Scotland 0 shots on target, 1 corner . . . England ease to 3-1 win over Scotland at Hampden - reaction
Exactly. Our best chance next summer is with Southgate. The players clearly love him and it's shown in all the major tournaments so far. A far cry from the absolute shite served up by the likes of McClaren and Capello. I think people forget just how bad that was.
You're making the mistake of assuming those of us who don't rate Southgate and his sleep inducing personality / footballing style were in any way fans of the likes of Capello, McClaren and Big Sam. We have a great squad right now, probably the best in the last 50 years and we're more than capable of winning one of the big two. Yet it's being criminally under-utilised. But it can't be denied there is hardly a raft of superior alternatives out there.
Dunk and Stones when he’s fit as the two centre-backs should be fine. Bellingham’s a generational talent. Thought the Birmingham thing was a bit weird, and it still is, but you can kind of see why they made such a big thing of him leaving with each game he plays.
I'm not assuming that at all. I'm sure you moaned relentlessly about all of them The point is Southgate has transformed everything about the England set-up and brought back a feelgood factor we haven't had since the 90s. We reached a World Cup semi-final, were penalty kicks away from winning a major tournament and we're joint favourites for the next one. That's huge progress. I actually understand some of the criticism regarding some of his selections and tactics in certain games but it can't be denied he's done an excellent job and is the right man to take us into the next Euros. I do agree we need to win something with this group of players though. It'll feel like a real missed opportunity if we don't.
The thing is though that used to be said about the 'golden generation' of Scholes/Lampard/Gerrard/Shearer etc etc etc.
Yeah and when you look at the individuals we had I think it was an understandable point of view. We had so much talent, but it never felt like a team. It does now, and we have strength in depth. We've also proven we can get to the latter stages on more than one occasion, something none of those sides managed.
I think the only difference in this situation, is this team feels more of a unity, whereas the golden generation played more for their own goals rather than the team. And the fact that Lampard and Gerrard couldn't play in the same team as both had the same mentality to get further up the field etc leaving us prone at the back.
International football is also unique in that although this England side absolutely is capable of winning something, it's entirely possible they don't and Southgate will still have done a good job. There can after all only be one tournament winner every 2 years. I also think that beyond 2024 we should really look carefully at who else is available, I wouldn't be against him staying on with the current options that are out there. I'd rather keep that unity going.
Player for player they were light years ahead of the current squad, but there was that Liverpool, United, Arsenal, Chelsea rivalry thing going on. They never played as a team, they should in truth be ashamed of themselves being like that...if that team had clicked theyd have won a World Cup.
Too many individuals looking for their own accolades to be remembered by rather than playing as a unit, if they did that I'd think we would have been more successful as a nation. But unfortunately they will be remembered as the golden generation that had zero success and failed in the early stages.
Gerrard and Lamps could've 100% played well together if today's more fluid systems and formations were used back then. It was too rigid and set in stone positions and obviously they struggled in a two man midfield with no one covering them. It was always going to be difficult without a DM sitting behind or even a sweeper to step forward when defending an attack to give centre backs a bit of protection. Yeah terribly wasted opportunity.
I think definitely euro 2004, not sure which world cup they'd have won though as 2002 was chock full of quality, 2006 maybe but I feel like that generation were on their way out by then anyway. Said for ages our midfield should have been Gerrard and Hargreaves (later on Carrick) in CM with Lampard having a free role to get into the box alongside Owen, Crouch or Rooney depending on what year you're looking at. We struggled on the wings for a long time in honesty, after Cole and Beckham there wasn't really anyone until the last few years.
The problem with the golden generation of yesteryear was that no matter how good Gerrard et al. were, Brazil were even better, and the other nations were good also. Now at international football the standard has regressed; the WC champs lost to Saudi Arabia FFS on their way to the trophy. England will get to a final or another semi based on talent and the feel-good factor Southgate has embedded into the squad making the team feel more like a club one. He will be tactically outclassed come the crunch though, as we've seen at the last 3 tournaments where he drops the ball each time. Is that deemed a success? Yes and no.
Yep. Such small margins. Kane's missed pen being a prime example. Score that and we may well have gone on to win a World Cup. Who knows. We've been there or thereabouts in every tournament since Southgate came in. He needs to win one to cement himself as a major success but he's still done a great job regardless.
2002 maybe. I remember an article with Roberto Carlos before the quarter final against Brazil and he said the winner of this game will go on to win the World Cup and I think he was right (well, he was obviously) but we would have had Turkey in the semi-final and that Germany side was probably one of the poorest to reach a WC final.
Yeah, we could (should?) have won in 2002, we had 30 minutes to find an equaliser against 10 man Brazil, then it was Turkey in the semi and a Germany side in the final who we'd beaten 5-1 in Munich less than 10 months beforehand. In that quarter final someone famously said of Eriksson's half time speech that they "needed a Churchill but got Iain Duncan Smith". Wonder what happened to that player..?
Light years? Not sure I agree. There are some positions where that squad was better (LB and CB are two that immediately spring to mind), but I think we have much better attacking options than we did at any point with the golden generation.
