The national attitude towards England

atypical_boro

atypical_boro

Well-known member
Very pessimistic isn't it?

After doing 'well' (at least in terms of the stage we exited) in the last 2 major tournaments, why is this so? Is it purely based on Nations League results?

Different to France 98 when (following Euro 96) everyone had a genuine belief we could win it.

Lower expectation may actually help us though, and we do have an easy run to the quarters.

The great thing about the world cup is that there are maybe 6-9 teams with a chance of winning, and all of them are capable of choking on the day (not just us) and have done so before.
 
Last edited:
We were dreadful in recent games in the Nations League and looking at those tournaments we have done well in realistically we didn't do anything special in that we beat all the teams we should have beaten and lost against all the teams that were better than us. We surely won't be lucky enough to avoid all the good teams again.

Southgate also likes to play with 7 right backs and our defence hasn't been great.
 
I'm usually excited for any England game especially a WC but it just feels like they have stagnated a bit since the euros, I don't think they will play more than 4 games before flying home either.... I really hope I'm wrong like.
 
One revisionist account of the last 2 tournaments seems to be growing in popularity: those tournaments were "gift wrapped" for England.

To me, that's just ignorant. We were never even favourites in Russia and, I believe France were before the Euros. Even then, no team is ever odds on to win the tournament: the field always has a better chance than the favourite. So I can't agree with this being used as a stick to beat England.
 
Last edited:
Nano said:
We were dreadful in recent games in the Nations League and looking at those tournaments we have done well in realistically we didn't do anything special in that we beat all the teams we should have beaten and lost against all the teams that were better than us. We surely won't be lucky enough to avoid all the good teams again.

Southgate also likes to play with 7 right backs and our defence hasn't been great.
Click to expand...
Well given Southgate's record of avoiding 'complete disasters at major tournaments' (of the Iceland ilk etc) I can't see us not making the quarters, given the run of fixtures to get there.

I'm not actually sure we should care much about Nations League results? Sure, we were rubbish in it, but does it matter?

Between Euro 96 and France 98 England lost to Italy, Chile and Brazil and a later 0-0 draw in Rome was celebrated as a national achievement. But still people went into the tournament with (perhaps misplaced) optimism.

I think its interesting how the Nations League results are being taken so seriously. To me they're just a series of friendlies of little consequence with a little bit of meaning (that I imagine most players don't care a jot about), like pre-season tournaments in a way.
 
Frozen Horse said:
One revisionist account of the last 3 tournaments seems to be growing in popularity: those tournaments were "gift wrapped" for England.

To me, that's just ignorant. We were never even favourites in Russia and, I believe France were before the Euros. Even then, no team is ever odds on to win the tournament: the field always has a better chance than the favourite. So I can't agree with this being used as a stick to beat England.
Click to expand...
I have always maintained we should have beaten Croatia but at the time I'd have taken anything better than the embarrassment of 2014 and 2016. Southgate's record is untouchable compared to the vast majority of his predecessors, all of whom didn't have this Nations League nonsense to deal with too.

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were also 'gift-wrapped' in exactly the same way and are continuously looked back upon with starry-eyed nostalgia.
 
Last edited:
atypical_boro said:
Well given Southgate's record of avoiding 'complete disasters at major tournaments' (of the Iceland ilk etc) I can't see us not making the quarters, given the run of fixtures to get there.

I'm not actually sure we should care much about Nations League results? Sure, we were rubbish in it, but does it matter?

Between Euro 96 and France 98 England lost to Italy, Chile and Brazil and a later 0-0 draw in Rome was celebrated as a national achievement. But still people went into the tournament with (perhaps misplaced) optimism.

I think its interesting how the Nations League results are being taken so seriously. To me they're just a series of friendlies of little consequence with a little bit of meaning (that I imagine most players don't care a jot about), like pre-season friendlies in a way.
Click to expand...
My issue is that Southgate has said if he was fit kalvin Phillips would have started over Bellingham.

Phillips and rice is his true partnership

I can see the likes of foden grealish Bellingham being on the bench
 
Jedi boro said:
My issue is that Southgate has said if he was fit kalvin Phillips would have started over Bellingham.

