[Football] Southgate - go or stay?

[Randy McNob]

We played well and lost are ignoring both the French goals. Pickford should save the 1st, Maguire and Stones are asleep for the 2nd. Pickford on balance hasn't had a bad tournament but Lloris - or even Pope - saves the first every day of the week and there is no way the Moroccan centre halfs let Giroud in like that on Wednesday night. We have a habit of giving away preventable goals with the same defence. Stones passed to a Dutch attacker in the Nations League semi final, We consistently got done in the air late against Croatia in the World cup semi and I'd argue - perhaps harshly - that Pickford is at fault for the Italian equaliser. A top quality keeper pushes it round the post which led to the goal (before you even get me started on the sitting back tactics against a back line with no pace which landed us under pressure in the 1st place)

Whilst we keep picking the same defence, we should expect the same results. The only way round that is getting rid of Southgate unless the abundance of attacking players scores more than 2 a game against top quality defences. The unanswered question about Southgate and the defence is whether it gets any better when it changes. I'd like to find out rather than watching the current lot come up short again in the next Euro's.

This smacks of Charlton fans thinking they can do better than 6th in the prem and Curbishley has to go

 

[Guinness Boy]

The England manager's job doesn't have to be a long term position. Take the England Women, while being a talented bunch they kept failing at the final hurdles at tournaments - until they turned to Wiegman who turned them into winners. It wasn't that Mark Sampson or Phil Neville did bad jobs, both contributed to their rise, but it was Wiegman who turned them from plucky finalists to champions.

Southgate has had 3 major tournaments, and the mentality hasn't changed really, for one reason or another we can't get a big game over the line. He's done a fantastic job, he's bought some brilliant players through, but I don't see why it's a 6 year + role?

We have St George's Park now, a much better connection between England youth pathways, and nurturing future talent. Like Brighton, much of that structure and knowledge is in place. I think Southgate could go now with a huge legacy behind him for what he did in the youth development and first team with England. Very few England managers get to go with their head held firmly high. I wouldn't sack him, but I wouldn't be upset if he decided to call it a day.

Who would take us over the line though? I can't see an equivalent coach to Wiegman who's available and would want the job.

We'd end up with Stevie G who would be MUCH worse..

 

[Iggle Piggle]

This smacks of Charlton fans thinking they can do better than 6th in the prem and Curbishley has to go

Southgate and the players he trusts unfortunately get found out at key moments. It's a huge improvement on the Roy era - which might get worse again with the wrong appointment - but it isn't unreasonable to assume that a 2026 version of this defence will serve up a similar dish. I'd rather eat something else even if it does turn out to be a shit sandwich.

Besides, a team with Foden, Saka, Bellingham and Co is a world away from one with Trevor Sinclair and Danny Mills in it which also got as far as this one did. England have been so poor for years that we forget this lot are actually quite good and have the best part of the lot at World youth and club level.

 

[1066familyman]

I think a lot of it comes down to your secondary national sport: the blame game. If Harry Kane scores that penalty, he's still oceans of football away from being the hero (since nothing but winning the whole thing is acceptable in a lot of eyes), but very close to being a "villain" like Southgate, Beckham, Seaman, the trio that missed penalties against Italy etc.

Roberto Baggio missed a penalty to lose the 1994 World Cup but he's still God over there. In the same tournament we had Jonas Thern sent off in the semi-final against Brazil but was welcomed as a King when he and the others came back after the bronze medal. Ronaldo had a poor 1998 World Cup final for Brazil but was still seen as a national hero when going into the 2002 WC.

The English players however know in any high-pressure situation what awaits them if they fail: months of bullying, years of blame. This puts a lot of extra pressure on decisive moments, like penalties. There's usually more to lose than to win.

I agree to an extent.
However, Saka and Rashford got fantastic receptions from proper football fans at grounds at the start of the season after the Euros.

 

[The Fish]

Southgate shouldn't be forced out by English exceptionalism. England are decent, but it's like there's an expectation they should win the tournaments. England just aren't that good.

