[Football] Can England finally knockout a BIG team on foreign soil?

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Context ok , so our great 1910/11 Community shield winning side against our current squad ?! , in context were they good or are we now better considering we havn`t duplicated their achievement ? .

If you want to compare "what`s gone before" you have to take the state of the opposition into account as well , as you pointed out Germany are out , yet they are 4 time world champions , it`s not just context but also perspective .

Context ok , so our great 1910/11 Community shield winning side against our current squad ?! , in context were they good or are we now better considering we havn`t duplicated their achievement ? .

If you want to compare "what`s gone before" you have to take the state of the opposition into account as well , as you pointed out Germany are out , yet they are 4 time world champions , it`s not just context but also perspective .

I've been genuinely trying to follow your argument as you're the only one on this thread defending an anti-southgate stance. I've got lost a little in the talk of the Albion and context and progress.

Would I be right in summarising your argument as essentially any success England have had under Southgate is down to the players?

 

[Butch Willykins]

We’ll smash France on Saturday. 2-0 inside 90 mins.

 

[Poojah]

Context ok , so our great 1910/11 Community shield winning side against our current squad ?! , in context were they good or are we now better considering we havn`t duplicated their achievement ? .

If you want to compare "what`s gone before" you have to take the state of the opposition into account as well , as you pointed out Germany are out , yet they are 4 time world champions , it`s not just context but also perspective .

Right, let’s go back a step and understand why the specific context I referred to is pertinent. In your original post which I was replying to, you stated (and these are all direct quotes):

1 - Southgate is a delegator
2 - you could name 3 managers better than him in a heartbeat
3 - a man with zero tactical sense

So, Southgate is a delegator, is he? I don’t really know whether it’s true or not, but let’s assume it is, why is it a negative? I’d see creating a cohesive coaching environment and deferring to the specialisms of others rather than egotistically following one’s convictions as a huge positive.

Now for the context bit. I’m not referring to something completely disassociated with the conditions of today, from the early 1900s to use your example, but rather a sequential pattern that has stubbornly continued for half-a-century.

Virtually if not literally every England manager since Sir Alf Ramsey left his post was better on paper than Southgate, ignoring everyone’s respective successes and failures on the international stage. And he’s done better than ALL of them. He’s broken the pattern. The context there is: a better managerial CV does not guarantee performance as England manager.

And that somewhat disproves your point of “zero tactical sense”. How has he done so much better than his tactically superior predecessors? Because he’s delegated, perhaps? Maybe, but then that rather makes your points 1 and 3 null and void.

He’s doing well mate. If I were you, I’d try and enjoy the moment a little bit as it’s as good as it’s been in a long time and may well be as good as it gets for a long while after.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Update Raheem Sterling will rejoin the squad today. I believe arrests have been made in connection with the burglary.

 

[Mellotron]

Update Raheem Sterling will rejoin the squad today. I believe arrests have been made in connection with the burglary.

Excellent news. Another very strong attacking option off the bench.

If the game went to 120 minutes, our superior bench could make the difference.

 

[TugWilson]

I've been genuinely trying to follow your argument as you're the only one on this thread defending an anti-southgate stance. I've got lost a little in the talk of the Albion and context and progress.

Would I be right in summarising your argument as essentially any success England have had under Southgate is down to the players?

3 years at Boro and he achieved nothing , with England we are doing well the only difference i can see is the squads he had at his disposal , hence it must be the players .
It`s only my opinion but it is obvious that a better squad will achieve more , with a poorer squad at Boro he couldn`t make a difference , but with the best England has to offer he is getting results . It seems inarguable that the players are the difference .

 

[Brovion]

So what we're saying is that we always get knocked out by the first 'decent/big' team we face? And have done for the past 60 years at least?

So if it happens again against the reigning World Champions it'll definitely be a disaster, unforeseen and proof that the manager is shit?

#waistcoatwanker
#everymanagerwe'veeverhadwould'vebeatenfrance
#everymanagerwe'veneverhadwould'vebeatenfrance

or


#Englandgotlucky

Indeed. If we lose to France on Saturday it will simply be the same old story - we've been knocked out by a better team*. And yet if this happens again ... it'll be all the manager's fault! Unbelievable. Yes Southgate has his faults but he has been a brilliant international manager, his record speaks for itself. And we never used to score six goals against weaker sides either so he gets immense credit for that as well, something none of his predecessors could do. Usually we'd always struggle against the 'easy' teams.

Now I see that other old chestnut is being dragged out - "we should be doing better with the players we have". Jeez, the number of times I've heard that since 1966. The one-eyed insular, self-deceiving bollocks that England fans can still come out with is astounding. Even after all these years. (I know, I know it's always the manager's fault isn't it? Sack him, get someone better and then watch the trophies roll in).

Whenever Southgate's reign ends he will have left one hell of a legacy for his poor successor to try and emulate.


*Obviously I'm only including the Tournaments that we a) qualified for and b) got past the Group stage.

 

[Mellotron]

"we should be doing better with the players we have".

This was probably true between 1998 and 2010. But now, it really isn't.

