Gareth "Interesting" Southgate

[Tom13]

22 hours ago, Lunarsea said:

I'm English and I don't get it.

Southgate has done fine so far. Not every half will be a dazzling spectacle of football. That isn't how tournament football works.

He hasn't. He doesn't use our best players in the most effective way. It's all good winning groups, but when we face a good side, we lose. Italy, Belgium, Croatia. We beat a poor Germany side in what was effectively a home game, and that's it.

[villa4europe]

12 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

He hasn't. He doesn't use our best players in the most effective way. It's all good winning groups, but when we face a good side, we lose. Italy, Belgium, Croatia. We beat a poor Germany side in what was effectively a home game, and that's it.

Yep, it's watching us during the group or the qualifiers or the NL and having the confidence that should we play France he will play the best team possible in a fashion that best suits them and that he as the manager will put us in the best position possible to win that game 

Does anyone have that confidence? I **** don't, what he will do instead is stifle and hinder us making it harder for us to win not easier

I believe we have a punchers chance and can beat anyone because of the players we have but at the same time we can lose to anyone because of Southgate

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by villa4europe

[PaulC]

On 01/12/2022 at 14:32, Lunarsea said:

I'm English and I don't get it.

Southgate has done fine so far. Not every half will be a dazzling spectacle of football. That isn't how tournament football works.

I do and I dont. On the one hand Southgate has united all the players from different teams and made them so happy in being together.  Hes made every player feel a part of something. No manager has given us such hope that we now expect to get to the later stages of tournaments. Also many players are playing better for their Country than their clubs, which hasnt happened either.  On the other-hand our squad is as good as any other Countries so we should be getting to later stages of tournaments. 

It helps that he has experience of playing in world cups and Euros for his country and he understands better than previous managers the problems. 

Edited December 2, 2022 by PaulC

[Lunarsea]

5 hours ago, PaulC said:

On the one hand Southgate has united all the players from different teams and made them so happy in being together.  Hes made every player feel a part of something. No manager has given us such hope that we now expect to get to the later stages of tournaments. Also many players are playing better for their Country than their clubs, which hasnt happened either.  On the other-hand our squad is as good as any other Countries so we should be getting to later stages of tournaments. 

Really? I'm pretty sure Tom13 heavily implied, when asked what more we could ask for from Southgate, that Gareth should be "not spreading negativity and fear throughout the squad."

Hmmm? Who to believe? You, who seems to be using facts and stuff, or someone who seems to want to paint Southgate as someone managing England like the Incredible Hulk on a rampage.

It's a thorny one.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Lunarsea

[Lunarsea]

6 hours ago, Tom13 said:

He doesn't use our best players in the most effective way. It's all good winning groups, but when we face a good side, we lose. Italy, Belgium, Croatia. We beat a poor Germany side in what was effectively a home game, and that's it.

We beat Croatia twice in our last two games against them. Not bad. 

We have one win a piece with Belgium in our last two games ..... and Italy two draws in normal time, losing one merely by the lottery of penalties.

....so what you are saying is not strictly true.

[Stevo985]

We’ll hammer Senegal playing our relatively attacking formation and then play 5 at the back and 2 DMs against France and go out because we can’t score

[villaglint]

12 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

We’ll hammer Senegal playing our relatively attacking formation and then play 5 at the back and 2 DMs against France and go out because we can’t score

In some really weird way I almost hope we do because I’m not sure I could take the idea of waiting this long to win a WC and then we finally do it and it’s the bleeding Qatar WC. 

Edited December 2, 2022 by villaglint

[Tom13]

53 minutes ago, Lunarsea said:

We beat Croatia twice in our last two games against them. Not bad. 

We have one win a piece with Belgium in our last two games ..... and Italy two draws in normal time, losing one merely by the lottery of penalties.

....so what you are saying is not strictly true.

They all knocked us out when it matters though. And Italy was another effective home game, they were there for the taking.

[Lunarsea]

6 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

They all knocked us out when it matters though. 

Indeed they did.  I hope Southgate goes all in later on if we get that far ... obviously though, with not conceding goals a thing too. 

.... and when I said "Southgate has done fine so far." that conversation was specifically about this tournament, so using past results or saying "he hasn't" doesn't really follow.

We are through. On to the next round! .... where it might all go tits up.... or well. Oh, the joy and uncertainty of tournament football!

[HanoiVillan]

10 hours ago, Tom13 said:

He hasn't. He doesn't use our best players in the most effective way. It's all good winning groups, but when we face a good side, we lose. Italy, Belgium, Croatia. We beat a poor Germany side in what was effectively a home game, and that's it.

Losing to teams is how most teams go out of tournaments, this is rather baked into the concept. All you're really saying here is 'we didn't win the tournament', and it's certainly true that if your minimum expectation is losing to no-one and winning the entire tournament then Southgate's tenure has been as much of a disaster as all of his predecessors. But the question is whether that is a reasonable minimum standard to have (it isn't). 

[Kingman]

**** Southgate, Bearded piss flap 

[Tom13]

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Losing to teams is how most teams go out of tournaments, this is rather baked into the concept. All you're really saying here is 'we didn't win the tournament', and it's certainly true that if your minimum expectation is losing to no-one and winning the entire tournament then Southgate's tenure has been as much of a disaster as all of his predecessors. But the question is whether that is a reasonable minimum standard to have (it isn't). 

I'm using the fact we've been knocked out by every team considered 'better' than us to highlight that he's not as good as some people make out. He has us playing with the handbrake on. It limits us and creates a mentality that we're inferior to the 'better' sides we face.

[HanoiVillan]

1 minute ago, Tom13 said:

I'm using the fact we've been knocked out by every team considered 'better' than us to highlight that he's not as good as some people make out. 

There are three possible endings to a tournament, for any team:

1) You can go out having failed in a group you were fancied, or lost in a knockout to a team who are much worse.

2) You can go out having failed in a group against better teams, or lost in a knockout to a team who are similar or better. 

3) You can win the entire tournament. 

There are no other possible endings. You observing that Southgate ends tournaments in the second way is not a knock on him, unless the expectation is that he ends in the third way. 

[Tom13]

You're really losing me here. It's irrelevant which stage we face these 'top' teams, the fact is, we're beaten by them. There's a long list of reasons why I dislike Southgate as a manager but it will never be a squad brimming with confidence and belief with him at the helm.

[HanoiVillan]

2 hours ago, Tom13 said:

It's irrelevant which stage we face these 'top' teams, the fact is, we're beaten by them.

We beat teams including Croatia, Germany and Denmark during Euro 2020. 

[TheAuthority]

5 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Losing to teams is how most teams go out of tournaments, this is rather baked into the concept. All you're really saying here is 'we didn't win the tournament', and it's certainly true that if your minimum expectation is losing to no-one and winning the entire tournament then Southgate's tenure has been as much of a disaster as all of his predecessors. But the question is whether that is a reasonable minimum standard to have (it isn't). 

There is a lot more nuance to things than the above HV. I know Southgate's tenure as England boss is something that you see more positively than most on VT. However, this is football, and the expectation that "win it all and we're happy and lose and we're not," dissolves the degrees of pathos involved in football.

1990 we loved the way we lost with such effort (even though the team was somewhat ridiculed at the start of the tournament) and Gazza was born into an icon with his tears.

1996 was the swashbuckling valiant heroes led by Terry who were bested by the German rascals and Moller preening like a peacock.

1998 was a team dealt the harshest blow of Beckham's red card which meant that 10 men fought bravely with 3 lions on their chest until the end (or until David Batty.)

These are examples of the shades of emotion in football.

4 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

There are three possible endings to a tournament, for any team:

1) You can go out having failed in a group you were fancied, or lost in a knockout to a team who are much worse.

2) You can go out having failed in a group against better teams, or lost in a knockout to a team who are similar or better. 

3) You can win the entire tournament. 

There are no other possible endings. You observing that Southgate ends tournaments in the second way is not a knock on him, unless the expectation is that he ends in the third way. 

The fact that to make your point about Gareth you've had to be so reductive in the above argument should tell you that it's a weak argument.

As I said above, previous managers and teams have experienced your number 2 outcome, but it's the journey to that outcome that informs the football fan's emotional attachment to the team and manager.

Without covering all of the arguments again about this generation: in most fans mind I don't think that Southgate with ever be thought of as a great England manager because of the talents at his disposal. Euro 2020 was such a missed opportunity to win a trophy that not only is there no emotional connection to him, there is no belief that he can actually deliver a winning performance when it really matters.

[ThunderPower_14]

When a manager appears to be intentionally stifling the deep array of attacking talent at his disposal to play turgid, defensive football, he's going to be more harshly judged when that football isn't successful. It's not complicated. People can forgive defensive football if you're winning, but when you manage 1 shot on target in a final, they're naturally going to be less forgiving.

This world cup doesn't exist in a vacuum for Southgate. If he wants people to be positive about his management, he needs to give them something tangible to be positive about. 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, ThunderPower_14 said:

When a manager appears to be intentionally stifling the deep array of attacking talent at his disposal to play turgid, defensive football, he's going to be more harshly judged when that football isn't successful. It's not complicated

I think there's an element of accuracy in that assessment, but only a little bit.  It's true I think that Southgate leans towards " keep a clean sheet" as a priority, but in part because teams that so well in international tournaments need to not lose games, as @HanoiVillanrightly put it. It gets you out of groups and into knockout stages. From there, we've seen in the past 50 years that England have then tended to fail early via the old gung ho, up and at 'em style of old. Football is different now.  It's less about "slugging it out" and more about the stiletto. More cagey. Now I'm with you that he surrendered the initiative in the last Euro final, after half time and Mancini was smarter, more experienced and more proactive. But his Italy side failed to qualify for this WC. Southgate got there easy. We've scored 9 goals in 3 games. We're not defensive, there's more to come. He's not intentionally stifling attacking talent, that's just rubbish. He might, or might not have found the right mix of attackers, and tbh no one really knows what the best combo is, perhaps because there's so options.

He's incredibly harshly assessed by most people I think. Does he drive me up the wall sometimes? Yes. But he's the best manager since Venables, which was 26 years ago, who also had a hugely able squad.  Hostage to fortune but he's got England performing at least to their natural level, whereas before we consistently under performed.  He's taken the weight off.

[sne]

Think England will win the WC in Qatar, there will be  a statue of Southgate outside Wembley before long.

[fightoffyour]

59 minutes ago, sne said:

Think England will win the WC in Qatar, there will be  a statue of Southgate outside Wembley before long.

As long as they get whoever did the ronaldo one