Interesting debate to be had about who is the best Manson. Is it Shirley or Charles or Marilyn or or possibly the band Mansun? Have I left any out? Charles was a bit of a wrong un' but he did write some catchy tunes and Marilyn is clearly an **** too. But I never really liked Garbage's music so I'd probably go for Mansun the band myself, even though I don't really like them that much either.
Garbage
- Thread starter Scubahood
- Start date
Boro_Legend
Well-known member
Southgare going down hill.
Uwefuchs
Well-known member
Spot on, far too much respect was given to an average Scotland team.We could have risked losing the game?
We were playing the 3rd lowest ranked team in the competition, yes I get that it's Scotland they will always play better and try harder against us, but for crying out loud they are Scotland.
If we had removed a defensive midfielder for Grealish and kept Foden on the pitch we do not lose that game, we might still draw granted, but the probability is we would have won it.
Other nations have to play teams that will raise their game against them and yet the good teams always find a way to win, we always find an excuse when we don't.
To start with two defensive midfielders against Scotland is laughable, to finish the game with two defensive midfielders because we didn't want to lose is criminal. No doubt Henderson will come in for either Rice or Phillips on Tuesday and that wil be the big change.
When we are playing France or Spain I have no issue with the two holding midfielders, but against Scotland for crying out loud, it's Scotland the third lowest ranked team in the competition!!!
Rant over
atypical_boro
Well-known member
Well my point is just that a draw wasn’t actually such a terrible result. It’s purely because the opposition isn’t so great that we are “concerned” about it. There’s still every chance we’ll win the group (assuming we even want to).We could have risked losing the game?
We were playing the 3rd lowest ranked team in the competition, yes I get that it's Scotland they will always play better and try harder against us, but for crying out loud they are Scotland.
If we had removed a defensive midfielder for Grealish and kept Foden on the pitch we do not lose that game, we might still draw granted, but the probability is we would have won it.
Other nations have to play teams that will raise their game against them and yet the good teams always find a way to win, we always find an excuse when we don't.
To start with two defensive midfielders against Scotland is laughable, to finish the game with two defensive midfielders because we didn't want to lose is criminal. No doubt Henderson will come in for either Rice or Phillips on Tuesday and that wil be the big change.
When we are playing France or Spain I have no issue with the two holding midfielders, but against Scotland for crying out loud, it's Scotland the third lowest ranked team in the competition!!!
Rant over
boroboy6872
Well-known member
In my opinion the mindset of the coach and players was made by the result of the earlier game in the group.
Try to win but don`t lose and that rhetoric was repeated after the game on more than one occasion.
We can be over critical of course as the only thing that matters is getting out of the group, but unless we step up our game against the Czechs then we enter the knockout stages on the starting blocks, whilst other teams are already up and running
2 teams last night with very different aims in this competition.
England looking to win the competition
Scotland looking to get out of the group.
Looked to me like it was the other way round
Try to win but don`t lose and that rhetoric was repeated after the game on more than one occasion.
We can be over critical of course as the only thing that matters is getting out of the group, but unless we step up our game against the Czechs then we enter the knockout stages on the starting blocks, whilst other teams are already up and running
2 teams last night with very different aims in this competition.
England looking to win the competition
Scotland looking to get out of the group.
Looked to me like it was the other way round
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
The ball just needed moving quicker, to create gaps. It was too pedestrian from England
Pak_Doo_Ik
Well-known member
The trouble is this will be said after every game as Southgate does nit have ythe mindset to change his tactics.
the_holgate_roof
Well-known member
You do realise we are trying to engineer this so we finish second, so we avoid France, Portugal or Germany in the knock out stage?
TeaCider
Well-known member
Clearly isn't the case and makes no sense to do so.
We finish 1st and we play the 2nd best of those 3 teams at Wembley.
We finish 2nd, and if we're not knocked out in Copenhagen beforehand, we play the best of those 3 teams in Saint Petersburg.
I know which of those two options I'd prefer.
England played poorly last night, and a draw is the most they deserved, but it still sets us up nicely in the group and all but guarantees progression.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
I think it needs calling out if Southgate is picking players who can’t lift themselves when they pull on the England shirt.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Historical problem, I only remember Bobby Robson’s team being one that played at pace.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
You can’t switch momentum and form on and off like a tap.
If Mount and Phillips are going to start making proper contributions at international level it’s against the likes of Scotland that they need to start practising.
If Harry Kane looks like he has just turned 60, he won’t suddenly lose 30 years for the next game or the one after.
TeaCider
Well-known member
Yeah?
Which I was saying it was daft to suggest they would be playing to finish 2nd, it was clearly just a bad performance. It was not a strategic choice to draw against Scotland.
There's no real benefit this time as the route to the final is harder, you either face a good team immediately at Wembley in the round of 16 or finish 2nd and face an even better team in quarter finals away from home in a hostile country, after facing a potential banana skin in Copenhagen on the back of 2 draws in a row.
LowMoorBoro
Well-known member
What worries me is Southgate yet again showed he’s not able to make changes to influence the game. The subs he made had no impact.
