UEFA EURO 2024 (7 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

It also assume there's a play excitingly and win guarantee, as opposed to a Keegan type where you attack and lose regularly (and his England team wasn't as good to watch as his club sides anyway!) or, worse, the Hodgson peak of play terribly, lose terribly... potentially inspired by Robson in '88.

Ultimately if you don’t win it it doesn’t matter if you go out in the last 16, 8, or 4. International games should be more about the football if you aren’t going to win. And we aren’t going to win because you seem to think this, which is to beat teams outside the top ten but never in it, is our best possible return.

It’s not club football, shit performances to get a round further don’t do anyone any favours. It’s entirely vibes based.

 

---

[Deleted member 5849]

Ultimately if you don’t win it it doesn’t matter if you go out in the last 16, 8, or 4. International games should be more about the football if you aren’t going to win. And we aren’t going to win because you seem to think this, which is to beat teams outside the top ten but never in it, is our best possible return.

It’s not club football, shit performances to get a round further don’t do anyone any favours. It’s entirely vibes based.

Yeah I'd have far rather gone out the group stages than reached a final and semifinal. Same with the FA Cup, wish we'd lost to Maidstone.

 

[shmmeee]

Yeah I'd have far rather gone out the group stages than reached a final and semifinal. Same with the FA Cup, wish we'd lost to Maidstone.

If you think we would go out if we played a more attractive style then fair enough. I think that’s extreme personally. I’m not convinced that what we’ve seen this tournament is some tactical genius to get the best out of the players available but you do you. What we’ve got is a team that is less than the sum of its parts, everyone hates and plays depressing football. And we’re supposed to be grateful for it because getting further in tournaments expanded to include worse teams than ever and in an era of few real high quality international sides is good or something.

 

[Otis]

So do I.
I also hope he rides off into the sunset if he doesn’t win the tournament.

On a very, very, hot day

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Ultimately if you don’t win it it doesn’t matter if you go out in the last 16, 8, or 4. International games should be more about the football if you aren’t going to win. And we aren’t going to win because you seem to think this, which is to beat teams outside the top ten but never in it, is our best possible return.

It’s not club football, shit performances to get a round further don’t do anyone any favours. It’s entirely vibes based.

This is such a dumb take. Guess Denmark, Greece and Portugal should’ve packed it in in 1992, 2004 and 2016 respectively.

You’ve got to set up the team to prepare for the big games against Top 10 opposition. Southgate has hedged his bets on that style, it’s mostly worked at tournaments under him and this is tournament to get to final and go again.

Irrespective of the draw, two consecutive finals appearance would be unprecedented achievement for an England manager. If we get there.

 

[Otis]

472K views · 1.4K reactions | IMAGINE BEING THESE ENGLAND FANS WHO LEFT EARLY 👀 🎥: IG: tjfrancislive | Men In Blazers

IMAGINE BEING THESE ENGLAND FANS WHO LEFT EARLY 👀 🎥: IG: tjfrancislive.

www.facebook.com

Oops..

 

[Grendel]

Ultimately if you don’t win it it doesn’t matter if you go out in the last 16, 8, or 4. International games should be more about the football if you aren’t going to win. And we aren’t going to win because you seem to think this, which is to beat teams outside the top ten but never in it, is our best possible return.

It’s not club football, shit performances to get a round further don’t do anyone any favours. It’s entirely vibes based.

Nonsense

I think the 1990 World Cup is looked back fondly

Reality is we were crap until the semi final

We stumbled through the group scraping one win against Egypt, scored with the last kick against Belgium and should have lost to Cameroon

 

[tisza]

This is such a dumb take. Guess Denmark, Greece and Portugal should’ve packed it in in 1992, 2004 and 2016 respectively.

You’ve got to set up the team to prepare for the big games against Top 10 opposition. Southgate has hedged his bets on that style, it’s mostly worked at tournaments under him and this is tournament to get to final and go again.

Irrespective of the draw, two consecutive finals appearance would be unprecedented achievement for an England manager. If we get there.

Isn't his record Vs top 10 teams something like 9 wins in 26 games?

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

This is such a dumb take. Guess Denmark, Greece and Portugal should’ve packed it in in 1992, 2004 and 2016 respectively.

You’ve got to set up the team to prepare for the big games against Top 10 opposition. Southgate has hedged his bets on that style, it’s mostly worked at tournaments under him and this is tournament to get to final and go again.

