[Football] To all the Southgate haters / wrong again and again and again **SOUTHGATE NOW RESIGNED**

[Triggaaar]

To all the Southgate haters / wrong again and again and again

Just about everyone here, and most other places, disagree with you.

I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by repeating your falsehoods.

Let's have a look at your claims:

Criticised for sticking with Pickford - proved em wrong

How has he proven people wrong there? Pickford is currently England's best choice, but who knows what would have happened if he'd given other keepers the chance.

Criticised for picking shaw - proved em wrong

Could you show where he was criticised for taking a left back to the tournament?

criticised for his subs, brings on Palmer and watkins who assist and score the winner

People wanted him to bring Palmer and Watkins on in previous games. He finally does what everyone asked, and low and behold, it worked. Yet somehow you think this shows Gareth to be the tactical genius

previously Brought TAA and Toney on to take pens who both converted (v SwizzZZ)

Did anyone say that they shouldn't be taking penalties? Have you seen Ivan Toney take penalties before? We know he's good at them.

He stuck with Kane and Bellingham despite all the 'experts' saying they should be subbed who both went on to score (v Slovakia)

Surely even you can see that requiring an equaliser in the last couple of minutes against Slovakia is a desperate situation? We shouldn't have been in the position. They're ranked 45th in the World, and nearly knocked us out. That's a lucky escape, not proof of Southgate's tactical genius.

won 3 knockout matches from losing positions

Losing positions we shouldn't have been in! Losing positions against teams ranked well below us.

2 Euro Finals
1 WC Semi

This is great progress from where we've been. Southgate has two roles - the management side, and the coaching side. He's been fantastic on the management side, getting the players to play together as a team with a good spirit. So far he's been poor on the coaching side, and has relied on the fact that we have very talented players.

Time to hold up your hands and admit you were wrong about Southgate

We're not wrong though. He's not been a good tactical coach. It's bizarre that you can't see that.

If we go on and win it despite his coaching (but in large part thanks to his excellent people management skills), then we'll all be delighted. It won't suddenly make him a good tactical coach though.

 

[Justice]

Yes maybe, personally I couldn't give a stuff about the women's team and most on here who say they do are bandwagon jumpers who feel it's the 'right' thing to say they like women's football, I think where were you 10 years ago before it became the 'in' thing to like women's football.

You obviously don’t have any daughters who enjoy playing football.

 

[Cornwallboy]

You obviously don’t have any daughters who enjoy playing football.

Nothing to do with you. As my previous post said having no interest doesn't equate to a lack of encouragement.

 

[Bring back Bryan wade!!]

Criticised for sticking with Pickford - proved em wrong
Criticised for picking shaw - proved em wrong
criticised for his subs, brings on Palmer and watkins who assist and score the winner. previously Brought TAA and Toney on to take pens who both converted (v SwizzZZ)
He stuck with Kane and Bellingham despite all the 'experts' saying they should be subbed who both went on to score (v Slovakia)
won 3 knockout matches from losing positions
2 Euro Finals
1 WC Semi
Time to hold up your hands and admit you were wrong about Southgate

Have you held up your hands then?…

 

[Bring back Bryan wade!!]

Just about everyone here, and most other places, disagree with you.

I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by repeating your falsehoods.

Let's have a look at your claims:




How has he proven people wrong there? Pickford is currently England's best choice, but who knows what would have happened if he'd given other keepers the chance.




Could you show where he was criticised for taking a left back to the tournament?




People wanted him to bring Palmer and Watkins on in previous games. He finally does what everyone asked, and low and behold, it worked. Yet somehow you think this shows Gareth to be the tactical genius




Did anyone say that they shouldn't be taking penalties? Have you seen Ivan Toney take penalties before? We know he's good at them.




Surely even you can see that requiring an equaliser in the last couple of minutes against Slovakia is a desperate situation? We shouldn't have been in the position. They're ranked 45th in the World, and nearly knocked us out. That's a lucky escape, not proof of Southgate's tactical genius.



Losing positions we shouldn't have been in! Losing positions against teams ranked well below us.




This is great progress from where we've been. Southgate has two roles - the management side, and the coaching side. He's been fantastic on the management side, getting the players to play together as a team with a good spirit. So far he's been poor on the coaching side, and has relied on the fact that we have very talented players.



We're not wrong though. He's not been a good tactical coach. It's bizarre that you can't see that.

