Who should be next England manager?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

10 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Southgate has done well in terms of achievement but did it playing poorly and with a bit of luck. Sounds familiar. When his team came up against anyone decent, they failed. Now, we are failing against very average teams and still playing poorly.

He has reasonable players in his squad but chooses to ignore those who might require a small change in tactics. He always sticks to his shape, playing for a 0-0 and hoping to get lucky.

As someone else said above, only Kane would get a sniff at a place in an elite international team. That's where we are as a country - we are producing good players still, but our international manager doesn't use them properly.

The top clubs buying up the talent and not playing them doesn't help, of course.

Kane, Maddison and Bellingham should be the first names on the teamsheet; then Rice and Pickford. The rest are all a bit meh.

But the answer to the question is Steve Cooper. An absolute shoe in.

Trying to accommodate 5 bloody right backs in a squad doesn't help. 

Just have to tell 2 of them that unfortunately they have come through at a time when we're blessed with right backs so tough luck, they aren't needed. 

Every single squad we have too many right backs and yet get told there is no room for Maddison because of Foden and Grealish.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

13 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

As someone else said above, only Kane would get a sniff at a place in an elite international team. 

I think Foden gets in any national team in the world, just that talented midfielders are wasted in a Southgate team. 

[ged in the onion bag 855]

6 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Difficult to put the quality in midfield if you don't put them in the squad, James Maddison was the best English playmaker last season in the Premier League.

Would agree he should be in the squad, and play a part but I’m really referring to the central area where the tempo and rhythm of games are controlled!    Rice, Phillips and Henderson are nowhere near the level required in the crucial games.   Only one of them should ever play at any time as we need ball players to connect the team, keep the ball moving.   We don’t have them!

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Poch

[nutty nigel 7,534]

3 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Poch

Sooner have Pooch...

🐶🙃

[daly 501]

Victoria Beckham

[Channon’s Windmill 326]

Should be decided by some sort of X Factor/ BGT competition….yep that’s the way forward😉

[Well b back 3,203]

1 hour ago, ged in the onion bag said:

Would agree he should be in the squad, and play a part but I’m really referring to the central area where the tempo and rhythm of games are controlled!    Rice, Phillips and Henderson are nowhere near the level required in the crucial games.   Only one of them should ever play at any time as we need ball players to connect the team, keep the ball moving.   We don’t have them!

Why is Jude Bellingham not in your list, amazing player.

[Well b back 3,203]

Liz Truss should be manager.

[ged in the onion bag 855]

3 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Why is Jude Bellingham not in your list, amazing player.

Not seen much of him as yet.  Given his inexperience it’s unfair to expect too much consistently but he sounds more likely what we need than other options…. 
 

[Newtopia 517]

3 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Trying to accommodate 5 bloody right backs in a squad doesn't help. 

Just have to tell 2 of them that unfortunately they have come through at a time when we're blessed with right backs so tough luck, they aren't needed. 

Every single squad we have too many right backs and yet get told there is no room for Maddison because of Foden and Grealish.

Did he do that when it mattered last time, dropping TA.  

Maddison v sterling v fidel v grealish is a straight judgement call.  I think his biggest mistake has been a centre half, Smalling has been an outstanding out and out defender in Italy, not even a sniff recently, but again a judgement (personally I think henis better than Coady or Keane

[chicken 2,624]

8 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Southgate's CV has hardly stellar was it.

It wasn't bad though either. He did well motivating players, and typically had very little to spend. He then joined the England set up and gained what he knows there.

He gets a lot of grief, but that's mainly tabloid inspired and drivel IMHO. They love to build people up, and once they're built up, they love to dash them against the rocks from a great height. I pay little attention to them. You need to.

Half the issue is people think we have a plethora of great English talent. We're told the homegrown rules are helping this. How many of the England selections are you truly questioning?

There is tops, one, two, possibly three that a reasonable discussion could be had about.

I honestly just don't feel the quality and consistency of player is there anymore. You look at our choice of centre backs. We're not spoilt with them. You could put a case forwards for White at Arsenal. Perhaps he could do no worse. I think you'd be hard pressed to say he is head and shoulders better than every other option. Stones, on his day, is fantastic, but those days do not come consistently. Same could be said of Dier. Maguire, is very similar, absolute rock for Leicester and decent in his first season for Man Utd, hit and miss since.

Probably a bit of a controversial view but I think Foden is overhyped. Again, on his day, he can be decent. And to be fair to him, at 22 he isn't yet at his peak. The comparisons to Gazza were woefully premature.

