This is what Southgate played for

[Kopral Jono]

Wow the first manager to get England to a major final in 50 plus years and you’re calling for his head you spoilt bastards.

His formation was fine and he changed it, Italy are just a good team.

It went to penalties, two of the best teams on penalties in the final.

At the start of the tournament if someone said to me I’ll give you penalties in the final every single one of us snaps their hand off it’s just a shame the Man Utd boys let us down.

More to come.

Perspective, thank you. Why are people acting as if England are perennial winners? The progress England have made since 2016 has been nothing but exceptional and Southgate is key to this. England were fine and got beaten by a better Italian side, and even then it was too close to call right until the very last kick. I'm not putting the blame on Rashford but a few more inches to the middle on his penalty and chances are we wouldn't be having this so-called debate.

England will learn from this and I wouldn't be surprised at all if they go all the way next year in the World Cup.

 

[RORY65]

Grealish and Foden can both play in central midfield. Them two ahead of a Rice in a three, with Grealish helping Shaw and Sterling overload the left channel, and Foden helping Walker and Sancho/Saka overload the right, would make for a fine midfield.

Foden was injured anyway and barely ever plays in midfield (even though Guardiola has played number 10s in midfield a lot at City and as Southgate did at the World Cup) while Grealish according to Whoscored didn't play a single game in central midfield last season plus I'm not sure Rice is good enough as a sole holding midfielder so although that midfield has more flair and creativity in it they would have got completely overrun.

I said in my original post that Southgate got some things wrong but I wouldn't blame him too much because Italy's spine (goalkeeper, centre backs and centre midfield) is significantly stronger than England's and therefore it's not a huge surprise that they were the dominant side.

 

[SCP]

The problem was the midfield. Same problem as 3 years ago against Croatia. It would have been even worse if it was against Spain. The timming of the goal remembered me 2004 when scoring the goal too early against Portugal they tried to defend the result way too soon. But must be said first 20 minutes if England had scored the second it was game over. The future? Well, reality is that Qatar will be unknown territory, there's not 1 or 2 clear favourites to win there.

 

[Lash]

Genuinely shocking to set up the way he did, on home turf, massively skewed fan numbers in our favour.

Completely giving over possession and pinning all his penalty hopes on players that scarcely played all tournament.

Horrendously unfair to throw Saka in before any of the other lads on the bench. Looked out his depth - and why the feck wouldn't he be?

I'm so disappointed and annoyed about the set up and decisions, but he'll get a pass on all of that, which irks me.

 

[Oo0AahCantona]

The issue is that he sets sides up to fail by doing the self fulfilling defensive prophecy. We played with 8 defensive minded players every game, back 5, Rice/phillips and mount.

Attack is the best form of defence, we had arguably the best attacking talent at the tournament and we didn't use them. We wont have a better chance again, really is a shame.

 

[arnie_ni]

England's strength was their attacking depth and he didn't use it. He has to shoulder blame

 

[ivaldo]

Yes to all of this. Amd I'm not English so you should all accept my opinion as non-biased expert facts.

This is the uncontestable truth. It is written.

 

[pocco]

Southgate's initial plan worked like a charm. But then england couldn't score the second in those first 25-30 minutes or so, we adjusted, and he was late to react

The second half and first extra time were a hammering, we should have won long before the penalties

Think if Chiesa stays on then you win in the 90. He was turning the screw big time and his injury was exactly what England needed. He basically was your attack and was getting closer and closer each minute after moving to the left.

 

[Jezpeza]

It was a game of fine margins. I dont want to bash southgate as this is better than weve seen for 50 years at the end of the day.

My observation was Kane and sterling didnt have a good game tonight and mount was pony. We had no other attacking threat. Dont understand why you keep a wealth of talent in foden grealish rashford dcl and sancho anchored to the bench when what is on the pitch is not in the game or playing poorly. Saka was poor when he came on and i’m sorry but i dont get why he got the nod over any of the above.

going forward i think we need to find a way to move away from a back 6 as we want to try and get more attacking players on the pitch and play on the front foot. Bellinghams development will be crucial to our midfield i think

 

[Giggs86]

Needs to be ashamed of himself, the League One version of Mourinho. Small time, embarrassing little prick. With all the attacking disposal at his hands he decided to park the double decker after 15 minutes. Got what he deserved, shame that it was at the expense of our players.

 

[Lay]

How many shots on target did England have?

 

[pocco]

I couldn't agree more. England has a golden generation of offensive talent and he plays the team like Middlesbrough.

No Maddison, Mason Mount on the wing, no creative attacking midfielder to service the ball to Kane.

England won't be raising any cup under him.

Maddison for which position? I don't think he'd start for England, was average when I saw him at times last season.

 

[Irwin99]

Perspective, thank you. Why are people acting as if England are perennial winners? The progress England have made since 2016 has been nothing but exceptional and Southgate is key to this. England were fine and got beaten by a better Italian side, and even then it was too close to call right until the very last kick. I'm not putting the blame on Rashford but a few more inches to the middle on his penalty and chances are we wouldn't be having this so-called debate.

England will learn from this and I wouldn't be surprised at all if they go all the way next year in the World Cup.

This undeniable progress has been helped enormously by the talent of the players and the often quite lucky draws and circumstances of those tournaments but i just don't think Southgate is this messiah of English football that people want him to be. He's got the best squad I've seen England have and yet he's acting like they're plucky underdogs. The conservative mentality doesn't EVER change though and there's still no recognizable identity to the football despite having a group of very very talented attacking players; it's almost an embarrassment of riches. Italy, Belgium Germany etc can match England in the quality of their first 11's but squad depth is easily England's best strength and probably second only to France.

I still think there are mentality issues around the football. It's not an accident or a hard luck story to be constantly losing penalties, it's a negative mentality issue and Southgate hasn't changed that. It's the same with constantly being beaten in these games by a classier, more technically gifted midfields, it's a problem that has to be solved.

 

[passing-wind]

Southgate has the Solskjaer syndrome about his management. Poor in possession, reliant on individual moments and team lacks an established identity. If he's not fixed at least one of those issues by the next tournament he should be replaced. I really don't think these euro's are the pinnacle of international football the world cup is so the players and manager would need to go up a level to remain competitive.

There's too much attacking quality to have such a conservative approach it doesn't fit the profile of the team.

 

[Dominos]

Southgate talked about learning lessons from Croatia 2018 but it didn't look like he did. Tried to sit on a 1 goal lead for the last 80 minutes of the game, refused to make changes until the damage was done and we had conceded the equaliser. At one point in the 2nd half we had 29% possession, at home.

If Southgate makes his subs at the 60 minute mark I think we see out the game. His infatuation with Saka is also a bit bizarre when he has much more establish productive senior players on the bench - Sancho, Rashford and Grealish should all be ahead in the pecking order to come off the bench to change the game.

 

[Kearnkoff69]

Southgate was bad tonight, plain and simple. The team has come a long way under his tenure, but he was cowardly and tactically outwitted and his team paid the price.

 

[Laphroaig]

That was one of the worst managed games I've seen. What on eath was that?

 

[reddev3]

We've got a very limited midfield that can't control a game and a defence that can be got at. Did well to even get that far considering

If nobody can get the ball forward to the attacking players it doesn't matter how good they are. That's why he played like that.

No, he's a terrible manager and picked two defensive midfielders for his midfield every game that's why they can't control a game. He easily could have picked a three man midfield with Grealish left, Foden right and Rice sitting similar to what Spain, France, Italy etc do. Foden has played there a lot for Manchester City and Grealish is tailor made for that "David Silva" role on the other side.

They are press resistant, can press, can pass, can dribble, can create chances, score goals. There are no excuses with that England squad.

 

[Theonas]

Genuinely shocking to set up the way he did, on home turf, massively skewed fan numbers in our favour.

Completely giving over possession and pinning all his penalty hopes on players that scarcely played all tournament.

Horrendously unfair to throw Saka in before any of the other lads on the bench. Looked out his depth - and why the feck wouldn't he be?

I'm so disappointed and annoyed about the set up and decisions, but he'll get a pass on all of that, which irks me.

I don't think he could have set up any different really. It's odd how people think setting up pro actively is just a switch coaches can turn on and off as they please. Playing on the front foot is not just the opposite of sitting deep, it's far more difficult to implement. You either need midfielders who are superb technically and tactically like that Real trio or a micro coach who is very strong technically. England do not have the former whereas no one has ever argued Southgate is the latter. It still does not take away from the fact that he's done absolutely brilliant from when he took over and is slowly changing the mentality and feel around the national team with his exceptional management.

 

[Valencia Shin Crosses]

Southgate's initial plan worked like a charm. But then england couldn't score the second in those first 25-30 minutes or so, we adjusted, and he was late to react

The second half and first extra time were a hammering, we should have won long before the penalties

Sure the initial plan looked alright, but I’d argue England should never have had to “out tactic” teams with the quality they have available going forward. They could easily be just as frightening of a side as anyone in the world attacking, but instead they go the France route of grifting for goals and playing defensively first, except when doing that they don’t have a Pogba to create counters from deep for them.

