Full Time: England 1 (Gordon) Argentina 2

[Mr Tree]

I won't bother explainig my post further to you, giving the aggressive tone of your reply.

Regarding "truth", I reecommend reading a couple of posts here alone.
Last sentence of your reply is nonsense, too. I simply to not see how firing Tuchel would make the squad better than it is. He made a bad decision, but he's a good coach and lead the team to the semis in a World Cup when some other colourful managers would not have even gotten past group stages.

Aggressive tone lol, you can't explain your nonsense you mean it's cliche drivel, not our "first and biggest problem" in any way. We're not gonna solve it here, but no point just talking nonsense now.

 

[BuzzingBee95]

This is as good a summary as I've seen, whether it be players, managers, pundits, journo's or fans.

Re the fans, it is entirely understandable that they let their emotions influence their views, at least in the immediate aftermath, and the game would be a whole lot worse were they not so heavily invested and emotional.

But barring, perhaps, the players, there should be no such excuse for the others, from whom we should expect reasoned, objective and expert analysis.

Oh and Wayne Rooney always was a w***er.

I completely agree that the @Wouldbee assessment is spot on and the most genuinely objective one I've seen.

On expert analysis from former players, say you're Italian and you're lsitening to Maldini's thoughts, or Spain and listening to Iniesta so on and so on. It's hard to stomach figures such as Wazza be so assured in their criticism when they themselves represent our prolonged disappointment. Which is why when Joe Hart turned to the players and said we as a nation should be proud, you're going to generate heightened reactions.

Obviosuly no single player is responsible for that, but having grown up with the 'golden generation' and watched them achieve nothing and then the Roy Hodgson years where Sturridge up top says it all, I felt that this was the moment.

On Tuchel, I agree, I haven't seen us be so quick to demand a change. But whereas Southgate left as one of the most 'successful' England managers of all time, semi finals don't represent progress anymore.

As I said previsouly, sometimes mentality, pressure and mindset are thrown about so much that they become cliches, but losing against a top 10 side every time since I think 1998, represents a far greater underlying issue.

I did criticise Tuchel, and said the issue he has is that he was brought in to win it, that and nothing less. He hasn't. But I'd like to think his insistence on selecting less coveted players such as Spence and leaving out other such as Magurie suggests he has a plan for this team and for now, I would stick with that

 

[brooks]

Again, baffling. To what end? We should actually have the confidence, with this latest generation knocking on the door regularly (rather than the previous generation of "quarter-finals at best"), to push on.

Everyone here remembers how Spain were viewed globally prior to this generation, right? It'll take some work, we can't click our fingers and demand to be the top dogs, but that's gotta be the aim - I'm not sure i understand these "why don't we just accept we're not top level" posts.

I'm not saying 'we should just accept we're not top level'. You've just made that up. That's as daft as saying that 'knocking on the door' with quarter final and semi final appearances is a sign of great success and we can 'push on'. The point is England don't push on. In 76 years of competing in world cups and Euros we have 1 win. Something is wrong with the way football is run in this country and it has a lot to do with poor management at the top level and, more recently, obscene amounts of money available for investors.

 

[Wouldbee]

But at that point, if they weren't doing that, doesn't he still have the choice to replace the forward players like for like and tell Saka, Rashford and maybe Watkins to go for it instead of bringing on Konsa and Burn.

Of course he does. And he opted for defence and it didn't work. The very definition of damned if you do , damned if you don't. If he'd stuck Saka on lets say for arguments sake and Argentina scored he'd have got a slating for NOT going defensive. Its what you get for being England manager innit?

 

[Gawain]

I would personally go for Emery but it's all irrelevant as we're going to be stuck with the German clown for the next 6 years

Were you calling him a "clown" before Wednesday?

And where do you get "6 years" from? It seems pretty obvious that if he doesn't win Euro28 (or at least come desperately close and robbed by unfairness/bad luck etc), then the FA will dispense with his services. And if he should win it, he'd almost certainly walk anyhow, since still only 54 y.o., he would have his choice of offers from elsewhere.

 

[Gawain]

The point is England don't push on. In 76 years of competing in world cups and Euros we have 1 win. Something is wrong with the way football is run in this country and it has a lot to do with poor management at the top level and, more recently, obscene amounts of money available for investors.