Personally, I think Southgate has done pretty well with the players he has had to hand, especially when you consider what state the international set up was in when he inherited it. Prior to the last tournament people would have given him as long as he wanted as he was clearly turning it around, and he has, no way anyone predicted we'd do so well at the last tournament. And this one is going to be much harder.

I think folks need to remember that the Nations League was FIFA's way of making friendlies more appealing to TV audiences. More hype... 

[chicken 2,624]

5 hours ago, sgncfc said:

Southgate has done well in terms of achievement but did it playing poorly and with a bit of luck. Sounds familiar. When his team came up against anyone decent, they failed. Now, we are failing against very average teams and still playing poorly.

Oh shush! Seriously... the worst, and I mean, THE WORST arguments ever always put any prior success down to "a bit of luck"... For me, you tapped out at that point. Your gum shield has been removed by the ref, waving his hands above his head, your corner throwing the towel in and rushing over to you with the smelling salts whilst slapping your sweat drenched face. 10secs into the first round.

Oh how "lucky" we happened to luck our way past teams who were being unlucky... 

[Helsinki canary 242]

Boris Johnson is available but they need to move fast as he is in advanced negotiations with Peppa Pig World as head of entertainment 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Helsinki canary

[sgncfc 1,227]

On 28/09/2022 at 21:03, chicken said:

Oh shush! Seriously... the worst, and I mean, THE WORST arguments ever always put any prior success down to "a bit of luck"... For me, you tapped out at that point. Your gum shield has been removed by the ref, waving his hands above his head, your corner throwing the towel in and rushing over to you with the smelling salts whilst slapping your sweat drenched face. 10secs into the first round.

Oh how "lucky" we happened to luck our way past teams who were being unlucky... 

What a strange reaction......you OK?

In our "runs" to the S/F of the WC and the Euro final, who do you think we played well against? Let me help you out with that. Maybe Panama and maybe Denmark. Really, only Denmark was a team which at the time could have claimed to have players of our calibre. But we needed the ball to run for us in several games (Tunisia, Germany, Sweden, Colombia etc.) These are games we could equally easily have lost. I call that luck.

Whether you like it or not, a little luck does play a part in results of football matches. You can deny it all you like but Southgate got lucky with the draws and in quite a few of the actual games.

[chicken 2,624]

1 hour ago, sgncfc said:

What a strange reaction......you OK?

In our "runs" to the S/F of the WC and the Euro final, who do you think we played well against? Let me help you out with that. Maybe Panama and maybe Denmark. Really, only Denmark was a team which at the time could have claimed to have players of our calibre. But we needed the ball to run for us in several games (Tunisia, Germany, Sweden, Colombia etc.) These are games we could equally easily have lost. I call that luck.

Whether you like it or not, a little luck does play a part in results of football matches. You can deny it all you like but Southgate got lucky with the draws and in quite a few of the actual games.

Yup, I'm fine. And I don't retract my statement.

We got to where we did purely by luck is a totally cack handed argument. It always is and always will be.

Panama? In Europe?

We conceded 0 goals in the group stage and round of 16 including a 2-0 win over Germany. A side many would have put as more favoured for the tournament than us.

We then played Ukraine who had beaten Sweden - no mugs. In fact, Denmark was the first time we conceded. We conceded two goals in the entire tournament. If you think that is just down to luck... then like I say, you have no point, no argument.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

I think Southate's fine, to be honest. 

Ultimately, England players tend to be Prem players who have very high club demands on their time. Overall, any England manager has a very limited amount of time to forge a proper team, so regardless of how good the players are individually, I think manager's will always have to keep things fairly simple, and therefore not as elegant as you'd hope. 

I agree with Chicken. We're doing alright with Southgate. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I think Southate's fine, to be honest. 

Ultimately, England players tend to be Prem players who have very high club demands on their time. Overall, any England manager has a very limited amount of time to forge a proper team, so regardless of how good the players are individually, I think managers will always have to keep things fairly simple, and therefore not as elegant as you'd hope. 

I agree with Chicken. We're doing alright with Southgate. 

I appear to have quoted myself, but I agree with myself completely. 

Edited September 30, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

It’s a false premise. 
 

It would be far easier to manage Italy than England. 
 

Our issue is no consistent or clear methodology of play, no established principles, no widely understood pattern of play. 
 

‘Being up for it’ or ‘’wanting it’ or ‘showing bottle and heart and fight’ is utter gutter journalistic nonsense. 
 

I can pick every pass an Italian will make 2 passes before they receive it. 
 

I can draw a clear mark where an Italian player will move to before they go there. Like Commentators drawing out the snooker shots in advance.

