One of these sliding doors things, I really do wonder how a Spain-England final would hypothetically have transpired. Maybe worse.
No doubt if we went 1-0 up we'd have done the same misguided attempt to sit on it.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
No doubt if we went 1-0 up we'd have done the same misguided attempt to sit on it.
Many are not happy because of the correct points that you highlighted above. This was probably England's best chance to win a tournament. Everything was in their favour but they just stumbled at the last minute, which is frustrating for many who just cannot understand how they could mess this up.Going into the finals, they had only conceded one goal, which is remarkable. The problem with England is that they play to guard leads against teams who that will not work against. Truth is, they blew the best chance ever because the team were let down by their manager when they needed him the most.
There is no doubt that Southgate is safety first, and for International Tournamanet football I've actually no problem whatsoever with this (and I'm a staunch demander of a proactive brand of football to be played at my Club).
But if you listen to Southgate's post-match comments he wasn't happy about conceding possession and sitting back in the 2nd half, implying that this wasn't his game plan. It doesn't mean he was expecting for us to have 60% of the ball either but I think it's fair to say that this is why the Italians were clearly the better side, we couldn't get on the ball, Italy didn't allow it.
This wasn't Jose ball, it wasn't us deliberately doing this, it was Italy imposing their game on us and us not being able to play our game.
I think Spain would have given us a whole new problem but a problem that might have been more straightforward to deal with because you can prepare for it, you know they are going to have more of the ball, so like Italy did you prepare for that and they chose to set deep and paly on the counter and they were lucky IMO to go through given the missed chances from Spain. Conversely, if we played Spain I think our counter-attack would have presented Spain a bigger problem than Italy's and we would have played Rashford & Sancho.
Playing Italy proved a bigger tactical problem I think.
You say it wasn't Jose ball, but then again he would trot out the same old line about the team not being told to sit on the lead at half time. If not a conscious decision to sit back then Southgate should have been far more proactive in making a sub to try and tip the balance of the game back towards us.
I do think we were too cautious and certainly didn't take full advantage of those first 30 mins or so when we should have gone for the throat. Bizarrely, it felt like we stopped doing the one thing we'd continuously done in previous matches: get it on the wing and cross/cut into the box. Caused Italy problems every time we actually tried it.
I do think Spain may have been the kinder opponent to play though. Less consistent than Italy these past 30 or so international games and I don't think their defence are as horribly savvy as the Italians were.
But Jose ball was and has always been to sit deep, what he was coming out saying was completly and utter trash, he simply never had us well-drilled enough for us to sit deep and never had us pressing high, despite saying he did!
He did try to change the formation, he took Tripps off. Italy was simply better than us. Their record shows this too, they are unbeaten in what 33(???) games now.
Italy were struggling in the first 30mins but they hung in there, I thought they responded well after going a goal behind and they didn't create too much in the first half (Chiesa's effort being the only notable one, which was crafted solely by him rather than what Italy did as a team). They did shut down Shaw in the last 15mins or so and had pushed him back, a lot of people were praising Shaw, which I get but when he's pressed aggressively his passing is erratic and I thought he wasn't that impactful outside of the first half an hour as a direct result of Italy pressing him and thus our supply into Kane (dropping deep to collect and link) didn't happen. The same also on the other side of the pitch with Tripps. And when Tripps gets deep he doesn't stop crosses and shots.
So, this is where I thought was the key tactical thing that Italy got to grips with in first half and it meant we could no longer get on the ball as a result. Phillips and Rice were still controlling the middle of the park.
2nd half Italy then took the game away from us even more by winning the midfield battle by dropping Veratti deeper and out of reach from Phillips and Rice, both of whom were still playing well, just now unable to get to where Italy were dedicating play from. This is where a pressing Kane backed up by an energetic Mount should have been far more aggressive.
But all this still adds up to us just not being as good as Italy. I don't think there should be any shame in this, we took them to pens, they could only score once and that was from a scrabbled set piece. (I rewatched the 82 hand of God game vs Argentina last year and fuck me we were completly outplayed, from front to back, we barely strung a pass together all game. I mention this because the narratic=ve from this game from those that played in it and the English media is that England was robbed! What utter bollocks! This team is competing far, far better than any England side I've watched (it's not as exciting as '96 Euro side but they lost too and peaked at that tournament, where this team is the 2nd youngest in the entire tournament. We will be back challenging semi-finals of Euro's and World Cups for the next decade IMO.
Vs Spain:
Our fwds ought to have terrorised their defense.
Our defenders would have had their forwards for breakfast.
I wouldn't say I believe in Southgate, but he did take us to the final and the result against Germany was very good. On that basis, and the fact that the World Cup is very soon, he deserves to take us through the next World Cup. Hopefully, he recognises that we have to build on the defensive foundation and improve the attacking play.
It's not about having the ball being your game plan, it's about what you're willing to risk in order to see that you have the ball.
England responded well to their early goal and had the better of the rest of the first half.
In the second half Italy came out with great initiative and caused a still game and pressing England problems. Then around 55 or so minutes the retreat started. That was the moment to make changes to recapture control of the game, but up 1-0 with the clock ticking down Southgate chickened out.
