Gareth "Interesting" Southgate

[MrBlack]

10 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Applying the "Look at Emery after Gerrard" narrative to Southgate versus Whoever Comes Next is a false equivalence in some ways. There's just no huge comparison. Southgate is nothing like Gerrard in sensibility, coaching style, history, tone, or tactics. Nothing. Doesn't mean Southgate might not have his own set of fatal flaws, but they're not Gerrard's, IMO.

I don't think Emery would be any more successful with this bunch. It's a mature, overcoddled squad. Too mature.  Too many over-hyped, overcooked stars too set in their ways. They're not proving to be malleable, but that could be changing, too. That's why when Foden says players are partly to blame, he may actually have a point but actually they're not to blame in the way the press accounts suggest. It's not a lack of skill or effort, not really. It's being too deeply entrenched in their own habits and reacting poorly to the need to change. No surprise the best England players are easily identifiable as the greenest or most raw. They're the ones making the plays or setting them up. The vets are standing around. But Southgate doesn't have time for a rebuild, so it's going to be a challenge. Of course, Foden is just going to enrage the haters more with this, and the journos clearly are going to lick this all up. But it doesn't mean he's not right in principle, even if it's a narrow perspective.

 

You could argue the players were partly to blame under Gerrard using this logic. They're clearly capable of more than they delivered under him, but ultimately the buck stops with the manager, always. It's their job to get the players motivated and on-side.

Gerrard failed with that by alienating Mings, calling out their confidence, and saying we should be getting hammered by chelsea. Southgate has effectively done the same by setting the team up to play anti football, and indicating he has no confidence in them beating a team by out-playing them.

The biggest parallel between the two is that their styles of play rely on moments of magic. There is no organised build-up to create space, it's just a blind hope that your players deliver something out of the blue. 

So the players were largely the same between Gerrards failures and Emery's record breakers. Whoever comes in after Southgate, if they're competent, could easily oversee a similar shift in performances using the same players. Obviously trickier because you don't spend every week with them, but if you adopt a style similar to how the top teams play (instead of completely opposed to it) then you stand a chance of making it work.

Southgate is a fraud. His record at club level is terrible.  His tournament results have been lucky. 

Edited July 4 by MrBlack

[Podster]

21 hours ago, MarkLillis said:

I’m certain he’s an experienced coach.

I know he has achieved a lot in previous tournaments (apart from winning obviously)!

All I can come to is the conclusion that he thinks playing this way is the only way these players can succeed.

So…..are we all wrong about how good our players are? I mean Gareth knows them all better right?

Yes he is experianced, but that doesn't mean he knows what he is doing, the manager of my local pub team has managed them for over 30 years but he is still useless. The fact that Southgate is experianced and still hasnt won anything with the best group of players England has had for decades just highlights how useless he is.

As for saying "he has achieved a lot in previous tournaments" what has he achieved???? It wasn't an achievement to fail to win games we threw away because of his uiseless tactics.Its quite the opposite, he has under achieved on multiple occasions.

Yes he thinks playing this way is the only way these players can succeed, that just shows how wrong he is because we still havn't won anything, despite being the better team on many occasions.

Despite knowing the players as well as he does he is still too stubborn to listen to the masses, he still picks his favoured players, not his best players.

The man is a bumbling fool.

 

[Rob182]

Arsewipe

[fightoffyour]

Bollockhead

[rodders129]

I see Fodens kissing Southgate’s ass trying to stay in the team. Lad needs to be dropped. Jack Charlton has a better goals to games ratio for England  

[Marka Ragnos]

I believe we're almost to that strange tournament stage when England fans who absolutely do not care about England start getting sheepish and a bit quiet as they refresh this thread.

 

 

Edited July 4 by Marka Ragnos

[penguin]

33 minutes ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I believe we're almost to that strange tournament stage when England fans who absolutely do not care about England start getting sheepish and a bit quiet as they refresh this thread.

What does this even mean? Are you suggesting his detractors have been made to look silly by what has occurred this tournament?

[HanoiVillan]

14 minutes ago, penguin said:

What does this even mean? Are you suggesting his detractors have been made to look silly by what has occurred this tournament?

Probably he means that the thread is just endless swearing and angry 'jokes' so it's not really a space to have a conversation about the side or about the manager unless you share the extremely curdled and negative consensus. 

[MrBlack]

1 hour ago, Marka Ragnos said:

I believe we're almost to that strange tournament stage when England fans who absolutely do not care about England start getting sheepish and a bit quiet as they refresh this thread.

 

 

You didn't reply to my reply to your post... I'm genuinely intrigued to see what you think about my justification for comparing the two situations. 

[Adman]

We aren't changing the manager or the squad before the end of the tournament.  Everyone is doing their best and wants to win and represent their country.  If you can't support the team, lay off the poison FFS.

I know we've played poorly, we should be better and are very unlikely to get much further in the competition, but we're still in it.  

