Euro 2020 (21)

[sussexpob]

This is coming up all England this game. Ive lost count of players who have gone of injured, both teams are falling apart.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Extra time in their legs too.

[sussexpob]

Extra time in their legs too.

Looks like its Ukraine then. Been a brutal extra time, Ukraine get the chance. Could have gone either way tonight, but the red card probably sealed it.

[bigfluffylemon]

Just saw the replays of the Muller miss. That was a shocker. Guess it goes to show you don't just need to play well to beat a good team, you need a bit of luck too. Feels as though England have had a fair bit of bad luck in their tournament history, especially against Germany, (although that may just be selective memory at work), so nice for it to go our way. The luck definitely went our way in '66, not so much in '90, '96 and '10.

Wonder if not playing at home will have an effect in the next round? If England win, they really ought to win a home semi v Czech Republic or Denmark. But how often do we lose games that we 'ought' to win? And having said that, if you believe the FIFA rankings, Denmark are a stronger team than Germany...

[Durhamfootman]

I'm going to take full credit for that.

If I hadn't gone down to the allotment and watched it live instead, Muller would have scored his goal and Harry Kane's would have been ruled 1mm offside

Good result that, but my missus gave me the impression that England had given Germany a good spanking, so I was a bit disappointed that it was only the two

still.... first time that England have scored 2 in the same game, so...... progress!

Everyone seemed to think that the eventual winner was likely to come from group F, but they've all gone home now

I had to watch the Sweden game with the sound off, because I didn't trust the commentators not to mention the England score. Poor game that one.... didn't flow at all. Stop start, stop start. The half hour extra time took 40 mins because of all the fouling/diving/injuries. Good goal to win it though

[bigfluffylemon]

Everyone seemed to think that the eventual winner was likely to come from group F, but they've all gone home now

Indeed, so much for the 'group of death'.

Can't say I'm sorry to see them all go home. Means the usual suspects are nearly all out so the trophy is likely to go to a new home, which is nice. To be honest, if England can't win, I'd quite like to see Belgium do justice to their golden generation, but I wouldn't mind any of the remaining teams winning other than Italy (just because they have already won lots of stuff), and maybe Ukraine (never liked their team very much). So it'll probably be Italy now.

[alfie]

Everyone seemed to think that the eventual winner was likely to come from group F, but they've all gone home now

Indeed, so much for the 'group of death'.

Can't say I'm sorry to see them all go home. Means the usual suspects are nearly all out so the trophy is likely to go to a new home, which is nice. To be honest, if England can't win, I'd quite like to see Belgium do justice to their golden generation, but I wouldn't mind any of the remaining teams winning other than Italy (just because they have already won lots of stuff), and maybe Ukraine (never liked their team very much). So it'll probably be Italy now.

Group of Death actually very appropriately named : all of them killed at the next opportunity

Happy with that England win. Not spectacular ; but pretty well controlled for the most part (sure Germany had a couple of good chances : but most decent teams will have a couple of shots which should score/were well saved by the keeper , during any match). Grealish coming on - dare I say at exactly the right time ? - gave England the cutting edge they needed to get the job done in that last twenty minutes. Pickford was immense in goal, Sterling keeps scoring ; and Kane at last got on the board : hope he can go on from there as he still doesn't look quite right.

Mixed feelings about Ukraine next up. On the one hand it really ought to be a relatively easy opponent . But then there is the danger of thinking : "well we've slain our usual nemesis , this will be a piece of cake" - and end up tripping on a banana skin... Ukraine too must be overjoyed at exceeding expectations and really as underdogs have nothing to lose so will surely have a red hot go. I do think England will win but am not taking it for granted.