There is nothing clever in this, they are well trodden pathways and structures, like good chess openings.

They are repeated and repeatable. They require oppositions to do exceptional things to overcome them. 

Then we wait for our number 10 to do one clever thing in a game and play for free kicks and have a set piece specialist. 

England’s problem is that they try to win every game. 

They try to score all the time. They think about attacking for 90 minutes. 

Ar the top level this makes you weak strategically. 

It is why historically England have pounded weak teams in qualifying and lost to anyone good once in the latter stages of tournaments. 

Parma 

Edited September 30, 2022 by Parma Ham's gone mouldy

[Barham Blitz 653]

I think Southgate is doing pretty well to be fair.  People complain about the football, but which other European international side would we not be complaining about if we were from there ?  The French get the same criticisms we do, Germany aren't much better, the Italian team are considered by their own fans to be a bit meh at the moment, the same with the Dutch, Spanish and Portuguese sides and the golden Belgian generation haven't won anything either.  

International football used to be regarded as the pinnacle of the sport but in reality with the richest club teams having a better average standard of players drilled to within an inch of their lives that hasn't been the case for a long time.  Southgate has taken that team a very long way in a relatively short space of time, made them tactically a lot more sophisticated and has a tournament record that we could only dream of a few years ago.

The lack of a compelling alternative to Maguire has necessitated some concessions in the  midfield structure that do result in our being a little stodgier than we would ideally like because we have to have a relatively deep back line to compensate for his lack of pace.  But we are lacking high class competition there and for all the national conviction that we are brim full of attacking promise I'm not convinced that we could field a balanced lineup that would blow teams away.

Southgate is working with what he has, and working to a plan.  I forget the relatively recent match where he went a bit more gung ho but it smacked of selecting a team to prove his point and we were predictably totally undone in midfield in both a defensive and a creative sense.  It may not be as easy on the eye as we would like, but I'm not convinced that a replacement would be the simple route to success that the media and many fans would have us believe.

[sgncfc 1,227]

14 hours ago, chicken said:

Yup, I'm fine. And I don't retract my statement.

We got to where we did purely by luck is a totally cack handed argument. It always is and always will be.

Panama? In Europe?

We conceded 0 goals in the group stage and round of 16 including a 2-0 win over Germany. A side many would have put as more favoured for the tournament than us.

We then played Ukraine who had beaten Sweden - no mugs. In fact, Denmark was the first time we conceded. We conceded two goals in the entire tournament. If you think that is just down to luck... then like I say, you have no point, no argument.

Chicken, you're normally so sensible but this one seems to have really got under your skin. I never said anything was "just down to luck". My original post says "playing poorly and with a bit of luck". And we played Panama in the WC , which is where we got to the semi's - no one was just talking about the Euros when referencing Southgate's record.

I, and no one else, never said it was all down to luck. You are just making things up to suit your view. Not like you at all.

We did play poorly in both the WC and the Euros, with the one or two exceptions I have already noted. Even against Ukraine, a game we eventually won 4-0, we were shaky at the back. A bit like Norwich playing poorly at Birmingham and winning; or against Bristol City and winning; or against West Brom and drawing - we had a bit of luck. No one says we are playing that well. Half our support wants a change of manager, but at least Dean Smith has some history of sending out teams to play attractive football - Southgate doesn't. He always sets a side up for a 0-0 so keeping clean sheets against quite modest opposition (remember, that Germany team were not highly rated) is not that great an achievement.

We were lucky with the draws in both tournaments. We were lucky against Germany. We were lucky against Scotland. We were lucky against Czech Republic. Watch the games again on you tube if you don't agree.

The point is that we failed to beat anyone highly rated (at the time of the euros Germany were rated 12th) - as soon as we came up against better teams we failed.

Consistently, Southgate teams fail to beat those teams with whom we are compared and who we should compete with. That is simply undeniable. He has shown time and time again at both club and international level that he can't produce teams capable of making that step, and if he really is the best option we have available, he needs to keep being lucky.

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by sgncfc
update

[chicken 2,624]

1 hour ago, sgncfc said:

Chicken, you're normally so sensible but this one seems to have really got under your skin. I never said anything was "just down to luck". My original post says "playing poorly and with a bit of luck". And we played Panama in the WC , which is where we got to the semi's - no one was just talking about the Euros when referencing Southgate's record.

I, and no one else, never said it was all down to luck. You are just making things up to suit your view. Not like you at all.

