Phil Foden

In 90 minutes, Venables managed two competitive victories with England. Both at Wembley. One was against Scotland. He never managed any in a knock out.

On England career only, Venables’ record doesn’t hold a candle to Southgate’s. Neither does Robson’s tbh.

And he had Shearer, Gascoigne, Seaman, Adams, Beardsley, Pearce, Sheringham, Ince and McManaman at his disposal.
To be fair and for context Venables only managed 5 competitive games didn’t he?

Unless I’m missing a qualifying tournament his record in competitive games is Played 5, won 2, drew 3, including the 4-1 drubbing of Holland.

So technically Venables never lost a competitive game as a manger in 90 minutes
 
To be fair and for context Venables only managed 5 competitive games didn’t he?

Unless I’m missing a qualifying tournament his record in competitive games is Played 5, won 2, drew 3, including the 4-1 drubbing of Holland.

So technically Venables never lost a competitive game as a manger in 90 minutes
true but he also only had a 40% win rate. It was a talented Netherlands we drubbed, and a talented Spain we squeezed out on pens and a fairly talented German team too. But Scotland were poo and Switzerland were organized but fairly lightweight bar chapuisat who didn't even start. such a small set of data for truly analysing Venables tenure, zero away games, had a very good squad with some real world class players, but still failed to win.
 
true but he also only had a 40% win rate. It was a talented Netherlands we drubbed, and a talented Spain we squeezed out on pens and a fairly talented German team too. But Scotland were poo and Switzerland were organized but fairly lightweight bar chapuisat who didn't even start. such a small set of data for truly analysing Venables tenure, zero away games, had a very good squad with some real world class players, but still failed to win.

I'm not sure how good the Spanish were at that time; they were perennial underachievers until 2008. But they should have beaten us that day; they had at least 1 legitimate goal wrongly ruled out. If I remember rightly, the second was too tight to really call.

TV's reputation hangs on the sensational performance vs Holland and a heroic failure vs Germany.
 
To be fair and for context Venables only managed 5 competitive games didn’t he?

Unless I’m missing a qualifying tournament his record in competitive games is Played 5, won 2, drew 3, including the 4-1 drubbing of Holland.

So technically Venables never lost a competitive game as a manger in 90 minutes
Yep, all correct.

But the main point I was making wasn't that Tel was crap, it was that he didn't manage enough competitive games to even be compared to Southgate. Ok, had we won Euro 96 we'd be talking about him as one of the best, but as it turned out we actually played 'well' under him twice (Germany and Netherlands, winning one) and managed to get a result in the other (Scotland, where we played crap, and they missed a penalty because of some freak ball movement). We were also crap against Spain and Switzerland, lucky to have 2 offside decisions go in our favour and then beat Spain on penalties.

I loved what Tel did at Boro and he clearly had a great career as a manager, including Euro 96 to some degree, but the idea that he is some kind of legendary manager for England is, in my view, revisionist nonsense. In truth, we should have won that tournament every bit as much as we could/should have won Russia 2018 or Euro 2020.

Statistically speaking, Boro's greatest manager ever is Craig Liddle, by one metric.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how good the Spanish were at that time; they were perennial underachievers until 2008. But they should have beaten us that day; they had at least 1 legitimate goal wrongly ruled out. If I remember rightly, the second was too tight to really call.

TV's reputation hangs on the sensational performance vs Holland and a heroic failure vs Germany.
Let’s not forget we’d not qualified for the previous World Cup so weren’t exactly coming from a good place (oh and had finished bottom of our group in the previous Euros).
 
Let’s not forget we’d not qualified for the previous World Cup so weren’t exactly coming from a good place (oh and had finished bottom of our group in the previous Euros).
Taylor had a good squad available, and chose to ignore lots of them. He did a terrible job as England manager. Despite being a nice guy who was 'doing his best'. And had that also been a 32 team tournament England would have surely qualified.

Hodgson had us out at the group stage of 2014 (of a 32 team tournament), and couldn't get past Iceland in the last 16 of Euro 2016 (a 24 team tournament). Southgate was inheriting just as much of a mess as Tel did.

Just my opinion of course, we don't all have to see it the same way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: B_G
Let’s not forget we’d not qualified for the previous World Cup so weren’t exactly coming from a good place (oh and had finished bottom of our group in the previous Euros).

Agreed. I don't want to come across as negative about TV: he did well, and I believe every tournament winner gets there due to a little luck.

However, I do think his era benefits from some rose tinted nostalgia.

GS took on a fairly poisonous job too.
 
Southgate has done well to take us from where we were to where we are now.

We are now (in my opinion) at worse the 2nd best team in Europe and my worry is Southgate is either too stubborn or too naive to deviate away from his plan and seems to have an over reliance on his core players.
 
Southgate has done well to take us from where we were to where we are now.

We are now (in my opinion) at worse the 2nd best team in Europe and my worry is Southgate is either too stubborn or too naive to deviate away from his plan and seems to have an over reliance on his core players.
I think if he doesn't name Kane, Bellingham, Foden, Saka and Rice in his starting XI in June we may have cause for concern. But if he does, he's only doing what any other manager would/should be doing.
 