The potential for our attack was certainly there, not so sure we would have wrapped them up so well, they terrorized Bonuchi and Cellini all game, especially Olmo, basically, they created many chances just didn't finish them, whilst our defence was great (so too Italy's) I think they would have done the same to us as they did to Italy, perhaps they too would have missed them against us???
Against Spain, we would have played very differently, they even had Italy pinned in their half for virtually the entire game, and without Spinazzola Italy's best counter-attacking player, completely blunted them even more.
Every team we faced largely sat off us meaning it was pointless bringing on our out and out pacey runners (Sancho + Rashford) against a block defence. Whilst there was an argument for us to bring them on against Italy who were pushing us back meant we could have played long behind this defence, however the potential problem that we still would have had is that we still wouldn't have kept the ball well enough with those players, not to mention that Rashford hasn't been very good for Club or Country for over a season now and for all of his great season he had in Germany Sancho hasn't ever played well in an English shirt (Saka also is a player that a great carrier of the ball but doesn't hold up the ball well and maybe Southgate could see that Saka was really struggling to have a positive effect on the game.
As others have said it's a hard one. Voted yes because I would stick with him at least until the world cup since it's only next year and we will probably use pretty much the same squad which he knows. Main problem is he's not able to get the best out of the best players. I would have probably said all of Kane, Mount, Grealish and Foden had underwhelming tournaments given how talented they all are. It felt like every game it got to 50 or so minutes and everyone was crying out for Grealish to come on. I would actually play Mount further back in a box-to-box role alongside a DM which would allow a more creative player like Grealish to do what Kane was having to do and play in the faster players. Phillips was decent in most of the games but he wasn't really playing the box to box role. If anything it was Maguire that was making runs forward breaking the first line.
This was the team I said before the tournament and before the squad was announced:
Henderson
James - Stones - Maguire - Chilwell
Rice
Mount - Grealish
Sancho - Kane - Foden
I know that's really attacking but we should be attacking with the players we've got.
This was the team I said before the tournament and before the squad was announced:
Henderson
James - Stones - Maguire - Chilwell
Rice
Mount - Grealish
Sancho - Kane - Foden
I know that's really attacking but we should be attacking with the players we've got.
A lot of times Jose came out after our matches saying he didn't want us to sit as deep as we did either. We even had players like Kane saying Jose didn't want us to sit deep, and yet it happened.
The two couldn't be more different in terms of personality, but in terms of their football, it's really not that different.
I get this but the entire history of Jose's philosophy is not to have the ball, this is evidenced throughout his entire career from when he was good to now when he's totally outdated. The difference is the only thing to support Jose's intentions is him saying it (even Kane saying it), at no point was it ever coached/trained at Hotspur Way, all the comments out of the camp are that the training was hours spent on shape without the ball, practising defending throw-ins etc...
The only attacking instructions was get it to Kane or Son. Our counter-attacks were irregular, players not intelligently pulling defenders away etc, it was all off the cuff stuff., not rehearsed and one that the oppo figured out by Christmas on how to defend against it.
So saying that he didn't want to sit deep is no different to you or I going into a dressing room pre-match and say "right lads press them high", "don't sit back" it's pointless if it hasn't been coached.
And Southgate has a history of coaching great attcking football?
Because of our defense, two goals was always likely to be enough against Italy to win the game. When we scored and we were well on top in the first 20 we really should have been looking to get that second. To play the way we did in the second half with just a slender one goal lead was insanity. I'm sure Southgate didn't tell them to sit back so much though, so the players have to take some responsibility too. It's almost like they were just going through the motions and waiting for our subs to come on and make an impact, and ultimately finish the game for us. But Saka did nothing of note, Mount went missing but stayed on the pitch for about 40 minute too long and Sancho didn't get on until about a minute left of extra time. Thought Henderson was poor too when he came on after doing well in all of his other cameos.
Just a really crap evening when it was all there on a plate for us, waiting to be gobbled up.
I would go with this team myself going forward with everyone fit and available -
Pickford
Alexander-Arnold
Stones
Maguire
Shaw
Rice
Bellingham
Foden
Sancho
Sterling
Kane
Nothing against Phillips, who did well overall and better than I expected. But there's lots more athleticism and technical ability in that midfield than playing Rice, Phillips and Mount there. Might be tempted to go with Saka over Sterling depending on form.
That side might not be as strong defensively but it should certainly create more chances than the current England side generally does.
Pickford
Alexander-Arnold
Stones
Maguire
Shaw
Rice
Bellingham
Foden
Sancho
Sterling
Kane
Nothing against Phillips, who did well overall and better than I expected. But there's lots more athleticism and technical ability in that midfield than playing Rice, Phillips and Mount there. Might be tempted to go with Saka over Sterling depending on form.
That side might not be as strong defensively but it should certainly create more chances than the current England side generally does.
No, he absolutely hasn't. I even said this in my previous post.
I voted yes, as I think there's no point rocking the boat, at this time, with the WC only 16 months away, and he and the team have gained good experience of going deep into a knockout tournament. But not sure he is ruthless enough to take the final step into bagging a trophy.
