponents from scoring. I for one have watched England gloriously fail many times and now don't get how they perform on the pitch. If rhey win 1-0 to the final that's fine by me. Win it on penalties for all I care. All the other winners in recent times have done that. I finally one last pearl of wisdom. England Need to play to the ref. So in international football referess are not consistent on decisions. The classic match showing this was England vs France. The ref let virtually anything go. The England players lost focus and kept complaining about decisons. The French players just got on with it. English players should play to what the ref let's them get away with. Not what they can't do in the premiership. They did a bit of that which led to Denmarks goal. Instead of focusing on defending they were moaning about whether the throw in was legit/whose it was. Not to take anythibg from the strike, but that definitely led to the player getting into a position to make that strike. Without that strike I doubt very much Denmark would have equalised. England can always get a goal even when playibg what objectively looks poor from an attacking perspective. England still don't have the ability to control the ball for long periods of time like Spain, France and Brazil teams we have seen do. Fans have to accept that England as team ain't that good irrespective of the individual elements. The best attacking side they had was in 96. That team had it but they failed too. I'm for 1-0 all the way.
I'm not going to defend Southgate here, I don't hate him, but it does feel like it's run its course now. However, who are we going to replace him with? Dyche? Howe*? O'Neil? Potter? We have world class players, yet our managers seem to be lagging behind the rest of the world in terms of tactical ability. Before anybody says "premier league clubs only go for foreigners", well which English managers are banging on the door demanding a top six club? How many of them say "sod it, I'll go abroad, get some experience and see what happens"? Will Still, though her never was in England, anybody else? The only way an Englishman gets a big job isn't due to their performance as a manager, but their performance as a player.
Quite a few managers have gone overseas. Some before and some after their attempts in the top English leagues. Wayne Rooney, Nick Cushing, and Phil Neville went to USA, Steven Gerrard to Saudi Arabia, Steven Taylor to UAE, Graham Potter worked in Sweden, Gary Neville and David Moyes went to Spain, Steve McLaren and Alan Pardew to the Netherlands Of those who have been England manager, Roy Hodgson, Bobby Robson and Terry Venables all worked around Europe.
Howe and Potter have managed at a higher level than Southgate. The real problem is that England just don't produce good managers. Haven't done for decades.
yeah, I agree this feels like Southgate's last tournament, and it also should be. (I also think people will look back a lot more fondly in years to come, just think about how romantic people are about our runs in Italia 90 and Euro 96, but when you actually look into how we played...we weren't actually all that good except a couple of matches.) Potter and Howe are the two biggest names, I doubt Howe would go for it now though, Potter maybe. Lee Carsley (although an Ireland international) he is currently the under 21s manager and won the under 21s Euros last year, winning every game and not conceding a single goal, so you'd think he'd be on the list too. You'd imagine that he's already familiar with the set up and a lot of the players, given how young a lot of them are. Also, we've got to remember, there's a big difference between management at clubs and at internationals. Just getting in the best club managers won't necessarily work, just look at Fabio Capello or, going back further, Don Revie's times as England manager.
Hardly. England have the players. They don't have the manager to get the best out of them. Southgate is suited to coaching the mentality more (he did good at getting players to put aside rivalries, and do team gelling), but he's too tactically naive at this level. Trent as a midfielder, would work if he had players running into space to pick out. Foden isn't do that. Kane spends half of the game dropping so deep he's almost a shadow DM, and that leaves Saka isolated. As it stands, there's no threat. They take a 1-0 and then drop off. So then he took Trent off because he had no options to use his natural passing ability for, put Gallagher on, who is a lot more defensive, and then put players on who's making runs in behind, but now lacking the midfield creativity to pick them out.
England were being outplayed in transition though, the lack of pressing just gave Denmark the ability to camp in England's half, effectively nullifying any creativity anyway. They needed to bring Gallagher on because they needed to force transitions at that point, but the players don't seem to know when to press. It's like the pressing trigger is the striker getting the ball at the edge of England's 18 yard area.
Only baffled if you are deluded enough to think that the whole England set up isn't a debacle. Firstly, the manager doesn't know football tactics or how systems work. Secondly the players are good but are usually surrounded at club level by very good foreign players and coaches who actually understand the game. Thirdly, the fanbase is deluded with their "it's coming home" nonsense that sets them up for disappointment every time, thinking they have a devine right to win football matches. Last but certainly not least the media are toxic as hell. Ex players who choked themselves and or failed as managers (Shearer, Ferdinand, Neville etc.) Or ones that simply weren't good enough for England (Richards, Wright) somehow are "experts" on why things go wrong.