 

[Psychobilly freakout]

Has he fecked off yet ?

 

[Easy 10]

It took Joachim Lowe 3 tournaments before he won one for Germany.

Euro 2008 - lost in the Final
WC 2010 - lost in the semi's
Euro 2012 - lost in the semi's
WC 2014 - winners.

Southgate could follow that same path...?

 

[Milano]

You can’t blame Southgate for Kane taking and missing that penalty.
I do however question his in-game decision making and his persistence with players who are clearly ‘in the circle’ however their form. For example bringing Sterling on at right mid when desperate for a chance/goal was baffling and he’s done it too often.
What was the point of the noise and fuss around Maddison, he didn’t kick a ball.

That said there is little point sacking him if we have no real replacement yet.

 

[sparkie]

Has he gone yet ?

Every time I see this thread I'm reminded I've wanted him out for a few years - only lessened because I didn't want England to poach Potter ( which is no longer a problem ).

 

[Rush7V]

I'd let Southgate have another crack at it. Can't say we played badly, because we didn't overall and it's the best we've played, and against the best too - just unfortunate that Kane fluffed up his shot If he does go, and someone else comes in, I don't think it'll get better - probably worse.

 

[hart's shirt]

Take the England Women, while being a talented bunch they kept failing at the final hurdles at tournaments - until they turned to Wiegman who turned them into winners. It wasn't that Mark Sampson or Phil Neville did bad jobs, both contributed to their rise, but it was Wiegman who turned them from plucky finalists to champions.

Southgate has had 3 major tournaments, and the mentality hasn't changed really, for one reason or another we can't get a big game over the line.

"Maybe the next step is to take a leaf out of the Lionesses’ book and recognise when a longstanding mental block requires an outside influence. For all the improvements made by Mark Sampson and Phil Neville, it took Sarina Wiegman, a coach who had been to the top step of the podium before, to get them over the line." https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/dec/12/england-world-cup-qatar-france-quarter-final

Wise minds think alike?

But regardless, it's another perceptive article by Jonathan Liew. These quotes jumped out for me.

"Wanting it, striving for it, trying your hardest, is one thing. But should England be more than simply proud and disappointed? Because if the goal of Southgate’s England is to win a trophy at any cost, then quite clearly it is not working."

"But of course there are other perfectly noble and legitimate aims for a national football team. Connection with the fans and the broader public. Self-expression and pride. Making the journey as worthwhile as the destination. Indeed for about 95% of the world’s nations the goal is simply to challenge, to give it everything, to keep improving. The debate over Southgate’s future seems to encapsulate this. Take Morocco, for example, who have just reached the semi-finals with a coach they hired four months ago. Not everything has to be a holistic process of growth, learning and empowerment. Sometimes you really just do need to get some talented guys in a room, shout a few things and play like the hounds of hell for four weeks."

"What is more important by far is a group of players able to make their own decisions on the pitch, able to recognise the kill when it is in their sights. Perhaps it is worth noting that the dominant coaching influence in the France squad is Carlo Ancelotti, the king of the knockout competition. Six of them have played for him at Paris or Madrid (seven if you include Karim Benzema, originally named before injury)."

"By contrast the dominant influence in the England squad is Pep Guardiola, the king of the process. That dynamic was in evidence again here: like a Guardiola side, England simply carried on their work, in the conviction that eventually the balance of play would reward them. If England v France were played over a 38-game league season, England would probably be champions. But France, like Ancelotti, grasp that actually you only get to play it once."

 

[Pavilionaire]

Can you imagine if Southgate was sacked, the USA decided he was an upgrade on what they have and offered him the job, and he then led them to glory in their home World Cup tournament in 2026?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Who would take us over the line though? I can't see an equivalent coach to Wiegman who's available and would want the job.

We'd end up with Stevie G who would be MUCH worse..

If a resigns then someone will need to make a decision. One thing Southgate has definitely shown us is you don't need success at club level to be a successful manager at international level. So it could be a left field appointment, what I hope England have these days is like us, more of a handle on the type of manager you want, not who's available, or who is the biggest name.

 

[Bold Seagull]

"Maybe the next step is to take a leaf out of the Lionesses’ book and recognise when a longstanding mental block requires an outside influence. For all the improvements made by Mark Sampson and Phil Neville, it took Sarina Wiegman, a coach who had been to the top step of the podium before, to get them over the line." https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/dec/12/england-world-cup-qatar-france-quarter-final

Wise minds think alike?

But regardless, it's another perceptive article by Jonathan Liew. These quotes jumped out for me.

"Wanting it, striving for it, trying your hardest, is one thing. But should England be more than simply proud and disappointed? Because if the goal of Southgate’s England is to win a trophy at any cost, then quite clearly it is not working."

"But of course there are other perfectly noble and legitimate aims for a national football team. Connection with the fans and the broader public. Self-expression and pride. Making the journey as worthwhile as the destination. Indeed for about 95% of the world’s nations the goal is simply to challenge, to give it everything, to keep improving. The debate over Southgate’s future seems to encapsulate this. Take Morocco, for example, who have just reached the semi-finals with a coach they hired four months ago. Not everything has to be a holistic process of growth, learning and empowerment. Sometimes you really just do need to get some talented guys in a room, shout a few things and play like the hounds of hell for four weeks."

"What is more important by far is a group of players able to make their own decisions on the pitch, able to recognise the kill when it is in their sights. Perhaps it is worth noting that the dominant coaching influence in the France squad is Carlo Ancelotti, the king of the knockout competition. Six of them have played for him at Paris or Madrid (seven if you include Karim Benzema, originally named before injury)."

"By contrast the dominant influence in the England squad is Pep Guardiola, the king of the process. That dynamic was in evidence again here: like a Guardiola side, England simply carried on their work, in the conviction that eventually the balance of play would reward them. If England v France were played over a 38-game league season, England would probably be champions. But France, like Ancelotti, grasp that actually you only get to play it once."

Wise minds copy other wise minds - or something...

 

[Randy McNob]

You can’t blame Southgate for Kane taking and missing that penalty.
I do however question his in-game decision making and his persistence with players who are clearly ‘in the circle’ however their form. For example bringing Sterling on at right mid when desperate for a chance/goal was baffling and he’s done it too often.
What was the point of the noise and fuss around Maddison, he didn’t kick a ball.

That said there is little point sacking him if we have no real replacement yet.

not that I disagree but most of the criticism I see is nitpicking and what-ifs, which is expected after a tournament exit, rather than big mistakes / glaring errors which other managers would have identified. So that's why he deserves another crack

 

[Stato]

The Guardian's Barry Glendenning doesn't often say anything sensible, but on this occasion, he has:

"If Southgate has one obvious shortcoming it seems to be a reluctance or inability to make decisive gamechanging decisions from the touchline, a flaw which may have cost England dearly in a game full of our old friends, the fine margins, on Saturday night. Should he remain in his post for the next Euros, there is little evidence he will be any more reactive then."

Southgate gets almost everything right, but in this area, he has shown no sign of improvement. If he stays, England will have a decent tournament, but will fall against tactically superior coaches who have similar talent in their squads. If he goes, the next appointee may be better than Southgate in this area, but there is no guarantee that he won't wreck the good work that Southgate has done in other areas. Stick and we're once again hoping for an unlikely pontoon win with a hand of four cards adding up to only 16, twist and we might draw a five, but could also bust. I don't see an obvious successor and I have little faith that the FA would appoint one even if there was one, but unless we take a risk, we will continue to be decent, but not good enough. I think that the stuff that Southgate does well can be embedded and am concerned that he will continue to seek ever dimishing returns from old favourites like Stones, Maguire, Henderson, Sterling etc. big names, who need to be cut if a new squad dynamic is to be built.

Personally, I'd twist. It's what Belgium should have done after the last Euros. This time around they were just a worse version of something that had previously proved to be not good enough.

