Match Day - England v Italy. 11/07/2021 - KO 20:00 - Wembley - Uefa 2020 - FINAL

Double J

Forum Patron
Patron
Probably none. But is that relevant

3 of the 4 teams in European finals this year were English. Illustration. Champions League final: 37 of the 46 players in the matchday squads weren’t English.

I am sure our 9 English lads are excellent players if they are commanding places in those teams
- but surely the riches of our EPL, concentrating the world’s talent around them, is the real reason we got so many domestic players there.
Our xenophobic FA requires English teams to have a certain number of English players in their squad.

There is no motivation for some of our English players to go and be the best in the world, as having a British passport means they’re paid like they are the best regardless of if they are or not.

Our press gas up average players as if they are world class when its the complete opposite. The press and media are also subconsciously xenophobic as well.
Why FA Cup winner Pepe is labelled a flop, but Jack Grealish is apparently one of the best in the world.

English players are pampered now. Labelled heroes as if they’ve won. What motivation do they have to win when they get the same treatment as that for losing?
 

nigelscamelcoat

Advisor to the Owner
Probably none. But is that relevant

3 of the 4 teams in European finals this year were English. Illustration. Champions League final: 37 of the 46 players in the matchday squads weren’t English.

I am sure our 9 English lads are excellent players if they are commanding places in those teams- but surely the riches of our EPL, concentrating the world’s talent around them, is the real reason we got so many domestic players to those finals (at the expense of teams from other leagues with less riches.
Perhaps it also shows how strong other leagues are and how we overhype the premier and do down the Spanish and Italian. I don't have the figures to hand but there are more spanish players in 1st 11s in La Liga than there are english/british in starting 11s in the premier league. Also there were only 3 in the Spanish squad from Madrid or barca. Considering the high level technical ability in the Spanish squad demonstrates the strength in that particular football culture.
 

Regardless

Forum Patron
Patron
Do you think City would have got to their final without Walker and Stones?

Do you think Chelsea would have got to their final without Mount?

Do you think Manchester United would have got to their final without Maguire?

FWIW, I think there's very few players these days deserving of the moniker 'world class'.

Avoiding going off too far at a tangent, my whole point was that I think europne’s statement that Southgate has had an “abundance of talent” and he’s wasting it - it’s delusional.

Putting up that squad list IMO lays bare that it’s no better than “good” and IMO, the management deserves huge credit to reach the last 4 of the WC and last two of the Euros.

In the last 50 years, we’ve had several managers of other good (better?) crops of English players that have not delivered a semi and a final like Southgate. The class of 90 and 96 were arguably unlucky though.

As for your questions about City and Chelsea reaching the CL final without those players- my guess would be “probably yes they would”. Stones, Walker & Mount don’t carry those teams in the way that Van Dyke carried Liverpool. If those players weren’t at those clubs, Chelsea and City would just buy other equally good players. Maguire? Dunno. Maybe.
 

stf4ever

Forum Patron
Patron
Avoiding going off too far at a tangent, my whole point was that I think europne’s statement that Southgate has had an “abundance of talent” and he’s wasting it - it’s delusional.

Putting up that squad list IMO lays bare that it’s no better than “good” and IMO, the management deserves huge credit to reach the last 4 of the WC and last two of the Euros.

In the last 50 years, we’ve had several managers of other good (better?) crops of English players that have not delivered a semi and a final like Southgate. The class of 90 and 96 were arguably unlucky though.

As for your questions about City and Chelsea reaching the CL final without those players- my guess would be “probably yes they would”. Stones, Walker & Mount don’t carry those teams in the way that Van Dyke carried Liverpool. If those players weren’t at those clubs, Chelsea and City would just buy other equally good players. Maguire? Dunno. Maybe.

"Probably yes they would."

No, none of them would.

I get your point about buying equally good players, but given that they would be cheaper and with less wages (given the inflated prices and wages for English players due to league rules), surely it would make economic sense to do that, if such players existed?

