Tbf Serie A fans also used to do this back in the day when their league was number 1. The premier league does have the best players, but I agree with you. There are many top players in both Italy and Germany that are not know or appreciated until major tournaments like this. Tomori not being in this squad is a prime example of what you are speaking about.
Are English players overrated or is it Southgate ?
- Thread starter 432JuanMata
- Start date
It's a bit annoying really. People are acting like Ole didn't finish second. The only similarity that I see is the slow build up due to lacking in midfield. It doesn't show Ole to be bad, it shows how important having midfielders who are press resistant is to how quickly a team can build up when playing out from the back.
The good thing is that it shows us that Rice is not the guy for us.
Then maybe you should have worded it better.
Even so, I think you'd struggle to find even one who thinks Pogba, Bruno, Shaw, De Gea and Maguire are the best players in their respective positions.
This is the reason that England look like they do, the reason why the wide forwards look subpar and the forward play in general looks so sparse.
Southgate is a conservative manager. I think quietly he won't be concerned by the performance last night. England had two big chances and usually at least one of these two chances would've been taken. Scotland didn't have a big chance in the game, the same as Croatia in the first game. I think that's Southgate's primary measure of success in a tournament game.
Of course when you play like this any failure will be heavily criticised. Choosing to play like this against a side like Scotland will also be seen by many as cowardly.
I think anyone hoping that the tactics are going to change will be disappointed.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Southgate is a conservative manager. I think quietly he won't be concerned by the performance last night. England had two big chances and usually at least one of these two chances would've been taken. Scotland didn't have a big chance in the game, the same as Croatia in the first game. I think that's Southgate's primary measure of success in a tournament game.
Of course when you play like this any failure will be heavily criticised. Choosing to play like this against a side like Scotland will also be seen by many as cowardly.
I think anyone hoping that the tactics are going to change will be disappointed.
Scotland had a few good chances, but Adams wiffed at least 2 of them.
Also the fullbacks are not the reason for the lack of movement from Kane, or his fear of getting in the box for a cross. It didn't cause Sterling to lose the ball every time he touched it.
That doesn't answer the question. Almost no international sides hire foreign managers, because it partly goes against the spirit of international football.
Nobody said we gave great coaches. We don't. Then again, very few of the teams at the competition do.
The nationality of the two CL final clubs is neither here nor there to be honest as we're not talking about club football.
Off the top of my head, I cant think of any country in the competition that has an international coach.
Scotland didn't have any big chances. Look at the xG on their shots. Adams's and Scotland's best chance was blocked by Stones. That's why it wasn't a big chance because there was a defender to beat and the keeper, hence the lower xG.
Given that the full backs are there to provide width and often do the crossing your second point is a bit odd. On the one cross James did get in Kane had a decent chance from it. Sterling wasn't great but feeding on scraps and having little support makes it harder and puts more pressure on the fewer moments that the attackers get on the ball.
It's both IMO. The majority of the players are definitely overrated but they're also better than what Southgate is getting out of them.
Hes one of the players who should be creating, not just losing the ball.
0:10
1:14
2:15
2;28
Were all good chances.
We're halfway through 2021, not 2017, and Kroos and Muller are miles past it. Verratti hasn't even consistently performed well for PSG in their farmers league. Why on earth do you rate this current version of Hummels above any of the English cb's in the starting lineup?
Pickford isn't very good, but then again it's got little to do with the way England is playing. He hasn't made any howlers yet.
Kane has 33 goals, 17 assists, in 49 matches this season. How many forwards playing in the euros has outperformed him?
And Portugals defenders? Good one.
Dias just won the player of the year in the premier league? Cancelo was the best right back (but is out). Kroos isn't miles past it, what the feck have you watched. For Muller, I'd suggest you look up his stats. One od the most productive players in Europe every year. Not sure what the feck you are on about.
Hummels is still a good defender, certainly better than fecking John Stones or Tyrone Mings
Pull it together man. Your takes here are embarrassing. Criticizing Verratti? The guy is a brilliant midfielder. Just because you don't watch him doesn't mean he isn't world class.But sorry, you're right. England have the best players in the world everywhere. Best country in the world. Best everything in the world. Kelvin Phillips is literally an Andrea Pirlo regen, Harry Kane is the best player in the world, Foden is better than a young Messi, etc. Am I doing this right? Mighty England have the best players everywhere yet can't ever seem to show this hidden class?
Honestly, comments like these are literally the reason everyone loves seeing England fail every tournament. The self overrating and underrating of others is beyond delusional.
Whatever fantasy world you're living in, you might want to come back to reality.
You're inventing bullshit proof to support a bullshit hypothesis.
A bit of both. England are deep, but how many players would walk into the France, Belgium or even Germany sides? On his best day maybe Kane, but Kane looks a shattered footballer at the moment and yet he’s undroppable.