Irrespective of the draw, two consecutive finals appearance would be unprecedented achievement for an England manager. If we get there.

Which would be fine until you look at Southgate's record against those teams and realise it doesn't work.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Isn't his record Vs top 10 teams something like 9 wins in 26 games?

It’s not great, friendlies are pretty meaningless. We’ve done well in such fixtures only to get battered when it mattered in tournaments. Beating Germany was a huge psychological win and I’d like us to meet and beat the Netherlands in the semis (providing we get past the Swiss) for another psychological victory.

Context matters, if England were good against the ‘big’ teams and Southgate was the outlier, I’d be a lot more more ‘anti-Southgate’. As it happens, we were shit before too.

 

[Evo1883]

Isn't his record Vs top 10 teams something like 9 wins in 26 games?

Worse than that

 

[Evo1883]

It’s not great, friendlies are pretty meaningless. We’ve done well in such fixtures only to get battered when it mattered in tournaments. Beating Germany was a huge psychological win and I’d like us to meet and beat the Netherlands in the semis (providing we get past the Swiss) for another psychological victory.

Context matters, if England were good against the ‘big’ teams and Southgate was the outlier, I’d be a lot more more ‘anti-Southgate’. As it happens, we were shit before too.

We weren't shit before .. we played in an era of many many great international teams around the time of sven , hoddle, el tel , keegan and probably the early capello years

Look at the teams who knocked us out of tournaments

Germany x2 semi finals ,France (amazing) , Portugal x2 (fantastic side ), Brazil (last great Brazilian team )

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Which would be fine until you look at Southgate's record against those teams and realise it doesn't work.

What was our record against Top 10 teams pre-Southgate? We hadn’t won a KO game since 2006 before he took over.

I’m sure beating Colombia and Germany in 2018 and 2020 were the highest ranked teams we’ve knocked out since Spain in 1996.

Again, you compare Southgate to his predecessors and he blows them out of the water - it’s not even close. He’s laid the groundwork fantastically for the next manager to come in and go the next level.

 

[shmmeee]

This is such a dumb take. Guess Denmark, Greece and Portugal should’ve packed it in in 1992, 2004 and 2016 respectively.

You’ve got to set up the team to prepare for the big games against Top 10 opposition. Southgate has hedged his bets on that style, it’s mostly worked at tournaments under him and this is tournament to get to final and go again.

Irrespective of the draw, two consecutive finals appearance would be unprecedented achievement for an England manager. If we get there.

It’s not mostly worked. Have you watched us? We’ve had a consistent pattern of squeaking past teams below us then losing to the first team around our level.

I guess that’s the divide here. Those of us who expect a manager to get a team achieving against teams of their level and those happy as long as we progress regardless of what the draw actually throws at you.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

We weren't shit before .. we played in an era of many many great international teams around the time of sven , hoddle, el tel , keegan and probably the early capello years

Look at the teams who knocked us out of tournaments

Germany x2 semi finals ,France (amazing) , Portugal x2 (fantastic side ), Brazil (last great Brazilian team )

Why did we end up playing some of the those teams? We failed to win the group. In 2002 we came second to Sweden and 2010 2nd to the USA.

Our team in 1998-2010 was genuinely great. Even compared to some of those other teams you mentioned and to have not made it past the quarters was a travesty.

 

[Evo1883]

Why did we end up playing some of the those teams? We failed to win the group. In 2002 we came second to Sweden and 2010 2nd to the USA.

Our team in 1998-2010 was genuinely great. Even compared to some of those other teams you mentioned and to have not made it past the quarters was a travesty.

Let's get it right too though , at the Euros you played good teams pretty much full stop because there was only 4 groups .. nearly all the sides in the tournament were Europe's best

Trying to suggest Sweden were shit back then is a reach

 

[Evo1883]

2006 - lost on penalties to Portugal with 10 men

England lost in 2002 against the last great Brazilian team

We lost in 2004 to a Portugal team containing 6 champions league winners with porto a month before

We lost in 2000 in the groups to Romania (ranked 8 in the world ) Portugal (ranked 2 ) and beat Germany


1998 - 10 men lost to a really good Argentina side on penalties

1996 - semi final to a very good German side


Not an awful lot of failure here
Some bad luck sure , not alot of failure


The period between 2008 and 2016 England had a genuinley poor selection lineup which included too many ageing greats

England over the last few years have had so much to choose from apart from at centre half, and many top international sides have been poor

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Let's get it right too though , at the Euros you played good teams pretty much full stop because there was only 4 groups .. nearly all the sides in the tournament were Europe's best

Trying to suggest Sweden were shit back then is a reach

They weren’t better than us and if a team of that calibre finished above us in the group this season you’d be (rightfully) fuming.

We agree our record was poor against the top teams before Southgate. Therefore, the conclusion that if we change manager all will be well just doesn’t seem plausible. Why else have top managers failed?

Let’s not pretend there aren’t great teams in our era too.

 

[SBAndy]

The last two goals Foden was an offside away from an assist and a goal. He’s not playing badly imo.

If we don’t change formation, I can see Gordon playing LW (Foden RW) with Saka LB. Personally, would prefer Palmer but Saka at LB is quite risky so Gordon offers more balance and Palmer as a super sub works for me.

I kind of follow your thinking, but if we had Saka at LB then from an attacking perspective you’d want Foden same side as Gordon may end up occupying the same areas of the pitch. Maybe you lean more on Rice to cover the LB spot when Saka drifts forward, but that then potentially exposes the middle of the pitch.

There is a fighting chance that Shaw is fit enough by the weekend as he was reportedly fit enough to have played a part yesterday.

 

[Evo1883]

They weren’t better than us and if a team of that calibre finished above us in the group this season you’d be (rightfully) fuming.

We agree our record was poor against the top teams before Southgate. Therefore, the conclusion that if we change manager all will be well just doesn’t seem plausible. Why else have top managers failed?

Let’s not pretend there aren’t great teams in our era too.

Which great teams are there today ? France and Argentina, who else

And this France isn't as good as the France of 2000 either nowhere near comparible to eras

Managers failed with England because there were much better teams in the world than us ..

Southgate doesn't have that problem , the team is as bad as it looks because of him not the players available

 

[Grendel]

Which great teams are there today ? France and Argentina, who else

And this France isn't as good as the France of 2000 either nowhere near comparible to eras

Managers failed with England because there were much better teams in the world than us ..

Southgate doesn't have that problem , the team is as bad as it looks because of him not the players available

Other than possibly Stones would any of our defensive options be considered by any of the big teams?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

2006 - lost on penalties to Portugal with 10 men

England lost in 2002 against the last great Brazilian team

We lost in 2004 to a Portugal team containing 6 champions league winners with porto a month before

We lost in 2000 in the groups to Romania (ranked 8 in the world ) Portugal (ranked 2 ) and beat Germany


1998 - 10 men lost to a really good Argentina side on penalties

1996 - semi final to a very good German side


Not an awful lot of failure here
Some bad luck sure , not alot of failure


The period between 2008 and 2016 England had a genuinley poor selection lineup which included too many ageing greats

England over the last few years have had so much to choose from apart from at centre half, and many top international sides have been poor

What does this prove in your mind? That the team was failed multiple times?

It’s like you prefer heroic failure to success.

 

[Evo1883]

Other than possibly Stones would any of our defensive options be considered by any of the big teams?

Stones and Walker play for the world's 2nd best club side

 

[Grendel]

Stones and Walker play for the world's 2nd best club side

That’s not what I asked.

 

[Evo1883]

What does this prove in your mind? That the team was failed multiple times?

It’s like you prefer heroic failure to success.

When people talk about how England's teams of the past failed , they always fail to include that we competed against some of the greatest international sides of all time in an era of many all time greats when england were barely ever in the worlds top 7 or 8 sides

They also fail to mention the watering down of competitions throughout southgates era with weaker top teams and more shit teams to fill the competition

Southgate isn't a good football manager , and many managers would have done BETTER with the same players available during this period

If Southgate is a good manager , we will see him join a top team after his England tenure is over

 

[Evo1883]

That’s not what I asked.

Well they all play for top sides , some of Europe's best included

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Other than possibly Stones would any of our defensive options be considered by any of the big teams?

If you did a player v player comparison to this team and 2002-2010 era team, how many would start?

Our defensive and midfield options aren’t as strong as people think. In international tournaments, these are the most important areas of the pitch.

 

[Evo1883]

If you did a player v player comparison to this team and 2002-2010 era team, how many would start?

Our defensive and midfield options aren’t as strong as people think. In international tournaments, these are the most important areas of the pitch.

But if you did the same with other international sides how many today on paper are better than that period ?

 

[skybluecam]

The last two goals Foden was an offside away from an assist and a goal. He’s not playing badly imo.

If we don’t change formation, I can see Gordon playing LW (Foden RW) with Saka LB. Personally, would prefer Palmer but Saka at LB is quite risky so Gordon offers more balance and Palmer as a super sub works for me.

For me it’s not about how well Foden is playing so much as what he does to the team’s shape.

Our left hand side is non existent because Foden wants the ball to feet and to come inside, and Trippier seems to have forgotten to pack his left foot so he also keeps cutting in.

A proper winger like Gordon or Eze would stretch the game and reduce the midfield congestion that makes us so boring to watch.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

When people talk about how England's teams of the past failed , they always fail to include that we competed against some of the greatest international sides of all time in an era of many all time greats when england were barely ever in the worlds top 7 or 8 sides

They also fail to mention the watering down of competitions throughout southgates era with weaker top teams and more shit teams to fill the competition

Southgate isn't a good football manager , and many managers would have done BETTER with the same players available during this period

That’s such a nonsense and you know it. You make these arguments because you think it suits your narrative around Southgate.

It doesn’t and really highlights just how much of a better tournament team we are under Southgate compared to others.

If you remember 2002, we went 1-0 and lost to 10 men - I don’t see you criticising the tactics there. Or in 2004 when we bottled a 1-0 lead in stoppage time v France…

Sven, Capello and even Hodgson were ‘top’ managers and failed miserably. This argument that it would magically be different this era is deeply flawed.

Southgate cut his teeth as a technical director and as an England age-group manager which has laid the foundations for us to be producing world class players better suited to major tournaments. He isn’t a Pep or a Klopp but there’s a reason there are v few top managers at international football. It’s a different ball game!

 

[Evo1883]

That’s such a nonsense and you know it. You make these arguments because you think it suits your narrative around Southgate.

It doesn’t and really highlights just how much of a better tournament team we are under Southgate compared to others.

If you remember 2002, we went 1-0 and lost to 10 men - I don’t see you criticising the tactics there. Or in 2004 when we bottled a 1-0 lead in stoppage time v France…

Sven, Capello and even Hodgson were ‘top’ managers and failed miserably. This argument that it would magically be different this era is deeply flawed.

Southgate cut his teeth as a technical director and as an England age-group manager which has laid the foundations for us to be producing world class players better suited to major tournaments. He isn’t a Pep or a Klopp but there’s a reason there are v few top managers at international football. It’s a different ball game!

Sven didn't fail miserably .. he lost to the greatest Brazilian side of the last 50 years

Was you even alive In 2002 ?

How would you know what it was like back then?

 

[Sky_Blue_Daz]

so Toney and Kane up front with Gordon on the wing in a 3-5-2?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

.Sven didn't fail miserably .. he lost to the greatest Brazilian side of the last 50 years

Was you even alive In 2002 ?

How would you know what it was like back then?

Have you looked at the route to the final had we won the group? Stop ignoring that fact.

We would’ve played Senegal, Turkey and Germany to get the final. Now you’ll tell me that the Turkey and Senegal teams were in the cohort of great international teams.

In 2010, we win the group we have to play Ghana, Uruguay and Holland to get the final. Compared to; Germany, Argentina and Spain.

If you take your argument to its logical conclusion, we could’ve finished 2nd in this group, lost to Germany and it would’ve been ‘ok’ because they’re a good side and the hosts.

I watched all the games in 2002, a dire 0-0 against Nigeria to confirm 2nd place. What a patronising and plain wrong argument to make.

 

[Evo1883]

Have you looked at the route to the final had we won the group? Stop ignoring that fact.

We would’ve played Senegal, Turkey and Germany to get the final. Now you’ll tell me that the Turkey and Senegal teams were in the cohort of great international teams.

In 2010, we win the group we have to play Ghana, Uruguay and Holland to get the final. Compared to; Germany, Argentina and Spain.

If you take your argument to its logical conclusion, we could’ve finished 2nd in this group, lost to Germany and it would’ve been ‘ok’ because they’re a good side and the hosts.

How old was you in 2002

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

How old was you in 2002

Has nothing to do with the conversation, if you remember it so well, why was it ok to finish 2nd to Sweden in the Group?

If you remember it so well, why do you not rue the missed opportunity of a relatively easy route to the final?

The cognitive dissonance is astounding.