We did play poorly in both the WC and the Euros, with the one or two exceptions I have already noted. Even against Ukraine, a game we eventually won 4-0, we were shaky at the back. A bit like Norwich playing poorly at Birmingham and winning; or against Bristol City and winning; or against West Brom and drawing - we had a bit of luck. No one says we are playing that well. Half our support wants a change of manager, but at least Dean Smith has some history of sending out teams to play attractive football - Southgate doesn't. He always sets a side up for a 0-0 so keeping clean sheets against quite modest opposition (remember, that Germany team were not highly rated) is not that great an achievement.

We were lucky with the draws in both tournaments. We were lucky against Germany. We were lucky against Scotland. We were lucky against Czech Republic. Watch the games again on you tube if you don't agree.

The point is that we failed to beat anyone highly rated (at the time of the euros Germany were rated 12th) - as soon as we came up against better teams we failed.

Consistently, Southgate teams fail to beat those teams with whom we are compared and who we should compete with. That is simply undeniable. He has shown time and time again at both club and international level that he can't produce teams capable of making that step, and if he really is the best option we have available, he needs to keep being lucky.

 

Yeah, I took issue with "a bit of luck" I stand by it. As if to underline that you then said we were lucky against various teams and with the draw.

If playing poorly means conceding two goals in an entire tournament we get to the final of, I'll take it. Such a crass, poor argument.

Not under my skin, it's just idiotic and we see it so much on here. It is a non substance argument. 

Lastly, who should we beat? Who in the current England set up would make a world 11, hell, even the bench of a world 11? Who would make a European 11? We just are not that good. Kane will overtake Rooney's scoring record but he's not the best striker in Europe, not even close really is he? I mean he's good, but he's probably not even top 5.

That goes for the majority of our squad. So when people say "teams we should compete with" - who? We've not been as good as Italy or Spain for over a decade.

For me, Southgate is doing better with a worse choice of players than the managers who had the luxury of picking players like Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes etc. We just don't have those players now. We can't be considered as being a genuine top quality international side anymore.

Edited October 1, 2022 by chicken

[Robert N. LiM 4,344]

17 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

England’s problem is that they try to win every game. 

They try to score all the time. They think about attacking for 90 minutes. 

Not doing this is (a) one reason Southgate gets so much stick as a manager and (b) why we've gone deep in recent tournaments. 

People seem unbelievably down on him given that he has done better than any other England manager since 1966. Not sure what they're expecting. As you say, in tournaments we lose to the first top-level team we play. We're towards the top of the second tier of international teams and have been my whole life. Last eight in a major tournament is par for us, anything better is success. 

[sgncfc 1,227]

6 hours ago, chicken said:

Yeah, I took issue with "a bit of luck" I stand by it. As if to underline that you then said we were lucky against various teams and with the draw.

If playing poorly means conceding two goals in an entire tournament we get to the final of, I'll take it. Such a crass, poor argument.

Not under my skin, it's just idiotic and we see it so much on here. It is a non substance argument. 

Lastly, who should we beat? Who in the current England set up would make a world 11, hell, even the bench of a world 11? Who would make a European 11? We just are not that good. Kane will overtake Rooney's scoring record but he's not the best striker in Europe, not even close really is he? I mean he's good, but he's probably not even top 5.

That goes for the majority of our squad. So when people say "teams we should compete with" - who? We've not been as good as Italy or Spain for over a decade.

For me, Southgate is doing better with a worse choice of players than the managers who had the luxury of picking players like Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes etc. We just don't have those players now. We can't be considered as being a genuine top quality international side anymore.

It's a messageboard, Chicken. People give different opinions. Some people who don't like those opinions seem to find it necessary to call them "crass" and "idiotic" and dismiss those opinions just because they feel their own opinion is superior. Your opinion holds no more weight than mine.

For instance, your opinion that Kane is not in the top 5 European strikers. Absolute, complete, total garbage. In my opinion. But you're entitled to think that. Even though you're completely wrong. Can't wait for you to reel off the names of the 5 European strikers who are better than Kane.

England are currently ranked 5th in the world by the way, so lots of other people also disagree with you about the quality of our players. 

This constant undermining and underestimating of English players is what is at the heart of the Southgate coaching manual and why we have to watch his turgid rubbish. Players like Bellingham, Maddison, Foden, Pickford, Kane etc are as good as anything fielded by any other European country. We have massive strength in depth too, but you'd never know it with Southgate always picking his mates.

And the reason we've gone "deep" in the previous two tournaments is based more on the draw we have faced than the way we have played. 

