Fair point, but then how do you account for Spain still playing that way? Admittedly
they're not as successful, but their team isn't now dominated by Barcelona/Real Madrid players.
Very late with this, but a line-up of Wilson, Ronay, Liew and Rushden feels like that meme with the four dragon heads (Max obviously being the one on the right...). And I love Max!
The point is not that specific style, it’s that to have a collective playing more coherently relied upon a core of one team who also happened to be the best in the world.
No international team but for Spain can play like that. Involves a level of drilling, preparation, and recruitment that is not available in the month or so international teams have.
I don't mean exactly like Barcelona....of course not.
But it is feasible for them to play something more akin to that style, than the insipid football they've served up in this tournament.
England do play quick and cohesive football when it's possible during games, that's clearly their aim.
When exactly was that and why do you assume they want to, because I can't recall a time they've played well in this tournament, bar the start of the Serbia game?
You want England to play like the best team of all time. That's your criteria for being entertained. OK Nero. We'll see what we can do. What do you think is involved in a team playing that kind of football? Do you really believe you could assmeble a scratch squad and get them to win an international tournament, training maybe two or three days a week for five weeks, playing like that? That's... that's not how this game works my friend. England do play quick and cohesive football when it's possible during games, that's clearly their aim. But you need to understand why they don't do it all the time. Instead of assuming they are doing something wrong, try and understand. I'm not going to lay it out for you because that would be condescending as fuck, you can work it out if you just change your expectations and assumptions to be more in line with what's actually within the domain of possibility.
Cohesive, fast football.... Barcelona under Pep, when at their best, that's another sport compared to this England team. For years England have been unable to play such a technical game, but that can't be said anymore, yet we are stuck with a team playing the same old way? Forgive me for wanting more from such a talented bunch.
Are you a lower league fan? What is this "round pegs in round holes" crap? It's so dated. Modern players fulfil multiple roles and positions over the course of a game, let alone a season. There is no "round pegs in round holes" selection for players as complex as the ones in this England squad. John Stones played a box to box libero role for Man City this season, do you think he should be doing that for England? Walker inverts and shields the space to the side of Rodri for City, do you think he should do that for Rice who plays typically 10 yards higher up and on the other side of the pitch? It's not as simple as you think.
Rashford clearly messed things up for himself last season and needed a break. Southgate and Rashford are close so I doubt it was an easy decision for him.
I don't think we should have "murdered" France. At all. There was nothing in that game or tournament that suggested we were anything other than a good match for them on our day. Then our champion striker missed a penalty. The notion that this is on the manager and we had a divine right to win is completely laughable.
Take me through who you think should be playing at LB and how your pick is a better option than a player with 50 caps, over 500 career appearances including 50 in the CL. Englighten me as to how, say, Iling Jr. with his 10 appearances for Juventus is ready to shut down Dembele, Lamal, Sane, and get Carvajal on the back foot. I'm gagging to learn.
There's a reason pros go with experience every time when it's available. Just try and understand. Do yourself a favour.
I seem to recall both Guy Mowbray and pundit Shearer wondering why Southgate wasn't making changes around the hour mark and pointing out that England were looking leggy and dropping deeper and deeper until the inevitable happened and Switzerland scored.
I think is fair to say that once fresh legs came on and we actually had a proper left back on the pitch the quality of the performance increased dramatically.
Undoubtedly there is a lot of good that has been done during the Southgate reign, but the process can be fantastic and the preparation first class but it doesn't replace the sheer ability to pick a balanced team that puts round pegs in round holes and gets the best out of the very best players we have.
Football is a results business and tournament football only has one winning manager.
Southgate has done better than any previous England manager going right back to Sir Alf Ramsay, and he won a 16 nation World Cup on home soil when it was arguably easier to do so.
I would be delighted if we go all the way, but unless the approach changes it probably won't be because Southgate out thought his opponents, and far more likely because one or two of our players have produced a moment of individual brilliance.
So why leave out Marcus Rashford then who had a lot of caps and a lot of goals?
You are wrong about form. If you pick players based on 'experience' rather than what kind of nick they are in you end up eventually falling short.
That approach failed us in 2022 when Southgate relied on the tried and tested and we lost to France when we should have murdered them.
Southgate has got it right selecting Mainoo, and of course Bellingham would get into any international team in the World, but how can he not see how much better the team looks when Palmer is on the pitch and how ineffective we are with Trippier as a right footed left back or left wing back.
I have watched every England game either in the flesh or on the telly from about 1990 onwards including friendlies and qualifying. The notion that this iteration of England in this competition is the boring one is ridiculous!
That's a very good point about how teams looking for third place have a distinct unfair advantage if they play later, the tournament has to go up to 32 or back to 16.
When originally setting up a sweep for the Euros I offered a prize for finishing 3rd but neglected to notice that there was no third place play off.
So what I did was to establish a figure to show how positively a country has played, or PI, to qualify for the third place ranking.