It’s counter intuitive, and we’ve seen over and over again that inviting pressure constantly is a failing tactic and it’s why Mourinho is a dinosaur manager these days. I don’t care how well someone tracks back, that should only be important if you’re a small side that doesn’t have the firepower to stack up. England is the opposite, and not once did Southgate try to take advantage of that this entire tournament. The closest he got was the Ukraine game in starting Sancho in the front 3 and going with an actual 4-3-3.

 

[Swiss_Red89]

Nah Southgate you still turn me on...subbing on two players you never trusted the whole tournement....sry that's a joke. Football doesn't work like that. But at least his loved ones Mount and Sterling (the citeeeh wanker) will be out of discussion.

The longer I think about what happened today, the more angry I get on Southgate.

 

[Theonas]

Sure the initial plan looked alright, but I’d argue England should never have had to “out tactic” teams with the quality they have available going forward. They could easily be just as frightening of a side as anyone in the world attacking, but instead they go the France route of grifting for goals and playing defensively first, except when doing that they don’t have a Pogba to create counters from deep for them.

It’s counter intuitive, and we’ve seen over and over again that inviting pressure constantly is a failing tactic and it’s why Mourinho is a dinosaur manager these days. I don’t care how well someone tracks back, that should only be important if you’re a small side that doesn’t have the firepower to stack up. England is the opposite, and not once did Southgate try to take advantage of that this entire tournament. The closest he got was the Ukraine game in starting Sancho in the front 3 and going with an actual 4-3-3.

All true but Southgate is simply not a great coach, he has done very well managing the side and bringing players through, creating a general air of optimism which was badly needed after the Iceland fiasco. He is more in the mold of Deschamps or Zidane in that his strengths are more managerial than coaching. These types usually depend more on individual quality and whereas it's true England have amazing quality, they simply do not have midfield controllers like Kroos, Modric or even Jorginho. If you are not a top coach and/or do not have that type of silky midfielders, your team will simply find it difficult to play higher up the field and control games regardless of the defensive and attacking talent.

 

[Wolf1992]

All true but Southgate is simply not a great coach, he has done very well managing the side and bringing players through, creating a general air of optimism which was badly needed after the Iceland fiasco. He is more in the mold of Deschamps or Zidane in that his strengths are more managerial than coaching. These types usually depend more on individual quality and whereas it's true England have amazing quality, they simply do not have midfield controllers like Kroos, Modric or even Jorginho. If you are not a top coach and/or do not have that type of silky midfielders, your team will simply find it difficult to play higher up the field and control games regardless of the defensive and attacking talent.

Deschamps if a much better manager than Southgate will ever be, without being great.

 

[Jericho]

He's is kind of like to England what Trappatoni was to Ireland.

 

[RaptorSlo]

Of course it's his fault. Sancho has over 150 goals and assists at the age of 21, and he brought on Saka with 6 goals in his entire career. He has a team dripping with attacking talent, and he played passively the entire tournament. When Italy scored he made two defensive subs, and he literally held off as long as he could to bring on Rashford and Sancho on. It's beyond contestation that he played for pens. If he plays for pens against the best penalty saver in the tournament, and expects 3 kids, 2 of which played scarcely a minute all game to win us the shootout, then that is all on Southgate. I'm sorry but you've got to be clinically blind think this is on the players.

Wait, how's bringing on Saka (RW) for Trippier (RB) a defensive sub?

 

[NewGlory]

First decent side they came up against and bottled it.

Not southgates fault.

Yeah, keep your two best attacking players, Grealish and Sancho, on the bench for 90 minutes and then cry how it is players' fault.

None of this was players fault. England had a fantastic squad with and idiot and coward manager

 

[Sweet Square]

Of course it's his fault. Sancho has over 150 goals and assists at the age of 21, and he brought on Saka with 6 goals in his entire career. He has a team dripping with attacking talent, and he played passively the entire tournament. When Italy scored he made two defensive subs, and he literally held off as long as he could to bring on Rashford and Sancho on. It's beyond contestation that he played for pens. If he plays for pens against the best penalty saver in the tournament, and expects 3 kids, 2 of which played scarcely a minute all game to win us the shootout, then that is all on Southgate. I'm sorry but you've got to be clinically blind think this is on the players.

great post.

