Group B: ENG/IRAN/USA/WAL

[TEESSIDE1]

Then how about giving him credit for last night and wait until Sunday evening before making another judgement? This is what I am on about. People wanted the likes of Foden starting last night and he did that. But you're still not happy because of a decision he is yet to make or you're yet to see?

Baffles me, it really does. He isn't the most gifted manager or coach, but there's this agenda against him I just don't get. He has given us the best tournament results consistently in decades. The football can actually be exciting and if you watched Iran or Wales games you should be able to acknowledge it.

Southgate crucially got this group to be united. It was always divided before he came along. He has done more for us than people want to give him credit for.

The changes against Wales weren’t due to giving other players a chance, he was shuffling his squad for fitness purposes. Barring a Welsh miracle England had already qualified for the next round.

Southgate has his favourites but given the quality of the squad he consistently either fails to pick his strongest XI or fails to react when things aren’t going our way.

Given the level of quality in terms of players that we’ve had over the last 4-5 years England should be reaching the latter stages of competitions if not going all the way and winning tournaments regardless of who the manager is.

The team last night was balanced, it had leadership, creativity and pace. Whereas he’s ‘first choice XI’ were poor in the lead up to the World Cup and offered absolutely nothing against the USA.

If Southgate sticks with the Welsh line up then yes I would support his selection but if he reverts back to his first choice XI (as he’s done previously) then it will be to the detriment of the team.

 

[Mr Pink]

It will be extremely interesting to see what Southgate does now.

I really hope he goes with the team that started last night...give or take.

Hope he doesn't bring back Mount and Sterling etc

Could be the difference between progressing and not...

 

[PLTuck]

The changes against Wales weren’t due to giving other players a chance, he was shuffling his squad for fitness purposes. Barring a Welsh miracle England had already qualified for the next round.

Southgate has his favourites but given the quality of the squad he consistently either fails to pick his strongest XI or fails to react when things aren’t going our way.

Given the level of quality in terms of players that we’ve had over the last 4-5 years England should be reaching the latter stages of competitions if not going all the way and winning tournaments regardless of who the manager is.

The team last night was balanced, it had leadership, creativity and pace. Whereas he’s ‘first choice XI’ were poor in the lead up to the World Cup and offered absolutely nothing against the USA.

If Southgate sticks with the Welsh line up then yes I would support his selection but if he reverts back to his first choice XI (as he’s done previously) then it will be to the detriment of the team.

The same argument was made under Jol, AVB, Redknapp and Poch.

I think football fans in general over rate their own team and/or under rate the opposition. At the end of the day they are all humans and will have off days and in a knockout tournament nothing is a given.

 

[easley91]

The changes against Wales weren’t due to giving other players a chance, he was shuffling his squad for fitness purposes. Barring a Welsh miracle England had already qualified for the next round.

Southgate has his favourites but given the quality of the squad he consistently either fails to pick his strongest XI or fails to react when things aren’t going our way.

Given the level of quality in terms of players that we’ve had over the last 4-5 years England should be reaching the latter stages of competitions if not going all the way and winning tournaments regardless of who the manager is.

The team last night was balanced, it had leadership, creativity and pace. Whereas he’s ‘first choice XI’ were poor in the lead up to the World Cup and offered absolutely nothing against the USA.

If Southgate sticks with the Welsh line up then yes I would support his selection but if he reverts back to his first choice XI (as he’s done previously) then it will be to the detriment of the team.

And if we play and win well with his "favourite XI"?

 

[PLTuck]

And if we play and win well with his "favourite XI"?

"senegal were really poor"

C'mon man, you know how the narrative works.

 

[easley91]

See my other response. He is winning lots and I like him.

But we’ve had nice runs in the last 2 tournaments and been beaten by top tier sides. His record against them is not great.

We lost to a better more experienced Croatia side after going ahead. We lost on penalties v Italy after going ahead, and held them for 120 minutes. Belgium in the World Cup 2018 group was a heavily rotated side, and the third place play-off they weren't bothered about.