If we go on and win it despite his coaching (but in large part thanks to his excellent people management skills), then we'll all be delighted. It won't suddenly make him a good tactical coach though.

The man’s an idiot… (not Southgate)

 

[Triggaaar]

Yes maybe, personally I couldn't give a stuff about the women's team

In which case, you've probably not watched them.

and most on here who say they do are bandwagon jumpers who feel it's the 'right' thing to say they like women's football, I think where were you 10 years ago before it became the 'in' thing to like women's football.

I like watching our women's team at international tournaments, not because of some daft 'right' thing to do, but because I enjoy it. They play good football. Because the women's game wasn't so professional a couple of decades back, their football wasn't as good. When I watched bits, I wasn't that entertained by the quality on show so I didn't watch much. Like supporting Brighton in the dark years, except I'm loyal to Brighton despite some of the crap we've played. I didn't grow up watching England's women, so I haven't had that loyalty to them. I now follow them because they play well, and over time I'll end up being loyal to them too.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just about everyone here, and most other places, disagree with you.

I'm not sure what you hope to achieve by repeating your falsehoods.

Let's have a look at your claims:




How has he proven people wrong there? Pickford is currently England's best choice, but who knows what would have happened if he'd given other keepers the chance.




Could you show where he was criticised for taking a left back to the tournament?




People wanted him to bring Palmer and Watkins on in previous games. He finally does what everyone asked, and low and behold, it worked. Yet somehow you think this shows Gareth to be the tactical genius




Did anyone say that they shouldn't be taking penalties? Have you seen Ivan Toney take penalties before? We know he's good at them.




Surely even you can see that requiring an equaliser in the last couple of minutes against Slovakia is a desperate situation? We shouldn't have been in the position. They're ranked 45th in the World, and nearly knocked us out. That's a lucky escape, not proof of Southgate's tactical genius.



Losing positions we shouldn't have been in! Losing positions against teams ranked well below us.




This is great progress from where we've been. Southgate has two roles - the management side, and the coaching side. He's been fantastic on the management side, getting the players to play together as a team with a good spirit. So far he's been poor on the coaching side, and has relied on the fact that we have very talented players.



We're not wrong though. He's not been a good tactical coach. It's bizarre that you can't see that.

If we go on and win it despite his coaching (but in large part thanks to his excellent people management skills), then we'll all be delighted. It won't suddenly make him a good tactical coach though.

I was hoping someone would step up to the plate and do the full forensic.

All that aside, the relative level of approval for Southgate versus Venables interests me. Regardless of how much they achieve, the resultant levels of approval by supporters is quite different. Here is a graphic I knocked up earlier:

This means that Southgate does 'deserve' more credit, but he will never get what he deserves. I suspect this is because too many supporters find him off putting. Same was true about Potter. They would prefer a geezer they can relate to. It is what it is

 

[Van Cleef]

Is anyone else getting chills at the thought of the hairy bollock celebrating in his over exuberant way if we lose on Sunday? Remember the way he acted after we lost to Chelsea at home? I may have to put my foot through the (fairly new) telly, so we'd better win or I'm sending Southgate the bill.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I was hoping someone would step up to the plate and do the full forensic.

All that aside, the relative level of approval for Southgate versus Venables interests me. Regardless of how much they achieve, the resultant levels of approval by supporters is quite different. Here is a graphic I knocked up earlier:

View attachment 185506

This means that Southgate does 'deserve' more credit, but he will never get what he deserves. I suspect this is because too many supporters find him off putting. Same was true about Potter. They would prefer a geezer they can relate to. It is what it is

I think that’s fair, but I do believe Venables was a tactical genius (although it pains me to say it etc….), and also believe we’d have done better in subsequent tournaments under him, and if he had the same players as Southgate, it is likely he would have done as well, if not better.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In which case, you've probably not watched them.




I like watching our women's team at international tournaments, not because of some daft 'right' thing to do, but because I enjoy it. They play good football. Because the women's game wasn't so professional a couple of decades back, their football wasn't as good. When I watched bits, I wasn't that entertained by the quality on show so I didn't watch much. Like supporting Brighton in the dark years, except I'm loyal to Brighton despite some of the crap we've played. I didn't grow up watching England's women, so I haven't had that loyalty to them. I now follow them because they play well, and over time I'll end up being loyal to them too.