Maybe Sancho, but Southgate apparently has no use for Sancho and instead plays fecking Foden. Tells you pretty much everything you need to know about Southgate.
Maybe Sancho, but Southgate apparently has no use for Sancho and instead plays fecking Foden. Tells you pretty much everything you need to know about Southgate.
It was 7 who played in the CL final. The players are of high enough quality. Tripper in la liga TOTY. Kane topping goals and assists in the premier league. Sancho delivering crazy numbers in the bundesliga. Surprising that Coady is picked over Tomori who persuaded AC Milan to spend a big chunk of their transfer budget on signing him. It's patently obvious this is on Southgate.
I think Foden was in the team of the season in the PL.
That just means they are part of strong domestic teams - it doesn't necessarily mean they are absolutely top class players - how many of them are really star players in those teams? Not every player in a strong team is a world beater.
Have I stumbled into a parallel universe where the Caf rates United players?
I'd list what's wrong with this post but in truth there's nothing right about it to start with.
Nobody rates England on the same level as France, or ahead of Belgium and Germany.
I forgot about Sterling and Walker.
It is mad that Sancho hasn't seen a minute yet, and even more so that he wasn't even on the bench for Croatia.
I agree that it is Southgate's fault. He is way too negative and has failed to get the team to play any style. We just stay in our half and hope the front the three can carry the ball from the halfway line to the opposition box.
Plenty of posts in here would suggest otherwise.
Such as?
England fans are allowed to be optimistic about their chances. Just like fans of every other country are optimistic about their own chances. But they're all aware of how good their players are relative to other nations who have been knocking England out of tournaments for decades.
You're just being overly sensitive because you have an axe to grind.
I have an axe to grind because I express an opinion on the England team? Ooooook
I agree that France are the best. A stronger attack and a stronger midfield. Wing backs is the only area I could possibly say is potentially weaker than England.
But I think England are not much different to Belgium and Germany.
Germany have a stronger midfield, but a weaker attack. I would say the defence is pretty tight. Both teams have great wing backs, but the current centre backs have big weaknesses.
Belgium have a stronger midfield. Their attack is very good, but I don't think it is better than England's attack (player-wise). Their defence is iffy, judging by the performance against Denmark.
Both Germany and Belgium do have better goalkeepers, though.
No you didn't. You expressed an opinion about England fans.
The fact you're conflating the two shows that you have a nationalistic axe to grind.
Eh? I just pointed out that there are posts in here that suggest that some people rate England in the same level as France, Belgium etc - this is simply a fact. 'a nationalistic axe to grind'? Goodness me mate I think you are the one overreacting not me. What a ridiculous take on things.
This is by far the majority opinion of everyone in the country and every pundit on TV.
The point is that England aren't overrated. They're rated appropriately. But as with any sports team in the history of the world, the fans are hoping that they can overperform. For Northern Ireland, that might mean qualifying. For Scotland, that might mean getting out of the group. For England, that might mean winning. It's not the same thing as arrogance.
As a country, England have a huge inferiority complex to other major nations. Decades of failure has caused that. Even the team anthem (Three Lions) is about how shit the national team is. And yet, hopefulness is seen as overrateing and self-deprecation is seen arrogance.
Last edited:
The vast, vast majority don't. The fact you focus on a tiny minority show that you have a nationalistic axe to grind.
Bonkers. Damn are you sensitive. Also I was responding to you saying 'nobody' held those views - now you accept that some do. Glad you confirm I was right then.
We get the same drivel written/spoken about England every time a tournament rocks up and this thread is filled with the same boring lines
Arrogant media, arrogant fans etc etc omg that England fan is singing it's coming home... someone please think of the children
We get it, you don't like England.. You don't have to justify that dislike behind a hypersensitive reaction to a song or an opinion piece in the Daily Mail
Arrogant media, arrogant fans etc etc omg that England fan is singing it's coming home... someone please think of the children
We get it, you don't like England.. You don't have to justify that dislike behind a hypersensitive reaction to a song or an opinion piece in the Daily Mail
Here's the tournament predictions thread. Try reading it without your nationalistic bias:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/euro-2020-2021-predictions.463235/
Maybe quote some of the posts you find problematically optimistic about England. And then compare them with the number which are pessimistic about England. I think you'll find that England are underrated at worst and appropriately rated at best.
This.
Southgate’s only real Management job was a Middlesbrough. At that point his Middlesbrough needed to be well organised and to keep their shape. That team didn’t need to take a lot of risks-and he was often happy with a draw.
No surprise then, that his England teams also keep their shape well and struggle to create chances and score- notwithstanding that this England team has a lot of attacking weapons.
The England players might be overrated, but there is a lot of attacking depth and they would create a lot of chances if they open up a bit and take some risks. I don’t think that is in Southgate’s character though.
Last edited:
Southgate is trash, but our midfield isn't great either.