 

[vegster]

I get the feeling he's going to walk. I think deep down he knows he's not quite tactically astute in the important games.

Still, he can retire now and be hailed as the most successful England manager for a generation. He does not even need to work again !

 

[Guinness Boy]

The Guardian's Barry Glendenning doesn't often say anything sensible, but on this occasion, he has:

"If Southgate has one obvious shortcoming it seems to be a reluctance or inability to make decisive gamechanging decisions from the touchline, a flaw which may have cost England dearly in a game full of our old friends, the fine margins, on Saturday night. Should he remain in his post for the next Euros, there is little evidence he will be any more reactive then."

Southgate gets almost everything right, but in this area, he has shown no sign of improvement. If he stays, England will have a decent tournament, but will fall against tactically superior coaches who have similar talent in their squads. If he goes, the next appointee may be better than Southgate in this area, but there is no guarantee that he won't wreck the good work that Southgate has done in other areas. Stick and we're once again hoping for an unlikely pontoon win with a hand of four cards adding up to only 16, twist and we might draw a five, but could also bust. I don't see an obvious successor and I have little faith that the FA would appoint one even if there was one, but unless we take a risk, we will continue to be decent, but not good enough. I think that the stuff that Southgate does well can be embedded and am concerned that he will continue to seek ever dimishing returns from old favourites like Stones, Maguire, Henderson, Sterling etc. big names, who need to be cut if a new squad dynamic is to be built.

Personally, I'd twist. It's what Belgium should have done after the last Euros. This time around they were just a worse version of something that had previously proved to be not good enough.

This goes to Liew's point about "process" for me. Southgate is a process coach (Pep) whereas France were influenced by a knock out coach (Ancellotti).

The subs thing is interesting in that context. Even though Brighton had three or four different possible formations under Potter, he's another process driven coach who regularly got our subs very, very wrong, and has been criticised for that at Chelsea too.

So - if you remove the process, what else do you remove. Do they become a tight group who know their job or suddenly a bunch of individuals again? Is it enough to just "get some talented guys in a room, shout a few things and play like the hounds of hell for four weeks" as Liew suggests? How does that work with Nations League, Euros and all the pointless friendlies. Friendlies, which, of course, are rendered not pointless if you use them for team building and bonding, trying out tactics and players and 'process' rather than just yelling at them "just get out there and get f***ing stuck in". Christ, Mike Bassett could do that.

In short, I still don't see who the tournament winning coach is when Southgate has got to a WC semi already and lost a major final on penalties. Morocco, for all the fairy story stuff, could easily go out to France at the same stage we did in 2018 and a stage behind England's Euros.

I know I'm answering Glendenning's point by disagreeing with Liew's but I really don't know who the tournament winning coach is, who will take us to the next level when probably only 18 months ago we were at that level.

The most shocking thing about this thread, though, is finding out @Bold Seagull is a Guardian reader

 

[Stato]

He does not even need to work again !

Which is lucky, because despite some rating him as an international boss, I don't see fans of any club clamouring for their board to appoint him. Not even Palace, the usual destination for failed England managers, would seem to need him at this stage. I think that a kick upstairs at the FA would be his best bet and seems to play best to what I see as his strengths. He's diplomatic enough to fit with the hugely risk averse FA, but has also shown some backbone on important off the pitch issues. He's defended his players and has hardly put a foot wrong in the media / PR jungle that is managing our national side.

 

[vegster]

Which is lucky, because despite some rating him as an international boss, I don't see fans of any club clamouring for their board to appoint him. Not even Palace, the usual destination for failed England managers, would seem to need him at this stage. I think that a kick upstairs at the FA would be his best bet and seems to play best to what I see as his strengths. He's diplomatic enough to fit with the hugely risk averse FA, but has also shown some backbone on important off the pitch issues. He's defended his players and has hardly put a foot wrong in the media / PR jungle that is managing our national side.

Yes, if he stays in football it won't be actual front lime management, he'd make a brilliant minor functionary .