Yep. Really looking forward to tomorrow night

 

[Triggaaar]

All that aside, the relative level of approval for Southgate versus Venables interests me. Regardless of how much they achieve, the resultant levels of approval by supporters is quite different. Here is a graphic I knocked up earlier:

View attachment 185506

I don't think that graphic is fair. El Tel only managed us for one tournament, and in it we reached the semi-final, and lost on penalties. In his short time with us, we went from Taylor's failure to qualify, to a flair team that took Holland apart, and were the better side against Germany (we got lucky against Spain).

We played great football under Venables who was excellent tactically. Dig me up when Barca come calling for the genius of Southgate.

 

[Triggaaar]

Spain have already beaten Croatia, Italy, Germany and France. Would be enough to win most European tournaments. Yet England somehow splutter on

That certainly looks like a who's who of European football, but the truth is that Croatia and Italy were shocking this tournament, and France were nowhere near as good as they should have been. The only team France could score against in open play was Spain!

Germany aren't as good as they've been in previous years (ranked 16th), but they were decent in this, their home tournament. Spain have certainly well earned their place in the final, while we got a lucky draw.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think that’s fair, but I do believe Venables was a tactical genius (although it pains me to say it etc….), and also believe we’d have done better in subsequent tournaments under him, and if he had the same players as Southgate, it is likely he would have done as well, if not better.

You have just proven my point. Venables' finest moment was being mugged by the Germans at Wembley. And it wasn't even a final.

Anyone can say he coulda, woulda, shoulda. But he didna .

So his approval is disproportionate to his achievements.

(I admit I instinctively much preferred Venables to Southgate, despite his evident racist team selections. But when I think about it, I can't justify it.)

 

[Van Cleef]

I don't think that graphic is fair.

I hope you're not suggesting that HWT has just "knocked it up".

 

[keaton]

I was hoping someone would step up to the plate and do the full forensic.

All that aside, the relative level of approval for Southgate versus Venables interests me. Regardless of how much they achieve, the resultant levels of approval by supporters is quite different. Here is a graphic I knocked up earlier:

View attachment 185506

This means that Southgate does 'deserve' more credit, but he will never get what he deserves. I suspect this is because too many supporters find him off putting. Same was true about Potter. They would prefer a geezer they can relate to. It is what it is

Not sure the achievement axis is correct.Venables has a 100% record of only being defeated by the best team on the tournament, Southgate doesn't

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't think that graphic is fair. El Tel only managed us for one tournament, and in it we reached the semi-final, and lost on penalties. In his short time with us, we went from Taylor's failure to qualify, to a flair team that took Holland apart, and were the better side against Germany (we got lucky against Spain).

We played great football under Venables who was excellent tactically. Dig me up when Barca come calling for the genius of Southgate.

I'm not saying Venables was bad, and as I have said, my instinctive response favours him over Southgate. Even though the evidence does not justify it. As you say, Venables wasn't there long enough to allow anyone to fairly judge.

 

[Triggaaar]

I hope you're not suggesting that HWT has just "knocked it up".

I actually thought he found it somewhere, but I now see he wrote that he did knock it up.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

You have just proven my point. Venables' finest moment was being mugged by the Germans at Wembley. And it wasn't even a final.

Anyone can say he coulda, woulda, shoulda. But he didna .

So his approval is disproportionate to his achievements.

(I admit I instinctively much preferred Venables to Southgate, despite his evident racist team selections. But when I think about it, I can't justify it.)

But he had one chance, with a tougher draw, against better teams, including Spain and Holland and did…..

Racist team selections? Who wasn’t selected? Ince was, Sol Campbell, Les Ferdinand? Can’t think of any obvious omissions.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I don't think that graphic is fair. El Tel only managed us for one tournament, and in it we reached the semi-final, and lost on penalties. In his short time with us, we went from Taylor's failure to qualify, to a flair team that took Holland apart, and were the better side against Germany (we got lucky against Spain).

We played great football under Venables who was excellent tactically. Dig me up when Barca come calling for the genius of Southgate.

Quite.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Not sure the achievement axis is correct.Venables has a 100% record of only being defeated by the best team on the tournament, Southgate doesn't

The graph is not 'over time'. It represents how much approval each get per quantum of achievement. Venables gets more approval for his one semi than Southgate gets for his 3 semis and two finals.