Have the postmortem after the event I recon

[penguin]

36 minutes ago, Adman said:

We aren't changing the manager or the squad before the end of the tournament.  Everyone is doing their best and wants to win and represent their country.  If you can't support the team, lay off the poison FFS.

I know we've played poorly, we should be better and are very unlikely to get much further in the competition, but we're still in it.  

Have the postmortem after the event I recon

Some see it as a much bigger picture though, we were mere seconds away from reaching the light at the end of the tunnel in the Slovakia game.

Now we could conceivably reach a Final with a run consisting of: Slovakia, Switzerland and Turkey and then does he get another tournament? Oh look another Final, greatest manager ever.

We have wasted so much time and talent under this buffoon and the favourable draws can't last forever, would rather just get the band-aid ripped off.

[Adman]

5 minutes ago, penguin said:

Some see it as a much bigger picture though, we were mere seconds away from reaching the light at the end of the tunnel in the Slovakia game.

Now we could conceivably reach a Final with a run consisting of: Slovakia, Switzerland and Turkey and then does he get another tournament? Oh look another Final, greatest manager ever.

We have wasted so much time and talent under this buffoon and the favourable draws can't last forever, would rather just get the band-aid ripped off.

I don't want my country to lose for any reason.  If he wins the euros playing the worst shite I've ever seen, I'll still be happy we won.  

 

[MrBlack]

11 minutes ago, Adman said:

I don't want my country to lose for any reason.  If he wins the euros playing the worst shite I've ever seen, I'll still be happy we won.  

 

I'd like to say i'd be the same but given how little I celebrated Bellingham's goal I'm not sure I would.

Southgate has killed my love for the England team. I don't know if it will come back if he flukes a tournament win, or even if it will when he leaves such is my feeling of "meh".

[Marka Ragnos]

1 hour ago, MrBlack said:

You didn't reply to my reply to your post... I'm genuinely intrigued to see what you think about my justification for comparing the two situations. 

Sorry, falling behind! See below.

8 hours ago, MrBlack said:

You could argue the players were partly to blame under Gerrard using this logic. They're clearly capable of more than they delivered under him, but ultimately the buck stops with the manager, always. It's their job to get the players motivated and on-side.

Gerrard failed with that by alienating Mings, calling out their confidence, and saying we should be getting hammered by chelsea. Southgate has effectively done the same by setting the team up to play anti football, and indicating he has no confidence in them beating a team by out-playing them.

The biggest parallel between the two is that their styles of play rely on moments of magic. There is no organised build-up to create space, it's just a blind hope that your players deliver something out of the blue.

Apart from a shared use of 4-3-3 at points in their careers, I don't see a substantial parallels between SG and GS unless I really want to go looking for evidence of foregone conclusions.

National team management is not club management, first of all, and SG doesn't have the particular set of pseudo-diplomatic communication skills to handle England. I think GS does, but that in itself isn't enough, we know.

I don't know what "anti-football" is. Sorry. That's a made-up concept. If they're playing within the laws of the game, it's football. It's true GS plays "tournament" ball. It's cautious and highly controlled and based above all on an ideology of preventing goals. It's uninspiring. Unai sometimes does the same, but Unai has that second and third gear that's easier to design in a squad hungry to learn and a coach who runs a "football university" versus a pop-up restaurant .

SG plays a very attacking style that lacks the tactical nous and educational detail to succeed.

GS has played a much more, again, cautious but refined style than SG in recent years and it often succeeds boringly whereas SG often flashily fails. You say there's no "build-up play" with GS. That's incorrect, IMO. If anything -- it's all build-up play. That's the main problem! It's what comes after the build-up that we've been missing -- the flair, the relentless resets of attacks, etc.

Disliking SG and GS doesn't mean one dislikes them for the same reasons, obviously.

I think we mustn't confuse SG's reliance on skilled players and positive football "pep talks" with GS's deeper "empowerment" model of coaching. They're not the same.

GS is more like a very grounded, more sober version of Jesse Marsch, who is incredibly intelligent -- maybe too intelligent. SG is a dolt beside them both. None of this gets GS off the hook. But conflating him with Gerrard oversimplifies the situation, IMO.

All managers depend at times on "moments of magic" and occasionally "blind hope," even if it's not intentional. You say GS has no confidence in them outplaying an opposition but also say he depends on blind hope and moments of magic, which is "effectively," as you put it, demonstrating confidence in them, isn't it? He thinks they'll come up with those moments, but it's surely not the foundation of his approach. It's a feature. The fairy lights on the porch don't make the house.

He's managing a way overhyped, grandiose national team with a cantankerous fan base that hasn't won the Euros ever (right?) or a world cup since 1966. He could use a little magic.

 

[Adman]

45 minutes ago, MrBlack said:

I'd like to say i'd be the same but given how little I celebrated Bellingham's goal I'm not sure I would.

Southgate has killed my love for the England team. I don't know if it will come back if he flukes a tournament win, or even if it will when he leaves such is my feeling of "meh".

I know what you mean, and apathy is understandable for me.  There is a hatred and ridicule brewing which is out of order.  Maybe some of the ridicule is quite funny, but the hatred is a bit weird

[Marka Ragnos]

9 hours ago, villa4europe said:

southgate rebuild?

the man would happily be playing maguire, shaw, henderson and phillips if he could

one of the most stubborn managers around when it comes to team selection rebuilding?

you're way off

But seriously, he does sometimes lift his arse up and chance places on the bus. It happens slowly, admittedly. Conservative ball is also predictable ball, and has advantages (easy to teach, easy to learn) and drawbacks (easy to predict, lack of creativity).

[Jonesy7211]

Southgate is so passionately and vehemently despised at a national level simply because a vast majority of the population find football is deeply ingrained in them, from an age before they can remember. It's replaced religion as our obsession and what we have our faith in. It's infinitely more popular than politics. It's been going far longer than any TV show, and retains far more viewers. The England job is the pinnacle of that, it's like being the Pope. Everyone knows who you are, no matter your club colours.

People have extreme negative reactions to Southgate because of the strength of their feelings. We've had many years of failing, but when it goes well the effect it has on the country's psyche is like nothing else. World Cup 90, Euro 96, beating Germany 5-1, and the Beckham free kick Vs Greece have been some of the best times I've ever had as an Englishman. The spite from the fans would be replaced instantly with incredible positivity if he gave us something to get behind.

The last 8 years haven't been great, but the last 6 have definitely been a case of what might have been, and this also hurts.

[leemond2008]

8 hours ago, Rob182 said:

Arsewipe

 

8 hours ago, fightoffyour said:

Bollockhead

he's a massive fraud bastard anus clown smug condescending conman bellend knob cocknosed beaky prick arsewipe bollockhead word removed 

[MrBlack]

1 hour ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Sorry, falling behind! See below.

Apart from a shared use of 4-3-3 at points in their careers, I don't see a substantial parallels between SG and GS unless I really want to go looking for evidence of foregone conclusions.

National team management is not club management, first of all, and SG doesn't have the particular set of pseudo-diplomatic communication skills to handle England. I think GS does, but that in itself isn't enough, we know.

I don't know what "anti-football" is. Sorry. That's a made-up concept. If they're playing within the laws of the game, it's football. It's true GS plays "tournament" ball. It's cautious and highly controlled and based above all on an ideology of preventing goals. It's uninspiring. Unai sometimes does the same, but Unai has that second and third gear that's easier to design in a squad hungry to learn and a coach who runs a "football university" versus a pop-up restaurant .

SG plays a very attacking style that lacks the tactical nous and educational detail to succeed.

GS has played a much more, again, cautious but refined style than SG in recent years and it often succeeds boringly whereas SG often flashily fails. You say there's no "build-up play" with GS. That's incorrect, IMO. If anything -- it's all build-up play. That's the main problem! It's what comes after the build-up that we've been missing -- the flair, the relentless resets of attacks, etc.

Disliking SG and GS doesn't mean one dislikes them for the same reasons, obviously.

I think we mustn't confuse SG's reliance on skilled players and positive football "pep talks" with GS's deeper "empowerment" model of coaching. They're not the same.

GS is more like a very grounded, more sober version of Jesse Marsch, who is incredibly intelligent -- maybe too intelligent. SG is a dolt beside them both. None of this gets GS off the hook. But conflating him with Gerrard oversimplifies the situation, IMO.

All managers depend at times on "moments of magic" and occasionally "blind hope," even if it's not intentional. You say GS has no confidence in them outplaying an opposition but also say he depends on blind hope and moments of magic, which is "effectively," as you put it, demonstrating confidence in them, isn't it? He thinks they'll come up with those moments, but it's surely not the foundation of his approach. It's a feature. The fairy lights on the porch don't make the house.

He's managing a way overhyped, grandiose national team with a cantankerous fan base that hasn't won the Euros ever (right?) or a world cup since 1966. He could use a little magic.

 

Fair points.  Anti-football as I meant it was Southgate telling us to not attack, and once taking the lead to sit back, take no risks, and invite pressure on to ourselves by taking up positions 10 yards further back than we would if we weren't winning. Fair enough, that could be described like you did as conservative, but to do it against any opposition, and not just those that pose a threat, is more than that to me.

On the comparison... its not so much about how they manage.... its the belief that someone could in,  play a completely different style of football to Southgate, and have the same England players win games against the likes of which Southgate hasn't been able to. Just like Emery did with the same players that Gerrard was failing with. It's more about the potential change in general performance, and the results that follow will likely be as good,  and there would be hope that they'll be better. Currently, there is no hope that Southgate will beat a team genuinely better than us, of which there are definitely a few in the other half of the draw.

Not sure the players are overhyped though,  look at their respective stats for last season.

[tinker]

3 hours ago, Adman said:

I don't want my country to lose for any reason.  If he wins the euros playing the worst shite I've ever seen, I'll still be happy we won.  

 

He won't win anything.