The formula is:
(Shots off target + shots on target + corners + goals) - Ease of passage (total of world rankings of teams beaten divided by own world ranking)
This gives the following scores:
Spain 119
Netherlands 93
France 83
England 41
To match France's current positivity index, England would need to have a PI for the semi final of 45, meaning a shot on or off target, a corner or a goal every other minute..
Don't worry. England will still win the tournament.
I sometimes manage to turn people around on Gareth by pointing out to them that he just doesn't really have the face or the demeanour for his personality. If you actually listen to what he says he's hard, funny, warm, can be devestatingly blunt and quick-talking at times. The players aren't watching him on TV, they are with him in the flesh, and the way they respond to him with total respect, deference, but also keenness, like a desire to be with him and listen to him, is obvious. People have really blinded themselves to the realities in order to go with their fantasy that Gareth is some sort of hateable incompetent who everyone despises because he stops England playing the visionary football they play in their own heads.
I think we have a deeper squad than ever before, but that's partly Gareth's doing. The fact that we are leaving out players with as many caps and with as exotic profiles in what we've had in English football previously as Rashford, Sancho, Elliott, Grealish, Loftus-Cheek, Tomori, Maddison... the fact we're able to bring players as good as Palmer and Trent off the bench... we've never had options like these before, or if he have they've not come in and performed. Wasn't Darius Vassell Rooney's alternate?
The improvements to the youth system under Gareth have meant that players like those coming in have positive tournament experiences in the England organisation. Gareth has known players of Trent's generation age group since they were schoolkids. He's a father figure to them, and they all talk glowingly about the training level, the preparation, the environment. It's another world, really. But this is really also Gareth's doing. He's just a really fucking good manager, but psychologically and culturally we just seem unable to handle it.
It's not supposed to be entertaining. It's a higher cultural form than that. It's about a lot of things, but one of them is the spectacularisation of the collective quest for collective excellence in the performance of complex techniques. You can admire that without being entertained, that is, without having the kind of low maintenance jovial experience we might enjoy in front of a TV sitcom or reality show, but you have to put in a bit of effort. Football is way more than a passive, consumerist entertainment. Always has been. I don't really get what your idea of entertainment in football must be if you can't find England's tactical and strategic struggle engrossing, emotional, challenging and fascinating. You're not just going to chortle over it like an episode of Love Island or whatever.
Just like to say I heartily dislike Ant’nee Gordon’s approach to playing football. The constant whingeing, diving, niggling etc gets right on my tits. God I hope he gets a run out against Holland. That’ll learn Koeman!
Honestly the problem with England fans is the short memories. Of course we remember going out to Iceland, Seaman backpedaling while hailing a taxi, Rooney stamping, etc. But it really, really gets forgotten how much of a drudge watching England was from late Sven to Hodgson, with the players looking like they would rather be anywhere else and that growing sense of collective dread the longer the games went on that something really, really stupid was going to happen because everyone was so terrified. Sometimes it didn't bit it was never far off, and you'd get players like Rooney and Walcott who'd be dynamite for 3 games and then just sort of get sucked into the malaise. It never used to matter whether we had good players or not, they just turned into timid blobs in white shirts.
Honestly that Southgate managed to lift that mood is Herculean, and something very, very few coaches and do, let alone sustain. And for all that he's damned either way; if he leaves Kane out and Watkins misses a sitter the malcontents aren't going to go "fair play, we got it wrong".
And however much a lot of people say it isn't personal, it is personal. He was a decent CB who played for Palace and Villa. He's a bit earnest and a bit opinionated. He's kind of fun to insult because he looks a bit pensive and isn't particularly good at pretending an avalanche of hatred completely disproportionate to working as a sports coach doesn't bother him.
And this crap about the bestest bestest crop of players ever ever ever is waaaay overstated. We're about where we often are give or take a player or two - a few genuine top class players scattered around and solid pros elsewhere.
Who was it that wanted to waste 3 subs on one position because honestly that's just ridiculous. Was that Jonathan. Honestly think about the downside of that man.
TBH apart from Georgia, Austria and Turkey (who all kind of fell into the "low expectations so why the F not" category) most of the football has been not so great; I could maybe get the criticism if everyone else was electric.
This is kind of what tournament football is now, teams trying not to lose games. I mean Greece won the damn thing playing like mid-80s Millwall. Everyone hated them and they did not give a damn.
The "entertain me" crowd are full of shit. If we'd played all out attack and gone out in the group after losing every game 5-4 Southgate and his family would be in a bunker under police protection right now. The ridiculous entitled nature of the ESL-type fanboys means they don't only demand that England do better each time (in a tournament that includes Spain, France, etc. etc.) but look prettier doing it each time. Spoilt brats the lot of them.
What things would make England more attractive? Without damaging the team's ability to compete? England produce loads of exciting moments and personally I find their struggle to meet the tactical challenges of games inspiring and exciting because I happen to know a bit about that side of football.
Does it ever occur to you that the reason you don't like watching England might be because you don't really know the sport in a way that reflects professional thinking? It's like, I know nothing about rugby so games are boring for me unless guys are beating eachother with the ball constantly. The main part of the game, the physical confrontation between the packs, just isn't something I know anything about and understand so I have no idea what the players are trying to achieve. I therefore find those parts of the game, i.e. most of it, utterly dull, and just wait for the part where a back gets the ball and scampers forward trying to beat someone.
When people say they don't find football matches entertaining, I don't assume that it reflects on the actual matches so much as the person complaining. So what specifically is it you'd like England to do?
UEFA want England out. One of the awful things about every big organisation I've ever worked for has been the extent to which the people in positions of responsibility share the mindset of the most ignorant and basic members of their constituency or institution or whatever. So you can be sure the UEFA top refereeing brass will be grumbling about Wokegate and Boring Rubbish England Having a Lucky Path To the Final and unfortunately are in a position to do something about it.
I barely feel I have the tools to assess whether England have been good, bad, or indifferent because the cultural pressure to hate them is so powerful to contend with.
I have clear memories of Saka beating his man so beautifully and so often that under normal conditions we would be celebrating him as the best winger in thr tournament, and scoring a goal of the kind and quality we will be talking of for decades. I recall Judge Bellingham performing a roulette and carrying the ball across midfield with elegance and power in a moment of unforgettable skill and grace and scoring two goals of heroic sublimity. I recall any number of brave and agile blocks from Guehi, Mainoo breaking the lines with the ball at his feet, Rice playing with a ragged and passionate authority coming back from a place of bleak hurt to press, pass and most of all to create the game with his running and intensity off the ball.
All these things have really happened. I remember nothing like this number and intensity of great moments in previous tournaments, even when they are remembered with pride, not since Euro 96. We are keeping the ball well. We are surviving in the difficult periods of the game. One of the many insightful things Gareth has talked about is the players needing to learn where we are in the game, what the opposition stance is, and responding appropriately. Are they trying to draw us on to counter? Don't fall for it. Stay on the low side, take negative possession, don't take duels, keep distances tight. Are they looking to pressure us and up tempo for 10 minutes? Drop, look to execute out-ball plans. Are they looking to protect players who are suffering with tiredness or and keeping it tight themselves? Pressure, pressure, pressure, but don't wear ourselves out, be ready to take our foot off the gas when the heart rate data tells us it's time.
We have been historically so naive, not just tactically but strategically and mentally, and Southgate has found a way to attack this weakness, to start to turn It around. I find his achievement absolutely stunning. I think the FA haven't done enough to protect him in the media, to explain his mission and his work, to make sure that coverage is tilted towards changing understandings of what is actually going on in any given performance. Our press office needs to be much more front footed and on the attack, we shouldn't have these youtubers frothing things up or papers like the mail running amok, they should be induced or coerced away from that kind of coverage; as does our fans organisation, like why do we still have the.problem people so well represented in the England support and travel clubs, it shouldn't be hard to create a different culture with application. These are also not just things we need to leave to chance.
Anyway, waffling a bit out of relief to meet someone who sees it compatibly with me. Totally agree with everything you say.
You hint at it, and I will say it till I am blue in the fingers, there are two teams playing! England may be playing "boring" football, but it is not like the opposition is either.
I watched Lincoln during the Keith Alexander and John Beck and the football was pretty boring. But they won games and that was exciting. 5 consecutive playoffs for one, and a promotion with the other. I don't recall the fans every being bored of winning. We played superb football under Alan Buckley, on the floor passing with dynamic attacking. And we were nearly relegated but for a quirk where the two teams who could put us down played each other. Oddly the fans didn't like him.
Fact is this is far more than the football. Wokegate is not a proper football man and now not even winning is shielding him. He has to win 4-0 each game or he is a cretin. If anything the biggest compliment you can pay Southgate is that he has set up an entitlement where he is hammered for not winning a final, and for just winning games. We would have killed for that before his tenure. It feels a bit like Charlton's Premier League Curbishly. Be careful what you wish for. Iain Dowie could be in the dugout before you know it.
Yeah, the discourse has been a real lurch back to the days of "why doesn't the manager just get Gerrard to play like he does for Liverpool?!?" stuff.
England haven't been great (yet; flashes from Gascoigne and Platt aside we were pretty poor at Italia 90 before the semi...) but honestly progression by doing the bare minimum is the sort of thing Nations like Germany and Italy have been praised for for years.
For my money I think Southgate is trying to win the trophy and nothing else. He's won plaudits and admirers before and look how much use they've been, instantly forgotten because teams like Serbia have done their best to not lose games of football. He's let people get under his skin but honestly it's hard to blame him after year upon year of histrionic criticism.
They'd never admit it as it's a PR game, but no elite manager will ever, ever take the England job apart from as a late career pension top-up. Klopp, Pep, Ancelotti etc. wouldn't do it for a million a game right now. Thanks to the media and some fans it's an absolutely toxic job, so when Southgate goes in a week or so we're going to get someone who did okay for a year at Brighton or someone who's done well with the U21s or Roberto Martinez.
