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

[Ian 1,129]

3 minutes ago, chicken said:

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? 

Is this a trick question?!

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,746]

3 minutes ago, chicken said:

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? 

Sadly...that will be the only way we will ever win anything

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, chicken said:

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? 

Lol, nah, just stick with ones who can beat Senegal.

[Ian 1,129]

1 minute ago, Aggy said:

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.

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.

Again though - relative to other top squads. Germany, Brazil, Argentina, Spain, Italy all light years away from their best squads 

Of course we have weaknesses, but I really think we closer are up there (on paper) with the very best than we have ever been before and have a small window to actually beat some good teams.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

Southgate out for me. Not a huge fan, definitely subscribe to the view/fact that he loses more games when he plays a decent team than he wins. The talent we have requires a manager who has faith in the talent as well as faith in a system that gets the best from that talent. Southgate kept faith with the wrong players in my opinion, which is his prerogative but ultimately meant he favoured systems and set ups that suited players who I’d not regard as our best. You can get away with it against rank 10 or below most of the time but you can’t when the big boys come into it and that’s been largely proven with Southgate’s record. 

A manager bringing into a system our best players and playing to their strengths is using the strongest weapons we have rather than trying to play to balance out our weaknesses. If it meant we shipped goals by smashing through teams and scoring more then so be it. Our defence is not ‘weak’ it’s just comparatively weak to the big boys. Our attackers imo are the potentially the best in the world in terms of depth and options. Southgate’s tried and ultimately failed at three successive tournaments, he has had a go and thanks very much for the efforts but he has reached his ceiling. International football is knock out football. We should pretty much assume we qualify for knockout rounds with our investment and domestic league level, Southgate would be a decent league manager over the course of a season with pragmatism, assuming he could have the talent he has under his club badge, which he won’t - so in reality he will be Dean Smith, playing pragmatic football without the talent to give you the goals and moments to hurt teams. International football is about winning a run of games that get harder. If you don’t beat France who were without Kante and Benzema and you have players in ‘competitive’ leagues filling your squad then your chances of ever going all the way are limited. 

[Virtual reality 707]

8 minutes ago, chicken said:

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? 

Er yeah. That is the only way we’re ever going to win a tournament….

[chicken 2,624]

6 minutes ago, Ian said:

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?

The answer to that is to point at the long line of managers who's managerial careers were full of glittering references and achievements of big clubs on the top stages of European football. Even Hodgson, was a very well respected and regarded manager before he took on the England job in comparison to Southgate.

Yet despite that, Southgate has seen a team that most people agree, has less quality than a number of previous England teams, do better in successive tournaments than those managers.

And then there is the Guardiola point too. Barcelona, one of the biggest, if not the biggest(plenty would argue it) teams in world football appointed him off next to no managerial experience, certainly much, much less than Southgate. Much more money at stake.

Why does it matter about experience? Alex Neil took Norwich to the Premier League... Roeder had a much longer CV with relative successes with clubs in the premier league. The difference between the two is chalk and cheese.

At this point, Southgate has proven that he is capable of getting an England team playing as a team rather than a bunch of premier league misfits. Do we have an Mbappe in our squad? No. Do we have an aging Messi or Ronaldo? No. Do we have a genuinely, ground shaking, turf ripping international player in our squad? No.

This isn't the greatest ever England squad on paper, as individuals, but it is playing like a better team than those who have had better groups of individuals. In many ways, England and France are very similar.

As I said before, in my view, this could prove to be the best match in the tournament in terms of evenly balanced and of two of the best teams if not the two best teams.

I'd love to see France Vs Argentina in the final for France to destroy them and prove that correct. We shall see though. Plucky, brave, fearless and exciting Morocco may yet have something to say about that. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, Virtual reality said:

Er yeah. That is the only way we’re ever going to win a tournament….

Lauding underachievement appears to be in fashion among a few PinkUn posters.

[TheGunnShow 5,935]

Just now, SwearyCanary said:

Southgate out for me. Not a huge fan, definitely subscribe to the view/fact that he loses more games when he plays a decent team than he wins. The talent we have requires a manager who has faith in the talent as well as faith in a system that gets the best from that talent. Southgate kept faith with the wrong players in my opinion, which is his prerogative but ultimately meant he favoured systems and set ups that suited players who I’d not regard as our best. You can get away with it against rank 10 or below most of the time but you can’t when the big boys come into it and that’s been largely proven with Southgate’s record. 

A manager bringing into a system our best players and playing to their strengths is using the strongest weapons we have rather than trying to play to balance out our weaknesses. If it meant we shipped goals by smashing through teams and scoring more then so be it. Our defence is not ‘weak’ it’s just comparatively weak to the big boys. Our attackers imo are the potentially the best in the world in terms of depth and options. Southgate’s tried and ultimately failed at three successive tournaments, he has had a go and thanks very much for the efforts but he has reached his ceiling. International football is knock out football. We should pretty much assume we qualify for knockout rounds with our investment and domestic league level, Southgate would be a decent league manager over the course of a season with pragmatism, assuming he could have the talent he has under his club badge, which he won’t - so in reality he will be Dean Smith, playing pragmatic football without the talent to give you the goals and moments to hurt teams. International football is about winning a run of games that get harder. If you don’t beat France who were without Kante and Benzema and you have players in ‘competitive’ leagues filling your squad then your chances of ever going all the way are limited. 

Yet in the two players who replaced them, they scored. Giroud's their record scorer. And Tchouameni plays for Real Madrid. They're got excellent depth. A bit more than England.

[Capt. Pants 4,222]

The list of negatives against Southgate grows and grows but still not a single name as a replacement.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

12 minutes ago, chicken said:

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? 

How is that odd? Surely if we expect to lose to teams we are proven to be losing to under Southgate we want someone who can beat those teams, because Southgate can’t. Am I missing sarcasm? 

[Keith Scott 244]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

Lauding underachievement appears to be in fashion among a few PinkUn posters.

I was thinking the very same thing 🤣 🤣🤣

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

[Van wink 2,994]

Great effort from England, heart goes out to Harry Kane. 

[Aggy 753]

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Again though - relative to other top squads. Germany, Brazil, Argentina, Spain, Italy all light years away from their best squads 

Of course we have weaknesses, but I really think we closer are up there (on paper) with the very best than we have ever been before and have a small window to actually beat some good teams.

Yes that’s probably fair. I’m certainly glad we didn’t play 5 at the back tonight for that reason - we play 5 at the back to shore up our weaker defence when actually if we played to our strengths we probably can match most sides at the moment.

Which then brings me back to my earlier question - when you consider we’ve got a load of young quality attacking players, but older less good defenders, is the usually more conservative Southgate the right man to get the best out of us moving forward? I’d probably agree with what I expect your answer will be!

[chicken 2,624]

2 minutes ago, Virtual reality said:

Er yeah. That is the only way we’re ever going to win a tournament….

I just love the way that this is said with such ease though.

"Yeah mate, wot we need, is a manager who, you know, can make a donkey look like a stallion. You know, get us to beat teams well better than us."

I mean, sure, everyone wants that. But how easy is that to find? Only, Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea have all been looking for a few seasons... Watford, I mean Watford are pretty much trying everyone out for that. Fair play to em, you twist enough times at some point you might get the result you want... 

It's such a naive and flippant thing to say. Childish even.

England has had better managers, but many haven't done better despite their club level records. 

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

1 minute ago, Capt. Pants said:

The list of negatives against Southgate grows and grows but still not a single name as a replacement.

That’s not really necessary to make the point that with Southgate we won’t win. When a suitable replacement is found who we believe can get more out of this side then great, but I don’t see lots of point in sticking with a manager that we know for sure can’t do the job. Unless we are happy to accept not going all the way? In international tournament football and with our resources and investment I don’t see the point myself. Any new guy coming in doesn’t win then do what? Neither did Gareth, same difference. We may not know who can but we know for sure who can’t 

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

3 minutes ago, chicken said:

I just love the way that this is said with such ease though.

"Yeah mate, wot we need, is a manager who, you know, can make a donkey look like a stallion. You know, get us to beat teams well better than us."

I mean, sure, everyone wants that. But how easy is that to find? Only, Man Utd, Arsenal, Spurs and Chelsea have all been looking for a few seasons... Watford, I mean Watford are pretty much trying everyone out for that. Fair play to em, you twist enough times at some point you might get the result you want... 

It's such a naive and flippant thing to say. Childish even.

England has had better managers, but many haven't done better despite their club level records. 

The point is most people believe France aren’t better than us and we should be doing better. We only don’t expect to beat these teams because Southgate can’t beat them 

[chicken 2,624]

2 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

How is that odd? Surely if we expect to lose to teams we are proven to be losing to under Southgate we want someone who can beat those teams, because Southgate can’t. Am I missing sarcasm? 

It's odd because it's the sort of thing you'd expect to hear from someone who thinks magic and santa are real and that you can make a wish to a fairy godmother and somehow you get it.

The reality is in the last 22yrs England have had better squads in terms of individual players and better managers in terms of more successful at club level which apparently means they'll be more likely to translate that to the international stage.

Yet Southgate has outperformed them. With a squad of players not as good as those his predecessors could call upon. Yet somehow, with all of that considered, there is this magical manager out there who could transform England to be an against all odds team. All we need to do to get that manager is trade Southgate in for some magical beans and send Trevor Brooking up the beanstalk to get them.

As has been asked - who is that magical manager?
Klopp? Guardiola? Deschamps?

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

5 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Great effort from England, heart goes out to Harry Kane. 

I feel for him for sure, I think the masses do. I imagine he will have less people feeling angry towards him than Saka, Rashford and Sterling did a few years ago. 

Wonder why that is 🙄

[Ian 1,129]

3 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Yes that’s probably fair. I’m certainly glad we didn’t play 5 at the back tonight for that reason - we play 5 at the back to shore up our weaker defence when actually if we played to our strengths we probably can match most sides at the moment.

Which then brings me back to my earlier question - when you consider we’ve got a load of young quality attacking players, but older less good defenders, is the usually more conservative Southgate the right man to get the best out of us moving forward? I’d probably agree with what I expect your answer will be!

My issue with Southgate is his seeming lack of ability to change things up and get a result, and over reliance on players who he "trusts" (AKA some England journeymen who know their squad place is likely). That's it.

I would rather see someone who has experience at a high level who could make the difference in these tight situations.

 

[TheGunnShow 5,935]

Just now, SwearyCanary said:

The point is most people believe France aren’t better than us and we should be doing better. We only don’t expect to beat these teams because Southgate can’t beat them 

There's the problem. Exalted expectations. A side with Varane, Griezmann, Mbappe and Benzema (or indeed Giroud as a back-up), probably is better than England.

 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

30 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

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.

I always get anyone who says this and have said the same myself before, but I must admit today I was much more looking forward to the England game than the Norwich one. And if I could trade the Norwich win for an England one I probably would - a treasonous statement I know. Ultimately if I felt like Norwich had a lot more to play for this season under Smith, and England didn’t, then I’d probably not say that. I’d have really fancied us to win the whole thing if we’d won tonight, and I don’t fancy us to get promoted under Smith whatever the result was today - in fact another win probably just kicks the can down the road for another few weeks in terms of his tenure here which I don’t think will last the season.

[Keith Scott 244]

'Chicken' and other posters bizarre whataboutery based argument seems to be that Southgate's failure is slightly more acceptable than past managers failure. Hmmm. Southgate hasn't won a big game in 6 years of trying. France were there for the taking tonight  England and Southgate failed again. Time for a manager who can lead England to win the big ones.

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

1 minute ago, chicken said:

It's odd because it's the sort of thing you'd expect to hear from someone who thinks magic and santa are real and that you can make a wish to a fairy godmother and somehow you get it.

The reality is in the last 22yrs England have had better squads in terms of individual players and better managers in terms of more successful at club level which apparently means they'll be more likely to translate that to the international stage.

Yet Southgate has outperformed them. With a squad of players not as good as those his predecessors could call upon. Yet somehow, with all of that considered, there is this magical manager out there who could transform England to be an against all odds team. All we need to do to get that manager is trade Southgate in for some magical beans and send Trevor Brooking up the beanstalk to get them.

As has been asked - who is that magical manager?
Klopp? Guardiola? Deschamps?

Why is it on those wanting him out to answer that? You can insult people who disagree by calling them fantasists, but our squad this year is absolutely up there, in other years our squad have underachieved and the managers then were not god enough, but if Southgate had those squads and performed better at those tournaments so you think those squads beat the dominant Spain squad at the time? Or Brazil, or France? The difference is, the last three tournaments we have had a comparatively good squad equal to the other sides in the world at the top and we have been beaten. Italy in the Euros was not as good squad as we had, but we lost. 

It’s not fantasy to want to try and change up to get the elusive win, it is utter madness to carry on doing the same thing we know won’t win. 

[chicken 2,624]

9 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

The point is most people believe France aren’t better than us and we should be doing better. We only don’t expect to beat these teams because Southgate can’t beat them 

People can believe what they like. France are the reigning champions and one of the favourites for the tournament for good reason.

Mbappe is the heir apparent to Messi and Ronaldo. Giroud is no worse a striker than Kane, just older. That said, I don't expect Kane to get worse with age in the same way a player based upon pace would. So I expect he'll be just like Giroud.

Mbappe is better than any wide midfielder we have.

Folks go on about Kante, but he's played twice this season. He's good, but he's also 31. He's not Frances future and they haven't missed him so far. Benzema is 34 and had a long spell out of the French team due to various reasons including attitude. A great player he is, but again, it's not like he is light and day better than Giroud.

We were not favourites going into this game. Despite that, the hurt people are feeling - and I am going to call it that despite the way it is coming across on here, is because actually, we were the better team for large parts of the game and IMHO, overall.

Neither goal was down to "just" Maguire, the first had absolutely nothing to do with him. Three CM all in the box, none reacting quick enough to close the shot down and the shot was superbly executed.

Southgate also didn't tell Kane to miss his pen.

Equally, England clearly didn't throw a bung to the ref. 

Edited December 10, 2022 by chicken

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

32 minutes ago, Virtual reality said:

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 

Yeah not a bad shout and you’re right he’s had a good tenure.

Ultimately he’s created a really good atmosphere in the team that another manager hasn’t matched in all my lifetime - he’s made me actually like the England team as well which is basically a first. 

He’s got pelters for only beating teams we were expected to beat but that’s a damn sight better than we did going out against Iceland, going out in the group stages in Brazil, etc. Then you look at teams like Belgium, Germany, Brazil, Portugal, Spain in this tournament and realise that actually just beating the teams you’re expected to on a consistent basis is pretty respectable. Knockout football is brutal.

If he does chose to go then I’d take a Howe or Rodgers, or even Pochettino if we could get him - but I’d struggle to see a team being more harmonious than it is right now sadly, so give Southgate the Euros in Germany if he wants it I say!

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

6 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

There's the problem. Exalted expectations. A side with Varane, Griezmann, Mbappe and Benzema (or indeed Giroud as a back-up), probably is better than England.

 

Foden, Saka, Grealish, Bellingham, Henderson, Walker and even Kane go pretty much toe to toe with these. The fact Mbappe did not influence the game as much as Saka shows this. Kane in Real Madrid with that midfield and about 4 descents teams to play against out scores Benzema for me. Mbappe is class, don’t get me wrong, but Kante missing in the team means we run the midfield tonight. France should’ve been toast. 

[TheGunnShow 5,935]

I'm amused at this "Southgate's only beating teams he should beat".

Yeah, because the generally sound Roy Hodgson really beat the tar out of Iceland in Euro 2016 and Costa Rica in WC 2014. As the lauded Fabio Capello managed England to thunderous victories against Algeria and the USA and a gloriously resolute performance against Germany in the KO stages.... (oh, wait a minute)...

Meanwhile, the almost equally lauded Sven-Goran Eriksson led England to champagne football and true calypso style against the might footballing powerhouse of.... Trinidad and Tobago.

[chicken 2,624]

1 minute ago, SwearyCanary said:

Why is it on those wanting him out to answer that? You can insult people who disagree by calling them fantasists, but our squad this year is absolutely up there, in other years our squad have underachieved and the managers then were not god enough, but if Southgate had those squads and performed better at those tournaments so you think those squads beat the dominant Spain squad at the time? Or Brazil, or France? The difference is, the last three tournaments we have had a comparatively good squad equal to the other sides in the world at the top and we have been beaten. Italy in the Euros was not as good squad as we had, but we lost. 

It’s not fantasy to want to try and change up to get the elusive win, it is utter madness to carry on doing the same thing we know won’t win. 

Italy are pretty well known for grinding it out through tournaments. They didn't have a better side than France when Zidane was sent off either, but they won that. 

And it is totally those who want him out to answer that. Why should it be anyone else? Another pretty childish view IMHO. The main reason being if you believe there is a manager out there who can do things that Southgate can't and who could be tempted to the England job, surely folks can throw forward some names? If not, if they can't identify that manager, do they even exist?

Our squad this year absolutely isn't "up there" - this is reflected everywhere. Take a look at the press that is usually absolutely frothing at the mere mention of an international tournament with England featuring. It hasn't been like that at all this time. Even the commentators and pundits on all of the TV channels etc have been saying that whilst this is one of the best chances we may have, we have to temper that with the knowledge that it would take getting more than the sum of parts out of this team.

We were neck and neck with France, reigning champions, IMHO the best team remaining in the tournament. Suspect defences is somewhat of a theme. Argentina are just as guilty, if not more so after throwing away a two goal lead and then going through on penalties.

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

7 minutes ago, chicken said:

People can believe what they like. France are the reigning champions and one of the favourites for the tournament for good reason.

Mbappe is the heir apparent to Messi and Ronaldo. Giroud is no worse a striker than Kane, just older. That said, I don't expect Kane to get worse with age in the same way a player based upon pace would. So I expect he'll be just like Giroud.

Mbappe is better than any wide midfielder we have.

Folks go on about Kante, but he's played twice this season. He's good, but he's also 31. He's not Frances future and they haven't missed him so far. Benzema is 34 and had a long spell out of the French team due to various reasons including attitude. A great player he is, but again, it's not like he is light and day better than Giroud.

We were not favourites going into this game. Despite that, the hurt people are feeling - and I am going to call it that despite the way it is coming across on here, is because actually, we were the better team for large parts of the game and IMHO, overall.

Neither goal was down to "just" Maguire, the first had absolutely nothing to do with him. Three CM all in the box, none reacting quick enough to close the shot down and the shot was superbly executed.

Southgate also didn't tell Kane to miss his pen.

Equally, England clearly didn't throw a bung to the ref. 

Just have to agree to disagree. We were the better side tonight I agree, but it’s not enough to be better and create your only good chances because you are fouled in the box. France are a fine team, so is the solution we keep Southgate indefinitely until we have a team we judge on paper to be irrefutably the best? I think the fact it’s so refutable that France have a better team than England means our opportunities will not always be so forthcoming as they have been. 
Its a new cycle. We need to do something different. Southgate isn’t going to change his style, so we change the stylist