Phillips and rice is his true partnership
Click to expand...
OK, but Phillips did well in the Euros didn't he? I don't think it is a completely ridiculous call, but in any case, Bellingham will start.
 
Jedi boro said:
We need to no change that we must build the England side around Bellingham he’s a phenomenal talent.

I just hope Gareth doesn’t go too safe as he has a habit of doing.
Click to expand...
Well he will have to play Bellingham anyway. If he is as good as people say (and whilst I have seen enough to know he is good I don't claim to watch Dortmund every week) he will prove it at the tournament, and will surely play a part in making us a good side.
 
People who say "oh we've only beaten teams we should have beaten" seem to have forgotten England for donkeys years failing to beat teams like Algeria, Costa Rica, Iceland. Or that we'd won about two knockout games in 20 years. They also forget we beat Germany and Denmark in the Euros, on the way to reaching our first final in 56 years. But we did lose a couple of games in a tournament no one cares about.🙄
Basically people criticise Southgate because its fashionable to do it.
 
It's 100% linked to the Nations League campaign.

6 really poor performances in a row in it, twice beaten by Hungary, and confidence has drained because of it.

You're not going to be full of confidence when you've been playing badly for a year before a tournament.
 
Jedi boro said:
My issue is that Southgate has said if he was fit kalvin Phillips would have started over Bellingham.

Phillips and rice is his true partnership

I can see the likes of foden grealish Bellingham being on the bench
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but you can't slate Southgate on hypotheticals. The fact is Bellingham is now a starter in this England team and unless injured will be in the first 11 in Qatar.

I'd also add that Grealish shouldn't be starting, given that he rarely does when it matters for Man City and Bukayo Saka is a vastly superior player.

Bellingham and Foden should be the fulcrum of this England team over the next decade, so if he benches both then feel free to criticise. But until then, it's unfair to criticise Southgate for doing something he is unlikely to do.
 
atypical_boro said:
Well he will have to play Bellingham anyway. If he is as good as people say (and whilst I have seen enough to know he is good I don't claim to watch Dortmund every week) he will prove it at the tournament, and will surely play a part in making us a good side.
Click to expand...
He’s a 19 year old English kid captaining a German side in the champions league.

That is impressive enough

He’s going to be world class if he isn’t already.
 
Jedi boro said:
My issue is that Southgate has said if he was fit kalvin Phillips would have started over Bellingham.

Phillips and rice is his true partnership

I can see the likes of foden grealish Bellingham being on the bench
Click to expand...
Well Grealish doesn't start for his club every week so I dunno if I disagree with that when he's up against Saka, Sterling (good England record), Mount/Rashford (back in form) and Foden himself.

Euro 2020 came a bit soon for Foden I felt (and perhaps why GS is apprehensive about putting too much responsibility on Bellingham) and he didn't have a great time when he started but I think he will start this time (and do better). And even if he doesn't, its only the wrong call if it doesn't actually work out.
 
atypical_boro said:
Very pessimistic isn't it?

After doing 'well' (at least in terms of the stage we exited) in the last 2 major tournaments, why is this so? Is it purely based on Nations League results?

Different to France 98 when (following Euro 96) everyone had a genuine belief we could win it.

Lower expectation may actually help us though, and we do have an easy run to the quarters.

The great thing about the world cup is that there are maybe 6-9 teams with a chance of winning, and all of them are capable of choking on the day (not just us) and have done so before.
Click to expand...
I would have said based purely on the form shown in the last few games including a drubbing at home to Hungary that expectations are more realistic. Nothing more simple than that.
 
atypical_boro said:
I have always maintained we should have beaten Croatia but at the time I'd have taken anything better than the embarrassment of 2014 and 2016. Southgate's record is untouchable compared to the vast majority of his predecessors, all of whom didn't have this Nations League nonsense to deal with.

Italia 90 and Euro 96 were also 'gift-wrapped' in exactly the same way and are continuously looked back upon with starry-eyed nostalgia.
Click to expand...
In 1990 the only game we actually won in 90 mins was the 1-0 win v Egypt!
 
I’d be happier if he included players like James madison in his squad as we need creative sparks and a plan b
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top