We have perhaps around the 5th best side/squad in World football. In the last two tournaments we reached a semi final and final, in both cases going out narrowly. Arguably we have overachieved so far with Southgate. He has been comfortably the best England manager in my lifetime.

If we lose to France, that will be about par. They're a decent side, probably slightly better than us.

 

[TugWilson]

Right, let’s go back a step and understand why the specific context I referred to is pertinent. In your original post which I was replying to, you stated (and these are all direct quotes):

1 - Southgate is a delegator
2 - you could name 3 managers better than him in a heartbeat
3 - a man with zero tactical sense

So, Southgate is a delegator, is he? I don’t really know whether it’s true or not, but let’s assume it is, why is it a negative? I’d see creating a cohesive coaching environment and deferring to the specialisms of others rather than egotistically following one’s convictions as a huge positive.

Now for the context bit. I’m not referring to something completely disassociated with the conditions of today, from the early 1900s to use your example, but rather a sequential pattern that has stubbornly continued for half-a-century.

Virtually if not literally every England manager since Sir Alf Ramsey left his post was better on paper than Southgate, ignoring everyone’s respective successes and failures on the international stage. And he’s done better than ALL of them. He’s broken the pattern. The context there is: a better managerial CV does not guarantee performance as England manager.

And that somewhat disproves your point of “zero tactical sense”. How has he done so much better than his tactically superior predecessors? Because he’s delegated, perhaps? Maybe, but then that rather makes your points 1 and 3 null and void.

He’s doing well mate. If I were you, I’d try and enjoy the moment a little bit as it’s as good as it’s been in a long time and may well be as good as it gets for a long while after.

Yes i should just enjoy it , you`re right , but i can`t stand southgate and how he treated Lewis , that will never change .

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

3 years at Boro and he achieved nothing , with England we are doing well the only difference i can see is the squads he had at his disposal , hence it must be the players .
It`s only my opinion but it is obvious that a better squad will achieve more , with a poorer squad at Boro he couldn`t make a difference , but with the best England has to offer he is getting results . It seems inarguable that the players are the difference .

It's not the same job though is it? International management and club management are quite different beasts with quite different skill sets needed.

Many successful club managers have 'failed' with England. Is that also down to the players? Does any manager have any effect on the national team? If not should there be any blame if/when we get knocked out?

 

[Poojah]

If we lose to France, that will be about par. They're a decent side, probably slightly better than us.

I think it will be an interesting battle. It’s easy to look at their front four of Giroud, Mbappe, Griezmann and Dembelè, coming up against the likes of Maguire and Stones and write us off.

But then I’d argue we have the best midfield at the tournament along with the best number 9, flanked by the likes of Rashford, Foden and Saka all three of whom have been in brilliant, scoring form. Plus, if the game goes long, the likes of Grealish and now Sterling to bring into the fray.

France will score, I’m almost certain of that. But they play with a naturally attacking stance; they will be open. If we can dominate the midfield, we can and will hurt them.

I expect a fairly robust and possibly different shape from Southgate. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if we reverted to a back three and a very similar lineup to the one we stifled Germany with at last year’s Euros, with Henderson in for Phillips and Foden in for Sterling. He got a bit of stick ahead of that game, but it worked a treat. Be hard to beat and let our attacking options do their thing. I predict an England win in a high-scoring game; an all-time classic!

 

[TugWilson]

I think it will be an interesting battle. It’s easy to look at their front four of Giroud, Mbappe, Griezmann and Dembelè, coming up against the likes of Maguire and Stones and write us off.

But then I’d argue we have the best midfield at the tournament along with the best number 9, flanked by the likes of Rashford, Foden and Saka all three of whom have been in brilliant, scoring form. Plus, if the game goes long, the likes of Grealish and now Sterling to bring into the fray.

France will score, I’m almost certain of that. But they play with a naturally attacking stance; they will be open. If we can dominate the midfield, we can and will hurt them.

I expect a fairly robust and possibly different shape from Southgate. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if we reverted to a back three and a very similar lineup to the one we stifled Germany with at last year’s Euros, with Henderson in for Phillips and Foden in for Sterling. He got a bit of stick ahead of that game, but it worked a treat. Be hard to beat and let our attacking options do their thing. I predict an England win in a high-scoring game; an all-time classic!

View attachment 154478

Don`t forget Bellingham .

 

[TugWilson]

It's not the same job though is it? International management and club management are quite different beasts with quite different skill sets needed.

Many successful club managers have 'failed' with England. Is that also down to the players? Does any manager have any effect on the national team? If not should there be any blame if/when we get knocked out?

I would only be guessing as to the differences between the two skill sets , but i will begrudgingly admit that he seems to have a way of bringing the group together , which is very important , i think that`s one of our strengths at the Albion .

 

[Poojah]

Yeah, I realised once I glanced back at that lineup and realised my glaring error. In that case, if we went with that system it would probably be Bellingham in for Rice; harsh on Rice but I can’t see a scenario whereby Henderson doesn’t start this one.

Here you go.