I think if he doesn't name Kane, Bellingham, Foden, Saka and Rice in his starting XI in June we may have cause for concern. But if he does, he's only doing what any other manager would/should be doing.
Definitely, but the conundrum will be who he plays alongside Rice (as he definitely will go with a two).

Philips has had a tough start at West Ham (early days I know) and Hendersons best days are behind him and I think that it is that decision that will be the one put under scrutiny.
 
Hopefully he'll give some minutes to Colwill and Branthwaite leading up to the Euros. Seems Guehl is injured atm. One of those three should really partner Stones in central defence, but I'm sure he will probably start with Maguire. Might be Walkers last big tournament, so either Trent or James should have that position going forwards. Big problem will be what to do when Kane eventually calls it a day/isn't as effective.
Wonder whether Grealish will find any form in the second half of the season. Likewise Rashford. Sterling or Mount probably longshots now, especially Mount whose form over the last couple of years seems to have fallen off a cliff.
Hopefully Shaw and Chilwell will stay fit for the rest of the season.
Haven't seen enough of Mainoo, but if he has a strong second half to the season, no reason why he shouldn't get picked ahead of Phillips or Henderson.
No reason for us not to go to the Euros as favourites, which I think we are, along with France. Surely it is our time now...
 
Last edited:
Definitely, but the conundrum will be who he plays alongside Rice (as he definitely will go with a two).

Philips has had a tough start at West Ham (early days I know) and Hendersons best days are behind him and I think that it is that decision that will be the one put under scrutiny.
True, but in fairness it isn't a no brainer. If he does go with Henderson, as much as its not the one I'd choose, I'd at least wait to see how it turned out before lambasting him for it.
 
You see it's this type of extreme black and white thinking that grips my chocolate log. If you don't win a trophy then you are a zero, a failure. By that rationale Jack Charlton was a failed manager he never won a world cup or euros with ireland never won the league or an FA or League cup as a manager. Ergo he's an utter failure. It's just nonsense.

England do not have a history of winning trophies or even making finals. Teaching one is, by definition one of our greatest acheivements, even if we lost it. Just like Boro reaching a UEFA Cup final.

People need to realise that this entitlement that we win trophies is a false narrative. We have very rarely been serious challengers for cups, despite having many talented squads. We are right now, it isn't just about having the right players because we had that 15 years ago and failed. It's having the right technical players, the right tactical plan, the right characters in the squad, the right culture around the group. We have all that in place now, and it just needs to be nurtured over the line. For the first time in my life, I feel we actually have the base of a group that could win this summer. It'll take some luck with refs not allowing the bad tackles we got against france, it'll take our CF not missing a key penalty, it'll need our only real CF to stay fit, and a LB to get fit. But there is a real chance with this group, this leader, and this philosophy.
Of we go again.
Are you seriously putting on a par Southgate with Jack Charlton.
That's even worse than comparing him to Venebles and Bobby Robson.
 
Of we go again.
Are you seriously putting on a par Southgate with Jack Charlton.
That's even worse than comparing him to Venebles and Bobby Robson.
Im saying that if you are going to apply the logic that if you fail to win a trophy, then you are a failure, if you are going to be black and white like that, then you have to apply that logic evenly which means by the same logic Jack Charlton is also a failure both at club and international level.

It's not about comparing the two, but you're smart enough to know that already, surely? it's about showing how utterly rediculous the logic is that is applied to attack Southgate.

I shouldn't have to point this out of course, but people's perspective on southgate is so utterly skewed by the media witch hunt that sometimes it needs to be pointed out. familiarity breeds contempt, especially with England managers, I can't remember an england manager that hasn't had contempt, the biggest issue for Southgate is that it's happened in the digital age, where all objectiveness is lost to subjective ad hominem attacks based on clicks and popularity rather than logic, reality, facts, nuance and fairness. It'll happen to the next manager, but it's more than likely they won't be as successful as southgate.

Southgates biggest success has actually been with the soft skills side of the game, the psychology, mentoring young men to be professional and dedicated, building a team spirit, and pride. People think that kind of thing is easy, should be a given, but it really isn't and has often been Englands biggest failure. When he goes, it will be really, really difficult to get continuity of that, we'll probably revert to bitter factions, jealousy amongst players, individuals not teams, players that are disruptive being allowed back in and upsetting the apple cart, a blame culture and players reverting within their shells when it gets tough.
 
Last edited:
Southgates biggest success has actually been with the soft skills side of the game, the psychology, mentoring young men to be professional and dedicated, building a team spirit, and pride. People think that kind of thing is easy, should be a given, but it really isn't and has often been Englands biggest failure. When he goes, it will be really, really difficult to get continuity of that, we'll probably revert to bitter factions, jealousy amongst players, individuals not teams, players that are disruptive being allowed back in and upsetting the apple cart, a blame culture and players reverting within their shells when it gets tough.
Agree with your last para.
 
Back
Top