“England are unbeaten in 13 group stage matches at the European Championship (W8-D5-L0), since a 2-1 defeat against France in Lisbon at Euro 2004. This is a tournament record.”
Personally I think we as a nation have a tendency to underrate the opposition. England weren’t brilliant but Denmark are a good side. England didn’t need to press for a goal so didn’t.
He certainly has drilled in a different attitude. He also has benefitted from fortune (football fortune?) particularly in Russia 18. I hope he stays forever in the interests of continuity
I think it is more a case of other managers being poor than Southgate being a great manager. Good chemistry builder, but he has five reverse gears.
WC 2018: Forgiving route to final, sat on lead in semis v Croatia, lost.
Euro 2020: Slightly less forgiving route to final (though Germany were below par for them), but played mostly at Wembley and won the semi with a dodgy pen. Sat on a lead in the final, lost.
WC 2020: Forgiving route to QFs, lost to first contending team (France), though played fairly well.
There is something to be said for beating the teams you should beat, but for me the main difference between Southgate and others is that he has had some favourable draws. He still generally loses to the first real contender, just like everyone before him. If you look at who England go out to (Iceland aside) it is almost always a contender rather than an upset - in other words, we have generally found a way to beat the secondary nations, but that doesn't win you silverware.
1996 was your best shot. Playing in England in a year ending in 6. Excellent players and a good manager. But sadly (for you) the squad culture was very alcohol based and you threw it away.
That was one we should have won, but also being 20 odd minutes and a positive substitution away last time is hard to beat.
To underline my point above, here is the route the eventual winners had to the final v England, for the two Southgate tournaments we went deep in:
WC 2018:
France: Argentina, Uruguay, Belgium
England: Colombia, Sweden, Croatia (lost)
Does anyone think Soutgate's England even gets past Messi's Argentina in the Round of 16 if they swapped draws?
Euro 2020:
Italy: Austria, Belgium, Spain
England: Germany, Ukraine, Denmark
England had the harder R16 here (though barely, as Austria gave Italy a huge scare and Germany were below par), but does anyone think they get past Belgium AND Spain if the routes are swapped?
When England go out of a tournament is almost always simply based on when we first play a true contender, simple as that. Southgate probably goes R16 and QF or SF if you swap the paths above, and then he is no different to the managers who drew Argentina in WC 98 in the Round of 16, Brazil in the QF of 2002, or Germany in the semis of WC 90 and Euro 96, etc. etc.
On the contrary (more or less the exact opposite, actually), I am actually saying a tournament winner needs to be able to beat another contender when they first meet one. I even mapped out the routes of the teams that won and all! The point was that the ultimate winners had harder routes than England but ran the gauntlet because they were championship-level teams. I pointed out that even with the "luck of the draw", England fell short. In other words, you need to be excellent more than lucky.
Italy not being able to do anything going forward, finally winning a free kick to get something into the box, but passing the set piece sideways and then ultimately backwards to the goalie is the most 'modern football' thing ever.
I am sure they are delighted with the slight boost to their possession stats!
Comments
Do you have a favourite team at this euros @drcongo?
You mentioned previously Romania as a dark horse. On the evidence of Slovenia so far I think they could go far (but would need a draw v eng).
I’m cheering for Scotland lol, but I reckon Germany look good for actually winning.
This Spain side looks good too, very positive with the ball.
It will be a legendary celebration if Scotland beat Hungary.
Hopefully a Scotland v England final but a long way to go
I agree those two have looked the best so far. Full of skill and purpose.
Things can only get better
https://youtu.be/V6QhAZckY8w?si=w9q6Me8Zvco5IWGC
Decent hair. Bit lower middle class. Likes the Pride suff. Won nothing at league level.
Bloomfield could take over from Southgate and nobody would notice.
Is it true that everyone in North Korea has to have the same haircut @Kim_il_Swan ?
Hate to say it again
southgate three tournaments two semis one final
all other England managers - loads of tournaments four semis one final
by the way my money would be that next manager will not be English.