 

[TugWilson]

Yeah, I realised once I glanced back at that lineup and realised my glaring error. In that case, if we went with that system it would probably be Bellingham in for Rice; harsh on Rice but I can’t see a scenario whereby Henderson doesn’t start this one.

Here you go.

I think the Senegal game was one of , if not the best iv`e seen Henderson play for England he was excellent . It will be hard to pick the team for France , i might be tempted to play 5 across the middle .

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I would only be guessing as to the differences between the two skill sets , but i will begrudgingly admit that he seems to have a way of bringing the group together , which is very important , i think that`s one of our strengths at the Albion .

I think that's his one great skill and I think that it probably counts for a lot in international football. The manager doesn't have the players for a long time, he gets them for a week or so about 6 times a year. There isn't much time to drill the players into a way of playing and numnerous tactical approaches. Being able to bring them together, taking the weight of the shirt away from them, making them play for each other and making them feel comfortable enough to relax and play to their best is pretty close to as much as what can be expected. I think Southgate does that. A bit more ability to affect things in game would be nice but on that score it could be corrected by appointing an assistant with more tactical astuteness.

Thinking about it, Harry Redknapp pretty much made a career out of the same style of management. He just did it with a bit more personality. He might have made a decent England manager.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

This was probably true between 1998 and 2010. But now, it really isn't.

We have perhaps around the 5th best side/squad in World football. In the last two tournaments we reached a semi final and final, in both cases going out narrowly. Arguably we have overachieved so far with Southgate. He has been comfortably the best England manager in my lifetime.

If we lose to France, that will be about par. They're a decent side, probably slightly better than us.

They are the defending champions. That makes no difference to some entitled fans.

 

[Eeyore]

3 years at Boro and he achieved nothing , with England we are doing well the only difference i can see is the squads he had at his disposal , hence it must be the players .
It`s only my opinion but it is obvious that a better squad will achieve more , with a poorer squad at Boro he couldn`t make a difference , but with the best England has to offer he is getting results . It seems inarguable that the players are the difference .

Many managers have succeeded at international level without having great CVs. The key, because of the nature of national team management, is whether the manager is popular or not. Reports suggest that there is a happy team atmosphere. That is half the battle. Southgate is a very likable bloke. The team will be aware of his tactical shortcomings. Some of my superiors over the years at work have not been very well skilled. But I've always worked better if they are good folk who are easy to get along with.

Contrast that with Capello. The best tactical manager of our time. Excellent football being played. Then look at how the wheels came off. It was all about relationship.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

I think it will be an interesting battle. It’s easy to look at their front four of Giroud, Mbappe, Griezmann and Dembelè, coming up against the likes of Maguire and Stones and write us off.

But then I’d argue we have the best midfield at the tournament along with the best number 9, flanked by the likes of Rashford, Foden and Saka all three of whom have been in brilliant, scoring form. Plus, if the game goes long, the likes of Grealish and now Sterling to bring into the fray.

France will score, I’m almost certain of that. But they play with a naturally attacking stance; they will be open. If we can dominate the midfield, we can and will hurt them.

I expect a fairly robust and possibly different shape from Southgate. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if we reverted to a back three and a very similar lineup to the one we stifled Germany with at last year’s Euros, with Henderson in for Phillips and Foden in for Sterling. He got a bit of stick ahead of that game, but it worked a treat. Be hard to beat and let our attacking options do their thing. I predict an England win in a high-scoring game; an all-time classic!

View attachment 154478

I think a three man central midfield is essential but I'd stay 4-3-3.

Same back four, telling Maguire to stick on Giroud and don't let him win anything.

Same midfield 3 but with Rice doing a man to man job on Griezmann.

If we can stop Giroud winning/flicking on/holding up the ball and give Griezmann no time/opportunity on the ball we greatly negate the threat of Mbappe and Dembele.

In this scenario our wingers are our greatest strength in that we've got loads of top quality ones. I'd play two of foden, Rashford, Saka or Sterling and tell them they have to double up defensively on Mbappe and Dembele and get forward to help Kane. I'd tell them to run themselves into the ground for a half/an hour at most and then replace with the other two and tell them to do the same thing.

That would still leave Mount and Grealish(and Maddison) for extra time if needed.

 

[nicko31]

You`re spot on , how garbage he was at Boro has absolutely no reflection on Saturday`s game . However the players he has at his disposal are light years ahead of not only Boro but what Sir Alf had . And yes i do know the list of heroes England had , but they were of their time . I have read on here how this is the best squad we have ever had , that means above the likes of Ward Mellor Sully Ryan Foster and countless others , it`s called progression .

Ask yourself one question , if England win the WC would you want him or De Zerbi , or Potter , Or even Hughton ? .

Players light years ahead of what Sir Alf had....i agree but its the same for everyone else. Winning the WC today is tougher than 66, football is a truly global sport, more professional and there a no crap teams. In 1982 Hungary beat El Salvador 10-1, would never happen today

Hard to say if any other manager would have done better than Southgate so far, but no one has done better than him in 5 decades thats just counting. All managers have their strengths and weaknesses, Southgate has created a togetherness in the players where others like Taylor, McClaren, Copello and Hodgson failed.