In that squad listed, we have probably the most expensive, by price tag, and most recently successful squad, by trophies and finals appeared in inside last 12 months.

There are no squads in the Euro tournament that are comparable, apart from maybe the French, who had a major fall out before the start of the tournament. They won the previous World Cup though.
 

Warton PNE

Forum Patron
Patron
Avoiding going off too far at a tangent, my whole point was that I think europne’s statement that Southgate has had an “abundance of talent” and he’s wasting it - it’s delusional.

Putting up that squad list IMO lays bare that it’s no better than “good” and IMO, the management deserves huge credit to reach the last 4 of the WC and last two of the Euros.

It certainly isn't 'delusional'. Maybe slightly over the top but its anything but delusional.

We have an array of attacking talent and bar the Ukraine game (who are a very poor side) we only managed to score 2 goals in 1 game over 90 minutes.

I barely remember a game where we played proper football and starting with a 3 at the back with two wing backs was a poor decision on Sunday as Italy have world class operators in the middle of the park.

For me, Southgate is far too negative. Once we score, that's it. We sit back and hope one of our forwards can grab us another one.

Grealish, Foden, Sancho and Rashford barely got a look in all tournament. Bringing Grealish on after 99 minutes on Sunday was ridiculous. We were crying out for someone to play in the hole infront of Bonucci and Chiellini after 60 minutes as Verrati had stepped back and was controlling the game.

He's given us two brilliant summers but do I ever think he's going to bring us a trophy? No, I don't.
 

JohnPNE

Advisor to the Owner
"Probably yes they would."

No, none of them would.

I get your point about buying equally good players, but given that they would be cheaper and with less wages (given the inflated prices and wages for English players due to league rules), surely it would make economic sense to do that, if such players existed?

In that squad listed, we have probably the most expensive, by price tag, and most recently successful squad, by trophies and finals appeared in inside last 12 months.

There are no squads in the Euro tournament that are comparable, apart from maybe the French, who had a major fall out before the start of the tournament. They won the previous World Cup though.

Germany had three players who won the champions league - rudigar, Werner and havartz. Same as us - chilwell, mount and James. Why didn’t they do better?

If we look at the bigger picture other clubs had better players for their national team who has done more in the bigger stage than we have. France, Germany and Portugal.

I think the issue is people over hype the premier league. Yes we had two teams in the champions league but to say they wouldn’t have got there without them is daft. Had stones not been playing Laporte would instead. Had Walker it would be cancelo or Mendy.

Just had a quick look at our team v Germany. From the starting 11 only 4 won a league title or champions league last season. That changes to six including players from the bench. In the German team 7 won the league or champions league. That changes to 12 with players on the bench and we beat them 2-0.

The premier league is always over hyped for me. Yes the squad has the capacity to improve but it isn’t World beating. Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy had better Squads and first elevens. You look at what they have won to what we have won over the last 4/5 years and it’s incomparable. Do we really have that many world class players. Players like foden/mount/grealish can be. But only Kane, Walker and maybe sancho gets into most elevens in world football. Phillips and rice - as good as they played aren’t anything close to world class or the midfield that the other class sides had. Games are usually won/loss in midfield. Ours were poor in comparison.

Squad value means Jack shit if players like grealish are going for 100 million and Kevin de bruyne went for 50. A truly world class midfielder.
 

stf4ever

Forum Patron
Patron
Germany had three players who won the champions league - rudigar, Werner and havartz. Same as us - chilwell, mount and James. Why didn’t they do better?

If we look at the bigger picture other clubs had better players for their national team who has done more in the bigger stage than we have. France, Germany and Portugal.

I think the issue is people over hype the premier league. Yes we had two teams in the champions league but to say they wouldn’t have got there without them is daft. Had stones not been playing Laporte would instead. Had Walker it would be cancelo or Mendy.