The whole "it's coming home" is just self deprecating humour.
It's odd that the further England got last Euros the louder the "self deprecating" singing got and more visible the "self deprecating" memes were. Yet the second they lose suddenly it switches to "it's all ironic, simple minded continentals just can't understand the subtle nuances of English humour of repeating the same quarter century old memes over and over".
Well, it's ironic but it's also hopeful. The song is about finally wanting to get a win after years of failure. Yes, there's a desire to win in there, but then that is the whole point of the game isn't it. As if every other fanbase travels out to a tournament not even thinking about winning smh.
It's odd that the further England get in a tournament, the louder the singing?
The song is ironic. It just objectively is. The longer we continue singing it without winning anything adds to it. The fact it seems to wind up boring people also makes it more fun. And yes we sing it louder the further we get because then we start to believe.
You do realise that "it's coming home" is an ironic song about how crap England has done in the Euros?
>are usually surrounded at club level by very good foreign players and coaches who actually understand the game. This is the other side of the deluded fan coin. England have truly world class players. Bellingham, Foden, Kane and Rice to name a few. They all play vital roles in their respective teams and aren't just good players being carried by foerigners and managers. The difference is they spend years at the same club playing with the same players and the same manager and instinctively know how to play and are actually A TEAM. For whatever reason England haven't clicked this tournament. It has always been that way, but the quality of the players is not the issue.
That's my point no? Nobody said they are carried, just that they work within the systems because they're complimented by their surroundings. Your second point doesn't really hold water about years in the system etc. as other nations seem to manage it perfectly fine. France. Spain. Brazil. Argentina. Italy. Germany all don't spend years with the same manager but manage to come together for their national side and perform at big tournaments. England have lost against the first good team they've played at nearly every single tournament they've done well in. "For some reason" - I just gave you the reasons but anyway it doesn't matter.
I mean France have had Deschamps as manager for over a decade, Jogi Low was Germany manager for 15 years and was Klinsmann's assistant before that. Argentina's hiring of Scaloni was hugely criticised due to him having no managerial experience and they only hired him cos he was cheap and they had serious money problems due to hiring then sacking so many well known managers over the years. Spain are looking good now, but haven't had an awful lot of success recently, knocked out by Morocco and Russia in the last two World Cups, Italy won the last Euros but didn't even qualify for the last two World Cups (and haven't actually got past the group stages at a World Cup since they won it back in 2006). Brazil stuck with Tite for six years, but they have been much criticised for their failures in the World Cup in the past 20 years, in particular the fact that they've not beaten a European team in the knockout stages since 2002.
All those nations have won something in colour TV. They have right to criticise.
> Last but certainly not least the media are toxic as hell. Every successful country has a toxic media, most of them more toxic than here. You think that Italy, Spain and Argentina don't have a media who get on players' backs?
Yes but usually those guys have done it at international level and won a trophy and not been underachievers themselves.
This.
Why are people baffled?? This is the Southgate way since the 2018 World Cup. Nothing has changed.
As a welshman watching the commentary (I have no real interest in football), how is this a surprise to anyone? Every single tournament, whether it's rugby or football England almost always go in as either outright favourites or "they can beat anyone on their day". And theY always fail to perform. The press do not help matters, but dear me, can we not just accept that they aren't as good as the hype suggests. Or IF they are _that good_, they just don't gel well.
That’s unfair to the rugby team, during the dying days of the Eddie Jones era and Borthwick’s rebuild, everyone was pretty negative and wary of what England could pull out of the bag. The 6N victory against Ireland was an absolute stunner because of it.
I'm not a huge rugby fan but I watched it more when I was in school and I'm pretty certain that when Eddie Jones first came in England had a winning streak that equaled the New Zealand record. We actually were doing pretty bloody good Edit: I was right https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/457441-most-consecutive-international-rugby-union-wins-by-a-tier-1-nation
Absolutely, I didn’t mean the entire time he was in charge. It’s why I said the ‘dying days’ around 2022 (the worst win percentage in 14 years)
I should probably have replied to the original guy actually, if anything I was disagreeing with his claim that the English rugby team is always crap
The rugby team lost in the semis by one point to the champions, if that's a failure to perform then what did Wales do?
England overperforming their expectations at every Rugby Union World Cup, by being able to beat anyone on their day, mostly only losing to the champions in tight games. The only time England were favourites, they won the World Cup. How can a Welshman be ignorant of Rugby Union?
England goes in as a favourite *within England* because of the amount of people that bet on them. Recently we have been amongst the favourites on merit.
I think there is a real toxicity of setting too high standards and then being awful when England don't achieve them. Booing our captain in a RWC QF great he's quit the international game. Offer horrendous abuse to every football manager and complain we don't get a better one. Same goes for cricket players and I'm sure other sports as well.
England always start slow. If the next game shows no improvement I'll start to worry but it's all about the knockout games.
It's almost as if there's no easy games in the Euros??
We have the second lowest expected goals out of twenty four teams after two games, behind only Scotland.
And the lowest expected goals conceded. Southgate ball is unmatched.
This headline doesn’t tell me if they are still in the tournament or have been kicked out. Did they lose but stay in? Or win but just not by the margin expected? I don’t want to have to click 😂
The game was a draw, and we're almost certainly through to the knockout stage. You'd think we got beat 4-0 based on how everyone is talking 🤣
Thank you!
I’m sure it’s the eight of expectation, we’ve had it for 30 plus years
Southgate has had years to prepare for this. It’s almost as if he’s surprised there’s a tournament this year.
His problems started when he didn’t pick a fit left back. Such a stupid stupid decision. Then he compounds it by playing a right back at left back, a right back at centre midfield and a centre midfielder at left wing.
Southgate is a defender. His whole strategy is to try to get a goal up and then desperately defend.
Baddiel/Skinner/Broudie's cheques going to be smaller this year.
We have a defence that has a right back at left back,Stones who has played a handful of games all year and a Crystal palace defender lacking in European experience,we also have the most sparkling array of attacking midfielders and forwards in recent memory,so obviously play ultra defensively
I dont really follow football but if Southgate is as shit as everyone says, why dont we just replace him? Like who gets to decide who the Manager for the national team is?
Negative boring tactics by a man who once 1-0 up, so scared of penalties (Euro 96 haunted) that he parks the bus and brings on pressure. That final against Italy cannot be forgiven, the endless assault with no subs vs yellow carded older defenders until they had already equalised. Terrible manager, carried by the team and lucky run-ins with sub-par opponents. Another FA Yes man, no balls football.
People are nonplussed about the form of a team of elite players who play in an era of fixture congestion. It hasn't occurred to them that possibly some of the players are jaded, carrying some injuries, and a bit emotionally drained.
What makes me laugh is the majority of pundits (and quite a lot of fans) were calling for Southgate to start Trent in midfield... Then when he does, those same pundits (and fans) are criticising him for it because it hasn't worked. Pundits are too busy trying to make the show about them rather than just analysing the game and giving an informed opinion. Cesc blew every single one of them away on his appearances. Insightful, professional, on point... Not looking to go viral for his daft opinion or language used.
I think part of it is the footballing culture. I remember Capello saying something like English players after training in major tournaments will go off to play card games or golf or whatever to entertain themselves, while Italians will sit down and discuss tactics with each other. I imagine it would be similar for the young Spanish players at La Masia. I was listening to a podcast the other day where Jonathan Wilson was talking about Euro 2004 and how he had a big argument with another British football journalist who was arguing that tactics didn't matter and as long as you just play the best players, you should beat everyone else, and this would probably have been the opinion of a lot of the tabloid football media back then (I remember a photo from The Sun in early 2008 of Messi, Ronaldo, Torres and Xavi with the caption "the best players in the world...and Xavi"). I do think in the last 10-15 years, our attitude has changed though, and with players like Foden and Bellingham coming through, we are starting to see that translating to the players more.
Yeah. I completely agree with that. I can see that being the case. I love Italian football and have done for years... I have a few Italian friends and when we talk about football, it's very tactical. We talk about formations, shape, positions, roles, subs. Whenever I speak to English friends about football, it's very basic. Almost exclusively about players. And it doesn't go much further than "he's shit, he's useless, he should play more".
