The Gareth SouthGOAT Appreciation Club ft. no fun at all

Dundrummer said:
Pretty much my feelings. His tactical ineptitude has been glaringly obvious since he froze in the Tunisia game, and his absolute fixation on this silly system killed England in the end. Seems a nice, humble fella though, so, knight him I guess?
Click to expand...

So inept he’s managed to get a team further than anyone else in 28 years!
 
Foxbatt said:
Defenders should be able to defend first. Get Defenders who can defend as the first priority. Forget about this ball playing business. If they can't defend then there are not fit to be there no matter how good they are on the ball.
Click to expand...
Yeah, let's blame the manager for England's biggest success in three decades. And let's not pretend that he left home some world class defender who isn't good at passing. I mean, Smalling's biggest problem next to his inability to pass is that he switches off at times, similar to how Stones did for the second goal. However, with him there, the entire gameplay plan goes wrong.

And no, defenders aren't only to defend. As Spain, Barcelona and Real Madrid showed this decade. Have defenders which cannot pass, and you cannot play a game when you build from the back. Now there are merits and counter-arguments to that type of play, but the fact is that Southgate achieved more with that type of play than England in the last 10+ tournaments when the defenders were there only to defend.
 
Last edited:
Dundrummer said:
Either of Sven's England sides would have absolutely demolished those Sweden and Colombia teams. He got very, very lucky, and then his luck ran out.
Click to expand...
Sven's sides won 2 KO matches (one of them a 1-0 against the mighty Ecuador) in three tournaments with a team full of world class players. Southgate won already two with a team of Kane and a few other players (bar Kane, no one in this team is on the level of Rio, Terry, Campbell, Cole, Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Owen, Beckham at their best). Heck, even bit part players like Hargreaves or Carrick would have been this England's best midfielders.

England's main problem this time was lack of quality players. Southgate masked it by making a good team, a sense of togetherness and having a gameplan, something that no England's manager have had since Sven in 2002.
 
Castia said:
Give him some credit on another day England have that game won at HT and Croatia are made to look like mugs we battered them in the first half.

He’s built up the youth teams and now he’s doing well with a young senior squad it’s hard to criticise.
Click to expand...

On what day?!? This England team are never going to have a game won by half time, because they can't create chances. England shat the bed second half, and Southgate should've done something.
 
Dundrummer said:
Either of Sven's England sides would have absolutely demolished those Sweden and Colombia teams. He got very, very lucky, and then his luck ran out.
Click to expand...

The so called ‘golden generation’ completely failed. Why on earth do you think they would have done better, they were a team of individuals, and egos and club cliques.

Southgate took a team that no one fancied, further than anyone expected. He built a team, that played for each other - that’s why people got behind him.

Just imagine if Big Sam was Manager, Hart in goal, Smalling and Cahill as CBs, Wilshire in midfield, Rooney as captain playing wherever he liked. Southgate has been nothing short of brilliant.
 
Said it twice already in this thread, his achievements are huge. Bigger than anyone since Venables (and arguably Hoddle).

BUT he hasn't once demonstrated the ability to change a game with either tactical adjustments or substitutions.

Great tournament. Disappointing outcome.
 
Castia said:
Give him some credit on another day England have that game won at HT and Croatia are made to look like mugs we battered them in the first half.

He’s built up the youth teams and now he’s doing well with a young senior squad it’s hard to criticise.
Click to expand...

The manager’s job is to react right to the flow of the game. Ultimately how well we played in the first half is irrelevant. When it was going against us early in the second half he should’ve changed it.

The CAF constantly criticises managers for having no plan B, why should Southgate be different?

We were ahead and simply needed to manage the game. Well before Croatia scored the flow of the game shifted to them. At that point he needed to change it. He didn’t, we lost.

You can pat him on the back for being a cheerleader rather than changing things. I choose not to.
 
Revan said:
Sven's sides won 2 KO matches (one of them a 1-0 against the mighty Ecuador) in three tournaments with a team full of world class players. Southgate won already two with a team of Kane and a few other players (bar Kane, no one in this team is on the level of Rio, Terry, Campbell, Cole, Scholes, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Owen, Beckham at their best). Heck, even bit part players like Hargreaves or Carrick would have been this England's best midfielders.

England's main problem this time was lack of quality players. Southgate masked it by making a good team, a sense of togetherness and having a gameplan, something that no England's manager have had since Sven in 2002.
Click to expand...

you must be joking!. Sven? The best bunch of English players for decades and Sven messed it up. If England had a decent manager with that squad England would already have won the World Cup that year.
As for the players you mentioned yes at their peak all of them were better than this lot. But players like Terry and Cambell and even Rio were defenders first. Apart from Rio the other two are purely defenders. But they also competed against players who were much better than them. The competition or the level of players in this WC is much poorer than the previous World Cups.
 