I agree. And the underlying arrogance and entitlement are disgraceful, especially from people who should know better. Our national common sense about international football is pathetically weak and I thought this was recognised now, that we knew we needed to learn to win rather than reproducing the nonsense that has kept us down for so long. But instead we've had this crap about "world class" players being "held back" by a "rigid system", from people like Lineker or whatever, on the national platform, not informing the public about what the England coach and players are trying to achieve, but instead just ragebaiting and waffling old cliches like the lowest of the low content creators. Like, what the actual fuck. The people who have most hideously underperformed at this tournament have been the English media circus. Awful.
This is pure dunce stuff. Do you think England wanted to pass back to Pickford from the corner? No. They wanted to create a chance. Can they cross it in first time from the corner? No, because Switzerland have Akanji near post and England don't have enough tall players to go for a deep option. So they lay it back to Saka to play it to Mainoo with the idea that he can slot in Trippier making a run into the box. It's a creative plan that comes with a risk attached. But what happens? What goes wrong? The pass from Saka bobbles on the poor surface and reaches Mainoo's wrong side so he can't play it first time. However, England haven't lost possession and play continues to their advantage.
Like, why is this hard to understand. England attempted a rational solution to a tactical problem, it didn't come off, the game went on. How is this some sort of shocking indictment of Southgate's management? It shouldn't be, right, because people from within profesisonal football should have explained this to you. But they haven't, because there's money to be made from not explaining it to you and letting you get all het up about it on your own.
Adam is just a journalist telling stories using pictures to explain what's happened in a game. It's not the same thing as analysing player performances in order to produce tactical plans for a match that hasn't been played. Not remotely. Don't just kneejerk disagree with me, actually think about this.
The data that the England setup has on the players is of a completely different kind and quality to that which the public has. That data is a closely guarded professional secret, to the extent that England have to generate their own data because clubs won't share with them. The levels of biometric data, for example, that they use to make decisions about how the moving parts of the team can fit together over the course of a game, and the experience they use to come up with plans which players can fulfil, and remember this is in relation to a game which no pictures exist for because it hasn't been played...
Just think for yourself along these lines and realise there is a world of difference between what Adam Clery and Gareth Southgate do. What Southgate is achieving is in professional football terms an unbelievable response to the challenge in front of him. I have lost a ton of respect for a lot of pundits and journalists I used to enjoy before this tournament over their inability to understand or to explain what England are doing, why they are doing it, and just what a scale of achievement it is to have produced these performances given where England started from. Coaching football is not about creating the right heat maps, xG and passing data.
By looking like a team that wants to be there, that have some spirit and are more incisive? This group look disjointed and devoid of patterns of play, I really don't know quite what they're doing in training, penalties all day?
Moments of individual brilliance have won England their place in the semi-final, nothing more. Sorry I'd like a bit more.
England aren't trying to create a lot of chances. Why would you do that with Kane up front and players like him who can create and take chances for themselves if you just supply pressure and territory. The rest of the game you can negate the opposition, suck up pressure, and choose your times to turn the tables. It's really not that complicated to understand what they are trying to do. They don't need to create a high volume of attempts on goal. They don't shoot every opportunity they get or play to a strategy intended to create lots of low quality openings. If you assume they know what they are doing and try to understand it, instead of assuming they are messing everything up because it doesn't look like whatever your imagination came up with as what they ought to look like, you might learn something about how this sport everyone is supposed to love so much is actually played at the top level.
Obviously having built a pool, and a squad, and a team he no longer needs to pick based on form. It's not a fresh start anymore and England have players with 50+ caps to call on, players with massive tournament experience, which we didn't when Gareth took over. So he can pick based on the premium quality for international footballers. This is so basic. It makes the rest of your generic and obvious "critique" just seem equally mindlessly negative, like a bot parrotting talking points.
Awful, turgid teams don't reach semi finals. I don't think you understand what the players are trying to accomplish so you aren't in a position to assess it. Football is not just a simple matter of "great players" and playing "better". Your whole idea of what you are looking at is deranged by the coverage to the point that people pointing out to you that England are playing well, which they were, seems like some sort of treacherous mindgame. You need to sort yourself out.
England are somehow one game away from the Euro 2024 final – Football Daily
Comments
Fair point, but then how do you account for Spain still playing that way? Admittedly
they're not as successful, but their team isn't now dominated by Barcelona/Real Madrid players.
Very late with this, but a line-up of Wilson, Ronay, Liew and Rushden feels like that meme with the four dragon heads (Max obviously being the one on the right...). And I love Max!
The point is not that specific style, it’s that to have a collective playing more coherently relied upon a core of one team who also happened to be the best in the world.
I don't accept that reasoning. As once Spain weren't the team many others aspired to be like.
No international team but for Spain can play like that. Involves a level of drilling, preparation, and recruitment that is not available in the month or so international teams have.
