England v Hungary 7:45pm

[viv_andersons_nana]

Sure, but do you think the players would like it if no one turned up? (You're basically saying "More fool you (me) for paying good money to go and see unimportant games".

Added to which, the FA aren't daft. You have to go to these more minor games, to build up the points to be able to get ESC tickets for the important matches, and tournaments (Euros, WC).

If people are therefore being expected to make the effort to turn up and shell out, (which they are), then the very least you expect to see is decent application on the pitch. The fact is that the team (players) that were picked last night should have been more than good enough to turn Hungary over.

It's no wonder they got booed. The booing was largely at the end. Not really 'pantomime', more likely fans who feel like expressing that what they've been served up is far from good enough.

This is partly what I mean when I say entitlement though. The FA and most other clubs in the top divisions do 'expect' people to turn up and they almost always do. Last night's performance was lethargic, laboured, way off where we've been for the vast majority of Southgate's time as manager. There were individuals well below their best; Stones and Phillips in particular. You could probably name about 8, even Bellingham. Bowen has been brilliant for West Ham but was way off it last night. People have been clamouring for Bowen, Guehi, Bellingham et al to get their chance, don't forget.

At least this manager will give them an opportunity, widening the pool of players and increasing competition along the way. We haven't that sort of thinking in decades, certainly not in my life time. Sven cast his net far and wide in his first year or so but then you could name the squad, not just the team but the squad, off by heart for years after that.

Sorry for the digression.

England's biggest issue, in my opinion, is the lack of top-class central midfielders. There's only Henderson playing at the elite level. Declan Rice is a fantastic midfielder and will play Champions League football and win loads of medals(IMO), but he's not at one of the top clubs in the game. And even if he was, when it comes to the business end of tournaments and we're trying to come out on the right side of a tight game against one of the world's best teams, he can't run a midfield on his own. That's why Southgate sets us up in the way that he does. We're a well-structured team, in a well-drilled shape and system, it's very hard to break us down, at least one of the midfielders will shield while a player like Maguire steps out and/or one of the wing-backs pushes on. But that solid set-up is designed to give the talented boys up top a chance of winning it, of only needing to make a small number of chances to get the goal that wins the game, or at least changes it in our favour and brings the opposition out so we can get in behind with the pace and skill we have in attacking areas.

We're rigid because we don't have an elite-level central-midfield that dictates the tempo, like other nations do. I think Southgate has accounted for that incredibly well and crafted a really effective football team from a group of really hungry and talented young players. The system is designed to account for the gaps in the playing pool. He will be planning to play like this in the next tournament, to sit in and conserve energy in possession and try to tire the opposition. To not give anything away and to allow Sterling, Kane, Saka or whoever to pinch the goal. This is what good TEAMS do when they can't just waltz their way to 3 and 4-0 wins every week, like the top teams around Europe do. Why would Southgate scrap everything he's been working on just for a Nations League game against Hungary? He experimented with selection and a little variation on formation, it didn't work, but we move on. We don't rip it up or decide to attack, attack, attack, because it won't work. It never does.

When Southgate got the job we were flying around in games and conceding too many goals. He changed it and got the balance right. That's what we need going into tournaments IMO. Not lofty ideas of Ajax-esque total football or gegenpressing until our feet are bleeding. We need cool, measured football, like we had last summer. If we can replicate that sort of play in Qatar we might just win it this time.

Apologies for the ramble.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

Some comments have been to kind on last night's performance. It was a friendly, it was a minor competition, they were tired, injuries and Southgate's own response on the performance - that they were a "young side".

The goodwill earned by a great WC run in 2018 (albeit fortuitous with the draw) and the Euro 2021 campaign has now gone and there can be no excuses for that lacklustre effort last night.

What fortuitous draw though? This is the sort of entitlement I was alluding to earlier. People just somehow expect England to win their games and when they don't win them the world has ended. Look at our record in tournaments prior to Southgate taking over. I bet Southgate has got more wins in knockout games under his belt than Robson, Hodgson, Hoddle, Keegan, Taylor, Eriksson and Capello combined. He's only behind Sir Alf in the record books isn't he? In terms of results and how far we've gone into tournaments.

People say we 'should' be winning these games, against Hungary and Sweden and Denmark and USA and even Croatia and you just think... but why 'should' we? We'd struggled to win those sorts of games for the 30 years I've been watching England, prior to this manager being appointed, so maybe the players just aren't as good as some of us think they are or were. The difference under Southgate is that we DO win these types of games, which has seen us progress to a semi-final and a final. I just can't see why there's so much anger and frustration and hostility after four Nations League matches. People seem to be treating it like we've gone out of a World Cup.

Teams such as Hungary are very well coached and well drilled. Look at their improvement over the past few years. They've caused a few upsets and are no pushovers. An experimental England side were labouring for 60-70mins and in the event of pushing on for an equaliser, conceded again. Hungary then picked us off twice as the team wilted. Well to my mind I can forgive that. If they'd wilted in a tournament like they did last night then that's a different matter but the context is important in this instance.

We experimented, it didn't work, we lost a couple of games to Hungary and drew with Germany and Italy. Is it really THAT bad that the manager should be being asked questions about his job? I just can't get my head around it TBH.