Can you admit that Southgate is doing a great job yet?

Saka & Trippier have to be in our best 11. They're by far the best in their position for this season (and going back further).

As for Mount & Sterling I can see the argument. Both have been dreadful this season compared to their high standards.
 
Midtable quality teams, we were at home and one of them their best player had very recently nearly died. We were clear favourites for both games.
marginal favourites, they were top 10 sides and so they DO meet the criteria of beating a 'decent team in the knockout stage', these were far from gimmes
 
people talking about playing qf's vs france. Senegal are better than iran usa and wales by some margin. its a tough game. france will play argentina maybe. i back the argies in that one.
Senegal, it's no gimme, and we have a poor record outside of europe in knockout matches. It will be a tough game.

I agree about argenitina, they will pull, push, provoke and everything they can to get the job done
 
How many would have Mount, Saka Trippier Sterling in our best available 11?
It's about roles as well.

Nobody can argue that Trippier doesn't deserve to be in the team ot that Saka has been on fire.

Sterling has always done it for England.

Mount is the only one that you could argue against, but we don't have an abundance of creative central midfielders, maybe if Maddison was fit he could have challenged for that role, but he isn't so that's moot
 
You're right Senagal are a good side who could cause us problems. Until England beat them, then they're obviously a pub team who have magically appeared at the World Cup by chance.
Just remember, whatever happens there will be some way you can be negative about England. You can do it!

This is it in a nutshell.

Senegal will be bigged up as a serious threat before thee game, then assuming England win, they'll be dismissed as "essentially a bye in the second round".

If England win the tournament, some will dismiss the achievement as "the tournament was gift wrapped for England", despite no one on the forum tipping them to win it beforehand.

A harsh judge is a poor judge.
 
The media have always had it in for every manager including world cup winner Alf ramsey. Southgate has had it extremely easy compared to the dispicable personal attacks on sir bobby and Graham Taylor.
It's true that the media have, I don't agree that southgate has had it easy though, his 'wokeness' has been constantly attacked, GBeebies, Talksport, LBC, BBC have all attacked him personally. Those other managers were largely vilified for their results. If he had the results of some of those other managers he would have had it even worse, and yes Ramsey got it in the neck because he failed to qualify for the world cup, imagine if Southgate had that.
 
That sentence in bold is about playing attacking football. Attacking gives us a chance to score. I.e. if we attack we might win. The pragmatic (which is a fancy way of saying overly negative) means we won't win but we might not lose.
absolute codswallop.

Firstly, if you need to play attacking football to score, and Southgates teams are the all-time highest scoring England teams in tournaments and qualifying, and you need to score to win and Southgate's England have won more competititve and tournament games than any other manager.....then how on earth can you square that circle with a claim that he is "overly defensive"??? It's an absolute logical loophole to these claims. Let me guess 'golden generation', 'easy games'.....I'll save you the effort, this generation is not our best, and all generations have easy games.

We just topped our group, 12 hours ago, and are probably going to be the top or second highest scorers in group games, again, and yet all the evidence and facts are dismissed for this playground rhetoric of 'overly defensive'. The mind boggles, it truly does. England fans will one day look back on this golden age, just like Boro fans look back on the McClaren era with begrudging respect.
 
This is daft. Loads of teams have won over the years with defensive styles of football where protecting the clean sheet is the starting point. That's what makes the sport interesting. There isn't one way to win and all other tactics are doomed.
I'd argue that Brazil didn't win with attacking football for 20 odd years, then a Dunga inspired defensive style won them the WC All out attack is anti-tactics, vindaloo football, we'll score more than you, that is that antithesis of tactical thinking, creating a defensive style requires strong tactics, yet Southgate apparently isn't a tactical manager. Another logical loophole from the haters.
 
I'd argue Spain's victory was a triumph for defensive football.
Sure you can list the great attacking players they had, but that's not how they played. Their primary philosophy was "If we have the ball, we can't concede".
I believe they're the lowest scoring world cup winners by some distance (8 goals), despite playing a few more games than some of the early winners.
Should England ever win the tournament with 4 1-0 wins in the knockout stage, no one would dare suggest they'd been anything other than a defensive team.

On a different note: tournaments are not won at the group stage. The last WC winner to get 9 points in the group were Brazil in 2002. Since then, every winner has dropped points, so let's not pretend swashbuckling through the group stage is somehow prerequisite for success.
 
Last edited:
I hope I'm wrong but can see us getting done by Senegal 1-0 or something silly like that. lets just hope we have a better 1st half on Sunday than we did last night.
and if that isn't what happens then you are going to give credit, or will you still look for something to complain about?

It's a 90 minute game, sometimes you have to be patient and wear the other side out, I mean Brazil vs Serbia is a good example of that, took them an hour to score and Serbia were decent value for 0-0 at that time.
 
I'd argue Spain's victory was a triumph for defensive football.
Sure you can list the great attacking players they had, but that's not how they played. Their primary philosophy was "If we have the ball, we can't concede".
and the British media and fans complained that we just were not as technically good as the Spanish side, and we need to have technical players that dominate the ball.......here we are, with those players, playing that style, but now it's labelled as defensive and wasting our talent...you just can't win against that kind of thinking.

