We’ll have to disagree about that. Winning one relevant PK shootout and a second training match does not a PK expert make.
Southgate has told us what his thoughts were in selecting Saka. Not many people think they make sense.
Selecting Maguire, on the other hand, makes a ton of sense. It’s why you’ll see Kjær (and while active, Agger) take penalties for Denmark. Granqvist for Sweden. Also Bonucci (twice) in the Euros. You usually want your teams leaders on penalties because mental >>> technique in this situation (also - at this level - all of the players have good enough technique to put the ball away under normal circumstances).
What Southgate describes does not sound very advanced, compared to other descriptions of training I’ve heard (which focuses a lot on the mental). But sure - there may well be details being left out. But again - at the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding. And England did not perform.
I agree with your analysis of the first 30 minutes; I was positively surprised by that. But England wasn’t rubbish for the last part because of the formation change. As professional footballers will tell you time and time again on TV, the reason you don’t want to sit back for too long is that it’s mentally very hard to go from being the defending team to being the attacking team.
Beat them? No. But why should you not be expected to match them? Italy were clearly the better team in the final, but pound for pound, there is not much daylight between England and Italy.
For sure, Pickford is no Donnaruma. And Rice and Phillips - although I definitely think they played good matches, are not at the level of Verratti and Jorginho. But Mason Mount was Chelsea’s player of the year (ahead of Jorginho). The back line of the English team are among the strongest in the Euros - I’d take Shaw and Walker ahead of any other player in their position in this tournament and while I’d rate 3-4 players ahead of Maguire and Stone personally, it’s hard to argue against Maguire being an all-star pick. Up front, Kane is a world class striker, easily Top-5 in the world. One can easily argue Sterling to be the best player of the Euros (though my personal pick would be Jorginho). There is not a team in the euros (including Italy) that would not play those two in their start-XI. And behind those two in attack, you have players like Foden, Sancho, Saka, and Rashford to chose from. And that’s without mentioning benched players on other positions such as Henderson, Grealish, and Chilwell - no other Euro team had such a deep bench as England. Most of Italy’s substitutes in the final wouldn’t even make England’s squad.
Pickford, Rice and Philips are the only three England players where I’d consider this England side to not have world class players, but the final was not lost (drawn) due to their performance - all three performed admirably well.
There is a reason most neutral observers considered England to be one of the big favorites to win the Euros prior to the tournament, and why England was a slight favorite to win the final. I totally agree that England’s media (and fans) have often been extremely unrealistic about the teams prospects, but this was not one of those times.
Really? I agree with you that there has often seemed to be a tendency to overconfidence in the media, but I’m pretty sure that the players and coaches England have had are professionals. I strongly doubt there has ever been very much “taking things too lightly” among the actual players - anymore than there is now. Just because the English media is crazy, doesn’t mean the players are.
And while a healthy respect for opponents is always good, calling England a “second-tier” team makes absolutely no sense. You have world class players on every position except the three I’ve mentioned above. You’ve now in two consecutive tournaments gone to the semis and the finals. This England team will definitely be one of the favorites in 2022, and most likely 2024 as well.
IMO, the English mistake is to think that you cannot match the other big teams.
Denmark is currently #10 on the world rankings. Until the match with England, Denmark had only lost 4 games in the last 50. That feat was not achieved by the Danish team thinking “we can not match mighty Germany/England” (both of whom DK tied or beat in the year before the the Euros) - on the contrary, the Danish team always goes on the pitch with the mindset that they can beat anyone. Braithwaithe put it best after the quarter finals - he doesn’t care who the opponents are - he’s confident that the DK team can run down and eventually beat anyone.
And granted - Denmark has a golden generation right now. Schmeichel, Kjær, Christensen, Højbjerg, Eriksen - these are players who would slot right into the first XI on most other national teams. Most of the players play in top leagues as regular starters. But there is no comparing the Denmark team with England, Germany, Italy. France, Belgium, Holland, etc. Despite that, you’ll never find this Danish team enter a game against any of the above sides looking to defend for 90 minutes after scoring a goal. Respect does not mean you shouldn’t attack or play your own game.
I have a lot of respect for what Southgate has achieved. I don’t respect the way he makes England play. These are two separate things. It’s the same way I have a lot of respect for old Mourinho’s ability to win trophy’s (current version doesn’t even have that going for him) - at the same time as I’m not a big fan of how he builds his teams.
Well - that is Southgate’s fault. That is his responsibility as national team manage - to make the players he has available shine. Denmark’s Christian Eriksen was decidedly average in the start of his international career, despite dominating for Ajax/Tottenham. Hareide came in as coach, and Eriksen was suddenly the #1 assist maker and goal scorer for 4 years, dominating the midfield for Denmark. Hjulmand came in, and suddenly we were back to an Eriksen who was again merely average. Eriksen didn’t suddenly become a better player under Hareide and suddenly forget how to play under Hjulmand. It’s 100% down to the coach’s ability to use him. Hareide built his team 120% around Eriksen - everything was set up to protect him and put him in the best positions - and he flourished. Hjulmand’s approach is more multi-facetted (fortunately for DK, given what happened), and while Eriksen was still the teams best player, he was no longer THE key player.
To make players like Grealish, Sancho, or Foden shine (or for that matter Sterling and Kane), Southgate has to put in place the tactics which give them that opportunity. If they’re constantly receiving the ball in the wrong places and being put in the wrong situations, then they won’t.
Southgate has managed to put together a frightening defensive unit, despite not having a world class keeper. The defensive organization of England is - really - second to none. There are several teams that are almost as good (I’d patriotically point at Denmark, for instance), but IMO the only team which has an equally strong defense right now IMO is Italy - but if given the choice between the two teams, I’d personally pick England’s back 4 or 5 every time (lots more speed, lots more heading strength).
But England still stops playing, at some point. You had the Italians on the ropes in those first 15 minutes of the final - but instead of keeping up the pressure, England drops back and lets the opposition take over. Again - that is not the player’s choice - many of them come from teams that play intensitve, high-pressure football. This is Southgate’s decision.
And - as I suggest above wrt Sancho, Foden, etc - IMO - he has failed to develop the England offense. In practice, England has only two really big attacking threats outside of set pieces. Sterling getting the ball in a position where he can challenge and Kane dropping deep. The problem for England’s opponents is that those two players are so brilliant that they are impossible to neutralize for 90 minutes - but if you can neutralize them (as both Denmark and Italy did for long periods), there is no effective Plan B. Which is inexcusable, when you have so much quality on the bench.
Defensive organization can win you Tournaments. Portugal did it in 2016. Greece did it in 2004. Some would say Denmark did it in 1992. So Southgate is not necessarily wrong to continue riding the horse that has brought him success. But I do think a more offensively minded coach would be able to get more out of this England side than Southgate does,
Or to put it another way - if the passports of Mancini and Southgate were exchanged, I’m pretty sure it would “have come home”.
All of the above being said - that’s all just my opinion, of course. And I probably need to move on … SO given me dirty looks for discussing football on a forum now that the tournament is over, heh. So I may not answer much more, but thanks for the discussion - it’s been fun.