I've long thought that there is an additional problem faced by English football and hardly anyone else (at least from amongst the leading nations). Which is that much of "the football community" in this country - owners, administrators, players, commentators and (esp) fans - are more concerned with the fortunes of the club they follow, than of the NT. So the various leagues and cups are seen as being the "real" business, with international football being more of a sideshow, for when your club is on an international break, or during the summer. Which in turn explains how/why resources are concentrated in the game, eg clubs signing big players and managers from abroad, rather than producing their own.

Which in turn is explained by the fact that the club set-up dates from the 1870's, with leagues and the FA Cup etc, and professionalism introduced from the early 1900's. Whereas international football didn't become truly "international" until after WWII. Yes, I know we had the Home Championships, but for England, that was basically one "big" game a year vs Scotland, while England actually withdrew from FIFA in 1928, not returning for two decades, and so failed even to enter the first three World Cups.

Which isolation led to a mixture of indifference and arrogance towards international football - see eg the total shock at Hungary tonking England 6-3 at Wembley in 1953, followed by a 7-1 thrashing in the return out there which was so traumatic that hardly anyone even talks about it now!

This club-over-country preference is most noticeable amongst fans of the "big" clubs, which is why the club banners you see at England games abroad are more likely to be eg Stockport County or Grimsby Town, than Man Utd or Liverpool. But even then, were you to ask eg Brentford fans whether they'd rather their team won the League or FA Cup, or England won the World Cup, I suspect a majority would say the former.

 

[RAF_Patto]

This one still hurts today. Not because I thought we were the better team or this squad was final quality, but purely down to the manner of the defeat.

I do feel somewhat for TT, because if he brings on like for like subs, and still loses, we'd all be saying "should've done what we did against Mexico". My only concern is that he bought into the Big Dan Burn, Low Block mentality & it's bitten us. I do feel Argentina were there to be had, we just gave them far too much respect and ultimately played into their hands.

I'd stick with TT personally. I'm not sure who does a better job, as I do feel our squad quality & depth is lacking, and a semi final is probably about right if you were to look at things objectively.

Tournament football is also won and lost during moments in game, decisions that affect the outcome. Would another manager have got us this far? Maybe not. It's unfortunate that TTs one major mistake came at that moment, others may not have been in that position to make that mistake.

 

[Ghost]

I've long thought that there is an additional problem faced by English football and hardly anyone else (at least from amongst the leading nations). Which is that much of "the football community" in this country - owners, administrators, players, commentators and (esp) fans - are more concerned with the fortunes of the club they follow, than of the NT. So the various leagues and cups are seen as being the "real" business, with international football being more of a sideshow, for when your club is on an international break, or during the summer. Which in turn explains how/why resources are concentrated in the game, eg clubs signing big players and managers from abroad, rather than producing their own.

Which in turn is explained by the fact that the club set-up dates from the 1870's, with leagues and the FA Cup etc, and professionalism introduced from the early 1900's. Whereas international football didn't become truly "international" until after WWII. Yes, I know we had the Home Championships, but for England, that was basically one "big" game a year vs Scotland, while England actually withdrew from FIFA in 1928, not returning for two decades, and so failed even to enter the first three World Cups.

Which isolation led to a mixture of indifference and arrogance towards international football - see eg the total shock at Hungary tonking England 6-3 at Wembley in 1953, followed by a 7-1 thrashing in the return out there which was so traumatic that hardly anyone even talks about it now!

This club-over-country preference is most noticeable amongst fans of the "big" clubs, which is why the club banners you see at England games abroad are more likely to be eg Stockport County or Grimsby Town, than Man Utd or Liverpool. But even then, were you to ask eg Brentford fans whether they'd rather their team won the League or FA Cup, or England won the World Cup, I suspect a majority would say the former.

Having seen the damning heat map from after our goal and reading the above, I think we have to ask ourselves if on some possibly deep unconscious level are we actually addicted to being the perpetual bloodied warrior (Terry Butcher) who did everything but went out valiantly on his shield?

How many "Years of hurt" does it need to be before we retire that awful phrase? We love getting the flags out and talking over the fence about the games, but deep down everyone knows we won't win it and the players have reflected that attitude haven't they.

A lot has to do with the media as well. From the nadir of the WAGS, to the lip licking delight of a potential spat when Jude said "Yeah well whateveh"

At this point, I don't think even Pep would win anything for us.