Scotland were always going to drop deep and pack the centre of the pitch, making it difficult to play through them. Spaces were always going to be out wide, but we failed to put any decent crosses in and there was often nothing to aim at anyway. Playing 2 wide players cutting in just ran into a crowded area. As Kane dropped deep he didn’t pull defenders with him so it didn’t even create any space anyway.
Scotland were always going to drop deep and pack the centre of the pitch, making it difficult to play through them. Spaces were always going to be out wide, but we failed to put any decent crosses in and there was often nothing to aim at anyway. Playing 2 wide players cutting in just ran into a crowded area. As Kane dropped deep he didn’t pull defenders with him so it didn’t even create any space anyway.
Randy
Well-known member
Noticed this as the players were walking out before the kick off. Wry smiles appearing across the faces of the Scottish players like they knew this was a special occasion and a chance to bloody England's noses. English players after the first 10 minutes looked all out of ideas and lost instinct and followed Southgate's apparent plan to the letter.
Compare the freedoms the likes of Foden, Mount, Sterling have with their clubs compared to the rigidity they showed last night.
Scotland could quite easily have won the game if it weren't for Pickford and the two CB's. Imagine the front pages today if that had happened.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Yes I was agreeing with you.
Chris_Boro
Well-known member
My main issue with last night is despite playing two holding midfielders they were still easily by-passed and largely anonymous the whole game.
A better team would have punished us.
A better team would have punished us.
atypical_boro
Well-known member
It’s a National/cultural footballing problem. He could pick eleven die hard England fans from the pub and they’d still freeze when they walked out at Wembley. Southgate’s job isn’t to pick different players it’s to break the mental issues the (otherwise good) players we have had since 1966 have.
proctors_perm
Active member
I’m suspicious of the performance and the result. I think the team are engineering a 2nd place out of this group which could be a dangerous tactic. In all probability Croatia will best Scotland, meaning a draw would ensure a 2nd place, without having to win or lose the final game
Laughing
Well-known member
A couple of points in the cold light of day. Firstly England were bad last night and more on that in a bit. Secondly to blame personnel or team selection or formation is clutching at straws.
England should be able to pick any of their first 14 or 15 and play better against a team of Scotlands ability. It wasn't the team selection nor the formation.
Scotland played like 10 outfield players who were playing as a team. They did not allow gaps to appear between their lines. They moved forward and attacked as a team and dropped as a team but never too deep.
Tactically Scotland got it spot on.
England with the 11 players that started or the 11 players that ended the game should have done better.
There had been some nonsense about it being Scotland final and they were bound to raise their game.... These are professional footballers. Anyone who thinks that Scotland were more up for it than England are either wrong or you need to find another country to support. An England national team that can't get up to play Scotland isn't an England team. I'll leave the England fans to decide which it was.
On the individual players. Kane is clearly not right and needs dropping and if he has been training like that he should be nowhere near the pitch for England.
Southgate should have changed things more. The changes he made were in effective but they would have been in effective whatever changes he had made. England were too slow and that never changed in the 90 minutes at any time. They're was 10 minutes at the start where England created a couple of chances and 10 minutes in the second half. That's not good enough against a team like Scotland.
Is Gareth Southgate tactically useless? Of course he isn't. He was let down by the players endeavour. You may disagree with the team selection but grealish made no difference, not 1 bit.
Once the players had laboured for an hour with no real spark or desire to put their bodies on the line there was nothing Southgate could do to change that with 5 substitutes.
Did Southgate give the players the wrong messaging? I don't know, but I would have to doubt that.
England were poor Scotland were excellent and deserved to win the game.
Not sure you can play the performance at Southgate's feet entirely the players on the pitch have to take a lot of responsability.
England should be able to pick any of their first 14 or 15 and play better against a team of Scotlands ability. It wasn't the team selection nor the formation.
Scotland played like 10 outfield players who were playing as a team. They did not allow gaps to appear between their lines. They moved forward and attacked as a team and dropped as a team but never too deep.
Tactically Scotland got it spot on.
England with the 11 players that started or the 11 players that ended the game should have done better.
There had been some nonsense about it being Scotland final and they were bound to raise their game.... These are professional footballers. Anyone who thinks that Scotland were more up for it than England are either wrong or you need to find another country to support. An England national team that can't get up to play Scotland isn't an England team. I'll leave the England fans to decide which it was.
On the individual players. Kane is clearly not right and needs dropping and if he has been training like that he should be nowhere near the pitch for England.
Southgate should have changed things more. The changes he made were in effective but they would have been in effective whatever changes he had made. England were too slow and that never changed in the 90 minutes at any time. They're was 10 minutes at the start where England created a couple of chances and 10 minutes in the second half. That's not good enough against a team like Scotland.
Is Gareth Southgate tactically useless? Of course he isn't. He was let down by the players endeavour. You may disagree with the team selection but grealish made no difference, not 1 bit.
Once the players had laboured for an hour with no real spark or desire to put their bodies on the line there was nothing Southgate could do to change that with 5 substitutes.
Did Southgate give the players the wrong messaging? I don't know, but I would have to doubt that.
England were poor Scotland were excellent and deserved to win the game.
Not sure you can play the performance at Southgate's feet entirely the players on the pitch have to take a lot of responsability.