English fans are largely uncultured when it comes to football, still stuck in the 80s, thinking it's all about running lots, kicking lumps out of people and attacking at every opportunity.
 
and if that isn't what happens then you are going to give credit, or will you still look for something to complain about?
Of course he will look for something else! This is Southgate we're talking about. Certain 'fans' will only ever look for fault with him. If we win this and the next Euros, they'll grumble throughout, wait for the next poor game afterwards and then brand him a failure.
 
Of course he will look for something else! This is Southgate we're talking about. Certain 'fans' will only ever look for fault with him. If we win this and the next Euros, they'll grumble throughout, wait for the next poor game afterwards and then brand him a failure.
Indeed they will but thats just they way football fans behave, your only as good as your last result. Fans think they know best regardless of past glories. Its absolute nonsense to suggest Southgate has been treated any differently to any other manager. I think some boro fans are a bit sensitive to criticism of Southgate, unfortunately it goes with the territory, it would be exactly the same if Fat Sam was still in charge and winning matches.
 
Its absolute nonsense to suggest Southgate has been treated any differently to any other manager.
no it isn't most England managers didn't live in the age of social media that we have today, the ones that did got grief for persistent on field failure. Southgate is different in that he gets grief for persistent on field success. Fat Sam wouldn't be getting this success.
 
and if that isn't what happens then you are going to give credit, or will you still look for something to complain about?

It's a 90 minute game, sometimes you have to be patient and wear the other side out, I mean Brazil vs Serbia is a good example of that, took them an hour to score and Serbia were decent value for 0-0 at that time.

I answered that in another post (y)
 
and the British media and fans complained that we just were not as technically good as the Spanish side, and we need to have technical players that dominate the ball.......here we are, with those players, playing that style, but now it's labelled as defensive and wasting our talent...you just can't win against that kind of thinking.

English fans are largely uncultured when it comes to football, still stuck in the 80s, thinking it's all about running lots, kicking lumps out of people and attacking at every opportunity.
So what if we dont like the spanish Tiki-taka style of football, there's more than one way to win football matches. Most fans would love us to play the strong running game Germany played in 2014 or the high tempo way liverpool play in europe.
 
Last edited:
no it isn't most England managers didn't live in the age of social media that we have today, the ones that did got grief for persistent on field failure. Southgate is different in that he gets grief for persistent on field success. Fat Sam wouldn't be getting this success.
if fat sam was still in charge and getting success they would be saying its dull and longball, so he would be definitely getting criticised regardless of results.
 
Of course he will look for something else! This is Southgate we're talking about. Certain 'fans' will only ever look for fault with him. If we win this and the next Euros, they'll grumble throughout, wait for the next poor game afterwards and then brand him a failure.

Na, as I said in my other post, I will give credit. But I won't be dancing around my front room singing 'It's Coming Home' after wins over Iran and Wales.

We have issues spanning back to the Euros which leaked into the Nations League and I fear against better opposition we'll come unstuck. As I have said MANY times I hope I am wrong.
 
absolute codswallop.

Firstly, if you need to play attacking football to score, and Southgates teams are the all-time highest scoring England teams in tournaments and qualifying, and you need to score to win and Southgate's England have won more competititve and tournament games than any other manager.....then how on earth can you square that circle with a claim that he is "overly defensive"??? It's an absolute logical loophole to these claims. Let me guess 'golden generation', 'easy games'.....I'll save you the effort, this generation is not our best, and all generations have easy games.

We just topped our group, 12 hours ago, and are probably going to be the top or second highest scorers in group games, again, and yet all the evidence and facts are dismissed for this playground rhetoric of 'overly defensive'. The mind boggles, it truly does. England fans will one day look back on this golden age, just like Boro fans look back on the McClaren era with begrudging respect.
Because we play completely differently against good teams. We are not overly defensive against rubbish teams. He allows the players to just go and do what they want and we score for fun. As I have said, he should be commended for that because our record against minnows is exceptional. However, he changes our approach against better teams and so far it has failed every time. We have a good group of attacking players and we should be playing our game against every team, not shutting up shop and playing for 0-0s. International knockout tournaments are not leagues where beating the minnows and not getting beat by your rivals would be successful. In a cup competition you have to beat teams. I think we can do it by playing the way that suits our players best. I don't think playing for penalties is a good strategy, that's what minnows would do but we are not minnows. Our squad is good enough to beat anyone. Our players aren't used to playing that defensive way because we don't do it very often. It's not a coincidence that when we do play like that we don't win.

In no way am I criticising his management of the team in qualifying and in the groups. You can't win tournaments by only beating minnows though. At some point you will come up against a good team. He has been very lucky that it has been so late in tournaments so far. It is looking very likely that it will be earlier this time with France in the QF. Sven got England to the knockouts every tournament, only lost 1 qualifying game during his time in England but got knocked out of tournaments by Brazil (eventual winners), Portugal (home team) and Portugal again both on penalties. If he had the luck Southgate had with the draw would he be remembered better? Sven and Southgate both did well in tournaments until they played a good team and got knocked out. Until Southgate proves himself by beating an actual good team in a knockout then he is just another England manager. He doesn't have to win the tournament to prove himself. If we beat France I will hold my hands up but if not then he's achieved nothing other than what is expected.
 
Back
Top