I don't mean exactly like Barcelona....of course not.
But it is feasible for them to play something more akin to that style, than the insipid football they've served up in this tournament.
England do play quick and cohesive football when it's possible during games, that's clearly their aim.
When exactly was that and why do you assume they want to, because I can't recall a time they've played well in this tournament, bar the start of the Serbia game?
You want England to play like the best team of all time. That's your criteria for being entertained. OK Nero. We'll see what we can do. What do you think is involved in a team playing that kind of football? Do you really believe you could assmeble a scratch squad and get them to win an international tournament, training maybe two or three days a week for five weeks, playing like that? That's... that's not how this game works my friend. England do play quick and cohesive football when it's possible during games, that's clearly their aim. But you need to understand why they don't do it all the time. Instead of assuming they are doing something wrong, try and understand. I'm not going to lay it out for you because that would be condescending as fuck, you can work it out if you just change your expectations and assumptions to be more in line with what's actually within the domain of possibility.
Cohesive, fast football.... Barcelona under Pep, when at their best, that's another sport compared to this England team. For years England have been unable to play such a technical game, but that can't be said anymore, yet we are stuck with a team playing the same old way? Forgive me for wanting more from such a talented bunch.
Are you a lower league fan? What is this "round pegs in round holes" crap? It's so dated. Modern players fulfil multiple roles and positions over the course of a game, let alone a season. There is no "round pegs in round holes" selection for players as complex as the ones in this England squad. John Stones played a box to box libero role for Man City this season, do you think he should be doing that for England? Walker inverts and shields the space to the side of Rodri for City, do you think he should do that for Rice who plays typically 10 yards higher up and on the other side of the pitch? It's not as simple as you think.
Rashford clearly messed things up for himself last season and needed a break. Southgate and Rashford are close so I doubt it was an easy decision for him.
I don't think we should have "murdered" France. At all. There was nothing in that game or tournament that suggested we were anything other than a good match for them on our day. Then our champion striker missed a penalty. The notion that this is on the manager and we had a divine right to win is completely laughable.
Take me through who you think should be playing at LB and how your pick is a better option than a player with 50 caps, over 500 career appearances including 50 in the CL. Englighten me as to how, say, Iling Jr. with his 10 appearances for Juventus is ready to shut down Dembele, Lamal, Sane, and get Carvajal on the back foot. I'm gagging to learn.
There's a reason pros go with experience every time when it's available. Just try and understand. Do yourself a favour.
Although I have disagreed with Southgate's team selection in every single match I do have to praise a man where praise is due.
Bringing on a Labour Government for the rest of the Tournament and beyond is a masterstroke Gareth!
I seem to recall both Guy Mowbray and pundit Shearer wondering why Southgate wasn't making changes around the hour mark and pointing out that England were looking leggy and dropping deeper and deeper until the inevitable happened and Switzerland scored.
I think is fair to say that once fresh legs came on and we actually had a proper left back on the pitch the quality of the performance increased dramatically.
I agree. Let the manager talk shite instead as he is being paid £millions to do so.
I just hope that he plays Shaw from the start and drops Trippier, who was only included in the first place as cover for the United left back.
I fear he will persist with the left flank malfunction and we will go a goal down before he belatedly makes changes.
We have got out of jail twice in successive games. Only a fool would chance his luck a third time.
Undoubtedly there is a lot of good that has been done during the Southgate reign, but the process can be fantastic and the preparation first class but it doesn't replace the sheer ability to pick a balanced team that puts round pegs in round holes and gets the best out of the very best players we have.
Football is a results business and tournament football only has one winning manager.
Southgate has done better than any previous England manager going right back to Sir Alf Ramsay, and he won a 16 nation World Cup on home soil when it was arguably easier to do so.
I would be delighted if we go all the way, but unless the approach changes it probably won't be because Southgate out thought his opponents, and far more likely because one or two of our players have produced a moment of individual brilliance.
So why leave out Marcus Rashford then who had a lot of caps and a lot of goals?
You are wrong about form. If you pick players based on 'experience' rather than what kind of nick they are in you end up eventually falling short.
That approach failed us in 2022 when Southgate relied on the tried and tested and we lost to France when we should have murdered them.
Southgate has got it right selecting Mainoo, and of course Bellingham would get into any international team in the World, but how can he not see how much better the team looks when Palmer is on the pitch and how ineffective we are with Trippier as a right footed left back or left wing back.
I don't "believe" it, I'm describing an affective experience. What do you mean by attractive, what's an attractive event in a football match?
I have watched every England game either in the flesh or on the telly from about 1990 onwards including friendlies and qualifying. The notion that this iteration of England in this competition is the boring one is ridiculous!
Yes because that's exactly what I meant by entertaining? (sigh)
Yes because that's exactly what I meant by entertaining? (sigh)
Do you really believe that?
engrossing, emotional, challenging and fascinating...it can be all those things and be attractive, that's all I'd like.