You can only play who the schedule permits you to play in a tournament. If the likes of Germany, Argentina and Denmark don't go through that's on them not us. We can only do our job and win the group. Which we have done. This "easy" games malarky is a crap argument. Saudi beat Argentina. Iran beat Wales. Costa Rica beat Japan. There are no easy games, bar maybe Qatar, at this tournament.

 

[easley91]

"senegal were really poor"

C'mon man, you know how the narrative works.

Ah yes of course how silly of me..

 

[Shanks]

It will be extremely interesting to see what Southgate does now.

I really hope he goes with the team that started last night...give or take.

Hope he doesn't bring back Mount and Sterling etc

Could be the difference between progressing and not...

I think this is the frustrations really.

rashford up top with Kane, kinda reminds me of the Kane/son partnership, so far seems to be very similiar, and we are much better without Sterling and mount.

I know Saka has done well, but he always looks like he trips up over the ball a lot - weird one I k ow, but rashford over Saka for me

 

[A Bit Much]

We lost to a better more experienced Croatia side after going ahead. We lost on penalties v Italy after going ahead, and held them for 120 minutes. Belgium in the World Cup 2018 group was a heavily rotated side, and the third place play-off they weren't bothered about.

You can only play who the schedule permits you to play in a tournament. If the likes of Germany, Argentina and Denmark don't go through that's on them not us. We can only do our job and win the group. Which we have done. This "easy" games malarky is a crap argument. Saudi beat Argentina. Iran beat Wales. Costa Rica beat Japan. There are no easy games, bar maybe Qatar, at this tournament.

It's not though? Yes there have been upsets in tournaments but that doesn't change that playing Colombia, Sweden then Croatia is a much easier run than playing major international teams.

Southgate has done a good job overall but it's nonsense to say he hasn't had some pretty soft routes. It isn't wrong to accept that, or we might as well not bother looking at the various routes to the final because apparently playing Senegal or Argentina doesn't matter because 'theres been upsets yknow!'.

 

[Mr Pink]

The same argument was made under Jol, AVB, Redknapp and Poch.

I think football fans in general over rate their own team and/or under rate the opposition. At the end of the day they are all humans and will have off days and in a knockout tournament nothing is a given.

Nah.

The team that started last night was better.

I'll be really disappointed if Mount and Sterling start.

 

[hughy]

Very professional last night IMO, from both Southgate and the players.

I know scoring 4/5/6 goals is fun, but the most important thing after winning was making sure the key players all got a bit of a rest. We'll go in to the game on Sunday in a great position having just played a match which could literally be described as a walk in the park, and coming through with no injuries/suspensions.

7 points from 9, 9 goals scored, and a 5 day break before playing a team who have already suffered a loss this tournament and are without their best player. Definitely would have taken that at the start of the tournament.

 

[hughy]

Nah.

The team that started last night was better.

I'll be really disappointed if Mount and Sterling start.

Only player I'd bring back in is Saka, and as shouty as he was yesterday put Henderson back on the bench. Rashford, Kane, Saka with Foden and Bellingham in behind and then Rice sitting.

 

[Mr Pink]

Only player I'd bring back in is Saka, and as shouty as he was yesterday put Henderson back on the bench. Rashford, Kane, Saka with Foden and Bellingham in behind and then Rice sitting.

That'd be nice but i don't think he'll be as adventurous as that.

If Henderson comes out it will be for Mount.

I really like Phillips. I'd have him and Rice together with Bellingham more licence to get forward.

Front three that started last night id definitely keep...but think he'll bring Sterling in for Foden.

 

[RuskyM]

It's not though? Yes there have been upsets in tournaments but that doesn't change that playing Colombia, Sweden then Croatia is a much easier run than playing major international teams.

Southgate has done a good job overall but it's nonsense to say he hasn't had some pretty soft routes. It isn't wrong to accept that, or we might as well not bother looking at the various routes to the final because apparently playing Senegal or Argentina doesn't matter because 'theres been upsets yknow!'.

