Does anybody get the Southgate criticism…

He has a great record in qualifying and it is obviously something we struggled with before. Not sure why because we have always been expected to qualify comfortably so I presume it is down to poor management at the time. In tournaments again he has got us through group stages where we would expect to progress and then we've been beaten by the first real challenge we have faced*. Luckily for him that was very late in tournaments until Qatar. Would he have such positive reviews if we had been knocked out by Croatia and Italy in the first knock-out rounds instead of the semi/final, of course he wouldn't. Personally I just don't think we will win anything with Southgate as manager (despite us having the players to do it) so it depends what you want. Are we happy with always doing well but never winning or would you prefer to win something?

I am a big fan of Southgate as a person and I certainly wouldn't ever say he deserves sacking but I don't think he is the manager to take us to the pinnacle. He consistently meets expectations which is definitely not a sackable offence but I just can't envision him ever exceeding expectations. If/when he leaves England I don't think he will be a success at club level either.

*I know some people are going to argue that teams like Ukraine, Germany and Denmark were good teams but they weren't. None of them were even considered as potential tournament winners and we had the massive advantage of playing at home.
 
It wasn't something I agreed with, but there's at least a logic to that.

Sterling has plenty of flaws and there are alternative players who you could argue would do better.

Kane is the most complete striker England have, he can shoot with both feet, can score with head, can hold the ball up, can start attacks and finish them, and has reached 20+ goals in each of the last 9 seasons.
His only real weaknesses are a slight lack of pace and he's a bit rubbish at free kicks.
There is not currently a better English striker than him.
Kane is a top class striker. He's proven that in the PL over years. His international record is very good as well but I saw the below which, while a bit harsh, shows what International football records are worth. Most games are massive mismatches and it's like letting a top PL team enter the FA Cup at the qualifying round.

I don't think the way England use Kane in big games is the most effective. He drops too deep and he doesn't get into position to do what he does best which is scoring goals. I think that is the major reason we struggle against the best teams.

1679916072278.jpeg
 
There's been plenty of criticism of him on here, which I've never been able to fathom.

He's revolutionised the England team; results have been excellent, but he's also transformed the culture too.

Before he took over the squad wasn't together, many players didn't get on and it was occasionally a negative experience for players.

Players ate desperate to play for their country again.

I would love to see him back at Boro after his England days are over.
 
There's been plenty of criticism of him on here, which I've never been able to fathom.

He's revolutionised the England team; results have been excellent, but he's also transformed the culture too.

Before he took over the squad wasn't together, many players didn't get on and it was occasionally a negative experience for players.

Players ate desperate to play for their country again.

I would love to see him back at Boro after his England days are over.
Please god no. Are gareth and gibson on good terms now i thought there was a contractual disagreement about money when southgate was rightly dismissed
 
He has a great record in qualifying and it is obviously something we struggled with before. Not sure why because we have always been expected to qualify comfortably so I presume it is down to poor management at the time. In tournaments again he has got us through group stages where we would expect to progress and then we've been beaten by the first real challenge we have faced*. Luckily for him that was very late in tournaments until Qatar. Would he have such positive reviews if we had been knocked out by Croatia and Italy in the first knock-out rounds instead of the semi/final, of course he wouldn't. Personally I just don't think we will win anything with Southgate as manager (despite us having the players to do it) so it depends what you want. Are we happy with always doing well but never winning or would you prefer to win something?

I am a big fan of Southgate as a person and I certainly wouldn't ever say he deserves sacking but I don't think he is the manager to take us to the pinnacle. He consistently meets expectations which is definitely not a sackable offence but I just can't envision him ever exceeding expectations. If/when he leaves England I don't think he will be a success at club level either.

*I know some people are going to argue that teams like Ukraine, Germany and Denmark were good teams but they weren't. None of them were even considered as potential tournament winners and we had the massive advantage of playing at home.
So who do England have to beat?
France - is that the benchmark - fine margins and if Kane wallops one in the top corner of the net at the last World Cup against them, I am sure we would have gone on to win that game.
Lets beat them in the next Euro final.
 
Kane is a top class striker. He's proven that in the PL over years. His international record is very good as well but I saw the below which, while a bit harsh, shows what International football records are worth. Most games are massive mismatches and it's like letting a top PL team enter the FA Cup at the qualifying round.

I don't think the way England use Kane in big games is the most effective. He drops too deep and he doesn't get into position to do what he does best which is scoring goals. I think that is the major reason we struggle against the best teams.

View attachment 55313


Clearly a tweet with an agenda given some of those 32 goals were penalties, and they're being counted twice.

Any striker's international record is going to be heavily weighted towards goals against weaker opposition, it's natural.
 
He has a great record in qualifying and it is obviously something we struggled with before. Not sure why because we have always been expected to qualify comfortably so I presume it is down to poor management at the time. In tournaments again he has got us through group stages where we would expect to progress and then we've been beaten by the first real challenge we have faced*. Luckily for him that was very late in tournaments until Qatar. Would he have such positive reviews if we had been knocked out by Croatia and Italy in the first knock-out rounds instead of the semi/final, of course he wouldn't. Personally I just don't think we will win anything with Southgate as manager (despite us having the players to do it) so it depends what you want. Are we happy with always doing well but never winning or would you prefer to win something?

