*** The Official 2022 World Cup Thread ***

[chicken 2,627]

I'll stand by what I have said to others elsewhere.

This probably will be the most evenly matched game of the tournament both in terms of on paper and on the pitch. I genuinely believe that France and England were the two best teams left in the tournament as well. I hope France go on to win it, though I would also take Morocco.

No disrespect to Croatia, but they grind out those results and I want to see a more flowing attacking team rather than more chess-ball. 

[chicken 2,627]

2 minutes ago, Surfer said:

I wasn't criticizing the fact we didn't dominate for a full 90 minutes. I criticized the fact that until France scored England refused to aggressively attack. And I'm sure Southgate would have had them play that way all game but fortunately France scored early and when England ware now forced to play the way they should have from the very beginning look what happened.

(And later they threw it all away, but that's life it happens)  

Too early in the game to say. England certainly didn't play defensively for the previous two games. Cautiously today? Sure, but every chance France had was on the break, so any real surprise they didn't want to go 100mph from the off? No.

[Capt. Pants 4,246]

Just wondering from those who want Southgate out who they would put in his place?

 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

We could have had a pacey CB who just won a Serie A winners medal. Our manager left him at home. In favour of Harry Maguire.

Harry Maguire.

Who's actually played well in this tournament, despite most people's misgivings and his poor form in a Utd shirt. Moreover, he and Stones are well-used to playing with each other in an England team (along with Pickford behind them). Putting Tomori in that late is risking breaking up a decent partnership at a very late stage and they might not gel in time.

Should Stones and Tomori be a combo worth looking at in the future? Could agree.

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Did they have anywhere near the level of talent over the pitch that Southgate has? I am not convinced.

I am sure Morocco and Croatia have far better CBs than Gareth has available right?

Genuinely couldn't care less if the England camp is happy and contented if they aren't winning games. Has to be secondary - and if any player isn't desperate to go out and represent their country we have bigger problems.

1. I'd take the 2006 side over anything re. individual talent, the problem with it was a slight lack of balance. Lacked a natural holding midfielder. Neville, Ashley Cole, Ferdinand, Terry, (Sol Campbell as a back-up centre-half), Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham, Owen, Rooney..... we're talking about Jamie Callagher as a fourth-choice centre-half and a maligned, but subsequently very solid player in Owen Hargreaves on the bench. Think that's some way ahead of this crop, and with a naturally better line of defenders. It just lacked a Batty-esque holding midfielder; there was a problem on getting Gerrard and Lampard together, not to mention best using Scholes.

2. Considering that a big problem about the 2006 and indeed 2010 squads was that many took club rivalries into the camp (and had the bigger problems you appear to describe), I'd say keeping the squad happy is a good base on which to build. That performance today wasn't a team that didn't care for their manager, and wasn't a team that wasn't desperate to do well.

[Ian 1,129]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Well at one point previous managers have had the likes of Seaman, Cole, Campbell, Ferdinand, Terry, Neville, Lampar, Gerrard, Owen and Rooney. How many of those get in ahead of our best 11? Four of the back five, a central player and an attacking player? So 6 out of 11 being Conservative?

Do you honestly believe any other manager has had as much talent across the entire squad as Southgate has relative to other international teams?

We've always had the odd top player, but never the squad depth. The problem is Southgate is IMO too safe to offer these players the opportunity to make a difference. Should Maguire (who I think was actually alright) have been starting on merit? Should Mount have been preferred to Maddison, who was in scintillating form?

He obviously relies on the loyalty of players, which is fine, but have never felt he has the nouse  to make the big decisions required to win a tournament.

[Branston Pickle 3,661]

5 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Just wondering from those who want Southgate out who they would put in his place?

 

I don’t particularly want him out, but don’t think we can make the step up with him there. It’s the same old same old. We were **** in Nations League, only played one good side in 5 games at the W Cup, and lost to them.

Tbh it doesn’t really bother me - I actually said I’d prefer us to beat Swansea today than for England to win (while obviously wanting both) and I stand by that.  England have always ‘represented’ the favoured few sides/players and it is a shame that many good players don’t get a look in.

Edited December 10, 2022 by Branston Pickle

[hogesar 9,676]

1 minute ago, Ian said:

Do you honestly believe any other manager has had as much talent across the entire squad as Southgate has relative to other international teams?