[chicken 2,624]

42 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

It's a messageboard, Chicken. People give different opinions. Some people who don't like those opinions seem to find it necessary to call them "crass" and "idiotic" and dismiss those opinions just because they feel their own opinion is superior. Your opinion holds no more weight than mine.

For instance, your opinion that Kane is not in the top 5 European strikers. Absolute, complete, total garbage. In my opinion. But you're entitled to think that. Even though you're completely wrong. Can't wait for you to reel off the names of the 5 European strikers who are better than Kane.

England are currently ranked 5th in the world by the way, so lots of other people also disagree with you about the quality of our players. 

This constant undermining and underestimating of English players is what is at the heart of the Southgate coaching manual and why we have to watch his turgid rubbish. Players like Bellingham, Maddison, Foden, Pickford, Kane etc are as good as anything fielded by any other European country. We have massive strength in depth too, but you'd never know it with Southgate always picking his mates.

And the reason we've gone "deep" in the previous two tournaments is based more on the draw we have faced than the way we have played. 

FIFA rankings have nothing to do with people's views on how good a squad is. It's based on results of national teams. So again, a daft argument to make. Not only that, as Norwich City fans, we should be blooming well versed in how a team can perform to a greater level than any of it's individual parts should suggest.

We finished 3rd in the premier league against anyone's views that we would finish that high. 3rd best in England. Doesn't mean that the players we had individually were better than any others in the Premier League, or 3rd best in that position. The fact that many were not close to top international team selection says that really. Crook wasn't in contention for England for example.

Leicester winning the Premier League was also another example of a team punching above it's weight on paper.

England is much the same. Go around each position and tell me where each of those starting players gets inside the top 5 in that position in the world.

A great example is Belgium. De Bruyne would walk into the England side. Eden Hazard on form would as well. Are their players over rated or is it because they don't have the team unity, organisation and cohesion that England had at the last tournament?

Parma is right when it comes to Italy, as has been an on off criticism of the Italian national side and at times Serie A over the years. They build from defence first, or have done traditionally. There is a reason that Italy usually does well at tournaments because of that. If you drill on organisation and defence your side becomes hard to break down and beat.

Southgate did that in the last tournament, and we got to the final and lost against the team that has that reputation. Doesn't make it lucky. And no one is down playing our players unless you honestly think any of the current England set up would make a world 11? Like I say, go through each position and tell me that there are not 4-5 players internationally that you wouldn't play ahead of what we have.

As for a message board etc - yeah, it's like being down the pub, if you think "we've been lucky" is an opinion that hold's weight, you'd expect to be told by someone else you're not making a lot of sense. It's a cheap, poor and substance lacking argument. The stats don't support it, the results don't support it, the performances don't support it... there has been next to nothing "lucky" about it.

Southgate has done better with a side that lacks the standout stars we had in the recent past. No Beckham, Scholes, Lampard, Gerrard - all of those would walk into this side. They are a cut above. The same goes defensively, we don't have a standout goalkeeper. None of the options are particularly consistent. You wouldn't really describe any of them as a safe pair of hands would you? Pope has gone from a lower prem/top championship goalkeeper to England international.

Kane is consistent in that he knows where the goal is, he isn't particularly pacey. Arguably he and Stirling can be / are our best players. I don't see them being top 5 in their positions in the world though. Especially not Kane. 

Edited October 1, 2022 by chicken

[Crafty Canary 495]

Tailor made for Sam Allardyce 😏😏

[shefcanary 2,407]

16 hours ago, sgncfc said:

England are currently ranked 5th in the world by the way 

Just to underline that this is not a subjective opinion, but an objective one based on actual results. The methodology could be argued is false, but in a results based world, very difficult to argue with successfully if you only use subjective opinions.

[Ken Hairy 3,772]

Watching Foden ripping Man Utd apart right now is why Southgate should go, he's wasting top attacking players like Foden. 

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

15 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

Watching Foden ripping Man Utd apart right now is why Southgate should go, he's wasting top attacking players like Foden. 

Agree Hairyo , Foden is currently my favourite English player to watch in the Prem, he is very accomplished and perhaps( as im not looking it up) the first Academy player to have properly come through under Pep( who i dislike but acknowledge  is a good coach) . He is outstanding imo.

[rock bus 851]

3 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Agree Hairyo , Foden is currently my favourite English player to watch in the Prem, he is very accomplished and perhaps( as im not looking it up) the first Academy player to have properly come through under Pep( who i dislike but acknowledge  is a good coach) . He is outstanding imo.

Totally agree, I've been saying for about last 18 months that Southgate should be building his team around Foden. He is a great talent and Southgate with his negative/conservative tactics is just stifling him at an international level