I am pretty sure there are Brentford fans who preferred the days of losing to Mansfield and complaining about it with their mates in the pub.

 

[BuzzingBee95]

I've long thought that there is an additional problem faced by English football and hardly anyone else (at least from amongst the leading nations). Which is that much of "the football community" in this country - owners, administrators, players, commentators and (esp) fans - are more concerned with the fortunes of the club they follow, than of the NT. So the various leagues and cups are seen as being the "real" business, with international football being more of a sideshow, for when your club is on an international break, or during the summer. Which in turn explains how/why resources are concentrated in the game, eg clubs signing big players and managers from abroad, rather than producing their own.

Which in turn is explained by the fact that the club set-up dates from the 1870's, with leagues and the FA Cup etc, and professionalism introduced from the early 1900's. Whereas international football didn't become truly "international" until after WWII. Yes, I know we had the Home Championships, but for England, that was basically one "big" game a year vs Scotland, while England actually withdrew from FIFA in 1928, not returning for two decades, and so failed even to enter the first three World Cups.

Which isolation led to a mixture of indifference and arrogance towards international football - see eg the total shock at Hungary tonking England 6-3 at Wembley in 1953, followed by a 7-1 thrashing in the return out there which was so traumatic that hardly anyone even talks about it now!

This club-over-country preference is most noticeable amongst fans of the "big" clubs, which is why the club banners you see at England games abroad are more likely to be eg Stockport County or Grimsby Town, than Man Utd or Liverpool. But even then, were you to ask eg Brentford fans whether they'd rather their team won the League or FA Cup, or England won the World Cup, I suspect a majority would say the former.

I think one of the biggest issue may be simpler than that -

Arguably one of the reasons so many people love football, is that for all its analysis, tactical strategies and the like, it's a very simple game.

For all the coaching expertise that players today receive, what cost England, at least to start with, was not closing down a player who only moments before had had a long shot tipped over by Pickford. It's not rocket science, though so often pundits and even fans seem to almost want it to be.

In the Premier League, especially now that Arsenal flood the box, we see teams almost 'invite' long range efforts, because the stats will show that across the season it's more beneficial to encourage teams to shoot from distance than put a ball in. Stats work across a season, not in a head to head knockout. Even then Argentina's second is poorly defended.

We had Argentina where we wanted them- JUST RUN AT THEM! KEEP RUNNING AT THEM.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the one England player I've observed actually running with the ball happens to play outside the Premier League - Bellingham, and that the only other player prepared to do that is off to Barcelona.

There's a reason players like Lionel Messi don't come from England. Could you inmagine a player like Ronaldinho coming up through the ranks here? I can't.

I appreciate these players are generational talents, but all the talk of the Premier League being the best in the world, technical brilliance, I do find the game so static now.

But having said all that, it's hard not to think that the weight of 60 years only beats down more with every chance. There's no way that doesn't play in their minds. Which is why I want Tuchel to stay. Yes the players will be despondent, but use that. Build on it, otherwise we might as well become just as changeable as Chelsea as a nation

 

[Andy_Mc_is_God]

View attachment 67258

With this in mind I feel it only appropriate that we give our friend senor Romero a fitting Brentford welcome on his first game back ‘home’ after his travails in the US this summer.
I’ve got some black paint, anyone out there got a not too badly soiled bedsheet they can donate?

Also need a ‘proof reader’ please?
Don’t want to upset the poor chap ….
“HOLA AMIGO ROMERO
MALVINAS TODAVÍA BRITÁNICA
COWARDOS MASTURBATOROS”

 

[Ghost]

With this in mind I feel it only appropriate that we give our friend senor Romero a fitting Brentford welcome on his first game back ‘home’ after his travails in the US this summer.
I’ve got some black paint, anyone out there got a not too badly soiled bedsheet they can donate?

Also need a ‘proof reader’ please?
Don’t want to upset the poor chap ….
“HOLA AMIGO ROMERO
MALVINAS TODAVÍA BRITÁNICA
COWARDOS MASTURBATOROS”

You might be missing a tilde somewhere.

 

[Gawain]

I think one of the biggest issue may be simpler than that -

Arguably one of the reasons so many people love football, is that for all its analysis, tactical strategies and the like, it's a very simple game.

For all the coaching expertise that players today receive, what cost England, at least to start with, was not closing down a player who only moments before had had a long shot tipped over by Pickford. It's not rocket science, though so often pundits and even fans seem to almost want it to be.