Foxbatt said:
you must be joking!. Sven? The best bunch of English players for decades and Sven messed it up. If England had a decent manager with that squad England would already have won the World Cup that year.
As for the players you mentioned yes at their peak all of them were better than this lot. But players like Terry and Cambell and even Rio were defenders first. Apart from Rio the other two are purely defenders. But they also competed against players who were much better than them. The competition or the level of players in this WC is much poorer than the previous World Cups.
Click to expand...
I thought that England in 2002 were pretty good and definitely had a plan. Just that Brazil were slightly better, or a bit more lucky. I mean, England lead them, then they scored, then keeper fecked it up. I said Sven in 2002, in 2004/2006, they should have done better.

About your other point, the team in 2006 was full of world class players bar the keeper (okayish), defensive midfielder (very good but not WC) and the right back (almost world class). On paper, it might have been the best team in both 2004 and 2006 (and almost there in 2002).
 
Idxomer said:
He proved today that having defenders who are supposedly good on the ball won't compensate for lack of quality and quantity in midfield.

I lost count how many times the English defenders passed back to the keeper as they had no one in the midfield to relieve the pressure off them and they couldn't do anything useful with ball themselves.

Look on the other hand Modric and Rakitic always showing for the ball and moving the ball forward, so much difference in quality.
Click to expand...


Jack Wilshere.
 
Grinner said:
Jack Wilshere.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately Southgate has very few decent midfielders to choose from. Wilshire is clearly not good enough, you then have maybe Shelvey? Loftus-Cheek did well when played, but we are not blessed with decent midfielders.

In a couple of months, I can go back to calling Henderson all the names under the sun, but thought he had a good WC - he’s a limited player, but he did very well, he has had to do a lot of defensive work in the system we deployed.
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Unfortunately Southgate has very few decent midfielders to choose from. Wilshire is clearly not good enough, you then have maybe Shelvey? Loftus-Cheek did well when played, but we are not blessed with decent midfielders.

In a couple of months, I can go back to calling Henderson all the names under the sun, but thought he had a good WC - he’s a limited player, but he did very well, he has had to do a lot of defensive work in the system we deployed.
Click to expand...

He should have been in the squad. An option.
 
Fairplay to him. That was an incredible achievement. Honestly though the best England would get was a 1-0 win over Panama. Incredible World Cup.
 
Castia said:
Give him some credit on another day England have that game won at HT and Croatia are made to look like mugs we battered them in the first half.

He’s built up the youth teams and now he’s doing well with a young senior squad it’s hard to criticise.
Click to expand...

He's right though. We were the better team in the first half but we certainly didn't batter them. Southgate has done well in terms of the spirit and togetherness of the players, but tactically he just doesn't seem to understand what's going on.

One midfiielder against three when the other team is on top, and your solution is to take your one midfielder off and just replace him with another, slightly worse one? ...Nah

By the end of the game we had five people at one end of the pitch, and five at the other, and were still trying to pass it through the middle. You kind of need to have some players in the middle of the pitch to do that, or at least try to bypass the middle third. You definitely can't do neither.

Since Southgate started using this system he seemt to think that by playing central defenders who like to arse around with the ball, he can get away with not having a midfield. In reality it just makes it very easy for a team like Croatia to press your centrebacks into repeatedly giving the ball away. He needed to change it after about 50 minutes and it never happened. You're highly unlikely beat teams with better players than you if you're not going to be tactically aware of what's going on.
 
He’s just not good enough. He’s living off of his reputation when he burst through as an 18/19 year old. He’s a good midfielder, but doesn’t really excel at anything. He will do OK at West Ham, but the players in the England squad are better than him.
 
noodlehair said:
He's right though. We were the better team in the first half but we certainly didn't batter them. Southgate has done well in terms of the spirit and togetherness of the players, but tactically he just doesn't seem to understand what's going on.

One midfiielder against three when the other team is on top, and your solution is to take your one midfielder off and just replace him with another, slightly worse one? ...Nah

By the end of the game we had five people at one end of the pitch, and five at the other, and were still trying to pass it through the middle. You kind of need to have some players in the middle of the pitch to do that, or at least try to bypass the middle third. You definitely can't do neither.

Since Southgate started using this system he seemt to think that by playing central defenders who like to arse around with the ball, he can get away with not having a midfield. In reality it just makes it very easy for a team like Croatia to press your centrebacks into repeatedly giving the ball away. He needed to change it after about 50 minutes and it never happened. You're highly unlikely beat teams with better players than you if you're not going to be tactically aware of what's going on.
Click to expand...

Fabio Capello is one of the best tactical minds of the last thirty years but how did his England World Cup go?
 
Boycott said:
Fabio Capello is one of the best tactical minds of the last thirty years but how did his England World Cup go?
Click to expand...

Came up against a vastly superior German side?

Not his fault Alan Shearer and company described them as trash prior to the match.
 
Minimalist said:
Came up against a vastly superior German side?

Not his fault Alan Shearer and company described them as trash prior to the match.
Click to expand...

1-1 vs USA
0-0 vs Algeria
1-0 vs Slovenia

He had a better side than this one
 
Boycott said:
Fabio Capello is one of the best tactical minds of the last thirty years but how did his England World Cup go?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but if you play an unfit Gareth Barry as your only holding midfielder, against a clearly superior Germany side, you aren't any kind of tactical mastermind.

I'm also not sure what relevance a compeltely different manager with completely different players has to Southgate...it has nothing to do with anything. On the one hand, I think Southgate did well to come up with a system that tried to get around our weak selection choices in certain areas. On the other hand, it created weaknesses that were exposed in more than one game and he didn't at any point try to address this. He also wouldn't drop Sterling which was a problem as he was never going to just magically turn it on and produce an end product. Southgate had his plan which as a starting point wasn't a bad one...but he clearly wasn't going to budge from it no matter how much it wasn't working. He needs to be smarter than that going forwards.
 
noodlehair said:
Sorry, but if you play an unfit Gareth Barry as your only holding midfielder, against a clearly superior Germany side, you aren't any kind of tactical mastermind.

I'm also not sure what relevance a compeltely different manager with completely different players has to Southgate...it has nothing to do with anything. On the one hand, I think Southgate did well to come up with a system that tried to get around our weak selection choices in certain areas. On the other hand, it created weaknesses that were exposed in more than one game and he didn't at any point try to address this. He also wouldn't drop Sterling which was a problem as he was never going to just magically turn it on and produce an end product. Southgate had his plan which as a starting point wasn't a bad one...but he clearly wasn't going to budge from it no matter how much it wasn't working. He needs to be smarter than that going forwards.
Click to expand...

This all over.

It was clear we needed fresh legs and most importantly a tactical change, then all he did was like for like subs anyway.
 
I like him and I'm pleased with how he's done this tournament. However, the one negative is that he didn't make the big calls when he needed to. Alli has looked injured throughout the full tournament and could have been hooked at half time to tighten up the midfield after offering nothing attacking wise anyways.
 
He's done fairly well and should be praised for the general unity he's managed to create with the team, but I think people are at risk of overrating his personal achievements on the basis of a knockout tournament where luck factors in, and where he's also gotten lucky due to the draw.

Plenty of average managers do fairly well at international tournaments with good crops of players. Domenech was fairly obviously kinda rubbish for France, but Zidane's superb performances helped inspire them to the final in 06. Similarly, Martinez isn't really that great a manager but manages to get to the semis with an excellent crop of players. Maradona even looked somewhat competent with Argentina until they got thrashed by Germany.

I'd have said before the tournament that the QF's would've been matching expectations based on England's general quality, but that would've been on the basis of them getting a tougher draw in the QF's than they eventually did. As it stands I don't think England really came up against anyone they shouldn't have beaten with the quality they had in getting to the SF's. So despite their impressive performance he about matched expectations.
 
noodlehair said:
Sorry, but if you play an unfit Gareth Barry as your only holding midfielder, against a clearly superior Germany side, you aren't any kind of tactical mastermind.

I'm also not sure what relevance a compeltely different manager with completely different players has to Southgate...it has nothing to do with anything. On the one hand, I think Southgate did well to come up with a system that tried to get around our weak selection choices in certain areas. On the other hand, it created weaknesses that were exposed in more than one game and he didn't at any point try to address this. He also wouldn't drop Sterling which was a problem as he was never going to just magically turn it on and produce an end product. Southgate had his plan which as a starting point wasn't a bad one...but he clearly wasn't going to budge from it no matter how much it wasn't working. He needs to be smarter than that going forwards.
Click to expand...


You did see what happened when he swapped Rashford for Sterling?
 
ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg said:
Unfortunately Southgate has very few decent midfielders to choose from. Wilshire is clearly not good enough, you then have maybe Shelvey? Loftus-Cheek did well when played, but we are not blessed with decent midfielders.

In a couple of months, I can go back to calling Henderson all the names under the sun, but thought he had a good WC - he’s a limited player, but he did very well, he has had to do a lot of defensive work in the system we deployed.
Click to expand...

Loftus-Cheek should have been trusted over a very clearly unfit Alli.

Agree about Henderson too. Our best midfielder at the world cup. Didn't put a foot wrong, aside from the penalty. Can see why RAWK rate him so highly, if not why they write poetry about him.
 
Alot of hysteria and people with incredible hindsight in this thread. We lost in extra time to a decent Croatia team and we had the chances to put the game to bed at 1-0. Don’t understand the criticism of Southgate really. He made the right call on Sterling, bringing him off early in the second half for Rashford (who was poor himself this tournament) and his formation choice was inspired compared to what we have had performance wise in the past.

At the end of the day this was a tournament too early for most of these players. I can’t wait for Gareth to bring the next generation through and gel them into this squad of players who now have the experience and self confidence to build on too. So much promise for the next 4+ years.
 
Revan said:
Yeah, let's blame the manager for England's biggest success in three decades. And let's not pretend that he left home some world class defender who isn't good at passing. I mean, Smalling's biggest problem next to his inability to pass is that he switches off at times, similar to how Stones did for the second goal. However, with him there, the entire gameplay plan goes wrong.

And no, defenders aren't only to defend. As Spain, Barcelona and Real Madrid showed this decade. Have defenders which cannot pass, and you cannot play a game when you build from the back. Now there are merits and counter-arguments to that type of play, but the fact is that Southgate achieved more with that type of play than England in the last 10+ tournaments when the defenders were there only to defend.
Click to expand...
I guess it would be fair to credit Gareth for England going that far in the tournament. However, I don't think that it is proof he's a great tactician, or that the ball-playing style he has implemented is some superior tactic. Neither is there any evidence of Smalling not being able to successfully play in the system they just now used at the WC. England hasn't been on the level of Spain etc, and has clearly struggled to create chances, therefor the importance of defenders playing the ball around between them diminishes. It becomes less important because it is a tactic of establishing dominance and when you don't actually create chances and goals by keeping the ball, it is ineffective. It was the same problem under LVG. Without all the right pieces it certainly isn't useless and has given England defensive consistency and shape.

I would congratulate him for getting all the players to believe in him, that they themselves could work together in this new system. The fact he made that happen made all the difference and is what is the most important thing for national teams. Doesn't matter as much about if the system is fancy or not as long it is a team effort, which is what separates this England side from the others . All this to say, we don't know if Smalling would have ruined the team spirit, took them to a final scoring the winning goal, ruined the gameplan completely or given the team more incentive to attack by his defensive superiority.

And I don't agree he switches off like what Stones did. Stones, Van Djik, Valencia does that a lot. Smalling just doesn't. It is like saying Smalling run with the ball like Macguire, no he doesn't. Yeah, i can find clips of him dribling players on runs but it isn't something that is in his usual play. I can find clips of Smalling making effective forward passes through the lines, but it is not in his usual play. I don't think he could have played for Barcelona, but come on now.
 
Smalling is incapable of playing out from the back which clearly forms the bedrock of this new England team. Maguire and Stones are light years ahead of him in that respect which is why they are in the team. I respect Southgate for that and it was the right call.
 
Southgate's been a breath of fresh air for England. He deserves all the plaudits and has changed the way the nation perceives the national team. He's changed the mentality of the team and has created a bond and togetherness I have never seen in an England squad. You can tell the players love playing for him and they seem more relax and enjoy being together which we definitely didn't see with the golden generation.

Southgate changing to the 3-5-2 formation was a great move and got the best out of the players and should be credited with that. I think England and the FA are moving in the right direction, there seems to be a change in the air with the setup and the structure of the England team and Southgate and his staff deserves all the accolades.
 
balaks said:
Smalling is incapable of playing out from the back which clearly forms the bedrock of this new England team. Maguire and Stones are light years ahead of him in that respect which is why they are in the team. I respect Southgate for that and it was the right call.
Click to expand...
Yeah if you are talking about general play, but that isn't alone what have brought England some success in this tournament. I haven't watched all matches but as far as i can tell most of the goals has come from corner, freekick, penalties. I certainly think you could get a team to be better playing out from the back then what England has been with 1 out and out defender, 1 ballplaying defender, and 2 great midfielders. If you don't have midfielders suited to a system, which is suited for gifted midfielders then it becomes compromised. Since England doesn't have these midfielders and want to play out from the back, they play 3 at the back and often resort to playing long passes upfield. I wouldn't call it building from the back like what Spain do really, which obviously is strongly dependent on competent CB's since their use of the ball isn't protected by an extra defender, as the team attack with much more midfield control.
 
He has potential. Inept is a strong word, I would say he'll showed his naivety at times though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.