From the BBC
“England are unbeaten in 13 group stage matches at the European Championship (W8-D5-L0), since a 2-1 defeat against France in Lisbon at Euro 2004. This is a tournament record.”
Personally I think we as a nation have a tendency to underrate the opposition. England weren’t brilliant but Denmark are a good side. England didn’t need to press for a goal so didn’t.
He certainly has drilled in a different attitude. He also has benefitted from fortune (football fortune?) particularly in Russia 18. I hope he stays forever in the interests of continuity
What happen to balding people like me?
I think it is more a case of other managers being poor than Southgate being a great manager. Good chemistry builder, but he has five reverse gears.
WC 2018: Forgiving route to final, sat on lead in semis v Croatia, lost.
Euro 2020: Slightly less forgiving route to final (though Germany were below par for them), but played mostly at Wembley and won the semi with a dodgy pen. Sat on a lead in the final, lost.
WC 2020: Forgiving route to QFs, lost to first contending team (France), though played fairly well.
There is something to be said for beating the teams you should beat, but for me the main difference between Southgate and others is that he has had some favourable draws. He still generally loses to the first real contender, just like everyone before him. If you look at who England go out to (Iceland aside) it is almost always a contender rather than an upset - in other words, we have generally found a way to beat the secondary nations, but that doesn't win you silverware.
The commentator just said 'Spanish inquisition'.
I wasn't expecting that.....
1996 was your best shot. Playing in England in a year ending in 6. Excellent players and a good manager. But sadly (for you) the squad culture was very alcohol based and you threw it away.
If Gazza’s studs were a few mm longer…
England have drifted to 3rd favs on Betfair..which is good at managing expectations and pressure for me
That was one we should have won, but also being 20 odd minutes and a positive substitution away last time is hard to beat.
To underline my point above, here is the route the eventual winners had to the final v England, for the two Southgate tournaments we went deep in:
WC 2018:
France: Argentina, Uruguay, Belgium
England: Colombia, Sweden, Croatia (lost)
Does anyone think Soutgate's England even gets past Messi's Argentina in the Round of 16 if they swapped draws?
Euro 2020:
Italy: Austria, Belgium, Spain
England: Germany, Ukraine, Denmark
England had the harder R16 here (though barely, as Austria gave Italy a huge scare and Germany were below par), but does anyone think they get past Belgium AND Spain if the routes are swapped?
When England go out of a tournament is almost always simply based on when we first play a true contender, simple as that. Southgate probably goes R16 and QF or SF if you swap the paths above, and then he is no different to the managers who drew Argentina in WC 98 in the Round of 16, Brazil in the QF of 2002, or Germany in the semis of WC 90 and Euro 96, etc. etc.
His record is not the mic drop some think it is.
I genuinely and literally (in the literal sense of the word literally) have dreams about that and kick out in my sleep
(Gazza 96 imean)
Every time I see it I genuinely think he is going to score!
Nico Williams is a bit good isn’t he.
Such a shame Germany v Spain is a likely QF rather than final.
@shev improves England's chances no? Mr Bond?
Definitely, though I think we would likely have Italy or Switzerland in the QF then France in the SF, then Germany or Spain in the final.
Incredible what Spain have done to a decent Italy side.
You seem to have discovered that a tournament winner needs lots of luck @Shev ?
No ground breaking dissertation there
On the contrary (more or less the exact opposite, actually), I am actually saying a tournament winner needs to be able to beat another contender when they first meet one. I even mapped out the routes of the teams that won and all! The point was that the ultimate winners had harder routes than England but ran the gauntlet because they were championship-level teams. I pointed out that even with the "luck of the draw", England fell short. In other words, you need to be excellent more than lucky.
Italy not being able to do anything going forward, finally winning a free kick to get something into the box, but passing the set piece sideways and then ultimately backwards to the goalie is the most 'modern football' thing ever.
I am sure they are delighted with the slight boost to their possession stats!
You make your own luck.