Such bad management on Southgates part…

Temperature in the 20s when the world cup's played (Qatar winter)
That's why they moved it to December

 

That may be true but it doesn't mean he can't be questioned when we lose that's how teams improve and while he may be the best England manager for some time its perfectly acceptable to ask if he could have made better decisions and been an even better manager by actually Winning a tournament.

 

Not arguing against that. Depends on your persuasion I suppose. Upon the last kick, I felt sadness but pride. Others clearly looked to blame.

 

No it's not but it's also fair to ask questions about why it was only not bad and not absolutely brilliant. I'll ask this question is Southgate getting the best out of the squad or are his decisions or lack of them in the heat of the battle holding the squad back.

 

If you don't look for the reasons for a defeat you'll keep repeating the mistakes that led to the defeat. England have done well to reach the final no one is saying they haven't but the question remains could they have done even better. I think with the squad they have they should have and I think the manager bares the responsibility for them falling short in the final. Just my opinion but surely that's what this forum is for it's a place to state your opinions.

 

Cos we had do so much better with Sam Allardyce in charge.

 

We were superb for half an hour or so, then reverted to type. Gave up trying to win the game, let an excellent team have possession and come at us time after time, and handed them the initiative.

We then seemed to be happy to play for penalties which we know we’re f@&cking dreadful at, and then we put pen takers on with a couple of mins to go when they have virtually no chance of even touching the ball because we’re so scared of attacking. How are they meant to be prepared?

Southgate is a lovely bloke and fantastic for inclusion & diversity etc, which is a good thing, but at the end of the day we’ve lost yet again, and when you review the tournament as a whole, how much have we actually looked like one of the best teams in Europe?

Sorry but for me he should be getting his p45 this week and moved upstairs, so that someone who actually wins things can be given the job

 

If you do want to read some shitty takes Danny Baker is having a proper meltdown on twitter.

 

Selecting 2 young players that had been on the pitch for 1 minute to take pens was abysmal on Southgate's part. Crackers really.

 

Has anyone said you can't state your opinion?

I'm confused.

 

You didn't but some have heaped abuse on anybody questioning Southgates decision making.

 

Southgate proved he hasn't learned from the Croatia game. This one followed the same pattern but we have a much better team this time. I almost feel we'd have been better off not scoring so early. It just led to negativity and inviting pressure for 80+ minutes. He had to go for the kill. He had to put on Sancho and Grealish at 60 mins. We did not test their old centre halfs. It was clear this was not Stirling's best game so make the change early. He leaves changes so late.

 

No they wasn’t rashford missed his

 

I have not reached an opinion about Southgate, and his management principles because of the result of a penalty shootout. Those things are a lottery, and you should not based any opinion on the result of a lottery. No, I reached my opinion based on the performances of the team throughout the competition, and not just on their results either.

Last night, Southgate used 3-4-3, the same system that Ismael used to such great effect at Barnsley last season. I did not enjoy watching the Barnsley team playing that system, but the system help some average players over-achieve as compared to the previous season. Even though I did not enjoy some aspects of the system, I tried to follow the logic of what he did, and why he was successful. I hated the long ball, but Ismael had realised that if you keep your front 3 high (except for set piece defending), you force the opposition to respect the threat, and they keep at least as many players deep in order to mark those players. That threat is compounded if you keep a high back line, with a sweeper keeper behind, because you reduce the space that the opposition has to pass the ball, and if they pass the ball inaccurately, you win the ball back high. I did not enjoy some of what Ismael did, but our success was an important message about the way that the psychology of the game works.

Last night, the England team began the game much more positively than they began their earlier games in the competition. I thought that I was watching a completely different team. They scored, but after 30 minutes, Italy took over. The whole team dropped into a deep defensive system. Harry Kane, our most advanced forward was less than 40 yards from our goal. It was like watching Ismael's team in the later stages of last season, after his tactics had been rumbled, and after the opposition stopped playing from the back. But Italy were not playing long balls. They continued to build from the back, but they were under no pressure from a forward press. The England press was not delivered with the same high intensity as the Barnsley press was at any point, and Italy played through us, and they pushed us back. But reacting like we did to Italy playing through us is a predictor of what will happen. Italy dominated, and there was a very good chance that they would score, and that we would not be able to add to our opening goal. It is how the game works. If you are negative, then you invite pressure and that pressure is often a predictor of the final outcome. When he finally reacted to the pressure being exerted by Italy, it was not to insist that England played further forward. It was to accept the inevitability of the situation, and revert to a back 4. It was to accept that Italy were in control of the way that the game was being played. It was to hope that we could hold on, and perhaps get lucky. Of course, Southgate was never going to want to exhaust his front 3, and change them all after an hour. His talisman and captain was one of those front 3, and he did not want to lose his talisman. But that is why we could not organise and maintain a proper forward press. Southgate did not want to change the front 3.

I do not like watching Southgate because I think he is overly negative, but my opinion is not based on the lottery of penalty kicks.

 

Rashford's really took the ****.

 

I think he compromised with his initial team selection, because he wanted to change formation, but didn't want to leave Mount out. Saka or Sancho should've started.

It's not so much that we should've gone for it in the second half, but from about 25 minutes in the first half Italy were dominating and our midfield was being overrun, but he waited till the goal went in to do anything about it.

Then to throw Rashford and Sancho on right at the end like that was just wrong, made even worse by the fact that Sterling wasn't on the list. Could've brought Sancho on for Sterling 15 mins earlier and given him a chance to do something.

 

opinions eh?. Perhaps people should be barred from this site for having different opinions from obviously more knowledgeable contributors.

 

For those who like a good quote:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt

 

?????????!