We've always had the odd top player, but never the squad depth. The problem is Southgate is IMO too safe to offer these players the opportunity to make a difference. Should Maguire (who I think was actually alright) have been starting on merit? Should Mount have been preferred to Maddison, who was in scintillating form?

He obviously relies on the loyalty of players, which is fine, but have never felt he has the nouse  to make the big decisions required to win a tournament.

I think Southgate was generally proved right on making a huge decision with Maguire. The easy option was not to play him.

I could also argue has any other manager given so many inexperienced young players an opportunity to shine on the big stage?

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Who's actually played well in this tournament, despite most people's misgivings and his poor form in a Utd shirt. Moreover, he and Stones are well-used to playing with each other in an England team (along with Pickford behind them). Putting Tomori in that late is risking breaking up a decent partnership at a very late stage and they might not gel in time.

Should Stones and Tomori be a combo worth looking at in the future? Could agree.

1. I'd take the 2006 side over anything re. individual talent, the problem with it was a slight lack of balance. Lacked a natural holding midfielder. Neville, Ashley Cole, Ferdinand, Terry, (Sol Campbell as a back-up centre-half), Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham, Owen, Rooney..... we're talking about Jamie Callagher as a fourth-choice centre-half and a maligned, but subsequently very solid player in Owen Hargreaves on the bench. Think that's some way ahead of this crop, and with a naturally better line of defenders. It just lacked a Batty-esque holding midfielder; there was a problem on getting Gerrard and Lampard together, not to mention best using Scholes.

2. Considering that a big problem about the 2006 and indeed 2010 squads was that many took club rivalries into the camp (and had the bigger problems you appear to describe), I'd say keeping the squad happy is a good base on which to build. That performance today wasn't a team that didn't care for their manager, and wasn't a team that wasn't desperate to do well.

You missed my point though - relative to other teams I think the 2022 squad is well up there.

We looked great in 2006, but then take a glance at the Brazil squad. Also would argue we didn't have players like Maddison, Grealish etc to come off the bench.

 

[Newtopia 517]

I am really proud of the team, we could and possibly should have won today.  We have been genuinely competitive for years, and although there are some really good players in this squad, not many would get into the golden generation, for me the difference is Southgate, he has plan, and he picks the players to suit the system.  I am nervous of changing approach for a more pragmatic manager who focuses on managing the game, we have seen how that has gone with Smith.

[Capt. Pants 4,246]

1 minute ago, Branston Pickle said:

I don’t particularly want him out, but don’t think we can make the step up with him there. It’s the same old same old. We were **** in Nations League, only played one good side in 5 games at the W Cup, and lost to them.

Tbh it doesn’t really bother me - I actually said I’d prefer us to beat Swansea today than for England to win (while obviously wanting both) and I stand by that.

I would have taken the England win and Norwich lose tbh. 4 years is a long wait.

 

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

I think Southgate was generally proved right on making a huge decision with Maguire. The easy option was not to play him.

I could also argue has any other manager given so many inexperienced young players an opportunity to shine on the big stage?

We can argue **** for tat as long as you would like, but the simple fact is we lose when we come up against decent teams.

I don't think Southgate is a disaster, but it's the same old at England level - he trusts in the young players who come through the England youth system and that's it, has always been the same.

For my entire life I have heard about how important it is to build a squad for the future - that was two generations ago and we still predictably lose with a hard luck story whilst leaving top in-form players out of the squad (Toney) or out of the lineup (Maddison).

[Keith Scott 244]

2 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Just wondering from those who want Southgate out who they would put in his place?

 

Someone who wouldn't leave England's most creative in form player on the bench for the entirety of the world cup. Someone who isn't a robot, and makes the same changes. Every. Single. Time. A manager who isn't a cautious coward. A manager who picks players on form and merit. Someone who can actually win the big games. Who that is I don't know. But I do know it isn't and never will be Gareth Southgate. He's had his time. He's failed. Genuinely believe Dean Smith is a better manager than Gareth Southgate. 

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

[Capt. Pants 4,246]

Just now, Keith Scott said:

Someone who wouldn't leave England's most creative in form player on the bench for the entirety of the world cup. Someone who isn't a robot, and makes the same changes. Every. Single. Time. A manager who isn't a cautious coward. A manager who picks players on form and merit. Someone who can actually win the big games. Who that is I don't know. But I do know it isn't and never will be Gareth Southgate. He's had his time. He's failed. Genuinely believe Dean Smith is a better manager than Gareth Southgate. 

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

So does this someone actually have a name?

