Forum Replies Created
-
I don’t think pundits questioning how Kane performs can be labelled as abuse really. The pundits were all reiterating how they like Kane, but think there is a limitation in how he is being played after 2 weak performances. It’s the job of pundits to analyse, not cheerlead, so Kane should learn to handle it and do the talking on the pitch.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The players did not do themselves any favours yesterday and should be able to make simple passes no matter what. However, a lot of it seems to be stemming from the system. We sit deep a lot of the time, but especially after going a goal ahead. The players get pinned back and Kane is practically a defensive midfielder at this point. There is then no outlet and the ball keeps coming back with us under pressure. This is on Southgate, and this is before we get into Foden and especially Trent being out of position, especially the latter. With constant pressure the panic rises and the morale drops, while the opposition gain momentum and it’s hard to switch back into higher gears after that.
It’s similar to what happened previously under Southgate. Except then the opposition couldn’t live with the talent we do possess, and Southgate’s instilled unity helped a lot, but now they have figured how to nullify the talent and we seem to be struggling more. This hasn’t been a one off. Since the last world cup we have struggled in games. Many of those games aren’t so meaningful, but it’s a worrying pattern. The game has moved on from ‘managing’ the game by sitting back and trying to stifle the attack. The ‘tiki taka’ of Barcelona and Spain, plus the pressing brought in by German coaches has rendered it archaic. Now this is becoming more common, well drilled teams like Denmark can nullify it and the better teams are only more likely to do so. I don’t have any confidence that Southgate knows how to play differently or adapt with the players at his disposal.
It annoys me when some say we have to be winning the Euros with this squad, it does come across as arrogant. However, they are right in that we should be performing a lot better with this squad. It may be true that some players may be overhyped, but the star players we have do demonstrate good passing, pressing and moves into space for their clubs. I don’t think the only reason Foden can do this for Man City is because De Bruyne, Rodri and Bernado Silva enable him to pass a ball quicker and more accurately. I don’t believe that Bellingham can look like the star in a Real shirt because of Vinicius Jr, Kroos or Nacho. If they were so bad as to not be able to pass a ball they would stand out like a sore thumb. If they really are so overrated that they struggle like this, then it sweeps by pretty much every expert. So many nations like Romania, Austria and Turkey have impressed so far, but I don’t think their players are as good as England’s. Not because of overhype, but because they don’t necessarily replicate it in club shirts or stand out like English players. It suggests to me that the underperformance seen so far is not because of overhype, but lack of gelling, ineffective tactics and systems. There may be an issue with players here, but a lot of this falls on the coaching in my opinion.
2 users thanked author for this post.
We did have some scrappy games in previous group stages, but none of the performances were as disjointed as yesterday from memory.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I agree that the defence seems a weak link, but that wasn’t an issue last night. The goalie and back four played well. We seem to be making the same mistakes, and Southgate doesn’t seem to know how to stop us from losing control of games after taking a lead. He has done well, and I am not saying this to be negative, but a fresh outlook would surely not be amiss if we lose again in the knockouts with the same things happening. We don’t have a right to win, and if this was Southgate’s first tournament I wouldn’t be saying it, but with some of those players there are many valid questions as to why Southgate can’t seem to maximise it.
1 user thanked author for this post.
England don’t have a right to win every tournament, no team does, but we do have a right to expect us to play to the best of our ability. Many of these players have shown their class for their clubs, which have made them have very good reputations. Bellingham was sensational for Real Madrid, Kane did have a good season for Bayern and Foden for Man City. My non-English friends say the same thing, so I don’t think it’s all English bias. Many knowledgeable fans can see the same players put in star performances for their clubs, but failing for their country. I don’t believe that Foden can go from being a big player for Man City to resorting to sloppy passing and hoofs from defence as he did with England last night. Pep wouldn’t have that.
Southgate does have a decent record with England. I would say he has done the most to make a united England team out of any manager for decades. This is to his credit, but he isn’t without flaws. It doesn’t seem fair to make out that we have achieved more results under Southgate because of him alone and to say failures only come because of players alone, or vice versa. When looking at the record above, we could say that the players we have got have allowed us to achieve such results, so Ferrite’s criticism of them is as wrong headed as any directed at Southgate because of this. Those results and tournament progressions aren’t bad for a team whose players regularly get found out at international level, where this argument is used against a team like Serbia, who are a good team but not better than some of those we have beaten in the recent past.
I have just finished watching Romania beat Ukraine with a more composed performance than England last night. I doubt the Romanian team are actually more talented than England, but are underhyped because of English bias. Their left back is a Spurs bench player, many others play in leagues of lower quality, but they looked like a team that could have beaten us last night. They were well drilled and knew how to control a lead, which is something we have lacked often under Southgate.
The positives are that we had scrappy performances in groups in all previous tournaments with Gareth and that didn’t stop us achieving more than we had done for years. Gareth clearly can man manage, which has allowed some success, but the performance yesterday was not a one off and is what punished us against Italy in 2021 and Croatia in 2018. He clearly hasn’t found a solution to it, and doesn’t seem to make changes to prevent it. I would expect a coach to be able to drill the squad in how to actually control a game, with possession, like other nations do. Even ones like Romania, with players of a lower calibre. That is on Southgate and I feel like he cannot get more out of the squad, so if we fail, I would like to see a fresh start with another manager who can maybe identify how to maximise the potential. After 4 major tournaments Gareth will have had enough opportunities.
3 users thanked author for this post.
Typical Southgate performance. France, Germany, Spain etc control games. We sit back an invite pressure and play hoofball with ages taken to make a change.
3 users thanked author for this post.
My own feeling on this is that Simon probably did have something to offer regarding sponsorship links. However, the shareholders have been split among those who contributed the most financially. If Simon has been disgruntled because he isn’t a big wig, he needs to get his ego checked. I remember when that news article didn’t include him among the saviours, until hours later when he was included. I wonder if that was him with some angry phone calls.
I do feel like he has an ego. Photos with Jimmy at the operation and being at Hilton’s side when Hilton needed some credibility. The problem with Simon and Hilton was that he opposed anyone who dared call out Hilton at the time, which goes against this portrayal of him as tirelessly working to save the club (people were citing Simon’s say so for why they trusted that Hilton had the funds). Compared to Michelle, Roj and Sharp his contributions seem to have been minimal. A streamlined board will serve us better than Simon, if he did kick up a fuss about shares. I don’t think his advantages with bringing in sponsors from Volkswagen or BMW outweigh him being a potential trouble causer because he wants his name in lights.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Expecting our solvency to rely on the wealth of benefactors is precisely the problem which led us to fall to the depths under Swann and Hilton. Though, with the latter, the wealth they were portraying just wasn’t there.
She didn’t say “one of the offers” was a touch above minimum wage. It was not said at all that he received more than one. In fact everyone assumed it was one offer, and the implication was that it was a derisory one as a way of saying they tried to keep him. That he was offered 3 contradicts the “he wasn’t wanted” interpretation, since the club wouldn’t bother with renegotiation if this was the case. Which makes this statement by her lose some reliability, so I don’t know why we should treat it as beyond doubting.
I don’t see why Andy needs to go into the specifics of contract negotiations. Such dealings involve negotiations and the club showing hands on how they handled this would have other players, for transfers or contract negotiations trying to push for their benefit. Not because of anything sinister, but because it’s natural to try and push for financial advantages in contracts. Anything that loses the club leverage pushes it in the player’s favour.