I am a big fan of Southgate as a person and I certainly wouldn't ever say he deserves sacking but I don't think he is the manager to take us to the pinnacle. He consistently meets expectations which is definitely not a sackable offence but I just can't envision him ever exceeding expectations. If/when he leaves England I don't think he will be a success at club level either.

*I know some people are going to argue that teams like Ukraine, Germany and Denmark were good teams but they weren't. None of them were even considered as potential tournament winners and we had the massive advantage of playing at home.

Who is the manager to take us to the pinnacle then? Because we've appointed proven "winners" in the past and they've ended up further away from winning tournaments than Southgate has.

This is a big part of the problem with people's attitudes for me. There's only one chance to win something every two years. Unlike club footy where there are at least 4 chances for most clubs in with a shout, every year.

Then you have to take into account that football is an unpredictable sport, and knock out football even more so. You need a bit of luck.

Better sides than this England side have failed to win tournaments. Far weaker sides have won them. Were the weaker sides better managed? Maybe. But probably more likely is they just got the rub of the green at key moments.

Did the Argentina manager do a better job than the France manager at the world cup just because they won it? It's a very simplistic take.

If England had beat Italy on penalties would you be saying "we'll never win another competition under Southgate". I doubt it. Yet the only difference in that attitude from people is a couple of penalty kicks.
 
Clearly a tweet with an agenda given some of those 32 goals were penalties, and they're being counted twice.

Any striker's international record is going to be heavily weighted towards goals against weaker opposition, it's natural.
Let's see who Rooney, Lineker and Charlton scored the majority of their England goals against....

It is ironic that one of the loudest critics of the current international set up which pits strong established richer countries against the poorest countries, which does nothing for England and even less for a country trying to find some level of competitiveness, is Gareth Southgate.
 
2 of our 4 best tournament finishes. Only ever lost to the winners/finalists in any finals competition. The records keep falling, and we have one foot in the euro finals after just 2 games. A remarkable record.
It doesn’t massively diminish his record but it’s two of England’s best six. England have six last four appearances. Ramsey a 1st in 66 and a 3rd in 68 has two of the best three, and Venables and Robson have a semifinal exit each in 96 and 90.

And strictly speaking, even if no one by then cared, England lost to Belgium in the 2018 finals competition.
 
It doesn’t massively diminish his record but it’s two of England’s best six. England have six last four appearances. Ramsey a 1st in 66 and a 3rd in 68 has two of the best three, and Venables and Robson have a semifinal exit each in 96 and 90.

And strictly speaking, even if no one by then cared, England lost to Belgium in the 2018 finals competition.
The 68 appearance was a tournament of 4 teams , not really the same
 
Kane is a top class striker. He's proven that in the PL over years. His international record is very good as well but I saw the below which, while a bit harsh, shows what International football records are worth. Most games are massive mismatches and it's like letting a top PL team enter the FA Cup at the qualifying round.

I don't think the way England use Kane in big games is the most effective. He drops too deep and he doesn't get into position to do what he does best which is scoring goals. I think that is the major reason we struggle against the best teams.

View attachment 55313

That tweet is just insanely biased. Why don't penalties count for a start? They are chances that need to be converted, probably harder than a tap in from 5 yards, no easier than a one on one.

It's also nonsense that he only scores against rubbish teams. More than 20 of his goals have been against teams ranked in the top 20-25 of world football, including 10 against Germany, France, Croatia Switzerland and Italy. All ranked in the top 10.

It's also not fair to suggest we've struggled against the big teams with Kane in the team. We've had our most successful period in 60 years with him in the team beating the likes of Germany, Spain, Italy in competitive games.
 
Last edited:
That tweet is just insanely biased. Why don't penalties count for a start? They are chances that need to be converted, probably harder than a tap in from 5 yards, no easier than a one on one.

It's also nonsense that he only scores against rubbish teams. More than 20 of his goals have been against teams ranked in the top 20-25 of world football, including 10 against Germany, France, Croatia and Italy.

It's also not fair to suggest we've struggled against the big teams with Kane in the team. We've had our most successful period in 60 years with him in the team beating the likes of Germany, Spain, Italy in competitive games.
It’s just stupid and should be roundly ignored, in the same way you’d ignore graffiti on a public toilet wall.
 
It also ignores how integral Kane is to many of the other goals that England score, despite not having the final touch.
Yes but it would be better if he didn't drop deep and get involved with general play. Just stand up front Harry and wait for the ball! :rolleyes:
 
Impossible job. There's millions of people who are only happy if England win and play well EVERY GAME. That isn't possible which allows them to point to some 'obvious' mistake (wrong formation, too negative, not picking X, Y or Z). Of course there's no way of ever telling if a different 11 or a different formation would have led to the required vanquishing of Johnny Foreigner but that doesn't stop them acting like the manager is incompetent for not seeing it.
 
Back
Top