Just curious, you're the 2nd person to avoid the question.

[chicken 2,627]

6 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

 

1. I'd take the 2006 side over anything re. individual talent, the problem with it was a slight lack of balance. Lacked a natural holding midfielder. Neville, Ashley Cole, Ferdinand, Terry, (Sol Campbell as a back-up centre-half), Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham, Owen, Rooney..... we're talking about Jamie Callagher as a fourth-choice centre-half and a maligned, but subsequently very solid player in Owen Hargreaves on the bench. Think that's some way ahead of this crop, and with a naturally better line of defenders. It just lacked a Batty-esque holding midfielder; there was a problem on getting Gerrard and Lampard together, not to mention best using Scholes.

The biggest travesty with this for me is two, possibly three-fold.

1. Paul Scholes could play holding midfield in the same way Fox did for us. But England managers kept trying to figure out how to play both Gerrard AND Lampard.

2. Gerrard's best position was holding midfield. He could break from there like Yaya Toure did and had a very decent ranged shot on him. Why on earth would you want him further forward with his range of passing. Especially when Lampard scored many career goals in and around the box.

3. Formation. 4-4-2 mostly back then I think. 4-2-3-1, Gerrard and Scholes holding with Lampard flanked with two wider players with a striker ahead of them.

I honestly just think the managers we had at the time were not adventurous enough. And they had an abundance of endless substitute friendlies to try things out. The nations league has eradicated that as whilst they have replaced friendlies, there is also a limited number of substitutes.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

1 minute ago, Ian said:

You missed my point though - relative to other teams I think the 2022 squad is well up there.

We looked great in 2006, but then take a glance at the Brazil squad. Also would argue we didn't have players like Maddison, Grealish etc to come off the bench.

 

Didn't miss your point at all, I just disagree with it. I don't think the 2022 squad is particularly outstanding, and it's not outstanding IMO because it's very unbalanced. It's a bumper crop of attacking midfielders and a proven world-class striker, and has a decent crop of quality right-backs. However it's a bit below par in defensive midfield, definitely below par at centre-half unless Tomori comes right through as he needs blooding, whilst also lacking in depth in goal and possibly left-back as well.

There's still a lot of years in that team though. Bellingham's come through and been one of the lights from an England perspective, and should - fate permitting - be good for a decade or more. Rashford's looked more the player he was, Saka and Foden had their moments. 

Think you're overrating Grealish a bit, Maddison might have been worth a go, but he had been injured before making it. Can understand the caution on that call.

[Branston Pickle 3,661]

5 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

I would have taken the England win and Norwich lose tbh. 4 years is a long wait.

 

Meh - I watch and support Norwich, not England (though do occasionally go to England games).  I want both to do well, but for me Norwich means more football-wise.

Edited December 10, 2022 by Branston Pickle

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Didn't miss your point at all, I just disagree with it. I don't think the 2022 squad is particularly outstanding, and it's not outstanding IMO because it's very unbalanced. It's a bumper crop of attacking midfielders and a proven world-class striker, and has a decent crop of quality right-backs. However it's a bit below par in defensive midfield, definitely below par at centre-half unless Tomori comes right through as he needs blooding, whilst also lacking in depth in goal and possibly left-back as well.

There's still a lot of years in that team though. Bellingham's come through and been one of the lights from an England perspective, and should - fate permitting - be good for a decade or more. Rashford's looked more the player he was, Saka and Foden had their moments. 

Think you're overrating Grealish a bit, Maddison might have been worth a go, but he had been injured before making it. Can understand the caution on that call.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I think this is the weakest the "top" international teams like Brazil, Germany, Spain and so on have been for a long time and I am not sure we will have a better opportunity of winning international trophies.

I am sure our squad has weaknesses, but not much point in having excellent attacking players if you don't bother utilising them.

[chicken 2,627]

4 minutes ago, Ian said:

We can argue **** for tat as long as you would like, but the simple fact is we lose when we come up against decent teams.

I don't think Southgate is a disaster, but it's the same old at England level - he trusts in the young players who come through the England youth system and that's it, has always been the same.

For my entire life I have heard about how important it is to build a squad for the future - that was two generations ago and we still predictably lose with a hard luck story whilst leaving top in-form players out of the squad (Toney) or out of the lineup (Maddison).

You missed the news then? No way any player is being included in the squad whilst he faces over 200 counts of betting on football matches which are no doubt being investigated... 