In the Premier League, especially now that Arsenal flood the box, we see teams almost 'invite' long range efforts, because the stats will show that across the season it's more beneficial to encourage teams to shoot from distance than put a ball in. Stats work across a season, not in a head to head knockout. Even then Argentina's second is poorly defended.

We had Argentina where we wanted them- JUST RUN AT THEM! KEEP RUNNING AT THEM.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the one England player I've observed actually running with the ball happens to play outside the Premier League - Bellingham, and that the only other player prepared to do that is off to Barcelona.

There's a reason players like Lionel Messi don't come from England. Could you inmagine a player like Ronaldinho coming up through the ranks here? I can't.

I appreciate these players are generational talents, but all the talk of the Premier League being the best in the world, technical brilliance, I do find the game so static now.

But having said all that, it's hard not to think that the weight of 60 years only beats down more with every chance. There's no way that doesn't play in their minds. Which is why I want Tuchel to stay. Yes the players will be despondent, but use that. Build on it, otherwise we might as well become just as changeable as Chelsea as a nation

There's a lot in what you say, but I might question one observation:
"There's a reason players like Lionel Messi don't come from England. Could you imagine a player like Ronaldinho coming up through the ranks here?"

Players like Messi don't come from anywhere very often, never mind from England.

Players like those are once in a generation (if that), and exceedingly rare. Just as important is the quality of the players constituting the"supporting cast" to the star players. And in that respect, I'd argue that playing alongside Kane and Bellingham, the likes of Rice, Saka, Rogers and Anderson, even eg Spence or Guehi, are near enough the equal of their counterparts from Argentina, France, Germany, Portugal and Belgium etc, and only exceeded by those of Spain.

So I don't think it was the quality of players which saw England lose that game, or their coaching, but a number of other factors which combined to see them denied in the final 10 minutes of a closely contested game against battle-hardened opponents. Fine margins and all that.

 

[Sheerwater Bee]

It's all quite simple. We're the 4th best team in the world and our current crop just aren't good enough to break through that ceiling and win a big tournament.

 

[Ghost]

There's a lot in what you say, but I might question one observation:
"There's a reason players like Lionel Messi don't come from England. Could you imagine a player like Ronaldinho coming up through the ranks here?"

Players like Messi don't come from anywhere very often, never mind from England.

Players like those are once in a generation (if that), and exceedingly rare. Just as important is the quality of the players constituting the"supporting cast" to the star players. And in that respect, I'd argue that playing alongside Kane and Bellingham, the likes of Rice, Saka, Rogers and Anderson, even eg Spence or Guehi, are near enough the equal of their counterparts from Argentina, France, Germany, Portugal and Belgium etc, and only exceeded by those of Spain.

So I don't think it was the quality of players which saw England lose that game, or their coaching, but a number of other factors which combined to see them denied in the final 10 minutes of a closely contested game against battle-hardened opponents. Fine margins and all that.

In semi-seriousness, with our weather getting hotter and hotter, we might start seeing players putting their foot on the ball and playing in bursts of intelligent movement to conserve energy, instead of athleticism recycle ball - 2050 is our year maybe.

 

[TeeJayBee]

When you look at Argentina’s other games they had a run in which they went behind, sometimes quite late (e.g. 0-2 v Egypt) and then raised their game and intensity and succeeded in turning them round.

So I think that when we scored it was entirely predictable that might / would happen again.

Their identity seems to be that they spend a lot of time using the dark arts to wear their opponents down (physically or mentally or both) before turning their attention to playing the really good stuff we all know they are capable of.

The substitutions looked bad to all of us, but was it the case that after all the exertions in Mexico and v Norway, the team ran out of gas just when Messi and co started to up the ante, and Tuchel decided our only hope was to try to keep them out?

The players are complaining that we became too defensive, but are they blaming Tuchel for wrong tactics or themselves for failing to react in the way that was needed, perhaps because they simply couldn’t do it at the time? (Or maybe both?)

The substitutions backfired big time because they disrupted the tight formations / relationships, and they could have done with someone like JH on the pitch to keep them organised.

In the end the Argentinians made far more chances and could easily have scored two or three more goals so we were well beaten really although when we scored and based on the play until then it looked like ours for the taking .