Just had a quick look at our team v Germany. From the starting 11 only 4 won a league title or champions league last season. That changes to six including players from the bench. In the German team 7 won the league or champions league. That changes to 12 with players on the bench and we beat them 2-0.

The premier league is always over hyped for me. Yes the squad has the capacity to improve but it isn’t World beating. Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy had better Squads and first elevens. You look at what they have won to what we have won over the last 4/5 years and it’s incomparable. Do we really have that many world class players. Players like foden/mount/grealish can be. But only Kane, Walker and maybe sancho gets into most elevens in world football. Phillips and rice - as good as they played aren’t anything close to world class or the midfield that the other class sides had. Games are usually won/loss in midfield. Ours were poor in comparison.

Squad value means Jack shit if players like grealish are going for 100 million and Kevin de bruyne went for 50. A truly world class midfielder.

I would argue the Prem isn't overhyped, given the amount of different English teams appearing in European finals over the last few years.

But, overall, I think its a discussion that could be had until the cows come home John.

Completely understand your view and have some sympathy for it. Just, that lingering thought of "what could have been" will always persist simply because of the abundance of talent (in my opinion) that didn't get a chance to influence.
 

Doc Brown

Advisor to the Owner
Your post is so bad, it’s almost funny.
  • Between 1970 and the appointment of Gareth Southgate, there were 24 major tournaments.
  • 16 times, we didn’t get beyond the last sixteen
  • 6 times, losing in the last 8.
  • 2 times, reached the semis.
Since he took over, there have been 2 major tournaments and reached one semi-final and one final - the latest of which lost only on penalties, against a team that’s forgotten how to lose.

The above is fact. Moving to opinions, you have to be wilfully blind or stupid to not see that it’s everything to do with the management.
Excellent post.

For even more context, in just two tournaments Southgate has won as many knockout matches (5) as the team managed in total since 1986. There are certain caveats about quality of opposition faced at those two tournaments, but that should not detract from the totality of his achievements.

So much good stuff has happened under Southgate in a short period of time. He inherited the set-up at pretty much its lowest ebb in 2016.

England had not won a knockout match in 12 years. The team had just suffered the ignominy of losing to Iceland in that summers euros, and the FA was in chaos over the controversial sacking of Big Sam. At the world cup, England won their first ever penalty shootout. They scored 6 in a world cup match for the first time ever. Kane won the golden boot. They reached their first semi-final for 28 years.

At this summer’s euros, they won the group, then beat Germany in a knockout game for the first time since 1966. England conceded 0 goals from open play in the whole tournament. They reached their first ever final. And so much more.

That doesn’t happen if the manager isn’t excellent. There were huge challenges for Southgate coming into this tournament, mainly massively increased expectation and injuries to key players. Yet he managed the tournament and his squad almost to perfection. I think he’d use his substitutions differently in the final if he could.

Regardless, GS has achieved more in his two tournaments than many great teams/managers past could dream of. It shouldn’t be forgotten how difficult it is to get the England team to win knockout matches.

There’s a strong case he is already England’s second best ever manager, as someone else already posted.
 

Double J

Forum Patron
Patron
Not sure what Gareth has achieved as some of you are suggesting.

No difference between finishing last in your group and losing a final, you still lost.

Achieving something is winning it. Would the Spanish or French be awarding knighthoods if they lost the final?

Country rewards failure. English love a loser and a sob story. Aim of the sport is to win, not be the best loser.
 

simo

Advisor to the Owner
2016 - second round lost to Iceland.
2018 - WC semi finals
2021 - Euro runners up.

It's called PROGRESS mate. Look it up.

And since you've got all the answers what do they do differently and, more importantly, who.

You've made this point multiple times now and talk about being keen to debate. I've seen no debate from you and nothing positive or constructive. So, there's your challenge. What have you got?
 

Double J

Forum Patron
Patron
2016 - second round lost to Iceland.
2018 - WC semi finals
2021 - Euro runners up.

