I think my view of Southgate's management of the team is summed up by the fact that I would be very disappointed if he were appointed Tottenham manager.
He was also a mathematician who produced one of the most devastating pieces of maths of the 20th century
I agree. Which isn’t to say I think he’s straight up a bad manager. International management and club management are very different. Southgate does very well motivating and uniting the players and simplifying tactical concepts to set them up depending on the opposition. He does this well in a limited time with the players - aside from at tournaments he doesn’t have much time with them in camp to drill tactical concepts in any depth. Club management is very different - he would have to be more proactive and develop a style and deal with far more aspects of management than he does for England - more consistent contact with players, trickier schedules, transfers etc. It’s ultimately very hard to implement a club-style way of playing at international level because of time limitations - the exceptions being teams like Spain’s peak side, where so many of the side played club football together and/or in a certain style already. It’s one of the reasons I’m not certain Klopp, Pep or Poch would be certain to be elite international managers.
[Re: Saka] Well after coming on he ran right past Chiellini who had to get a yellow to stop him, which is something Sterling failed to do in 120 minutes. Did we generally do enough to test their older centre backs?
Don't disagree with your points at all. Sterling flattered to deceive on the night. And the lad was also targeted and fouled. But he also was caught out of position several times, lost possession too often and made some bad calls. Very different to the Saka of previous games. As I said, not a criticism of a fine young player at all, my issue is with the managers decision.
The tactic of Kane dropping deep in the first half seemed to be to draw one of the centre backs out (Bonucci probably) which might have left space. But with only Sterling to run in behind and nobody to play the passes needed, it didn’t seem to happen that way. We got more joy from the full backs getting forward in wide areas before Italy settled down. I would have liked to have seen Sancho and Rashford on before the last few seconds. With Italy dominating possession, there may have been opportunities later on to play some long balls and have the speed merchants attack those old centre backs on the counterattack.
It’s hard to know whether England sitting off and allowing Italy so much possession for so long was the players losing their nerve or a conscious tactical decision from Southgate. The fact he took so long to change it implies the latter IMO though of course that’s speculation. Though the continued selection of Mount (who looks a player for Chelsea but has never quite convinced me in an England shirt) is an issue for me, I think the main issue was mental and tactical, not the selection per se. England with Mount in the side proved at the start of the game that they could play on the front foot and create chances. It was clear from the first 10 minutes of the second half that they would continue to be passive unless a change was made and that change took too long.
Mount is a tidy little player but I don’t see anything exceptional about his game. There must be something because he plays for Chelsea and England but I just don’t really get it.
I think that it's something similar to the situation that we've got at Spurs. No playmaker in central midfield, so those further ahead look poor.
I think Italy were initially caught cold by the early goal but gradually got their passing game together and started giving England the run-around.
Maybe. I think it was more a lack of desire to hold onto the ball for a bit and kill the game. Italy are decent pressers but not to the extent where we wouldn’t be able to live with it. Ultimately it wasn’t good game management from players or the manager. This is true but I think England played their part in letting them back in by being passive and allowing possession. Those situations we need to dictate the play a bit more but the team looked happier to sit in and defend, which to be fair was working fine until Italy got very lucky at a set piece.
It’s worth remembering that England drew the final of the Euros but lost in the lottery of the penalty shootout. Had we won it, every player and every decision by the manager would be lauded. Instead there are recriminations by and large. That’s the reality. Hindsight viewed through the lens of defeat rather than victory.
I think that the nature of the performance is going to attract criticism, though. Win playing negatively and you may get away with it. Lose and you'll get additional stick. If you select a team with five at the back and two holding midfielders, then you're going to give up the ball. Failing to threaten on the break much means that you're basically creating nothing. I don't think that anyone needed hindsight for that.
Presumably he wrote it and it was photographed and sent via twitter....or they subcontracted the postage to the tooth fairy
Spot on , it was just like watching a Jose era game, early goal ,sit back and hope to catch them on the break , get deeper and deeper in defence until they equalised, hang on by the skin of our teeth and in the last couple of minutes sub on a player or two with the faint hope of grabbing a winner Saka subbed on too late and when he did get a chance Chiellini nearly choked him , we needed players doing this much earlier in the second half