Yo dude, come on The Neth
Bless you.
Hey, we're just lucky they didn't say TNNMT.
Go watch wrestling then.
That's a very good point about how teams looking for third place have a distinct unfair advantage if they play later, the tournament has to go up to 32 or back to 16.
When originally setting up a sweep for the Euros I offered a prize for finishing 3rd but neglected to notice that there was no third place play off.
So what I did was to establish a figure to show how positively a country has played, or PI, to qualify for the third place ranking.
The formula is:
(Shots off target + shots on target + corners + goals) - Ease of passage (total of world rankings of teams beaten divided by own world ranking)
This gives the following scores:
Spain 119
Netherlands 93
France 83
England 41
To match France's current positivity index, England would need to have a PI for the semi final of 45, meaning a shot on or off target, a corner or a goal every other minute..
Don't worry. England will still win the tournament.
I sometimes manage to turn people around on Gareth by pointing out to them that he just doesn't really have the face or the demeanour for his personality. If you actually listen to what he says he's hard, funny, warm, can be devestatingly blunt and quick-talking at times. The players aren't watching him on TV, they are with him in the flesh, and the way they respond to him with total respect, deference, but also keenness, like a desire to be with him and listen to him, is obvious. People have really blinded themselves to the realities in order to go with their fantasy that Gareth is some sort of hateable incompetent who everyone despises because he stops England playing the visionary football they play in their own heads.
I think we have a deeper squad than ever before, but that's partly Gareth's doing. The fact that we are leaving out players with as many caps and with as exotic profiles in what we've had in English football previously as Rashford, Sancho, Elliott, Grealish, Loftus-Cheek, Tomori, Maddison... the fact we're able to bring players as good as Palmer and Trent off the bench... we've never had options like these before, or if he have they've not come in and performed. Wasn't Darius Vassell Rooney's alternate?
The improvements to the youth system under Gareth have meant that players like those coming in have positive tournament experiences in the England organisation. Gareth has known players of Trent's generation age group since they were schoolkids. He's a father figure to them, and they all talk glowingly about the training level, the preparation, the environment. It's another world, really. But this is really also Gareth's doing. He's just a really fucking good manager, but psychologically and culturally we just seem unable to handle it.
It's extremely weird.
It's not supposed to be entertaining. It's a higher cultural form than that. It's about a lot of things, but one of them is the spectacularisation of the collective quest for collective excellence in the performance of complex techniques. You can admire that without being entertained, that is, without having the kind of low maintenance jovial experience we might enjoy in front of a TV sitcom or reality show, but you have to put in a bit of effort. Football is way more than a passive, consumerist entertainment. Always has been. I don't really get what your idea of entertainment in football must be if you can't find England's tactical and strategic struggle engrossing, emotional, challenging and fascinating. You're not just going to chortle over it like an episode of Love Island or whatever.
Just like to say I heartily dislike Ant’nee Gordon’s approach to playing football. The constant whingeing, diving, niggling etc gets right on my tits. God I hope he gets a run out against Holland. That’ll learn Koeman!
Honestly the problem with England fans is the short memories. Of course we remember going out to Iceland, Seaman backpedaling while hailing a taxi, Rooney stamping, etc. But it really, really gets forgotten how much of a drudge watching England was from late Sven to Hodgson, with the players looking like they would rather be anywhere else and that growing sense of collective dread the longer the games went on that something really, really stupid was going to happen because everyone was so terrified. Sometimes it didn't bit it was never far off, and you'd get players like Rooney and Walcott who'd be dynamite for 3 games and then just sort of get sucked into the malaise. It never used to matter whether we had good players or not, they just turned into timid blobs in white shirts.
Honestly that Southgate managed to lift that mood is Herculean, and something very, very few coaches and do, let alone sustain. And for all that he's damned either way; if he leaves Kane out and Watkins misses a sitter the malcontents aren't going to go "fair play, we got it wrong".
And however much a lot of people say it isn't personal, it is personal. He was a decent CB who played for Palace and Villa. He's a bit earnest and a bit opinionated. He's kind of fun to insult because he looks a bit pensive and isn't particularly good at pretending an avalanche of hatred completely disproportionate to working as a sports coach doesn't bother him.
And this crap about the bestest bestest crop of players ever ever ever is waaaay overstated. We're about where we often are give or take a player or two - a few genuine top class players scattered around and solid pros elsewhere.
Who was it that wanted to waste 3 subs on one position because honestly that's just ridiculous. Was that Jonathan. Honestly think about the downside of that man.
TBH apart from Georgia, Austria and Turkey (who all kind of fell into the "low expectations so why the F not" category) most of the football has been not so great; I could maybe get the criticism if everyone else was electric.
This is kind of what tournament football is now, teams trying not to lose games. I mean Greece won the damn thing playing like mid-80s Millwall. Everyone hated them and they did not give a damn.