It's called PROGRESS mate. Look it up.

And since you've got all the answers what do they do differently and, more importantly, who.

You've made this point multiple times now and talk about being keen to debate. I've seen no debate from you and nothing positive or constructive. So, there's your challenge. What have you got?
Progress is a made up word to hide failure by people who are failing in their jobs.

You win or you lose. One tournament has absolutely nothing to do with the next.

Is Gareth being paid to win trophies or lose games of football that actually matter? If the latter, he’s doing a grand job.
 

simo

Advisor to the Owner
Progress is a made up word to hide failure by people who are failing in their jobs.

You win or you lose. One tournament has absolutely nothing to do with the next.

Is Gareth being paid to win trophies or lose games of football that actually matter? If the latter, he’s doing a grand job.
So you've got nothing then.

Cheers, at least we now know for sure.
 

Kathryn

Advisor to the Owner
Not sure what Gareth has achieved as some of you are suggesting.

No difference between finishing last in your group and losing a final, you still lost.

Achieving something is winning it. Would the Spanish or French be awarding knighthoods if they lost the final?

Country rewards failure. English love a loser and a sob story. Aim of the sport is to win, not be the best loser.
So, by your logic, we were no better than Scotland.
 

Double J

Forum Patron
Patron
So you've got nothing then.

Cheers, at least we now know for sure.
Missed the questions on what they should change, I was addressing your progress claim which as ive stated above, in football, is a made up word.

Quite easy what to do. Hire a manager who knows how to win trophies. Not stick by a bloke whos failed in 3 tournaments, has 0 trophies, and relegated Middlesbrough.
See Italy who hired Mancini, a serial winner.

Mourinho would have been my choice, but he’s just gone Roma. Of those available now it would be Wenger.
 

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
Not sure what Gareth has achieved as some of you are suggesting.

No difference between finishing last in your group and losing a final, you still lost.

Achieving something is winning it. Would the Spanish or French be awarding knighthoods if they lost the final?

Country rewards failure. English love a loser and a sob story. Aim of the sport is to win, not be the best loser.

You seem to be fundamentally misunderstanding how the various sports bodies in the UK tend to operate. Whether it's football or athletics or rugby they set parameters or expectations of where they want those sports to go and what to achieve, "winning" isn't their only objective but t's a desired outcome. They certainly aren't setting out shit or bust objectives and declaring stuff as a failure when a team reaches a final. That might be your expectations but from grassroots and youth football it's probably a damaging way to make people think about sport that anything but a win is a failure
 

Double J

Forum Patron
Patron
You seem to be fundamentally misunderstanding how the various sports bodies in the UK tend to operate. Whether it's football or athletics or rugby they set parameters or expectations of where they want those sports to go and what to achieve, "winning" isn't their only objective but t's a desired outcome. They certainly aren't setting out shit or bust objectives and declaring stuff as a failure when a team reaches a final. That might be your expectations but from grassroots and youth football it's probably a damaging way to make people think about sport that anything but a win is a failure
Not to go round in circles but anything but a win is failure.

Wouldnt see team Mercedes and Lewis Hamilton calling finishing second in the constructors Championship progress. Its failure. The aim is to win.

Being pandered to for losing and being called heroes is exactly what is wrong with the country. Rewarding failure.

<pic removed>

This was the reaction to costing your country success in 1998.
Compare that to the reaction of the last few days.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
Not to go round in circles but anything but a win is failure.

Wouldnt see team Mercedes and Lewis Hamilton calling finishing second in the constructors Championship progress. Its failure. The aim is to win.

Aims and progress are different things. For Mercedes it wouldn't be progress as they were already first. For a smaller team finishing top 10 or top 5 or top 3 would be seen as progress rather than a failure as everything is in your eyes. You're starting to sound like one of those awful competitive parents on the sidelines at football who get wound up if their kid isn't playing every game or the team wins each week. Like I said, it's not healthy for many reasons
 
Top