Still, because he's trash he consistently digs a hole for himself by playing the likes of Foden instead of looking for some kind of balance or even picking his best 11.
Still, because he's trash he consistently digs a hole for himself by playing the likes of Foden instead of looking for some kind of balance or even picking his best 11.
Please read what I was responding to - your own comment ' Nobody rates England on the same level as France, or ahead of Belgium and Germany. ' I said - well some do just look here - you said ' The vast, vast majority don't.' So you contradict yourself and then go on a very odd rant about me being nationalistic. Very strange take on it.
Last edited:
Yeah they’re just making up the numbers. They’re almost like mascots
Let’s be honest, the measure of success for England managers is set very low. We got to the semi finals of a World Cup beating Panama, Tunisia, Colombia and Sweden whilst losing 3 games. We all got carried away but ultimately we were lucky with the teams we played and lost once we played a decent side.
But didn't you guys reach the semis of the European nations thing too? So two tournaments=two semifinals, that's very good results if you look att the England national team historically, aren't they? Who cares which teams you meet along the way?
Probably these gems:
Patricio, Pepe, Guerreiro, Danilo, Renato, Bernardo....Portugal has 3 players that would walk into Englands starting 11, Dias, Bruno and Ronaldo.
Germany have a better goalkeeper, easily, but Kroos isn't the player he was years ago, neither is Muller. Kimmich isn't all that, nor is Goretzka, Hummels?
Verratti is vastly overrated, same with Donnarumma, Jorginho? Locatelli, Barella? Nope. Mancini is just a better manager and plays to their strengths.
Quite a lot of our players would start for Germany & Belgium to be fair.
I've already mentioned Dias as one of the players that would walk into Englands starting lineup, haven't i? It doesn't really improve the situation much for Portugal, given how poor the rest of them are. Do people rate them so highly simply because of Fernandes and Ronaldo, Jota?Dias just won the player of the year in the premier league? Cancelo was the best right back (but is out). Kroos isn't miles past it, what the feck have you watched. For Muller, I'd suggest you look up his stats. One od the most productive players in Europe every year. Not sure what the feck you are on about.
Hummels is still a good defender, certainly better than fecking John Stones or Tyrone Mings
But sorry, you're right. England have the best players in the world everywhere. Best country in the world. Best everything in the world. Kelvin Phillips is literally an Andrea Pirlo regen, Harry Kane is the best player in the world, Foden is better than a young Messi, etc. Am I doing this right? Mighty England have the best players everywhere yet can't ever seem to show this hidden class?
Honestly, comments like these are literally the reason everyone loves seeing England fail every tournament. The self overrating and underrating of others is beyond delusional.
Cancelo isn't available, so how does it in any way matter?
The fullbacks they actually have available in the euros, are awful. Semedos positioning and awareness makes AWB look solid. Portugals defending for Germanys first goal, second goal, third and fourth
It's amateur hour, at best. It's bizarre to see them defend so poorly in situations where they should be in complete control.Kroos is miles past it.
Muller plays in a farmers league where Bayern has won the league 9 seasons in a row, they can jog backwards into their 10th next season. His mentality is important for the group, but quality wise he's far from the player he used to be. 15 goals in the league 21, assists. Harry kane has 4 less assists and over twice as many goals, it's an fairly easy pick. Imagine what sort of numbers someone like Kane would produce playing for Bayern.
Hummels better than John Stones
Feel free to overrate Verratti as much as you want.
Southgates inability to pick a functioning side is what's causing England problems, not the quality available.
So one guy. Who happily admitted that France were superior.
And he barely even talked about England anyway. He only pointed out imperfections in other teams in order to point out that England's own imperfect team was comparable.
This myth of 'overrating' the national team England is nonsense. The vast majority of English fans are fully aware of world talent through having supported foreign players in Premier League, or through watching the CL, or through having witnessed entire international tournaments in the past, or through seeing every team play at least one round of matches of the Euros this time around. They're also just as likely to play FIFA and Football Manager as anyone else on the planet. Since, let's be honest, that where most internet experts get their knowledge of world football from anyway.
It's arrogant to believe that English football fans are somehow ignorant to the world game, whilst those outside of the country are better versed (not directed at yourself).
The major factor that leads to this misconception seems to be that UK channels and media receive more widespread coverage around the world (I'm guessing this due to how many non-Brits seem to know everything about what Sounness and Neville say every week). Because of that global reach, they've been set an unrealistic standard of impartiality. If French, German, Swiss, Finnish or Macedonian media had the same international footprint, it would become immediately apparent that those broadcasters also focus on their own teams. Because that's what their home audiences demand. But focussing coverage is not the same thing as overrating. It's not worth getting upset about.
England fans treat international tournaments like buying a lottery ticket. They know they won't win, but they enjoy bantering about their chances.
Funnily enough, you don't hear the same complaints about Scotland or Wales fans overrating their teams by hoping for them to qualify from their groups.
Last edited: