England v Eyeties Euro Qualifier

[bigfrank]

What is everyone thinking? 0-0 or 1-0 to them

[Willtell]

"I think it is far simpler to say that Southgate is a good coach that does really well in qualifiers. The problem comes when the tournaments begin and the players get to see him daily. That's when they get to realise he's a lightweight, full of politically correct shit and little fun to be with..."

[southbankbornnbred]

"No point getting all misty-eyed about it, I know, but I do wonder how well England's supposed ""golden generation"" would have done with a more enlightened set of managers than Sven, McClaren, Capello (at the end of his career) and ""Iceland"" Hodgson. A CENTRAL midfield trio of Gerrard, Scholes and Lampard. Or with Carrick sitting in front of the back four, and two others, would have been a different proposition to the embarrassments we had trying to force Scholes out on the left wing and - even worse - that ludicrous situation where Gerrard played on the left wing during a World Cup Finals. Ho hum."

[southbankbornnbred]

"What Southgate has to do now is pick the best XI within that context - and that's generally where he falls down. Mount playing left wing/AM in the Euros final, just because of his high-press, was insane and shows how Southgate's instincts are innately conservative."

[southbankbornnbred]

"Russ, But Southgate IS the manager who ditched the obsession with 4-4-2. People can't do anything but credit him for that. Don't get me wrong, he's a bang average coach in almost all other ways. I think he's a good man-manager of international teams (he is loyal to his players, gets on with them and creates a genuine sense of team/squad spirit). But he's a bang average coach - especially going forward. His one big idea, thankfully, was to immediately move to a position where his sides were rarely outgunned in the key area of the pitch which, despite everybody's fixation with roles like ""false 9s"" and Trequartistas etc has always been the central midfield area. If you're outgunned in CM then your two players will spend 90 minutes playing that horrible grid game where your opponents in the grid have one more player - and always one more passing option - than you. Southgate played international football into the 2000s and was well aware of the shortcomings of that approach. But, in fairness to him, nobody changed it until he did. I don't rate Southgate particularly highly. He's innately conservative. But he should be credited with the single biggest contribution to turning around England's fortunes. Semi-final, final, quater-final and now easy qualification from a group containing Italy: his record is strong because he generally refuses to give ground in midfield."

[daveyg]

"Big Frank and Southbank. That's the big dilemma. I'd rather have Dunk for set pieces but Guehi for all round defence. If you're going to have JWP in that midfield then Rice has to sit in front of the back 4 more. Trent Arnold is a better player than JWP in every department. Can we play with that midfield, will it be too open ? If Bellingham plays like he did with defensive duties too then yes. Saka will be better bet than Grealish,Grealish slows the build up to much. Even Bowen would be better but he won't feature unless he keeps his form up and more. We do need a left back. Shaw is the best,Chilwell to lightweight. Trippier isn't a left back of high class. An alternative to Kane,Tony probably,but will he have enough time ? The next two games Kane should start on the bench."

[Russ of the BML]

"southbankbornnbred 10:21 Wed Oct 18 You raise a good point. Although, playing devils advocate.... I think you give Southgate too much credit for ditching 4-4-2. I think that was a general trend throughout the whole of football. Not sure anything Southgate specifically designed. Just following the trend."

[swindon hammer]

As well as Mount he also left out Sterling again despite some calls for him to be recalled so he’s obviously not afraid to do that if need be.

[Manuel]

"Chim - You may well be right, but I'm, probably naively, hoping he has a word with himself. He wasn't going to do it at this point as it would have looked like he was bowing down to pressure. He did end up finally ditching Mount."

[chim chim cha boo]

"Re: England v Eyeties Euro Qualifier Manuel, I wouldn't hold your breath. He' not breaking up his little gang no matter how well fringe players are doing for their clubs. I can't see the Euros being any different from past managers making a bollocks up of another potential 'golden generation'."

[Manuel]

"''Players obviously like Southgate and hopefully he'll quietly drop his Henderson/Phillips/Maguire fixation in time for the tournament and let the team off the leash and actually win something'' Yes, that's the hope. Henderson was washed up as a top level player at the world cup last year, so how is he going to be any use next year? Hopefully Southgate will stop ''proving a point'' with Maguire at some point, and I don't think Phillips will be a starter. Southgate cannot fucking blow this next year, despite his many critics he's not an idiot and will be fully aware of criticism for being so stubborn with certain players, so hopefully he will see the woods for the trees with these players soon."

[southbankbornnbred]

"BigFrank - England played 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1) in three out of five games in Euro 96: Switzerland, Holland and Spain. The two exceptions were Scotland, when Venables started Southgate in midfield (and it failed, so he brought on Redknapp) and Germany in the semi-final. The last game, against Germany, was forced on Venables because Neville was suspended - so he played a back three. As you say, it was Hoddle who really switched formation more permanently. Then he went all witchy, and the FA defaulted to a stream of old style 4-4-2ers. Because it’s all they knew or understood - and they thought the players would, too. The rest of the world had moved on at that point."

[aldgate]

Walker seems to have Mbappe's number and France still have Giroud lumbering around up front so we shouldn't be scared of them. We are the envy of the world for our midfield/attacking talent and will be 7/2 favourites when the Euros kick off. Players obviously like Southgate and hopefully he'll quietly drop his Henderson/Phillips/Maguire fixation in time for the tournament and let the team off the leash and actually win something

[bigfrank]

"Le Saux and Anderton were wing-backs for Hoddle, Scholes played behind Shearer and Owen Seaman Neville Adams Campbell Anderton Beckham Ince Le Saux Scholes Shearer Owen In 96 Seaman Neville Adams Pearce Ince/Southgate Anderton Gazza Platt McManaman Shearer Sheringham"

[southbankbornnbred]

*Ramsey.*

[southbankbornnbred]

"Zico, Yeah, Alf Ramsay always said that the narrow (diamond?) 4-4-2 he played was the team's big strength. They didn't have wingers, and Ball (right) and Peters (left) played more as inside right/left - often joining the two CMs (Stiles and Charlton). That also allowed Charlton to mark Beckenbauer in the final - because he knew that Ball and Peters would fill the space inside anyway. In fact, that was an occasion when England outmanned their opponents in central midfield. A lesson few learned after that."

[southbankbornnbred]

"I saw Owen play for Liverpool as a lone striker in the Premier League a couple of times when I lived up there. He was electric. They just didn't hoof it to him in the air - and it forced them to think about passing to feet/space. IIRC, one game their forward line was McManaman (right), Owen and Berger (left). They tore their opponents to shreds with pace and movement. No hoofing in sight. It didn't last: this was English football in the 90s! Heskey or Fowler came back from injury and off they went a-4-4-2-ing..."

[zico]

Scholes stuck out on the *left*

[zico]

"Didn't England play narrow though in 66, rather than your typical 4-4-2 hence the Wingless Wonders? Hoddle has said that he wanted to build the team around Rio as a centre back who could dribble out of defence, so that would have been three at the back, but of course his comments got him fired before he could implement it properly.. Whilst obviously immensely successful at Man United you could argue Rio never quite made the most of his ability due to the flat back four they played at Man U, and of course same could be said for Joe Cole, trophies at Chelsea but his flair coached out of him. Sven was just bizarre looking back playing a 442 with Scholes stuck out on the right. That said how would you have fitted someone like Michael Owen in without playing two up top, as he was probably not the kind to play as a lone striker."

[bigfrank]

"Euro 1992, 2000 & 2016 were the worse ever euros i witnessed"

[southbankbornnbred]

"Venables only played three at the back a few times. Mostly, he played a back four (Neville, Adams, Southgate and Pearce etc). He often played an amended 4-4-2, which was really a 4-4-1-1: with Sheringham dropping into midfield when England didn't have the ball, leaving Shearer upfront on his own (a job he could easily handle, due to his strength etc). Venables was probably the last England manager to make that approach work. Taylor and Robson before him fucked it up good and proper (until Robson got forced, by his own players, to play 5-3-2). Basically, England had almost no success with 4-4-2 after 1966. But, with a three or four year exception, stuck with it until we got fucked over by Iceland in 2016."

[southbankbornnbred]

"FWIW, I thought that front three (four if you count Bellingham as the most advanced CM/AM) last night was excellent - and possibly England's strongest attack. Bellingham creating behind Kane, with Rashford and Foden wide of them, has a lot of potential. You could argue for Saka instead of one of the wide men (although Foden is more creative and Rashford more direct/scores more). But last night we saw that when they have possession and space, they can be very good against strong sides. To me, the big questions marks going into next year's tournament are: what's the best CB pairing, and who partners Declan in the deeper CM roles? Plus, how good will France be?!"

[southbankbornnbred]

"FWIW, I thought that front three (four if you count Bellingham as the most advanced CM/AM) last night was excellent - and possibly England's strongest attack. Bellingham creating behind Kane, with Rashford and Foden wide of them, has a lot of potential. You could argue for Saka instead of one of the wide men (although Foden is more creative and Rashford more direct/scores more). But last night we saw that when they have possession and space, they can be very good against strong sides. To me, the big questions marks going into next year's tournament are: what's the best CB pairing, and who partners Declan in the deeper CM roles? Plus, how good will France be?!"

[bigfrank]

Didn't Hoddle and Venables before him play 3 at the back. Sven and McClaren both perservered with 4-4-2 and the odd diamond formation

[southbankbornnbred]

"The biggest improvement to England's football team in recent years - and, let's face it, it has all happened under Southgate - has been finally ditching the dreary and hugely damaging obsession with 4-4-2. Since Hoddle had his wheelchair and witchcraft meltdown, England has appointed a succession of managers fundamentally committed to a rigid 4-4-2 which, at international level, has been out of date since the 1980s. Keegan, Sven, McClaren, Capello, Hodgson and Allardyce were all tactically old fashioned and out of date (for the international scene) when they took the job. Even the caretaker manager, Wilkinson, was completely obsessed with 4-4-2. Tp the point where, when we had shit options upfront alongside Owen, the likes of Keegan and Sven kept going with Heskey. The reason 4-4-2 was well out of date is that good coaches realised you could pack your central midfield - where 60%+ of the play flows - against England's two CMs and pretty much spend 90 minutes making the pair of them chase shadows on hot summer's days during tournaments. It left England without the ball for too long in THE key area of the pitch. All this bollocks about why Gerrard and Lampard couldn't work together, for example, was complete claptrap from day one. The solution was to play an extra CM in there with them, so that you were rarely, if ever, outgunned and outnumbered in central midfield. Lampard made this point not long after he retired, when he said he used to turn up for 442England and sides like Paraguay would pack their central midfield all day. Southgate, for his many flaws, has at least made the structural change which means England are rarely outmanned in central midfield. It gives them more of the ball and allows the CMs the luxury of not chasing shadows for 90 minutes on hot days in Korea, Brazil and elsewhere. Hence, since the disaster against Iceland in 2016, England (under the one guy not wedded to 4-4-2) have been very competitive in all competitions. Southgate's big failure so far is failing to pick the right blend of players now that he's got the core structure of the team right. Hence, that ludicrously defensive line up in the final against Italy, which had Mason Mount playing on the left wing just because of his high press. That was taking things too far. Last night, with a team packed with talented players, that blend started to look better. It doesn't make England a shoo-in for a tournament win, but it is all progress - and has made us very competitive in recent years against the likes of Germany, France (we outplayed them in the second half of that quarter final) and Italy. The English version of 4-4-2 killed the England team for many years."

[Fauxstralian]

"I see both Mexico & Ghana were playing in the USA Alvarez played the 90mins in Mexico's 2-2 draw with Germany & Kudus 75mins in Ghana's 4-0 defeat by USA Finished in the early hours so hopefully back with a couple of days preparation for Villa For the 2024 Euros France are obviously the strong favourites , England next and a fair distance to the rest. England were a Kane penalty miss away from matching France at the World Cup and have the talent to test them .... but maybe not the manager. Most of the other usual challengers as set out by many earlier are nowhere near their previous best. Italy may not even make it and they look a team in transition. You'd expect Germany at home to rise to the occasion but they are way off a traditional German team."