 

[bosnian_red]

This is why I can't stand managers like that and will never want them to succeed. If Italy lost on pens you could say fair enough, they went for it, outplayed England and were unlucky to lose. For England though, they lost and are left wondering what if he just went for it? What if he tried to win from minute 1? What if he tried to win in extra time? What if he played one of his all star young attackers from the start who are elite creators? What if a guy who is only matched by productivity at his age over the past 30+ years by Mbappe and nobody else in Europe's top 5 leagues actually played a meaningful amount of minutes? One of the best creators in the world to look for a goal? What if every position wasn't based off the defensive effort they would put in?

Now it's all on Southgate because he played cowardly tactics all tournament, and they lost at the first serious test after getting played off the park over the game. 65 - 35 in possession ar 19 - 6 in shots, both in Italy's favor. Southgate deserved to lose.

 

[Commentary]

Maddison for which position? I don't think he'd start for England, was average when I saw him at times last season.

Add him to the squad to give you another attacking midfield option when needed.

He's excellent at feeding the ball through, and despite having an injury this year, he scored more goals than Grealish and Mount this season....should at least get you a spot on the bench.

 

[Abraxas]

I think it goes to show how important midfield is, if we didn't realise this already through United's trials and tribulations.

England are loaded with attacking talent, you cannot seriously say Kane isn't one of the top strikers around, or that Sancho, Foden, Grealish, Sterling, Rashford aren't an excellent bunch to pick from. That is a selection of players that would have featured highly within the thinking of any side in the tournament.

But I think Southgate knew we had serious problems in the build up, in conceding the ball easily and panicking in possession. That was a serious problem and we tried to patch over it in many ways because the only option was a tactical solution as Bellingham is not necessarily ready. The personnel wasn't there to change the situation against teams of the class of Italy, and had we played Spain or France, maybe even Portugal we probably would have found something similar in that midfield area and the forwards ending up starved.

It's easy to say we should have completely gone for it and thrown all these players at the opposition but he made the decision to trust Mount, Phillips, Rice, Saka for solidity and got to pens in a final. There is no telling what the opposite approach would have yielded, it's tempting to look at it in hindsight and speculate but they would have had to win the thing to improve on what was produced. It's always going to feel worse when you lose on pens and the feeling is we could have been more attacking.

I think if Southgate continues the biggest thing he has to look at is how he's using his full complement of players. Generally his lineups and preparation seems relatively good, but there is definitely a feeling of passivity during the game.

 

[thepolice123]

I thought the tactics were spot on in the first half. We ran Italy ragged with the high pressure. The three CBs allowed Rice and Phillips to press high and severely disrupted their passing.

The problem was once we scored we forgot about the second goal. And once Mancini adapted it was lights out for him. Both of his subs Saka and Henderson were terrible while Mancini's subs wrestled the game back for him.

 

[reddev3]

But I think Southgate knew we had serious problems in the build up, in conceding the ball easily and panicking in possession that was a serious problem and we tried to patch over it in many ways because the only option was a tactical solution as Bellingham is not necessarily ready. The personnel wasn't there to change the situation against teams of the class of Italy, and had we played Spain or France, maybe even Portugal we probably would have found something similar.

Why is Bellingham not necessarily ready yet Saka is? Bellingham has played and excelled in bigger games than Saka has.

He could have also subbed Mount for Grealish around the 55/60 minute mark to help get us up the pitch, provide some goal threat and win some free kicks to give the team some rest bite when it was painfully obvious we were struggling, Mount did nothing all game except gave away free kicks.

I honestly believe we win that 1-0 or 2-0 if he takes the non existent Mount off after 55 minutes for Grealish or maybe even Sancho.

It was even Mount that got beaten for the header that led to the goal, by Verratti of all people.

 

[Theonas]

Deschamps if a much better manager than Southgate will ever be, without being great.

I was not comparing their level, I comparing their approach to management. They both are not micro coaches who will drill a consistent pro active system into their teams. I don't think that this makes them bad managers, as that would neglect how there are so many other areas to it, areas in which Southgate did indeed excel at for England. However, there is no getting away the fact that it does make them limited and it can be a serious limitation when it comes to the difference between around the top and the top unless covered by extreme individual quality. England can have theoretically a better manager, but I can't think of many available managers who can offer what Southgate can in addition to that little extra coaching excellence. Maybe Brendan Rogers?

 

[Dan-Utd]

Given that we had only just been fined for booing the Denmark national anthem, I thought an intelligent side of the fans who boo may come out, not the case though and maybe the only thing coming home in the next few days is another fine.
It's an utter disgrace that the FA get fined for the behaviour of these idiots because you can't control what fans are going to say/sing etc.