Will readily admit I do not have the depth of knowledge of the game that some on here possess. But , if I may : I do think that Southgate knows what he is doing. Can understand criticism that he is too defence minded and doesn't seem to make the bold substitutions that other managers will to change games that have "gone to sleep". Everyone loves a gamble that comes off. But his more (pragmatic ?) approach has , by and large , worked quite well for England lately and I'd suggest this game was an illustration of a change of formation actually serving a purpose. Doesn't mean it will be the template for Sunday : I expect more "horses for courses" selections...hopefully the right ones.

Of course , the likes of Belgium , Spain and Italy all have as much right as an England team with a poor past record in knock out matches to be thought favourites now. But let us not look that far ahead , nor bask too long in the latest success : the match in Rome is now the one that counts. Looking forward to it

[Durhamfootman]

I think i've said it before, but Southgate brings a lot of good qualities to the role, it's just that tactical nous isn't one of them. Give him an assistant with a tactical brain and I'll be happy. Maybe Graham Jones is that man I don't know anything about him

anyway..... seeing England still in while France, Portgual, Germany and Holland crash out is definitely something to be celebrated

My gut is telling me that Denmark will make the final, so hopefully that will help England

[sussexpob]

Maybe Graham Jones is that man I don't know anything about him

He just joined Newcastle as Bruce's number two. He got the England role by satisfying the FAs main requirement; he relegated the only club he ever managed after one year, and then stopped managing. Maybe he's there to boost Southgate's morale on that regard so Southgate remains slightly more qualified.

Being serious though, he was Belgium number 2 for Martinez for a while and seemingly highly regarded as a number 2 coach.

[sussexpob]

Group of Death actually very appropriately named : all of them killed at the next opportunity

Makes you wonder if that group took too much out of all of them. When each team has to go to Budapest when its 36 degrees and play Hungary as the apparent "easy" game of the group, you know its bad times. As stated previous, I think this was the hardest situation in tournament football history to get out of... must be some link between that and what's happened.

Will readily admit I do not have the depth of knowledge of the game that some on here possess. But , if I may : I do think that Southgate knows what he is doing. Can understand criticism that he is too defence minded and doesn't seem to make the bold substitutions that other managers will to change games that have "gone to sleep". Everyone loves a gamble that comes off. But his more (pragmatic ?) approach has , by and large , worked quite well for England lately and I'd suggest this game was an illustration of a change of formation actually serving a purpose.

I think people get slightly carried away by looking at results, when its the process that really matters when rating if the results are repeatable. Yesterday, Havertz should have scored in the 47th min, and Mueller missed a total sitter. England had three chances of any note, and put away two. On another day the coin flip lands the other way, Kane misses the sitter instead of Mueller after the other chances hit the net and England lose.

England were the better team, but Southgate essentially asked his two wide men to produce magic and they wasted a lot of the ball England recycled from Germany by not having support. Time and time again Sterling and Saka, who did an honorable job, just had no out ball. So yeah, we dominated the ball for large parts, but it was for nothing. When Shaw finally broke the system by getting out his own area, England scored.

You see tactical confusion in everything Southgate does. He spoke midweek about the set piece being important for England, picked a right wing back noted for his set piece delivery in support of that idea, then the first three free-kicks England have Trippier watches as Shaw beaches the cross into the first defender. If you are leaving out 2 superior players just for Trippier to be there in those moments, why isnt he taking the free kick from 30 yards out and a perfect angle to whip it in? It took a few crap set pieces before Trippier finally got handed the ball....

His 3-4-3 goes against all tactical convention. You get the feeling its a current popular tactic in vogue, but Southgate doesnt understand it. It requires the full back to get up a lot, and the second CM needs to all so be aggressive and support his winger. England do neither of these things - Shaw and Trippier hardly got forward looking at their pitch maps (ironically the only time Shaw gets an overlap England score) and England's central midfield did nothing in the final third.

Compare it to Tuchel's CL final winning tactic of the same type. Jorginho in the "regista" role who is there as fire support. Kante as the box to box midfielder. Zero anchors, let alone two. When the forward transition occurs, these two are in the final third, and Chilwell and James pile forward... thats how you play it. That's how its always been played. Southgate pretty much compromises his defence to play a system that he doesnt exploit the attacking benefit from.