Maddison was injured at the start of the tournament when we were playing a formation he would more naturally fit into (4-2-3-1) and then wouldn't get ahead of Foden or Saka playing wide owing to both of those having more natural ability for wide positions. I would have preferred to see him come on for Mount tonight, especially with the number of free kicks we had been winning. I would love to get Maddison onto that pitch, but for me, not really a huge argument in that formation to do so. 

[Capt. Pants 4,246]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

Meh - I watch and support Norwich, not England.  Clearly want both to do well, but for me Norwich means more.

Meh. Both level for me.

 

 

[Virtual reality 712]

24 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

not really sure how anyone can blame Southgate for that, we were the better side for the majority of the game, had the better chances, missed a pen, could’ve had a lot more from the ref, things just didn’t go our way. No hard feelings from me, just a proper gutting result to take.

Must admit I wanted him gone based on our national league, but this tournament has turned it round again for me- id be happy with another international tournament with him for sure.

Completely agree that Southgate can’t be blamed for tonight. The game could have gone either way and hinged on one spot kick. But, that’s three tournaments for Southgate now and I think that should be the end for him in this role. Personally I’d like to see Eddie Howe but would be open to another quality foreign manager 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Just now, chicken said:

The biggest travesty with this for me is two, possibly three-fold.

1. Paul Scholes could play holding midfield in the same way Fox did for us. But England managers kept trying to figure out how to play both Gerrard AND Lampard.

2. Gerrard's best position was holding midfield. He could break from there like Yaya Toure did and had a very decent ranged shot on him. Why on earth would you want him further forward with his range of passing. Especially when Lampard scored many career goals in and around the box.

3. Formation. 4-4-2 mostly back then I think. 4-2-3-1, Gerrard and Scholes holding with Lampard flanked with two wider players with a striker ahead of them.

I honestly just think the managers we had at the time were not adventurous enough. And they had an abundance of endless substitute friendlies to try things out. The nations league has eradicated that as whilst they have replaced friendlies, there is also a limited number of substitutes.

Disagree with 2 but for a somewhat semantic reason, that's not a purely holding midfielder in my book. Gerrard was best when told "go box-to-box and use your engine, lad". Agree that he was at his best ten or so yards behind a Lampard, but with the talents that Lampard and Scholes had, that team needed a sitter who would free those two, and there wasn't a natural one in there. Gerrard liked getting involved too much and you lost a fair bit of his game - those raking strikes from distance that you mentioned being a case in point - if he were just supposed to be in front of the defence.

Would argue that England tried similar with Wilshere instead of Scholes later on and still had an issue with being lightweight in the middle. IIRC wasn't there a bit of a left-footer issue too out on the flanks - as in for all the talent going around, there weren't many natural left-peggers?

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,767]

Ultimately we couldnt score in open play..and not sure we really looked like it against an ordinary side that we had the better of in the 2nd half.

Crossing from wide not good enough all night. Cant just rely on pens.

Englands knockout record under Southgate

WC '18  Colombia W , Sweden W , Croatia L

Euro '20  Ukraine W , Germany W Denmark W Italy L

WC ' 22  Senegal W , France L

Of the above the Germany game in the euros is the only win against a team we may not have expected to beat.

Is there someone better to take us forward?

[Keith Scott 244]

2 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

So does this someone actually have a name?

Just curious, you're the 2nd person to avoid the question.

Like I said, I don't know who. But 'someone' else has to be given a chance to manage England now. Southgate has failed. In 6 years in charge his biggest win is beating the worst Germany side in living memory. No matter how you cut it, he's a flat track bully, and a failure. It's a results business. This England squad has so much potential but it needs a more dynamic, braver, tactically astute manager. A manager who can get results. Now it's up to the F.A to find that manager. But I have about as much faith in them as I have in the NCFC hierarchy.

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I think this is the weakest the "top" international teams like Brazil, Germany, Spain and so on have been for a long time and I am not sure we will have a better opportunity of winning international trophies.

I am sure our squad has weaknesses, but not much point in having excellent attacking players if you don't bother utilising them.

Well, considering the sheer different number of goalscorers, I think Southgate did.

The key point, which I may not have made clear enough though, is this: if your defenders aren't top-grade, and you're at the top-end of international football, you really can't be that gung-ho. The fact Southgate's put a team out that more than matched a very strong France side (is Pogba really a loss? And whilst Benzema is excellent, Giroud is one hell of a quality back-up!) between the boxes tells me he got more right than not today.