Sweden finished top of a group that contained the holders, Croatia took nine points from a group with Argentina in it and had the Ballon d'Or winner. They were there entirely on merit, as were England.

 

[Gassin's finest]

 

[easley91]

It's not though? Yes there have been upsets in tournaments but that doesn't change that playing Colombia, Sweden then Croatia is a much easier run than playing major international teams.

Southgate has done a good job overall but it's nonsense to say he hasn't had some pretty soft routes. It isn't wrong to accept that, or we might as well not bother looking at the various routes to the final because apparently playing Senegal or Argentina doesn't matter because 'theres been upsets yknow!'.

In the Euros last year we faced Croatia, Germany, Denmark and Italy on route to the final. That's not an easy run is it?

You get the softer routes by winning your group. That's the reward you get. We can only play who the route sees us play. You win your group, you're meant to get a second placed side and an "easier" tie on paper. Why aren't people happy we're winning regardless? Bloody hell I remember us struggling against ANYONE in tournaments.

It doesn't matter who you play, because in a one off knock-out game anything can happen. Easy or hard, you beat who's in front of you to win the thing. That's the only thing that matters. I would have thought English Spurs fans would take winning against anyone to get a trophy after all this time. But alas, they're not happy whatever the sides do.

Personally I don't care who we beat as long as we win and I would bloody love Gareth "Hazelwick school alum" Southgate to be the man to do it, just so he can shove it in everyone's miserable faces.

 

[14/04/91]

You cannot compare eras. It’s ok to say ‘he’s done so well, look at where we were before he took over’ but you have to take into account the players available.
Southgate has certainly created a fantastic culture & players who want to play for their country but the current squad is a vast improvement on the 2014 & 2016 versions. I have little doubt he would’ve ‘outperformed’ Hodgson (a relic) and he made a big (correct) call jettisoning Rooney but he still has greater talent available to him than his predecessor.
He has done a good job overall, whether he’s optimising the pool of talent will be easier to answer after this World Cup.

 

[HildoSpur]

You cannot compare eras. It’s ok to say ‘he’s done so well, look at where we were before he took over’ but you have to take into account the players available.
Southgate has certainly created a fantastic culture & players who want to play for their country but the current squad is a vast improvement on the 2014 & 2016 versions. I have little doubt he would’ve ‘outperformed’ Hodgson (a relic) and he made a big (correct) call jettisoning Rooney but he still has greater talent available to him than his predecessor.
He has done a good job overall, whether he’s optimising the pool of talent will be easier to answer after this World Cup.

Um.. was it not a few years ago the media were talking about the 'Golden Generation' of English players? You had the likes of Beckham, Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Cole, etc. in the side and didn't do nearly as well as Southgate has done with what is a generally much less experienced group of players. Southgate is the best English manager you lot have had in about 50 years, you might not like it, but it is a fact. The lack of respect and acknowledgement he gets is absolutely baffling.

 

[14/04/91]

Um.. was it not a few years ago the media were talking about the 'Golden Generation' of English players? You had the likes of Beckham, Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Cole, etc. in the side and didn't do nearly as well as Southgate has done with what is a generally much less experienced group of players. Southgate is the best English manager you lot have had in about 50 years, you might not like it, but it is a fact. The lack of respect and acknowledgement he gets is absolutely baffling.

I wasn’t talking about those years. I only referenced his predecessor, singular not plural.
Eriksson massively wasted a pool of talent, the guy was a money-grabbing fraud in my opinion who had no idea how to make a team out of a collection of individuals.
By all accounts he let club loyalties fester and didn’t encourage any bonding; Southgate has done the complete opposite and I mentioned that.

 

[HildoSpur]

I wasn’t talking about those years. I only referenced his predecessor, singular not plural.
Eriksson massively wasted a pool of talent, the guy was a money-grabbing fraud in my opinion who had no idea how to make a team out of a collection of individuals.
By all accounts he let club loyalties fester and didn’t encourage any bonding; Southgate has done the complete opposite and I mentioned that.

But surely if you are judging Southgate you need to compare him to all other England managers in the modern era?