And thats my main problem. The idea that having 7 defenders means you are solid defensively. 3 or 4 times Germany countered us with space when we hadnt committed men forward. Mueller's chance is the biggest example, but even minutes in when Kimmich made Rice look like a statute and Rice ends up having to foul him a metre from the box .... its totally passive, and passive means people can get in behind you. The Mueller chance occurs because Maguire is the liberio, and like all Liberio's he needs to get out of defence occasionally to create other angles of attack - but while he's doing that a lot, Rice nor Phillips drop in behind to cover him, they stay static in their midfield and allow Maguire to pass them, leaving space in behind. One of them has to adopt the CB role and drop as Maguire goes forward - the funny thing is, when England dont have the ball Rice does that. When the do have the ball Rice stays in midfield. Its a huge defensive tactical oversight and should have cost England a goal last night.

Its a very vulnerable system. I said before this tournament, England are Europe's favourites to win and they have the most talent in ages - lets not confuse them beating Germany for any other reason than them being better objectively; this is German team in decline, playing away in England v England's best team in my lifetime.

England's quality is so good, they can win despite Southgate's inept tactical vision.... not because of it.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Some of that could easily be a lack of alertness and discipline by the player, undermining the system rather than a fault of the system. That's often been a flaw with England.

[sussexpob]

Some of that could easily be a lack of alertness and discipline by the player, undermining the system rather than a fault of the system. That's often been a flaw with England.

Players make mistakes, that would be stupid to deny, but a well drilled defensive system inside which every player knows their responsibilities is the easiest tactical success for a team to achieve and requires the least technical skill in players; hence why so many inferior teams can achieve a lot by simply being disciplined in defense and frustrating superior teams who dominate the ball, which is the go to tactic when an inferior side plays as the underdog. Managers like Sam Allardyce have made careers out of being parachuted into rubbish teams and within a week he's got them drilled to the point of being tough to break down.

Discipline in players is pretty proportional to what role a manager assigns to them. Take England for example; with two defensive midfielders, which has the responsibility to press the ball, and which has the responsibility to drop back? Its not really clear. Phillips seems naturally more inclined to move forward, Rice more inclined to drop. But when Sterling loses the ball yesterday, its Phillips much further back behind the ball, and Rice who has pushed forward. If its Rice's job to drop into CB, why is that the case? Phillips ends in such a nothing position because (A) he thinks the numerical advantage England has gives cover and (b) because Rice is being relied on to drop most of the time.... he may as well have been in the stands when Sterling loses the ball. He's neither presenting an option to receive a pass, nor covering any space for a counter.

Its easy to say Phillips lost discipline, but what do you expect? He's being asked to basically playing as an attacking midfielder at the same time as center back. Rice is a CB with no attacking instinct, and takes up the most useless of positions on the right side where Trippier is already standing, and just gets swallowed up by a one of the spare markers, leaving a whole third of the pitch empty in the centre and Sterling with no option under pressure for an easy ball that hes craving for. Germany had 8 men behind the ball, one pressing Sterling, and two up the field.

When Sterling loses the ball, Maguire is doing what he should. He's seen the space in the centre and is creeping up to offer Sterling an outlet but is too late, and ends up out the picture. Stones is in a decent position because he's got the option of pressing either German outlet, but when the ball comes to Havertz he has zero support. He is given the impossible choice of pressing Havertz or dropping to Mueller and allowing Havertz to run all the way to the box unhindered; he does the right thing of pressing the initial pass and Havertz doesnt miss the easy through ball.

Walker has gone walk about, in the perfect slot for the right back. Is he lacking discipline? Well you could say that; you could also say he's played right back for a decade and hardly ever played CB in his life, so faulting him for playing his natural game and not being positionally aware is stupid. Trippier and Shaw have both joined the attack, like they should when England have the ball in the final third.