[All the Germans 1,078]

25 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Well at one point previous managers have had the likes of Seaman, Cole, Campbell, Ferdinand, Terry, Neville, Lampar, Gerrard, Owen and Rooney. How many of those get in ahead of our best 11? Four of the back five, a central player and an attacking player? So 6 out of 11 being Conservative?

I've been against Southgate but this is a fair point. Today's team would probably have Bellingham and Foden in ahead of that team.(Note; I have no idea how to fit Bellingham in with Gerrard and Scholes!)

[Ian 1,129]

5 minutes ago, chicken said:

You missed the news then? No way any player is being included in the squad whilst he faces over 200 counts of betting on football matches which are no doubt being investigated... 

Maddison was injured at the start of the tournament when we were playing a formation he would more naturally fit into (4-2-3-1) and then wouldn't get ahead of Foden or Saka playing wide owing to both of those having more natural ability for wide positions. I would have preferred to see him come on for Mount tonight, especially with the number of free kicks we had been winning. I would love to get Maddison onto that pitch, but for me, not really a huge argument in that formation to do so. 

Good point, I assume times have changed since we took Gazza.

You kind of make my point, if we are tactically good enough from a coaching perspective we should be able to mix the formation up to suit the opponents.

Let me turn it around then as I am sure it's easy to pick individual defences. What precisely has Gareth Southgate achieved in his managerial career to warrant the most prestigious job in domestic English football?

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Well, considering the sheer different number of goalscorers, I think Southgate did.

The key point, which I may not have made clear enough though, is this: if your defenders aren't top-grade, and you're at the top-end of international football, you really can't be that gung-ho. The fact Southgate's put a team out that more than matched a very strong France side (is Pogba really a loss? And whilst Benzema is excellent, Giroud is one hell of a quality back-up!) between the boxes tells me he got more right than not today.

Not being funny, but you are talking about lacking top quality defenders, and then in the next paragraph talking about matching France.

 I genuinely think they were amongst the worst teams defensively I have seen at this tournament and we didn't exploit it despite apparently having an unbalanced attacking squad. I have never seen an international quality team make so many challenges from the wrong side as they did tonight.

 

 

[chicken 2,627]

7 minutes ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

Ultimately we couldnt score in open play..and not sure we really looked like it against an ordinary side that we had the better of in the 2nd half.

Crossing from wide not good enough all night. Cant just rely on pens.

Englands knockout record under Southgate

WC '18  Colombia W , Sweden W , Croatia L

Euro '20  Ukraine W , Germany W Denmark W Italy L

WC ' 22  Senegal W , France L

Of the above the Germany game in the euros is the only win against a team we may not have expected to beat.

Is there someone better to take us forward?

Odd one. So you want a manager based on the idea that they could get us to beat teams we're not expected to beat? 

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Not being funny, but you are talking about lacking top quality defenders, and then in the next paragraph talking about matching France.

 I genuinely think they were amongst the worst teams defensively I have seen at this tournament and we didn't exploit it despite apparently having an unbalanced attacking squad. I have never seen an international quality team make so many challenges from the wrong side as they did tonight.

 

 

Took the words right out of my mouth.

People saying England did well with our defenders and saying how great France are without looking at their back line.

France were dreadful tonight, they were not great against Denmark and lost to Tunisia. There for the taking and we couldn't score from open play, despite attacking options most nation's can only dream of.

He's pissed away too many opportunities previous England managers couldn't have even dreamt of.

[Aggy 755]

17 minutes ago, Ian said:

Do you honestly believe any other manager has had as much talent across the entire squad as Southgate has relative to other international teams?

We've always had the odd top player, but never the squad depth.

Probably true in terms of overall squad depth, but I’d say we’ve had better first XIs fairly recently. That 2006 side 4141 - Robinson, Neville, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole, Hargreaves, Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard, Joe Cole, Rooney. 8 of those get into the starting xi of virtually every club side in Europe, 2 get into most, and Robinson is a solid keeper.

Tonight, 3 or 4 get into starting xi of virtually every club in Europe, 4 or 5 get into most, and two or three are solid.

18 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Who's actually played well in this tournament, despite most people's misgivings and his poor form in a Utd shirt.

Has he? Against the weaker sides yes (we’ve played sides who are bottom half prem/championship level in reality). At fault tonight. Even against the weaker sides there were times he looked slow and out of position. And he seems to think he’s De Bruyne pinging passes he isn’t good enough to make.