The "entertain me" crowd are full of shit. If we'd played all out attack and gone out in the group after losing every game 5-4 Southgate and his family would be in a bunker under police protection right now. The ridiculous entitled nature of the ESL-type fanboys means they don't only demand that England do better each time (in a tournament that includes Spain, France, etc. etc.) but look prettier doing it each time. Spoilt brats the lot of them.
Entertainment is a painfully hollow and shallow idea of human pleasure.
What things would make England more attractive? Without damaging the team's ability to compete? England produce loads of exciting moments and personally I find their struggle to meet the tactical challenges of games inspiring and exciting because I happen to know a bit about that side of football.
Does it ever occur to you that the reason you don't like watching England might be because you don't really know the sport in a way that reflects professional thinking? It's like, I know nothing about rugby so games are boring for me unless guys are beating eachother with the ball constantly. The main part of the game, the physical confrontation between the packs, just isn't something I know anything about and understand so I have no idea what the players are trying to achieve. I therefore find those parts of the game, i.e. most of it, utterly dull, and just wait for the part where a back gets the ball and scampers forward trying to beat someone.
When people say they don't find football matches entertaining, I don't assume that it reflects on the actual matches so much as the person complaining. So what specifically is it you'd like England to do?
UEFA want England out. One of the awful things about every big organisation I've ever worked for has been the extent to which the people in positions of responsibility share the mindset of the most ignorant and basic members of their constituency or institution or whatever. So you can be sure the UEFA top refereeing brass will be grumbling about Wokegate and Boring Rubbish England Having a Lucky Path To the Final and unfortunately are in a position to do something about it.
I barely feel I have the tools to assess whether England have been good, bad, or indifferent because the cultural pressure to hate them is so powerful to contend with.
I have clear memories of Saka beating his man so beautifully and so often that under normal conditions we would be celebrating him as the best winger in thr tournament, and scoring a goal of the kind and quality we will be talking of for decades. I recall Judge Bellingham performing a roulette and carrying the ball across midfield with elegance and power in a moment of unforgettable skill and grace and scoring two goals of heroic sublimity. I recall any number of brave and agile blocks from Guehi, Mainoo breaking the lines with the ball at his feet, Rice playing with a ragged and passionate authority coming back from a place of bleak hurt to press, pass and most of all to create the game with his running and intensity off the ball.
All these things have really happened. I remember nothing like this number and intensity of great moments in previous tournaments, even when they are remembered with pride, not since Euro 96. We are keeping the ball well. We are surviving in the difficult periods of the game. One of the many insightful things Gareth has talked about is the players needing to learn where we are in the game, what the opposition stance is, and responding appropriately. Are they trying to draw us on to counter? Don't fall for it. Stay on the low side, take negative possession, don't take duels, keep distances tight. Are they looking to pressure us and up tempo for 10 minutes? Drop, look to execute out-ball plans. Are they looking to protect players who are suffering with tiredness or and keeping it tight themselves? Pressure, pressure, pressure, but don't wear ourselves out, be ready to take our foot off the gas when the heart rate data tells us it's time.
We have been historically so naive, not just tactically but strategically and mentally, and Southgate has found a way to attack this weakness, to start to turn It around. I find his achievement absolutely stunning. I think the FA haven't done enough to protect him in the media, to explain his mission and his work, to make sure that coverage is tilted towards changing understandings of what is actually going on in any given performance. Our press office needs to be much more front footed and on the attack, we shouldn't have these youtubers frothing things up or papers like the mail running amok, they should be induced or coerced away from that kind of coverage; as does our fans organisation, like why do we still have the.problem people so well represented in the England support and travel clubs, it shouldn't be hard to create a different culture with application. These are also not just things we need to leave to chance.
Anyway, waffling a bit out of relief to meet someone who sees it compatibly with me. Totally agree with everything you say.
You hint at it, and I will say it till I am blue in the fingers, there are two teams playing! England may be playing "boring" football, but it is not like the opposition is either.
I watched Lincoln during the Keith Alexander and John Beck and the football was pretty boring. But they won games and that was exciting. 5 consecutive playoffs for one, and a promotion with the other. I don't recall the fans every being bored of winning. We played superb football under Alan Buckley, on the floor passing with dynamic attacking. And we were nearly relegated but for a quirk where the two teams who could put us down played each other. Oddly the fans didn't like him.
Fact is this is far more than the football. Wokegate is not a proper football man and now not even winning is shielding him. He has to win 4-0 each game or he is a cretin. If anything the biggest compliment you can pay Southgate is that he has set up an entitlement where he is hammered for not winning a final, and for just winning games. We would have killed for that before his tenure. It feels a bit like Charlton's Premier League Curbishly. Be careful what you wish for. Iain Dowie could be in the dugout before you know it.
Yeah, the discourse has been a real lurch back to the days of "why doesn't the manager just get Gerrard to play like he does for Liverpool?!?" stuff.
England haven't been great (yet; flashes from Gascoigne and Platt aside we were pretty poor at Italia 90 before the semi...) but honestly progression by doing the bare minimum is the sort of thing Nations like Germany and Italy have been praised for for years.