Everyone is doing what they think they should be doing, its just not clear in an alien system what that is. And that is the manager and his vision - he has to be saying to his central midfielders either two things (a) when one goes, the other drops. No questions. (b) one always goes, one always drops, which is preferable. Each midfielder is then not faced with having to read the game on an impossibly detailed level, and knows his specific responsibility. You get discipline that way - not by asking a player to do everything and fault him when he doesnt.

In that instance Phillips for example had to be aware of .... (a) where Maguire was as the libero with licence to push up, and cover him if he went forward (b) know where rice is and cover his duty (c) simultaneously cover a third of the pitch directly in front on him (d) know where his full backs are and whether he needs to cover that (e) know that Walker has wandered out of position. He cant do that, its impossible. And in this situation you can forgive him for thinking three CBs are behind him, and that they should have the situation in hand.

England end in a 4 v 2 situation where they should conceded a goal despite ample men to cover the attack. This is has been constant under Southgate - he seems to believe that defensive numbers mean solid defence, without really understanding that without defining what each is doing, they become totally passive. And this is a formation with a lot of moving parts, it requires that definition and strict role assignment.

You could say thats hard - Tuchel turned 9th place Chelsea into CL winners overnight with the same formation, giving every player rigid roles. Defensively Chelsea looked the best team in the world at the end of last season. With top quality players given top quality guidance, this isnt hard to achieve.

[Durhamfootman]

Maybe Graham Jones is that man I don't know anything about him

He just joined Newcastle as Bruce's number two.

Ah... it's that Graham Jones. I haven't paid much attention to Newcastle Utd related things recently.

[Durhamfootman]

I thought Maguire was excellent last night, despite also having to do the role that Rice should be doing. No apparent problems with his fitness. I thought Walker did pretty well too. I've criticised him a few times in the past when playing as a 3rd CB, but he did seem pretty disciplined to me. Marshalled the ball out of play well, made a couple of vital interceptions and didn't panic in chesting the ball back to Pickford in a pressure situation. Agree completely about the wing backs.... but that may also be down to a bit of confusion, because Walker's usual role as RB is to get forward quickly and he had to stay disciplined last night, but did Trippier realise that? Similarly Maguire kept pushing up which perhaps led to Shaw holding back in case he had to cover... Rice wasn't going to do it. The commentators kept calling for the wing backs to get further up the field to support Sako and the excellent (again) Sterling.

I've been pretty happy with Phillips in this tournament. I don't think he was ever in the running to be in the starting XI other than as cover for Henderson, but he took his opportunity in the first game and Southgate has recognised that and kept him in.

Good to see Kane get his goal, hopefully that will spark something.

I'd be tempted to start Sancho against Ukraine. He must be champing at the bit to get on the field and I think he could be a real handful if let loose. Foden's yellow has expired now, so SG will probably gravitate back towards his pre-tournament first XI

[Durhamfootman]

Seemingly the EU are going to begin legal proceedings against UEFA, for failing to provide enough goals for EU nations. Apparently goals are not like going to the butchers to buy sausages where a few countries can hog them all, they are like buying orange juice where everyone has the right to have as many goals as they ordered before the tournament started.

The EU commissioner Eric von der Cartman (respect ma authoritah) is, apparently, particularly galled by the fact that no goals have come out of Wembley for EU nations and thinks that England's holding onto all the goals is a flagrant breach of footballing protocols and international law

She has heard a rumour that a stadium in Italy has some goals stashed away for despatch on Saturday and she is going to send the regulators over to make sure that none of these goals have been set aside for England's benefit

Coreper, the unelected and appointed 'council of ambassadors', who are now the decision makers for everything, have instructed Angela Merkel to raise this matter at Chequers on Friday and to advise the British PM that continued failure to allow any goals to other teams is unacceptable and will lead to sustained and immediate reprisals

we have been warned