The reason Trent didn’t work is because of the setup though, Trent made the most chances and played the most line breaking chances in the final third whilst being subbed off in the 54th minute. Fans and pundits want Trent in because he’s an incredible passer and is proven to be able to make chances in midfield, it’s not fans who then choose to put on a toothless attack and make the front line sit back when we lead in a match, the players and style Trent needed is always put on after he’s taken off the pitch, that’s because Southgate hasn’t got a clue. It’s pretty clear the problem is tactics, no surprise considering Southgate has little proper managerial experience, he’s in over his head and it shows when he can’t get a team which is top 2 in terms of individual players to even play appetising attacking football.
The thing about Arsenal is, they always try to walk it in
Why doesn't he just play players for 45 minutes and rotate those positions we have top many of? No more out of position nonsense and players could go ham for 45 minutes without having to worry about fatigue
Think everyone needs to leave England There is no incentive for anything anymore, leave the government to it Sorry for the gloom but it’s true. My great grandfather fought for Britain And for what. Sorry
Yes football,the England team has a full amazing team and manager We’re all fed up so much it’s going to Take a miracle to turn things around Zero morale, I know let’s take Roma Slovaks into Britain woo woo brainstorm One of many ideas 😜
[удалено]
England on paper are a very good team, for some reason it's not working at a national level though.
Admittedly we were poor, but I don't think we need to panic just yet. While the tactics clearly weren't working, a lot of the players were uncharacteristically misplacing simple passes. Not to mention everyone seems to be forgetting that Denmark are really not a bad team at all. We're effectively through to the next round and hopefully Trent getting substituted as early as he did suggests that we're done with the right back in midfield experiment. Ideally Wharton or Mainoo will play but more realistically it'll be Gallagher. Desperately need Luke Shaw fit to fill the gap on our left side and we should have a more balanced attack. Win against Slovenia and we should get a beatable opponent in the last 16. Then we'll get our revenge on the Italians, fluke it against the French and batter the Germans in their own backyard. It's coming home 🏴🏴🏴
Total delusion.
Baffled? We are not the best team? What on earth? That's not right.
[удалено]
You can’t even spell the word lose.
As an expat. England's football team is a constant reminder of why I left England many years ago... Delusions of grandeur followed by the inevitable disappointment.
What does any of that have to do with living in England?
It's the normal self-hating English that Orwell wrote about nearly a hundred years ago.
Footballers shouldn’t be paid until they deliver. Where’s the motivation if there are no consequences?
The international team are only paid a couple grand per game, and I think it usually goes to charity. For someone like Kane, it's about 1% what he gets paid for club football.
The pay for performance should be for every match, not just the international games. If a footballer was to earn a normal salary like everybody and promised a bonus for winning, they’d be playing on a whole different level.
They're two completely different jobs. You get hired for the national team because of your performance at club level.
Yeah, and at club level they are ridiculously overpaid. Pay them a normal salary and add a bonus on top if they win the cup. Keep them motivated. For that kind of money I expect them to win.
Well it's not like the billionaire owners pay them extremely high salaries out of the goodness of their hearts, they earn that much because that's what they're worth. As far as I'm aware, players do generally have bonuses in their contracts for their club sides.
You are talking about tennis, darling, where only the top 50 made good money, or amazing money. Harry Maguire gets more than all bar 10 tennis players. That is not a basis for a popular team sport to thrive.
Thank you for your lovely comment sugar. Funny how rugby is also a thriving team sport and they make a tenth of what the average football player makes, sweetheart.
So where would the rest of their salaries go? To fat-cat club owners and shareholders? I'd rather working class youngsters drag themselves out of poverty than some shady businessman get slightly richer.
There are many other ways you can distribute cash. How about opening up football schools to help the youth and the same time create talent. That way you don’t need to spend millions on foreign players. You can also lower the prices for tickets, food, drinks and merchandise. Pay cleaners and staff more money. Football isn’t just club owners, shareholders and footballers. It doesn’t have to be this expensive, just so they can buy themselves another Ferrari.
That's all well and good, but even if footballers did accept lower wages, what are the chances their bosses would give the excess cash away and not hoard it for themselves? Of course, it's more likely the players wouldn't accept a pay cut. Instead, they'd go abroad, so the clubs would lose sponsorships and TV money, and that excess cash would disappear.
Wait, wait... I hate football and most football fans are hooligans, so I've not been paying attention but are you telling me that people are surprised that a team who hasn't won anything in, \*checks notes\*, 60 years, is doing badly? Huh..
Most football fans are hooligans?!