 

[Gawain]

The players are complaining that we became too defensive, but are they blaming Tuchel for wrong tactics or themselves for failing to react in the way that was needed, perhaps because they simply couldn’t do it at the time? (Or maybe both?)

In the rush to blame Tuchel, one thing may be being overlooked.

TT claims that after Gordon scored, he wanted England to keep up the attacking play, rather than just drop back in the deepest of deep blocks, but the players' defensive mentality prevented them from doing so.

Now he may just be trying to excuse himself, but with Gordon scoring on 55mins, TT didn't actually make his first defensive substitution, Konsa for Gordon, until the 72nd minute. Maybe that 17 mins was enough to show him that whatever his formation and instructions, his players simply couldn't, or wouldn't, play as he wished, so he turned to Plan B?

And it's not even as if he rushed on two or three defenders at that early stage, since O'Reilly and Burn only both came on another 10 minutes later (82 mins), for a defender (James) and a defensive midfielder (Rice), both of whom had had fitness doubts.

Of course people are saying - with hindsight - that his plan should instead have been to bring on Saka, Watkins, Rashford, Toney etc. But considering how his players weren't attempting to pass the ball sideways even, never mind forward, what service were they likely to receive? I mean, how many times did Gordon or Kane receive the ball in an advanced position between 55 and 72 mins? Where was Bellingham?

 

[BuzzingBee95]

There's a lot in what you say, but I might question one observation:
"There's a reason players like Lionel Messi don't come from England. Could you imagine a player like Ronaldinho coming up through the ranks here?"

Players like Messi don't come from anywhere very often, never mind from England.

Players like those are once in a generation (if that), and exceedingly rare. Just as important is the quality of the players constituting the"supporting cast" to the star players. And in that respect, I'd argue that playing alongside Kane and Bellingham, the likes of Rice, Saka, Rogers and Anderson, even eg Spence or Guehi, are near enough the equal of their counterparts from Argentina, France, Germany, Portugal and Belgium etc, and only exceeded by those of Spain.

So I don't think it was the quality of players which saw England lose that game, or their coaching, but a number of other factors which combined to see them denied in the final 10 minutes of a closely contested game against battle-hardened opponents. Fine margins and all that.

To be honest @Ghost said it better than me a few posts down (intelligent moments vs recycle ball).

Interestingly, if you compare to the Euro final defeat against Italy, the shots we had and the shots we faced are almost identical.

Argentina 17 shots, England 5
Italy 15, England 5

Possession for both between 35-38%

So you could argue ball retention is an issue, but more than that, it's a lot of huffing and puffing with ultimately little to show for it.

You're right about Messi, but going back to what @Ghost said, my point wasn't that our players should all be as good as him, obviosuly not, it's the way they play. They run at you, they take shots, it's very very positive. But it was almost as though, despite us doing that, it's so unnatural to be that dominant and efficient that we simply couldn't maintain it.

Whereas I think sometimes with England, when we do go 1 up I feel we've worded so so hard to get there that being in front is an achievement in itself.

 

[mattbee]

Of course he does. And he opted for defence and it didn't work. The very definition of damned if you do , damned if you don't. If he'd stuck Saka on lets say for arguments sake and Argentina scored he'd have got a slating for NOT going defensive. Its what you get for being England manager innit?

Fair enough but I just think Tuchel gave it all the talk pre tournament about not being scared to win and did the exact opposite when it came to the crunch. I don't get where this idea that Tuchel was going to be different comes from though, I didnt see a lot of his style outside England but winning that Champions League over Man City for Chelsea, they nicked a goal and then stifled Man City who tried to play all the football and it worked on the day. So when he was announced England manager, this was exactly what I expected from him.

 

[Ghost]

You're right about Messi, but going back to what @Ghost said, my point wasn't that our players should all be as good as him, obviosuly not, it's the way they play. They run at you, they take shots, it's very very positive. But it was almost as though, despite us doing that, it's so unnatural to be that dominant and efficient that we simply couldn't maintain it.

It was driving me spare how many times they were mentioning Messi walking and inferring from that it's down to his age. He's always done that, and then exploded in bursts when he needs to. I read somewhere that he would spend the first 20 minutes of games walking about, absorbing the pitch geography and which players were up for the game and which could be exploited, then he comes to life.

The inferrence was that you have to be going at full pelt the whole time. It's not some magical quality that nobody has ever done before. Jan Molby rarely left the centre circle, Glenn Hoddle used to saunter about, Le Tissier played in bursts. The fact that we never built a team around Le Tiss is very pertinent to this discussion. Scholes was an absolute master of intelligent targeted movement in the continental style.

 

[Greybeard]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53SKHiG7sMQ


And what are we/can we do about it? #rhetorical

Agree with every word.

 

[TeeJayBee]

IIRC the players needed a “reset” (b***ocking) at HT v Croatia following which we had the best football England played in the whole tournament. So there was previous for the players going off script and apparently becoming a bit “brain fogged” when the game went a bit against them.

We have all these players who have won major honours with their clubs but who apparently can’t handle certain situations for England. Is it the weight of the shirt or fear of failure?

At HT v Croatia we were told that if we were going to lose we would do it playing our way. That went out the window v Argentina.

 

[Mr Tree]

I'm not saying 'we should just accept we're not top level'. You've just made that up.

Your words were "We need someone of responsibility in English football to tell us the truth and not keep conning us." Not sure what difference you're seeing there.

We're close. I don't accept that that argie squad, man for man, was better, so this sort of "we just need to accept we're not good enough" talk baffles me. The issue has always been that we've struggled to make a team rather than a collection of individuals. I thought Tuchel would be better at that, and he showed signs of it, in his first tournament.

 

[HMDBFC]

Pretty sure Pickford runs around shouting at the pitch more than planning where to dive for penalties

Made me laugh out loud the other day when the BBC decided that my HYS comment describing Pickford as being "as mad as a box of frogs" was deemed offensive.

I thought I was being generous!

 

[LongLostBee]

I’m not saying he’s definitely right but interesting analysis from Andros and looks like he’d make a better pundit than most…

View: https://x.com/charliebarnicle/status/2077777243107975356?s=46

 

[Wouldbee]

Fair enough but I just think Tuchel gave it all the talk pre tournament about not being scared to win and did the exact opposite when it came to the crunch. I don't get where this idea that Tuchel was going to be different comes from though, I didnt see a lot of his style outside England but winning that Champions League over Man City for Chelsea, they nicked a goal and then stifled Man City who tried to play all the football and it worked on the day. So when he was announced England manager, this was exactly what I expected from him.

The crunch as you say was a semi final
Against the best team
In the world right now. And only after he had actually stuck exactly to his word. Post match Harry Kane said they were encrypting for the kill but the team
Couldn’t or didn’t. That’s on the players. Look im
No Tuchel acolyte im Just calling out the lazy media Reaction. And im
Saying that 15 minutes between going 1-0 up and Tuchel
Going super defensive is the bit that is the difference we
As a national football organisation have to adress. Sort that out we could win tne Euros.

 

[mhead bee]

I don't think Tuchel rated Watkins.

Or Toney

 

[mhead bee]

It’s so easy to bash Englands results over the years. But what should not be ignored is penalty shoot outs. Our recent record of 2 finals and 2 semi finals was unthinkable 10 years ago, but two of these included penalty shoot out wins.

If we had won all those shoot outs we would be adding 2 finals, 2 semi finals an a euro championship win to the collection and then our record stacks up against anyone and puts to bed the myth that we don’t produce players etc. obviously we did mess them up, but the point being

If we had another 4-5 finals under our belt we surely would have won more by now.

It took Brentford 10 attempts in the end.

 

[mhead bee]

I won't bother explainig my post further to you, giving the aggressive tone of your reply.

Regarding "truth", I reecommend reading a couple of posts here alone.
Last sentence of your reply is nonsense, too. I simply to not see how firing Tuchel would make the squad better than it is. He made a bad decision, but he's a good coach and lead the team to the semis in a World Cup when some other colourful managers would not have even gotten past group stages.

Firing Tuchel could make the squad better, you bring players who are fit over ones who are injured or are not match fit due to injuries this season. He gambled on players who clearly were not able to play.

Maybe he picks players like Foden and Palmer who had weak seasons but who were fresh and capable and just needed a pick me up to hit form.

Who knows, but his squad was short of players that can keep a ball in the middle so when we sat deep we just kicked it straight back

 

[larrysigny]

Suggestions above that TT doesn't like Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney - so why select 'em for the squad?

 

[Banana]

Or Toney

He obviously "rated" then, just not as much as Kane.

 

[Freebee]

Suggestions above that TT doesn't like Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney - so why select 'em for the squad?

We have very limited choices for a number 9 so it's a struggle to see who would have been a better option imho.

 

[aawharris]

We have very limited choices for a number 9 so it's a struggle to see who would have been a better option imho.

Kane was always going to play every minute of every game if able.
TT could easily have left one of Toney or Watkins at home for a goalscoring attacking midfielder like Foden, Palmer or Gibbs-White

 

[mhead bee]

Suggestions above that TT doesn't like Ollie Watkins or Ivan Toney - so why select 'em for the squad?

It’s a good question that was being asked by a lot of people.

With 20 mins to go Kane was shattered. He played out to Bellingham who charged up the left wing. There were 5 blue shirts chasing him down and HK and the others were still on the edge of our area.

Watkins may have give the outlets, made a sprint for a pass. All we needed was to get up the pitch and re group for 2-3 mins

 

[ladbroke]

It’s a good question that was being asked by a lot of people.

With 20 mins to go Kane was shattered. He played out to Bellingham who charged up the left wing. There were 5 blue shirts chasing him down and HK and the others were still on the edge of our area.

Watkins may have give the outlets, made a sprint for a pass. All we needed was to get up the pitch and re group for 2-3 mins

This was one of the biggest criticisms I was giving when people at work were asking what I felt.
We threw defenders on to help keep Argentina at bay but forgot that we need to attack.
The players were knackered and could even put Mexico altitude to partly blame as may not have re-adjusted to it back to normal.
Plus lots of games.
Its a squad game still. We should have put fresh, quick, forwards on. The first half showed tonight that fast counters can definitely achieve things.
We sit back a little, take foot of gas, and you grt punished, again like tonight.

 

[Hippobee]

It’s a good question that was being asked by a lot of people.

With 20 mins to go Kane was shattered. He played out to Bellingham who charged up the left wing. There were 5 blue shirts chasing him down and HK and the others were still on the edge of our area.

Watkins may have give the outlets, made a sprint for a pass. All we needed was to get up the pitch and re group for 2-3 mins

And Rashford and Saka last night showing an option that we could have used. Definitely not Watkins though!

 

[GlasgowBee]

To me, the biggest what might have been in this match is not about player selection or formation, it is what might have been if the officials had got a grip very early on and issued yellows and reds as appropriate, the forearm on Anderson being a good example, the Simeone head to the body another, there were so many in the first half it was a pleasure to see football break out in the second

 

[badgerbee]

To me, the biggest what might have been in this match is not about player selection or formation, it is what might have been if the officials had got a grip very early on and issued yellows and reds as appropriate, the forearm on Anderson being a good example, the Simeone head to the body another, there were so many in the first half it was a pleasure to see football break out in the second

Fair question.
But as I said in my other reflection on the game, the earlier Argentina started playing "properly", the worse it would've been for us. IMHO.
Based on what happened when we went 1 up, and how dominant they were, forcing them to stop the sh*thousery by early Yellows, would (probably) have meant we would have lost by 2 or 3. Again IMHO.
Keeping in at 0-0 for as long as possible, and a niggly game, was our best chance of going through.

 

[Canterbee]

Not clutching at straws as ive already mentioned several times it was our supposed defensive set up that lost this game but this is a still from when Spence won the ball off Messi before cross came back for their winner.

Extremely similar to how Argentina "earned" a free kick v Egypt after Egypt scored in previous rounds.

Literally got ignored.
Wonder if Spence stayed down if we'd have got something.

View attachment 67246

For the avoidance of doubt this is the non AI clip of what actually happened:

 

[Les Beeavinu]

For the avoidance of doubt this is the non AI clip of what actually happened:

That's interesting because amongst all the discussion, I couldn't recall the foul. Spence looked as though he over stretched. Haven't been able to watch it back.

 

[aawharris]

For the avoidance of doubt this is the non AI clip of what actually happened:

How do we know thats not AI?

 

[GlasgowBee]

That's interesting because amongst all the discussion, I couldn't recall the foul. Spence looked as though he over stretched. Haven't been able to watch it back.

Spencer did over stretch and had to rebalance, OReilly did his very best to get across to cover for DS but that unfortunate rebalance gave Messi the microsecond, and that is all a master needs to strike against an opponent, another player would probably not have benefitted from Spences over stretch, but Messi, that was all he needed!

 

[guilly]

How do we know thats not AI?

Here is the still of Getty Images

Argentina's Lionel Messi and England's Djed Spence battle for the...

Argentina's Lionel Messi and England's Djed Spence battle for the ball during the FIFA World Cup 2026 semi-final match at the Atlanta Stadium. Picture date: Wednesday July 15, 2026.

www.gettyimages.in

But the good thing about AI and forgeries is that you can always choose what's convenient to your beliefs - some people actually believe the earth is flat!

so no worries, it's rigged, it was a foul, Tuchel fault, discrimination against the Egyptian coach, I think even Bruno Fernandez said it was rigged 4 years ago, etc

 

[aawharris]

Here is the still of Getty Images

Argentina's Lionel Messi and England's Djed Spence battle for the...

Argentina's Lionel Messi and England's Djed Spence battle for the ball during the FIFA World Cup 2026 semi-final match at the Atlanta Stadium. Picture date: Wednesday July 15, 2026.

www.gettyimages.in

But the good thing about AI and forgeries is that you can always choose what's convenient to your beliefs - some people actually believe the earth is flat!

so no worries, it's rigged, it was a foul, Tuchel fault, discrimination against the Egyptian coach, I think even Bruno Fernandez said it was rigged 4 years ago, etc

My point is, nobody knows what is AI anymore.
Getty images could be using it for all we know.

 

[Banana]

My point is, nobody knows what is AI anymore.
Getty images could be using it for all we know.

unlikely. Getty's images will be directly from photographers

 

[aawharris]

unlikely. Getty's images will be directly from photographers

Or will they
Im just kidding of course, but everything in life now seems to be AI generated, so hard to believe anything anywhere

 

[mhead bee]

To me, the biggest what might have been in this match is not about player selection or formation, it is what might have been if the officials had got a grip very early on and issued yellows and reds as appropriate, the forearm on Anderson being a good example, the Simeone head to the body another, there were so many in the first half it was a pleasure to see football break out in the second

This is the thing. Bellingham scored one of the goals of the WC last night, surely one of the players of the tournament, but every time he broke away in a similar fashion v Argentina he was hacked on the half way line.

He may have scored that goal v Argentina which would have been poetic justice, but he was scythed down time and time again. Had the ref got the cards out they couldn’t have done it without a second yellow or letting him go.

The thing that irritates me most is when people call this straw grasping, and say England only lost cause of the last 15 mins as if what preceded it is irrelevant somehow.

Apparently we need to find a way to win these games, because Argentina have always been like this sonits somehow our fault. We are all ears if anyone has a solution. We can’t fight fire with fire because as soon as we tripped one of theirs the card comes out

How do you beat that level of unfairness?

 

[mhead bee]

Fair question.
But as I said in my other reflection on the game, the earlier Argentina started playing "properly", the worse it would've been for us. IMHO.
Based on what happened when we went 1 up, and how dominant they were, forcing them to stop the sh*thousery by early Yellows, would (probably) have meant we would have lost by 2 or 3. Again IMHO.
Keeping in at 0-0 for as long as possible, and a niggly game, was our best chance of going through.

Argentina only got to play properly when we collapsed. We underestimate how much the journey to the Aztec, the one day prep at altitude and playing in that heat with 10 men took out of us. A full nights sleep lost returning. Not surprising we were looking knackered last 20 mins.

But the reality is, had the ref done his job Argentina are down to 9 or 10 men and we are 3 up and cruising.

 

[Les Beeavinu]

Argentina only got to play properly when we collapsed. We underestimate how much the journey to the Aztec, the one day prep at altitude and playing in that heat with 10 men took out of us. A full nights sleep lost returning. Not surprising we were looking knackered last 20 mins.

But the reality is, had the ref done his job Argentina are down to 9 or 10 men and we are 3 up and cruising.

No way Argentina would have had players sent off, they are too smart for that.

 

[mhead bee]

No way Argentina would have had players sent off, they are too smart for that.

Disagree with that, the challenge on Anderson was a straight red.

If they are too clever to get a second yellow, then when the first yellow comes out, the next time Jude runs through, hey presto, a goal like last night.

 

[Bee1895]

To me yesterday was proof that the refs had been told to just card Argentina when there absolutely was now doubt.
Should have been another two sent offs yesterday alone.