Euro 2024 thread

I still think you're placing too much stock in the "tournament football" thing...but I do agree with the general point.

The settled starting lineup was a solid defence with no fit left back, no left sided midfielder, a striker who preferred to amble about in midfield and hope to get fouled, a really good right side and a skilful central midfield. The tactic was then to play sideways in defence, give it to the goalie (the only left footed player in the team) and hoof it away.

Each time we went behind and needed a goal, it was like a vision of what we could have had - suddenly the form players for each attacking position were put on the pitch and the dead weight was removed.

Keep him on, but convince him that England start each match one goal down.

It was an entertaining game I thought, full of action, and England played better than I expected, especially given the lack of possession, Spain nearly having the ball for 2/3rds of the game, that's always going to be a tough one to win against, would have been houdiniesque to my mind had they done so.

Pickford kept them in it, had it not been for him, it would have been 4 or 5 goals easily.

Spain looked brilliant the majority of the time, but were not unbeatable.

At 1-1 I thought it could go either way, but for me the better team with more cohesion won.

Williams was incredible, as he has been the whole tournament, surprised to find out how young he is, long career ahead of him - it does look like they have gotten back to their 'glory years' of a decade and more ago, should make for an interesting world cup in 26 - wherever that is.

The frustration for me was that it took being a goal down before the England attack really ignited, and it seemed to me that Kane (I'm not a Kane hater I hasten to add, never have been, and am not now) didn't bring much to the party, which leads to the inevitable question why did they not start with A nother striker up front - I appreciate and respect loyalty a huge amount, but when it comes down to winning or losing massive finals, someone needs to make those tough decisions.

I half wondered if swapping things around and bringing him on for the last 20/30 minutes could have worked well, as he'd be more hungry, have to run for less time so lack of fitness less of an issue, and should they have been in the lead at that point, he would have been good at holding the ball up (if he could get it) and winning free kicks.

I thought the majority of the team didn't look too dejected either, which makes me think they felt they played a good game, and were simply beaten by the better team on the night, which was much better I thought that feeling decisions have gone against you, and or losing it on a penalty shootout.

I'm encouraged and optimistic about the future for the team though I have to say, but can see why for the team and Southgate it might be time for someone with a new approach and a clean slate to work from.

Walker's advancing years is unfortunate, I would imagine he has one more world cup in him at most, and he was one of the stand out England players throughout the tournament for me, both defensively and attacking.

Managing England made a muppet of Fabio Capello, so I think the job poses some unique challenges!

If nothing else, Southgate has made the players likeable, so the arrogance is clearly now limited to some fans and some of the media.

Incredible to think there are people slagging off Southgate after the success (massive improvement at worst) he has brought to the England team. As I said days ago in this thread, I was as concerned about him going as I was about the result last night.

Nothing reinforces my incredulity with the haters as much as remembering 300,000 people in Luton to welcome home the 1990 World Cup squad on an open top bus after they had lost the semi final. That's what it used to be like - it never got better than a world cup semi final defeat and that was celebrated in that way.

It does, but I still think Klopp (or Guardiola) would be good.

I just know he's a bloody good manager, not sure why you think he 'wouldn't work' in a national team? Genuine question.

As mentioned above, I don't care if they're English or not and the nationality of anyone who wins it as manager will instantly become irrelevant.

I would say that one of the reasons that Southgate has been able to make such massive leaps with the England team is that he has first hand knowledge of English culture, the English press, English football and the weight of the England jersey. I'm not sure any european or premier league or ex premier league manager would have that same insight or understanding. SVE is a prime example of this.

Thought England were really poor and lacking in ambition. An xG of about 0.2 until those headers on nearly 90 minutes - yet another fantastic strike masking the complete lack of chance creation.

If you play a low block, have no threat on transition because your 9 can't run in behind and your other attackers always want it to feet then what is the plan? It turns out it's to play it back to Pickford to lump long - well at least get Toney on to battle for it.

Holland game aside England have been unwatchable in this tournament. They've been lucky with the draw - they've been lucky other teams have missed chances and they've relied on rare moments of individual brilliance for the goals that saved them. It's not entitlement - England have gone longer without a trophy than any equivalent nation in terms of size, league, players produced. I'm not even that disappointed now - I just accept the FA couldn't run a bath. We need a manager that plays a fairly simple attacking style - not Potter, not Pep, not Southgate. Howe would be ideal - Klopp would be possible if he wanted it though how he reacts to criticism I'm not sure.

I'm not convinced Klopp is a similar manager in drilling positional discipline and automations like Pep does. So I agree with Rick that kind of manager doesn't work for national teams - I'm just not convinced Klopp is that kind of manager.

I'd still say Howe is ideal though - if he's not available now then someone like Howe.

I do think management of international teams is just fundamentally different to clubs. You just have more control over what positions your team invests in and you have more time to shape tactics in your desired style. If you're the national team manager you can't just go and rebalance your team by getting the chequebook out come the January transfer window. If your best 11 players are all midfielders/strikers, then you're out of luck. And when you leave some of the best 11 players on the bench because you think the team is better off for it, you'll get criticized no end...

Klopp seems to have created a great atmosphere at Liverpool, so that could translate to an international team...but, hasn't he left Liverpool because he doesn't want the stress anymore! The England job isn't what you want in that case.

I think the problem with the England team is they should have scored another two goals, consequently by not scoring those two goals they put themselves into a precarious non winning position. Unfortunately this resulted in them coming home without the it.