For my money I think Southgate is trying to win the trophy and nothing else. He's won plaudits and admirers before and look how much use they've been, instantly forgotten because teams like Serbia have done their best to not lose games of football. He's let people get under his skin but honestly it's hard to blame him after year upon year of histrionic criticism.
They'd never admit it as it's a PR game, but no elite manager will ever, ever take the England job apart from as a late career pension top-up. Klopp, Pep, Ancelotti etc. wouldn't do it for a million a game right now. Thanks to the media and some fans it's an absolutely toxic job, so when Southgate goes in a week or so we're going to get someone who did okay for a year at Brighton or someone who's done well with the U21s or Roberto Martinez.
I agree. And the underlying arrogance and entitlement are disgraceful, especially from people who should know better. Our national common sense about international football is pathetically weak and I thought this was recognised now, that we knew we needed to learn to win rather than reproducing the nonsense that has kept us down for so long. But instead we've had this crap about "world class" players being "held back" by a "rigid system", from people like Lineker or whatever, on the national platform, not informing the public about what the England coach and players are trying to achieve, but instead just ragebaiting and waffling old cliches like the lowest of the low content creators. Like, what the actual fuck. The people who have most hideously underperformed at this tournament have been the English media circus. Awful.
This is pure dunce stuff. Do you think England wanted to pass back to Pickford from the corner? No. They wanted to create a chance. Can they cross it in first time from the corner? No, because Switzerland have Akanji near post and England don't have enough tall players to go for a deep option. So they lay it back to Saka to play it to Mainoo with the idea that he can slot in Trippier making a run into the box. It's a creative plan that comes with a risk attached. But what happens? What goes wrong? The pass from Saka bobbles on the poor surface and reaches Mainoo's wrong side so he can't play it first time. However, England haven't lost possession and play continues to their advantage.
Like, why is this hard to understand. England attempted a rational solution to a tactical problem, it didn't come off, the game went on. How is this some sort of shocking indictment of Southgate's management? It shouldn't be, right, because people from within profesisonal football should have explained this to you. But they haven't, because there's money to be made from not explaining it to you and letting you get all het up about it on your own.
Adam is just a journalist telling stories using pictures to explain what's happened in a game. It's not the same thing as analysing player performances in order to produce tactical plans for a match that hasn't been played. Not remotely. Don't just kneejerk disagree with me, actually think about this.
The data that the England setup has on the players is of a completely different kind and quality to that which the public has. That data is a closely guarded professional secret, to the extent that England have to generate their own data because clubs won't share with them. The levels of biometric data, for example, that they use to make decisions about how the moving parts of the team can fit together over the course of a game, and the experience they use to come up with plans which players can fulfil, and remember this is in relation to a game which no pictures exist for because it hasn't been played...
Just think for yourself along these lines and realise there is a world of difference between what Adam Clery and Gareth Southgate do. What Southgate is achieving is in professional football terms an unbelievable response to the challenge in front of him. I have lost a ton of respect for a lot of pundits and journalists I used to enjoy before this tournament over their inability to understand or to explain what England are doing, why they are doing it, and just what a scale of achievement it is to have produced these performances given where England started from. Coaching football is not about creating the right heat maps, xG and passing data.
By looking like a team that wants to be there, that have some spirit and are more incisive? This group look disjointed and devoid of patterns of play, I really don't know quite what they're doing in training, penalties all day?
Moments of individual brilliance have won England their place in the semi-final, nothing more. Sorry I'd like a bit more.
England aren't trying to create a lot of chances. Why would you do that with Kane up front and players like him who can create and take chances for themselves if you just supply pressure and territory. The rest of the game you can negate the opposition, suck up pressure, and choose your times to turn the tables. It's really not that complicated to understand what they are trying to do. They don't need to create a high volume of attempts on goal. They don't shoot every opportunity they get or play to a strategy intended to create lots of low quality openings. If you assume they know what they are doing and try to understand it, instead of assuming they are messing everything up because it doesn't look like whatever your imagination came up with as what they ought to look like, you might learn something about how this sport everyone is supposed to love so much is actually played at the top level.
Obviously having built a pool, and a squad, and a team he no longer needs to pick based on form. It's not a fresh start anymore and England have players with 50+ caps to call on, players with massive tournament experience, which we didn't when Gareth took over. So he can pick based on the premium quality for international footballers. This is so basic. It makes the rest of your generic and obvious "critique" just seem equally mindlessly negative, like a bot parrotting talking points.
*say
Your opening four words says it all. What about speaking as a lover of football?
Awful, turgid teams don't reach semi finals. I don't think you understand what the players are trying to accomplish so you aren't in a position to assess it. Football is not just a simple matter of "great players" and playing "better". Your whole idea of what you are looking at is deranged by the coverage to the point that people pointing out to you that England are playing well, which they were, seems like some sort of treacherous mindgame. You need to sort yourself out.
Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment