Jump to content
A Load of Squit

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

Recommended Posts

16 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.

 

Thats what England always do though isn't it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chicken said:

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.

Back to calling me childish. Your arguments are as much opinion based as mine, there’s no way of comparing the quality of squads accurately so let’s go to brass tacks. Southgate lost before we could go all the way. Again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SwearyCanary said:

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. 

Disagree in parts here. Grealish has been bang average this season and is looking on the way out at City. Henderson is a good servant but is beginning to fade a little. Foden and Saka are promising talents with some experience but need more seasoning, but Griezmann is much more proven at the sharp end of international and club football. Bellingham looked like a complete midfielder and a burgeoning talent, but he's still a rookie at this level. Mbappe's proven. Tchouameni's in a similar vein to Bellingham re. trajectory, just arguably a little further along considering caps and the club he's at, so I think you've overestimating the impact of Kante not being there. The fact Tchouameni has clocked up nearly 20 French caps since being called up for the first time less than 18 months ago indicates that the French aren't too worried and think his replacement is in the building.

Not to mention, Benzema has a decent scoring record for Madrid, but was often in the shadow of Ronaldo for a long time so wouldn't have been the main man. There's a reason he's still at Real Madrid and won the Ballon d'Or this year - enduring class. There's a reason Giroud is their record goalscorer, namely enduring class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

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.

Another example of the Southgate's failure is more acceptable than previous managers failure whataboutery argument. 

All the best. Big K.Scott.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

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.

So you’re best argument for not sacking Southgate is he is not Toy Hodgson and he’s not Sven? No s*** Sherlock, they were drops. That’s why we sacked them. Southgate is less dross, but not capable of winning with a great squad. I give him a B+. We need A* 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Disagree in parts here. Grealish has been bang average this season and is looking on the way out at City. Henderson is a good servant but is beginning to fade a little. Foden and Saka are promising talents with some experience but need more seasoning, but Griezmann is much more proven at the sharp end of international and club football. Bellingham looked like a complete midfielder and a burgeoning talent, but he's still a rookie at this level. Mbappe's proven. Tchouameni's in a similar vein to Bellingham re. trajectory, just arguably a little further along considering caps and the club he's at, so I think you've overestimating the impact of Kante not being there. The fact Tchouameni has clocked up nearly 20 French caps since being called up for the first time less than 18 months ago indicates that the French aren't too worried and think his replacement is in the building.

Not to mention, Benzema has a decent scoring record for Madrid, but was often in the shadow of Ronaldo for a long time so wouldn't have been the main man. There's a reason he's still at Real Madrid and won the Ballon d'Or this year - enduring class. There's a reason Giroud is their record goalscorer, namely enduring class.

Can’t ever determine who is right or wrong here though can we? It’s all opinion. Based on my opinion of them being better Southgate should be doing better. Based on yours that they’re worse Southgate gets a free pass until he inherits the best squad. 

Edited by SwearyCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keith Scott said:

Any manager who brings Mount and Sterling on to save a game whilst leaving Maddison on the bench deserves ousting. Bye bye Gareth.

All the best. Big Keith S.

First time over agreed with Keith. I was with you all the way here, sir. You're better on England than Norwich 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

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. 

No they don't.

Saka is 20, Foden 21, Bellingham is 19. You are comparing them to experienced professionals who have champions league titles, league titles and world cup titles to their names.

Mbappe influenced the game alright, as much as Saka, but differently. If Kane was better than Benzema, Real Madrid would have bought him by now. Benzema is 34. They'll be hunting for a replacement. Kane would be a relatively cheap option compared to other established top level strikers. Stranger things have happened but I doubt they will. Peak Benzema is miles better than Kane, he was faster and he has more technical ability. To top it off, didn't they have the chance to but pull out? 

Kante has been missing a lot, France don't rely on him. Nor should they. He's been fit to play for them twice in the last year. Injuries have prevented him from being massively regular for France for ages - since early 2019 really. 

Walker I do think is hugely underrated, his pace is amazing considering he is 32. Henderson is not toe-to-toe. I like him, I really like his character, love his energy, but he is not one of the best midfielders in the world. Again, he's 32, he's not at his best now, and Rice is arguably the better of the holding midfielders we have and he's 23 and again, has not played the consistently high levels of other footballers.

That is the biggest reason pundits have been keen to stress not to put unrealistic expectations on this England squad.

You might see the likes of Trippier, Walker and Henderson play again for England in the next Euro's, but realistically, I would say Walker is the only one likely to.

Saka, Foden, Bellingham, White, Rice are all the future of the England side, they have the most promise and in Saka, arguably talent.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Can’t ever determine who is right or wrong here though can we? It’s all opinion. Based on my opinion of them being better Southgate should be doing better. Based on you’re that they’re worse Southgate gets a free pass until he inherits the best squad. 

What's to indicate that they're better? You've said France were missing Benzema and Kante, but Tchouameni's playing regularly for Real Madrid after being bought there for the start of this season at a hefty sum from Monaco whilst having nearly 20 caps since an initial call-up less than 18 months ago. Giroud is - France's top scorer. England's number two striker is probably Callum Wilson.

France clearly have more depth than England. We've had fans begging for a mediocre Grealish to be chucked on, or hoping Maddison had recovered from knee issues to get on.

I think England are getting closer. Compare the defeat in 2016 (abject), 2018 (faded in the midst of a superb Croatian midfield and a poacher on top of his game in Mandzukic), 2020 (the draw opened up kindly and got lucky with a lot of home matches, but kept winning until an excellent Italian defence got to grips - 'arf - with matters) and between the boxes they were probably the better side today against a France side with Mbappe, Griezmann and Giroud in it.

You'd expect most of that England side to be around for Euro 24, if not WC 2026. Walker, Trippier and Henderson probably won't make it, but serious injuries permitting, I can't see many others of that side not being around. Not to mention, right-back isn't a position where England seem short of potential replacements that need blooding, and a B-group in the Nations League is probably a very good place to start.

Edited by TheGunnShow
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

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

For this tournament...I'd have handed the squad over to Guardiola for 4 weeks and asked him to name his price

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

What's to indicate that they're better? You've said France were missing Benzema and Kante, but Tchouameni's playing regularly for Real Madrid after being bought there for the start of this season at a hefty sum from Monaco whilst having nearly 20 caps since an initial call-up less than 18 months ago. Giroud is - France's top scorer. England's number two striker is probably Callum Wilson.

France clearly have more depth than England. We've had fans begging for a mediocre Grealish to be chucked on, or hoping Maddison had recovered from knee issues to get on.

I think England are getting closer. Compare the defeat in 2016 (abject), 2018 (faded in the midst of a superb Croatian midfield and a poacher on top of his game in Mandzukic), 2020 (the draw opened up kindly and got lucky with a lot of home matches, but kept winning until an excellent Italian defence got to grips - 'arf - with matters) and between the boxes they were probably the better side today against a France side with Mbappe, Griezmann and Giroud in it.

You'd expect most of that England side to be around for Euro 24, if not WC 2026. Walker, Trippier and Henderson probably won't make it, but serious injuries permitting, I can't see many others of that side not being around. Not to mention, right-back isn't a position where England seem short of potential replacements that need blooding, and a B-group in the Nations League is probably a very good place to start.

You can’t compare Giroud to Kane. Bellingham looked twice the player Tchouameni is tonight, as did Saka and Foden at times. Grealish is far from mediocre, and for Guardiola to rate him so highly is surely proof enough? I don’t want to give Southgate the reins with an even better squad to come, especially not really knowing what other National squads talents are also up coming so we can decry the next Mbappe or the next Ronaldo as being just that bit better than our full backs can manage. It’s not good enough

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

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 

It's not fact though, it's your opinion. It really isn't as "refutable" as you want it to be.

France are reigning world champions. On paper their team is better in terms of having more achievements in individual players.

You say Kane is one of our best players, but what does that look like on paper? Never won the premier league, never won the champions league, never won a world cup. 

In fact, in a head to head with Giroud, Kane comes out as underdog.

Giroud honours:
Domestic: Ligue 1(Montpellier), Serie A(AC Milan), FA Cup four times (Arsenal 3, Chelsea 1), Community Shield (Arsenal 3 times), Champions League (Chelsea), Europa League (Chelsea).
International: World Cup 2018, Euro 2016 runner up.

Kane honours:
No wins. Runner up in the champions league once and the EFL cup twice. Runner up in Euro 2020.

Now sure, you can argue that if Kane had been in a better squad, but it's empty. Plenty of teams out there chucking mega money about for players. It's an easy argument to make about almost any player, especially strikers. Shearer would have scored more goals in a better side than many of the Newcastle sides he played in. Shearer didn't want to leave Newcastle.

Now the thing is, you say Benzema is better than Giroud, and yet the latter has achieved more than Kane. And that is because he has been in better teams. That includes being part of the last team to win a world cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, chicken said:

No they don't.

Saka is 20, Foden 21, Bellingham is 19. You are comparing them to experienced professionals who have champions league titles, league titles and world cup titles to their names.

Mbappe influenced the game alright, as much as Saka, but differently. If Kane was better than Benzema, Real Madrid would have bought him by now. Benzema is 34. They'll be hunting for a replacement. Kane would be a relatively cheap option compared to other established top level strikers. Stranger things have happened but I doubt they will. Peak Benzema is miles better than Kane, he was faster and he has more technical ability. To top it off, didn't they have the chance to but pull out? 

Kante has been missing a lot, France don't rely on him. Nor should they. He's been fit to play for them twice in the last year. Injuries have prevented him from being massively regular for France for ages - since early 2019 really. 

Walker I do think is hugely underrated, his pace is amazing considering he is 32. Henderson is not toe-to-toe. I like him, I really like his character, love his energy, but he is not one of the best midfielders in the world. Again, he's 32, he's not at his best now, and Rice is arguably the better of the holding midfielders we have and he's 23 and again, has not played the consistently high levels of other footballers.

That is the biggest reason pundits have been keen to stress not to put unrealistic expectations on this England squad.

You might see the likes of Trippier, Walker and Henderson play again for England in the next Euro's, but realistically, I would say Walker is the only one likely to.

Saka, Foden, Bellingham, White, Rice are all the future of the England side, they have the most promise and in Saka, arguably talent.

Opinion opinion opinion opinion based on variable after variable after variable after variable. My opinion is no less valid and based on the same number of variables. I won’t call you childish though, because I am able to accept that your opinion has the same probability of being correct and coming to fruition as mine. 

Southgate isn’t the man to break the duck. With this squad or the next. You disagree, that’s all it is. I suppose time will tell.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

What's to indicate that they're better? You've said France were missing Benzema and Kante, but Tchouameni's playing regularly for Real Madrid after being bought there for the start of this season at a hefty sum from Monaco whilst having nearly 20 caps since an initial call-up less than 18 months ago. Giroud is - France's top scorer. England's number two striker is probably Callum Wilson.

France clearly have more depth than England. We've had fans begging for a mediocre Grealish to be chucked on, or hoping Maddison had recovered from knee issues to get on.

I think England are getting closer. Compare the defeat in 2016 (abject), 2018 (faded in the midst of a superb Croatian midfield and a poacher on top of his game in Mandzukic), 2020 (the draw opened up kindly and got lucky with a lot of home matches, but kept winning until an excellent Italian defence got to grips - 'arf - with matters) and between the boxes they were probably the better side today against a France side with Mbappe, Griezmann and Giroud in it.

You'd expect most of that England side to be around for Euro 24, if not WC 2026. Walker, Trippier and Henderson probably won't make it, but serious injuries permitting, I can't see many others of that side not being around. Not to mention, right-back isn't a position where England seem short of potential replacements that need blooding, and a B-group in the Nations League is probably a very good place to start.

Bang on. (out of emotes)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chicken said:

It's not fact though, it's your opinion. It really isn't as "refutable" as you want it to be.

France are reigning world champions. On paper their team is better in terms of having more achievements in individual players.

You say Kane is one of our best players, but what does that look like on paper? Never won the premier league, never won the champions league, never won a world cup. 

In fact, in a head to head with Giroud, Kane comes out as underdog.

Giroud honours:
Domestic: Ligue 1(Montpellier), Serie A(AC Milan), FA Cup four times (Arsenal 3, Chelsea 1), Community Shield (Arsenal 3 times), Champions League (Chelsea), Europa League (Chelsea).
International: World Cup 2018, Euro 2016 runner up.

Kane honours:
No wins. Runner up in the champions league once and the EFL cup twice. Runner up in Euro 2020.

Now sure, you can argue that if Kane had been in a better squad, but it's empty. Plenty of teams out there chucking mega money about for players. It's an easy argument to make about almost any player, especially strikers. Shearer would have scored more goals in a better side than many of the Newcastle sides he played in. Shearer didn't want to leave Newcastle.

Now the thing is, you say Benzema is better than Giroud, and yet the latter has achieved more than Kane. And that is because he has been in better teams. That includes being part of the last team to win a world cup.

Nope. You’re not convincing me. Appreciate the effort though. Southgate out. Perpetual loser. 

Good Southgate fact - never won an international tournament. 

Edited by SwearyCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

You can’t compare Giroud to Kane. Bellingham looked twice the player Tchouameni is tonight, as did Saka and Foden at times. Grealish is far from mediocre, and for Guardiola to rate him so highly is surely proof enough? I don’t want to give Southgate the reins with an even better squad to come, especially not really knowing what other National squads talents are also up coming so we can decry the next Mbappe or the next Ronaldo as being just that bit better than our full backs can manage. It’s not good enough

You "can't compare Giroud to Kane", yet you compared two attacking midfielders in Saka and Foden to a more defensive one in Tchouameni? And Grealish has been absolutely mediocre this season for Man City in the PL. 1 goal in 550 minutes of action over eight appearances, no assists.

There's a reason Mbappe and Griezmann are superstars. Foden could get there, but by definition he needs time. Bellingham could get there, but again - by definition he needs time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, SwearyCanary said:

Opinion opinion opinion opinion based on variable after variable after variable after variable. My opinion is no less valid and based on the same number of variables. I won’t call you childish though, because I am able to accept that your opinion has the same probability of being correct and coming to fruition as mine. 

Southgate isn’t the man to break the duck. With this squad or the next. You disagree, that’s all it is. I suppose time will tell.  

Firstly I am not claiming my opinion to be fact.

Secondly, it is childish to say that there is a better manager out there to take England to the next level but then refuse to accept that in saying such a thing you should be able to name one that is realistic.

It's literally like a child who doesn't want what's been served up for dinner but can't actually tell you what they do want for dinner. And getting all angry and frustrated about it.

Equally, I haven't said that Southgate IS the man to break the "duck", I've said that this squad isn't ready to, though it has come as close to it tonight as it has done since Euro '96. Had we won tonight we would have been tournament favourites. France already had that, and they edged it due to a Harry Kane missed penalty that would have seen us through to more time and possibly penalties.

I would also argue that the defender should have been sent off, as the last man and denying a goal scoring opportunity. I know the rules allow for refs to not award a penalty and feel as if they also have to give a red card, but it is very clear from the replays that he watched, that the French player only had eyes on the player, only had intent to make contact with the player and therefore, for me, should have been a straight red. That's before you go into detail about whether Greizman should have had a 2nd yellow, or that Saka should have had a penalty awarded in the lead up to their first goal.

I will say it again, for me, this will turn out to be 'the' game of the tournament. The best two sides meeting before the final. It happens sometimes. I don't think any side knocked out so far is better than England and I don't think the other sides in the tournament offer more than France. The strongest final on paper is Argentina Vs France, but I feel France would have too much for them. But who knows, Croatia have proven they are steady Eddy's, consistent if unspectacular, Morocco are proving to be the invigorated underdogs who could yet land more scalps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

You "can't compare Giroud to Kane", yet you compared two attacking midfielders in Saka and Foden to a more defensive one in Tchouameni? And Grealish has been absolutely mediocre this season for Man City in the PL. 1 goal in 550 minutes of action over eight appearances, no assists.

There's a reason Mbappe and Griezmann are superstars. Foden could get there, but by definition he needs time. Bellingham could get there, but again - by definition he needs time.

I’m glad you brought up Grealish’s season as evidence for his mediocrity. Because getting back to the main thrust of the point being that Southgate is not good enough, why would he pick Maguire and Sterling based on their respective seasons? Maguire at fault for second France goal, Sterling on as sub and had zero influence. It’s all up for debate. I just sit the other side of the fence as you 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Nope. You’re not convincing me. Appreciate the effort though. Southgate out. Perpetual loser. 

Good Southgate fact - never won an international tournament. 

Neither has Kane so clearly he's crap. 

Giroud has so clearly he should be the next England manager and is better than Kane.

I'm not trying to convince you. I am just proving your opinions are heavily flawed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

I’m glad you brought up Grealish’s season as evidence for his mediocrity. Because getting back to the main thrust of the point being that Southgate is not good enough, why would he pick Maguire and Sterling based on their respective seasons? Maguire at fault for second France goal, Sterling on as sub and had zero influence. It’s all up for debate. I just sit the other side of the fence as you 

You sit on the other side of the fence, but there doesn't seem to be much to back up the notion that England's players really are as good as you seem to think they are. That's the crux of the discussion, really.

In fact, if you accept that Maguire, Sterling and Grealish have not had great seasons this time out (agree), isn't that potentially a sign that England don't have that much talent, that much depth as some may think? After all, when France lost their best striker, they simply replaced him with their best ever goalscorer in a France shirt. And when they lost their best ball-winner, they replaced him with a 22-year-old who'd made an eighty-million euro move to Real Madrid, and has gone straight into their first team.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chicken said:

Firstly I am not claiming my opinion to be fact.

Secondly, it is childish to say that there is a better manager out there to take England to the next level but then refuse to accept that in saying such a thing you should be able to name one that is realistic.

It's literally like a child who doesn't want what's been served up for dinner but can't actually tell you what they do want for dinner. And getting all angry and frustrated about it.

Equally, I haven't said that Southgate IS the man to break the "duck", I've said that this squad isn't ready to, though it has come as close to it tonight as it has done since Euro '96. Had we won tonight we would have been tournament favourites. France already had that, and they edged it due to a Harry Kane missed penalty that would have seen us through to more time and possibly penalties.

I would also argue that the defender should have been sent off, as the last man and denying a goal scoring opportunity. I know the rules allow for refs to not award a penalty and feel as if they also have to give a red card, but it is very clear from the replays that he watched, that the French player only had eyes on the player, only had intent to make contact with the player and therefore, for me, should have been a straight red. That's before you go into detail about whether Greizman should have had a 2nd yellow, or that Saka should have had a penalty awarded in the lead up to their first goal.

I will say it again, for me, this will turn out to be 'the' game of the tournament. The best two sides meeting before the final. It happens sometimes. I don't think any side knocked out so far is better than England and I don't think the other sides in the tournament offer more than France. The strongest final on paper is Argentina Vs France, but I feel France would have too much for them. But who knows, Croatia have proven they are steady Eddy's, consistent if unspectacular, Morocco are proving to be the invigorated underdogs who could yet land more scalps. 

Well we’ll never know will we. 

Comparing my view of ousting our inadequate manager as ‘childish’ because I haven’t got a ready replacement to name, to an actual child not knowing an alternative dinner idea is clutching but let’s go with it.

When a child knows they definitely don’t like the food they’ve been dished up for tea (GS) (and already said they didn’t like that food before the meal was cooked (ie my pre World Cup view on GS)), but because they don’t do the shopping (for replacement managers) they don’t know what’s in the freezer or the cupboards and can’t possibly answer your question can they? Unless they just stab in the dark at their ideal dinner and hope you had the ability to predict they’d want that in. 
(if that’s your game I’ll have Klopp or Guardiola please dad)

But like all good analogies it comes with the realistic response that the child is probably told ‘tough, you’ll get what you’re given whether you like it or not.’ A completely mental response to a child telling you they don’t like the taste of something, the parent force feeds them that thing anyway because they’re too ignorant to accept that that child has their own sense of taste, but also the parent cannot accept that no matter whether THEY love the taste of what they’re dishing up, they’d personally never accept being given something they find unpalatable by someone else. 

I’m actually coming round to your analogy now.

PS- for clarity, you’re the parent trying to force feed me something I don’t like or want. Border line child cruelty, unless you grew up on the good old days when a good bit of physical abuse will learn ya! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

You sit on the other side of the fence, but there doesn't seem to be much to back up the notion that England's players really are as good as you seem to think they are. That's the crux of the discussion, really.

In fact, if you accept that Maguire, Sterling and Grealish have not had great seasons this time out (agree), isn't that potentially a sign that England don't have that much talent, that much depth as some may think? After all, when France lost their best striker, they simply replaced him with their best ever goalscorer in a France shirt. And when they lost their best ball-winner, they replaced him with a 22-year-old who'd made an eighty-million euro move to Real Madrid, and has gone straight into their first team.

The evidence is that England looked better man for man when faced with them. We just played in a way that despite being the better side we created very few chances when we have options to change that creativity. A failure to do so led to our sub par defence leaking the inevitable second goal when the onus should’ve been on us getting a winner. I believe I’ve seen pretty much universal agreement that England were better than France tonight. Now some may place that on the manager getting the most from the players, others (me) feel that it’s because the players we have are better overall but mostly in an attacking sense. I’m far more convinced by players matching up on the pitch than players price tags and trophies won previously playing alongside vastly differing squads in vastly differing leagues. Tonight England vs France is all that matters and wr should’ve won, but for how Southgate failed to capitalise on his players strengths. That’s my opinion. I am happy to accept yours is different and that France should’ve beaten us tonight and probably by much more. It’s just watching the game it didn’t look like that to me 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Southgate does stay beyond this tournament, maybe he needs a better level of assistant and coaches around him?

We see other countries with big name former internationals within their back room staff. Southgate is leaning on 'doyens of football' of the like of Steve Holland and Chris Powell.

Of all the coaches and ex England players there are out there, are these really the best we have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a great England fan coming from Edinburgh but I thought both England and Brazil deserved to win and both unfortunate to lose

This England team has so much potential with so many good young players and will only get better 

If Kane had scored sure they would have gone on to win and the Manager would be a hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Well we’ll never know will we. 

Comparing my view of ousting our inadequate manager as ‘childish’ because I haven’t got a ready replacement to name, to an actual child not knowing an alternative dinner idea is clutching but let’s go with it.

When a child knows they definitely don’t like the food they’ve been dished up for tea (GS) (and already said they didn’t like that food before the meal was cooked (ie my pre World Cup view on GS)), but because they don’t do the shopping (for replacement managers) they don’t know what’s in the freezer or the cupboards and can’t possibly answer your question can they? Unless they just stab in the dark at their ideal dinner and hope you had the ability to predict they’d want that in. 
(if that’s your game I’ll have Klopp or Guardiola please dad)

But like all good analogies it comes with the realistic response that the child is probably told ‘tough, you’ll get what you’re given whether you like it or not.’ A completely mental response to a child telling you they don’t like the taste of something, the parent force feeds them that thing anyway because they’re too ignorant to accept that that child has their own sense of taste, but also the parent cannot accept that no matter whether THEY love the taste of what they’re dishing up, they’d personally never accept being given something they find unpalatable by someone else. 

I’m actually coming round to your analogy now.

PS- for clarity, you’re the parent trying to force feed me something I don’t like or want. Border line child cruelty, unless you grew up on the good old days when a good bit of physical abuse will learn ya! 

Ok, so you've attached your own interpretation of why that child does not want what is served for tea, and it's because they don't like the taste.

So you didn't like Southgate before he was appointed then? And yes, I am comparing this to toddler mentality. And yes, it is still very much childish to demand a better manager but refuse to, with a world fully stocked of alternative managers - or a cupboard/pantry/fridge stocked with all the alternatives your could imagine, name an alternative.

If I was to demand that I wanted a better world, would you not expect me to be able to say what it looked like?

If I demanded a better car than the one I own, is it not unreasonable to be asked what car I would want to replace it?

I am not at all trying to force feed you anything. I will say it again. I haven't actually said that Southgate is the best manager ever, or that he is nailed on to win the next international tournament etc. I have simply asked who you think England can realistically bring in to replace him who could do better.

So far, you have just argued that it shouldn't be those that want him out that should have to come up with those suggestions... despite it being you that is adamant that there is better. And by saying that, you somehow feel it is down to other people who are not as extremely inclined to get shot just yet to come up with better... presumably just so you can disagree with them? 

It's ridiculous to be fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

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!

Pochettino is the manager I have been mulling over in my mind. At this stage I'm not sure how much better, or different Howe or Rodgers would be.

Howe will be hard to prise away from project Saudi-ball now too one would think. And prior to that, his experience has been low end Premier League, top end championship and the former was relatively limited and somewhat questionable... they spent a lot on players who turned out to be not that great and often ended up sticking with the tried and tested that had got them there (looking at those strikers brought in for £8-10m and failed to be better than £3m Wilson). Those players getting old is largely what led to their relegation. He's not a bad shout, just a very meh one.

Rodgers, IMHO, is on paper a more experienced option than Howe but I think is pretty questionable. Again, more meh, than anything, but there have been plenty of mumbles and grumbles coming from Leicester in recent times about him. And he's far from proven really. And compared to Howe, he's had a shot at a big club and couldn't make it stick.

Pochettino probably has the best credentials in terms of translating to an international side. He brought through younger players into the Spurs team and in hindsight it would appear that he galvanised them. It wasn't that long ago that people struggled to imagine an England team that didn't include Dele Alli in it. Yet since Pochettino's departure from Spurs, Alli has gone on a downward spiral. He's only 26 and even Everton have deemed him surplus and sent him out on loan. The Spurs teams under him always seemed to have verve and fluidity too, and with this young England squad, perhaps he is best suited to finding a way for that to be their approach too?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a positive note, it's a great complement to England still kneeling for Black Lives Matter to lose to a team they should beat on paper that has so many players of African heritage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chicken said:

Ok, so you've attached your own interpretation of why that child does not want what is served for tea, and it's because they don't like the taste.

So you didn't like Southgate before he was appointed then? And yes, I am comparing this to toddler mentality. And yes, it is still very much childish to demand a better manager but refuse to, with a world fully stocked of alternative managers - or a cupboard/pantry/fridge stocked with all the alternatives your could imagine, name an alternative.

If I was to demand that I wanted a better world, would you not expect me to be able to say what it looked like?

If I demanded a better car than the one I own, is it not unreasonable to be asked what car I would want to replace it?

I am not at all trying to force feed you anything. I will say it again. I haven't actually said that Southgate is the best manager ever, or that he is nailed on to win the next international tournament etc. I have simply asked who you think England can realistically bring in to replace him who could do better.

So far, you have just argued that it shouldn't be those that want him out that should have to come up with those suggestions... despite it being you that is adamant that there is better. And by saying that, you somehow feel it is down to other people who are not as extremely inclined to get shot just yet to come up with better... presumably just so you can disagree with them? 

It's ridiculous to be fair.

No. You struggle with this clearly. IN YOUR OPINION it is ridiculous. It is YOUR OPINION that football fans that feel the current is not good enough should be the people who choose a successor? 

I can interpret your clearly crap analogy how I want as I am the person who you have labelled the ‘child’, so my interpretation as the child is completely fair. I don’t like Southgate as England manager. This is not a question of me buying a better car, because if that car refused to start or broke down regularly you wouldn’t not replace it whether you knew about cars or not, you’d use the freely available information in the internet to research and then give a few a test drive before you commit. Another crap analogy. Can you please also give me your complete plan for ‘a better world’, because if you want to know what a better England look like it’s one that wins a major tournament. I think you need to give up on the analogies, they don’t work. 

Nothing is more childish than someone so unable to accept that there are completely reasonable views that differ from their view. I am able to accept I might be wrong that Southgate is not the man to take us to glory, which again, is so far proven and all that international football is ultimately about. But you are unable to accept that there may be a better manager we could get that would take us to that glory. That’s childish. No crap analogy needed. You also didn’t pay attention to my suggestions. I said I’d take Klopp or Guardiola. Infinitely better managers than Southgate. If you want to see some stats to back that up I can probably rustle some up, but it just needs to be that they’ve won something once to be better than GS, which I feel they may have 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

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

 

Dean Smith.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SwearyCanary said:

The evidence is that England looked better man for man when faced with them. We just played in a way that despite being the better side we created very few chances when we have options to change that creativity. A failure to do so led to our sub par defence leaking the inevitable second goal when the onus should’ve been on us getting a winner. I believe I’ve seen pretty much universal agreement that England were better than France tonight. Now some may place that on the manager getting the most from the players, others (me) feel that it’s because the players we have are better overall but mostly in an attacking sense. I’m far more convinced by players matching up on the pitch than players price tags and trophies won previously playing alongside vastly differing squads in vastly differing leagues. Tonight England vs France is all that matters and wr should’ve won, but for how Southgate failed to capitalise on his players strengths. That’s my opinion. I am happy to accept yours is different and that France should’ve beaten us tonight and probably by much more. It’s just watching the game it didn’t look like that to me 

That's not really much evidence in the grand scheme of things, it's a one-off game. By the same logic any underdog that wins has better players but I think we've seen the basis now. I'd say previous careers, career trajectory, trophies won and fees paid (with the exception of the inevitable premium on domestic players within domestic markets) are greater evidence over time. Or, to use a boxing phrase, styles make fights.

Re. the bit in bold, you just admitted the defence is not up to it at the elite levels of the game, and whilst England has a bumper crop of attacking midfielders with potential at the highest levels of club football, we're talking about a France side with Mbappe, Griesmann, and to a lesser extent Dembele - a proven set of attacking superstars who've done plenty at the highest levels of club football AND won a World Cup.

France didn't create that much either, their vaunted talent notwithstanding, as in Walker England had a natural right-sided defender with enough pace and nous to largely nullify Mbappe's explosive pace and acceleration, so more went through Griezmann instead. And they deserved to win because they took their chances when they came.

Edited by TheGunnShow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...