R.Bear

There was talks. It wont happen. European players wont want to fly across the world every international break. I realise the non European internationals have to but that's unavoidable. Plus, how long before North American or African teams want to be a part of it? Then it just becomes a World Cup spread out over 18 months. UEFA and FIFA just need to stop changing things. The World Cup and Euros being expanded was a good idea but they must stay as every 4 years. The Copa America needs to be in one of the summers that don't feature one of those tournaments. That way European audiences might actually give a **** about it. The AFCON needs to be every four years and held in summer. If that means that certain countries cant host then so be it or risk clubs refusing to release players. Quite frankly after the absolute farce that was the last one, they should just can it altogether.

He was right about the scheduling. The club games should have been the last of the season. Having the players hang around then to shoot off to international duty in June is ridiculous. Next season starts early and there is a World Cup in October. The players should have been allowed a free summer. Ironically friendlies would have solved this as they could have just been cancelled, the Nation's League does need to be completed as it affects qualifying and they had to fit in somewhere. Basically COVID and Qatar hosting a World Cup ruined everything. Friendlies will always exist otherwise European teams will never play South American teams outside of World Cups every 4 years and that's only if they meet of course. I think they should be completely abolished. European club teams dont face South American club sides at all outside of the World Club Cup and pre-season tours. No-one cares about that so why care about playing Brazil?

It's better than pointless friendlies. We don't take any notice of pre-season results for our club so why do they exist at international level? Managers don't want their players to play in them, players half the time don't want to play in them and the fans don't turn up to watch them. International friendlies have been a pox on football for years and the Nation's League was one of the few things UEFA have gotten right in recent years. As for a 32 team Euros. Yes it will likely happen and yes it will probably be the top 3 teams qualifying but so what? The top teams qualify which is what everyone wants and if they are cruising then they can mix it up and try new players in competitive games. The Nation's League has been a big success but unfortunately COVID messed up the scheduling of this one and the last one. It will be back on track by next year. I should also add that the different leagues in the Nation's League allows teams to play against their level so the minnows like San Marino don't get thrashed 10-0 every game which is also a huge benefit for them.

This is rubbish and incredibly ignorant. The Nations League allows top teams to play other top teams in competitive matches outside of tournaments. As they are usually separated in qualifying groups because of seeds, this isnt usually possible. Not to mention that doing well in your group gives you a second chance to qualify for tournaments which can be a life saver, like for Scotland at Euro 2020. It is absolutely not a "glorified friendly" competition. The rankings points are increased which effects seeding for qualifiers and also you dont have things like ridiculous substitute allocations which amongst other things, make friendlies a farce.

15m? I would take 1m for him.

I would absolutely love Suarez to join us. I dont give a shit that his best years are behind him. He'd win a few games on his own because he doesnt need 5 chances to score like our current strikers.

Old? Ages of their starting XI vs England. Neuer 35 Ginter 27 Hummels 32 Rudiger 28 Kimmich 26 Goretzka 26 Kroos 31 Gosens 26 Havertz 22 Muller 31 Werner 26 Subs Gnabry 25 Can 27 Sane 25 Musiala 18 I do enjoy the narrative that England only played shite teams in both tournaments though. Despite both featuring the best teams in the World/Europe.

No I wouldn't. I don't think he'll be a success at club level. I just know he could easily get a PL job if he wanted one. Southgate is contracted until 2024, bar a catastrophe in one of the next two tournaments, I think he has the job as long as he wants it. He is getting results, the media and fans like him and he doesnt cost much. A wet dream for the FA. That said, the minimum expected of him at the World Cup will be the semi-final. It's so hard to give a target for tournaments because anything can happen. A red card here, a bad decision there can change everything. Had England lost that shootout to Colombia then it would have been just another lacklustre early England exit from a tournament. Fine margins. The league table may not lie but tournament football certainly can. But as I said, anything less than a semi-final would be very underwhelming. Even a semi would leave certain fans disappointed. It all depends on who they play and how they go out, if they dont win it.

I'm trying to be reasonable here but you're not making it easy. I dont need mental gymnastics to defend him. His results and his demeanour off the pitch do it for me. He was close to winning two consecutive tournaments. That's as good as it gets for England. Saying he's "abysmal, terrible and shocking" is your opinion but 99.9% of the football world would not only say you're wrong, they would you're insane for thinking it. But let's be honest, you dont believe that. Southgate would walk into a Premier League job when he leaves England. You're deluded beyond belief if you think otherwise. Even if England bombed out in the group stage at the World Cup he would still be at the top of the shortlist for any vacancy.

Not to go off topic but I seriously doubt that. In 2008-09 we were riding our luck until the new year. Around Christmas in particular we had loads of fortunate goals and games we took 3 points from that we didnt deserve. It was inevitable that we would fall at some point. No chance we were better than Arsenal that year. We would never have finished top 4 under that fraud I agree but I'm not convinced we would have under anyone. We just werent quite a top 4 team and it was locked in in those days.

The main criticism of the Golden Generation, other than individuals not performing like they did for their clubs, was that the best players were shoehorned into the side rather than a fluid team with a game plan. Now you're criticising Southgate for doing the exact opposite. As he says himself, "some people want me start 15 players". Picking the best players works on FIFA, it doesnt necessarily in real life. Ultimately, all that matters are the results and they have been superb.

So we were poor but were a penalty shootout away from winning the tournament? Right ok. And you questioned how the team had become likeable but now agree that it has? But of course don't give the manager any credit. It would have happened anyway. So basically England havent been good despite their all-time great results and tournament record and the team becoming likable and improvements in other areas are nothing to do with the manager. Maybe I'm cynical but I'm sensing an agenda here. Any more mental gymnastics to belittle him?

Absolute nonsense. The Golden Generation had a midfield of Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard and Scholes. The midfield that started the Euro 2020 final was Declan Rice, Kalvin Phillips and Mason Mount.

For the most part, yes. Did what they needed to get through the group. Convincingly beat Germany, a game that could so easily have got the better of them. Brushed aside Ukraine. Came from behind against Denmark who had been riding the crest of a wave. Going 1-0 down at home in a semi-final could easily have made the team bottle it and fade away. They came back and won. In the final they were second best, no doubt but that's why Italy won, they were the best side in the tournament. Almost never does any team smash every their way to glory in international tournaments. They always have a very tight game here or a penalty shootout there. Because England didnt thrash everyone like Ukraine they played poorly? That seems to be what you're saying. Yes he made the team likable, don't you keep up? During the "Golden Generation" there were fans almost waiting for them to lose because some of the players were hated or not performing. Home games would get boos and players given dogs abuse for poor performances. Remember after the 0-0 versus Algeria when Rooney mouthed off on camera to the booing fans? It was them vs the fans not the oppo. Underachieving prima donnas was their reputation. Under Southgate, the whole nation was really behind them, Football's coming home, club rivalries seemed to be non existent. This still remains the case. Southgate managed to make England good and a source of pride to the country again. Two things that seemed impossible after the Iceland game.

So basically "wah wah wah other clubs have more money and are more rich and successful than we are". Let me flip it around. Villa and most of the big clubs have been in the top division for virtually their entire existence. Clubs like Barnet for example have never been anywhere near the top division despite existing for well over 100 years. They could say the same about us. "Aston Villa always have money and the FA protect them from ever dropping down" blah blah blah. So essentially we do what Liverpool, Man Utd and Arsenal do only not as well. We use our resources to stay at the top (or near it). I dont see you feeling sorry for Barnet. So you can piss and whine about money, so called corruption, status quo, protected clubs, anything you want but what it really comes down to is you're jealous of more successful clubs. This is where you say you would be alienated from the club if we bought success. Funny how the clubs fans who this has happened to said the same thing until it happened. Fans dont give a **** about how they get their success, they just want it. The ones that dont get it will use any reason to belittle the clubs that do. It's all just a smokescreen for jealously. Remember, we're jealous of about 5-6 clubs. There are 100s who are jealous of us. Keep that in mind or you will drive yourself crazy.

No, you’ll take it as I **** said it, I don’t deal with hypotheticals. I don’t know, neither do you. It’s a pointless question.

I can’t even tell if you’re serious sometimes But you’re right, like say the European Champions who had been unbeaten for years playing a playoff match at home to North Macedonia. An absolute formality.

I don’t deal with hypotheticals. If Kane had buried that chance at 1-0 against Croatia then England would have made the final. If Rashford had put his penalty a foot right then England would be European Champions.

No, I think he’s a terrible club manager. But that’s irrelevant. He fits perfectly into the England job and his results are superb. If your criticism is that he hasn’t won anything then fair enough. That’s impossibly high expectations for a nation who have been a glorified quarter final team for its entire existence but that’s your opinion. In reality, he couldn’t have done a much better job than he has and every single fan would have bitten your hand off to make a major final in their lifetimes, let alone in 4 years.

One of the best defenders of his generation Chiellini? And something that managers have done late in games for decades? “We should of attacked” some of you think you’re playing Football Manager.

England had been dogshit for years with some embarrassing and humiliating tournament exists. Southgate comes in, makes the team likeable, something that seemed impossible in years gone by, gets the team 20 minutes from a World Cup final and a penalty shootout away from a European Championship. Something that even the most optimistic England fan wouldn’t have even dreamed of before he came in. Yet some bitter Villa fans don’t like it because he didn’t play Jack Grealish enough. Something they wouldn’t have given a shit about had he played for anyone else. Hilarious.

Every single word of this is absolute drivel. Which isn’t a surprise.

The thing is, UEFA wont give less of a **** what happened yesterday. They sold all the tickets and the TV companies around the world had already paid for the rights and 40% of the ground was filled with corporate suits and "friends of the UEFA family", just how they like it. None of the trouble will effect their bottom line so they wont give two shits. They will say they are launching an "investigation" which no doubt will result in the French FA getting fined about £20k. The Stade de France will host another final when its their turn and that will be that.

Is that actually the best way to pick the team? No it isnt. Otherwise a national manager would just pick whichever Tom, Dick or Harry is having a purple patch for their club. This in the past has failed miserably and resulted in caps for Francis Jeffers, Michael Ricketts, Kevin Davies, Jay Bothroyd, David Nugent etc etc. People were calling for Kane to be dropped before he came good at Euro 2020 and going back a little bit, Alan Shearer hadnt scored for England in 12 games before Euro 96. You pick the team you think will give you the best chance of winning the game you're about to play, its just that simple. It could be a different the game after, even if you win 4-0.