I also think it's a disgrace that Italy were only allowed 5,000 fans, 1,000 according to some newspapers, a final and any internation game should have an equal amount of fans and if Covid restrictions don't allow it then the whole capacity should have been reduced. Knowing how much a crowd can influence a team, it's a huge disadvantage and was unfair on the Italians.

I did think to myself when Rashford was getting ready to come on, I wonder if it plays on his mind that he wasn't trusted to come on for 25 mins but was trusted to come on just to take a penalty.

Not trusted may not be the right phrase but Rashford has some big game experience and would have been worth throwing on for 25 minutes to see if he could break through.

Grealish has drive and should have started, he would of ground the Italians down more rather than giving them the opportunity to save their energy by sitting back so much after we got the first goal.

Congratulations to Italy, to get back into the game with so few fans, (maybe inspired by boo boys) and to use all their experience to shut us out while at the same time still creating some chances to try and win the game, is a credit to them.

Oh and on a final note, Roberto Mancini, when he was at City the media used to often go for him with comments about him being replaced behind his back which sometimes would provoke him, he's seemed very calm throughout the tournament and took a team who were on a downer, gave them some belief, mixed youth and maturity with a fine balance and got his rewards for it. The team he took over had actually won things so the fans were always going to have big expectations which again shows what a good job he's done to deal with the pressure and deliver.

 

[Abraxas]

Why is Bellingham not necessarily ready yet Saka is? Bellingham has played and excelled in bigger games than Saka has.

He could have also subbed Mount for Grealish around the 55/60 minute mark to help get us up the pitch, provide some goal threat and win some free kicks to give the team some rest bite when it was painfully obvious we were struggling, Mount did nothing all game except gave away free kicks.

I honestly believe we win that 1-0 or 2-0 if he takes the non existent Mount off after 55 minutes for Grealish or maybe even Sancho.

It was even Mount that got beaten for the header that led to the goal, by Verratti of all people.

I've not seen anything in the bits and pieces of Bellingham in an England shirt to suggest Southgate erred in playing Rice and Phillips.

I'm not saying Saka was particularly ready. I think he was somewhat overused but what's the relation to the above? Getting it wrong once doesn't mean the error should be compounded with another decision.

I think the idea we would have won just because we put Grealish on is a bit simplistic. I agree Mount was very poor and he should have been proactive with changes, but it doesn't mean it works just because he didn't do it. We weren't in the game second half. None of the attackers had a sniff for a few reasons so it would have been tough to even get him the ball in a position to impact the game. Maybe he would have carried the ball a little better from some positions, maybe won some fouls but I find it a stretch to think the whole flow of the game would have been changed, the Italian midfield was dominant. Ultimately he did come on and had a moment or two but nothing to write home about.

 

[Vernon Philander]

Bewlideringly negative, from the set up right through to the late late subs.

The Italian team needed the game being taken to them, not allow them dictate for 100 minutes.

 

[devilish]

Wow the first manager to get England to a major final in 50 plus years and you’re calling for his head you spoilt bastards.

His formation was fine and he changed it, Italy are just a good team.

It went to penalties, two of the best teams on penalties in the final.

At the start of the tournament if someone said to me I’ll give you penalties in the final every single one of us snaps their hand off it’s just a shame the Man Utd boys let us down.

More to come.

I am not English and I have quite a reputation of criticising English players although I find the latter to be unfair.

This Italy is solid but its hardly spectacular. It lacks the top quality talent the previous sides had in Pirlo, Totti, Del Piero, Baggio etc. Southgate is a train wreck. He played deep against a nation who invented the catenaccio, a team who loves dominating midfield and dictating tempo, that's silly really.

Then there's of course the basic stuff, like playing your best players, not pushing for penalties against a side whose got Donnarumma in goal and not choosing 2 players just off the bench and a 19 year old to give penalties.

 

[Giggs86]

England would've done better with Mourinho than with this Middlesborough clown. Don't know what's worse, the schooling in management that Mancini did to Gareth or the schooling in midfield that Verratti and Jorginho did to Rice and Philips.

 

[Bebestation]

The worst thing is that we have to have this guys management for another 2 years until his obvious sacking - players like Grealish and Shaw will be in their aged prime and waste it on a tournament they cannot win due to the managers tactics.

 

[RedDevil@84]

Funnily enough, some posters were standing up and applauding his tactical masterclass to reach finals.