England can’t toss Southgate aside. But they could ease him out and bring Eddie Howe in…
The Mailbox suggests a way for England to replace Gareth Southgate without parting ways. Also: Chelsea omens; and all the reasons to dislike Lionel Messi; and more.
Get your views in to theeditor@football365.com…
#SouthgateOut. Sort of.
I don’t think anyone would doubt how much Gareth has improved England, making them more likeable, beating teams they should be beating, building a strong bond between players from different clubs and all that, but his decision making is questionable when the chips are down.
Therefore, why not keep him on as part of the England setup, like a Director of Football for the PFA perhaps?
Then get in someone else to make the hard decisions that he is incapable of making. Many options are available but we have to keep the togetherness that Gareth has built within the squad and the general decency in which England now go about their business.
We can’t just toss him aside after what he’s done for us, so let’s keep him on board in some capacity, then bring in Eddie Howe to make the footballing decisions.
Fat Man
PS. for players to be “world class” then they have to be one of the best in the world in their position. England have had none of those, ever (OK maybe Bobby Charlton). For every English player who many regard as “world class”, I can name a better player from another country. Fabio Cannavaro > Rio Ferdinand, Javier Zanetti > Ashley Cole etc etc. Please take off your premiership blinkers, it’s quite embarrassing.
#GarethIn
It’s just not even a discussion for me whether Southgate should stay. He absolutely should. Howard Jones email on Wednesday morning flies in the face of ‘everyone is entitled to an opinion’ – honestly reading it made me want to scream.
They speak like he’s taken a World Class team from the heights of international football to the dregs, some post-Fergie David Moyes type experience. Simply look at the record this century:
Euros:
2000: Group Stage
2004: QF – lost to Portugal
2008: DNQ
2012: QF – completely outplayed by and lost to Italy
2016: Last 16 – lost to Iceland (?!)
2020/1: UNDER SOUTHGATE – Runners up
WC:
2002: QF – lost to Brazil (a fair one)
2006: QF – lost to Portugal
2010: Last 16 – Hammered by Germany
2014: Group stage (feat. our worst group stage performance ever)
2018: UNDER SOUTHGATE – SF
2022: UNDER SOUTHGATE – QF – lost to holders in an extremely tight match, where we missed an 86th minute penalty!
Do we also need to highlight that those QF losses in the 00’s were teams including supposedly the Bestest England Generation ever (TM).
Is it wilful ignorance? Misplaced anger? Sheer lack of understanding? A sad indictment of our educational system? I’m not sure, but let’s be serious, Southgate took a nation from the lowest of lows to being a major competitive force in internation football. If you choose to ignore it, that’s on you.
Cheers,
Marc (p.s. in response to Jason Soutar, if you’ve watched Declan Rice for the last 18 months and don’t think he’s world class – perhaps you shouldn’t be writing about football).
…Howard, I feel your pain. I too have tried not to get involved in this debate. There have been plenty of mails arguing the sensible, logical, reasoned side so I haven’t felt that pressing urge to counter the ignorant and obstinate. However you’re email has hooked me so lets look at your grievances one at a time.
You say Southgate only played a back 4 because of pressure that his previous formation “had been shown to be awful”. Well unless you’re telepathic I’m not sure you can know Southgates motivations for doing anything but perhaps he stuck with the back four when seeing the midfield control he gained with Bellingham and Henderson alongside Rice meaning he didn’t need as much defensive cover? Also the previous formation got us to a World Cup semi-final and a Euros final, not sure how that translates to ‘shown to be awful’. Maybe you meant to say ‘proven to be effective’?
Grealish was brought on because John Stones was injured and needed to come off. As you say there were only 90 seconds left so bringing on an attacker for an injured defender does seem like the logical move, also Grealish has a knack for winning free kicks on the edge of the box which would obviously be an advantage in the dying seconds of a game when you need to score. With the Sterling vs Rashford point, I’m sure anyone who has paid attention to these two players over the last few years would agree that Raheem is a better weapon against a packed well organised defence, and that Rashford is more effective with space in behind when he can isolate a defender for a one on one. Which kind of defence were England facing when Sterling came on? So really he got all 3 of those subs right didn’t he.
I’ll concede being better than Taylor, McLaren, and Hodgson doesn’t make you “good” however being better than Robson, Venables, Hoddle, Keegan, Eriksson, and Capello. That does make you good.
“He achieved the bare minimum most of the time”, this one just baffles me. Is a World Cup semi-final the bare minimum? No, that’s ridiculous. Is a Euros final the bare minimum? No, that’s ridiculous. Is a World Cup quarter-final the bare minimum? Arguable given how he’s improved the team over the last 6 years but still no. So really your statement should read ‘He surpassed predictions most of the time’.
Finally I’m not sure what iteration of England you’ve been watching but Southgate’s side are by far the most confident, assured, and dogmatic I’ve seen in nearly 40 years watching our national side. It’s the most obvious change he’s made, how can you think the opposite?
Dave, Manchester
Class system
We went out in the QF, that’s pretty normal for us really – let’s be honest.
But if you look at our squad, ooh, Kane, ooh, Saka, ooh Foden, ooh Trent(?)
Yet again we bamboozle ourselves with terms such as World-Class, “Generational talent” (whatever that means). I’ve said before, we need cast-iron descriptions of these, otherwise they mean nothing.
World-class for me is a player who’s in my World XI (plus subs). Somebody new comes along – they need to be better than my existing “team”. At that rate, how many England players would you have in a World XI?
As for generational talent – I’ve literally no idea what that means, it sounds like it’s better than World Class, but really – do we need a Generational XI too?
Also, where’s International Class? Seems like World Class is the starting point for these conversations.
All of this ignores the fact that football is a team game, and that’s why is so great to see Morocco doing well.
Simon (Hoping Messi wins, just to annoy Ronaldo further) S, Cheshire
Confused of Rwanda writes…
I’m not English but I have tended to support England at international tournaments in addition to our African representatives since my country Rwanda is never going to appear at the world cup-at least not in my lifetime. I’ve been following the debate following England’s exit and some of the discourse has left me feeling confused.
For starters you get a lot of people stressing how average England is and how big the gap there is between the team and the elite (sometimes the bar is lowered from ‘elite’ to ‘decent’) but yet paradoxically expect them to easily beat pretty much every team below the elite level (which also includes England’s level using this logic). That’s how you end up with plenty of people saying that England beating Croatia and Germany at the last Euros was no big deal. That’s how Denmark and Senegal become ‘easy’ games for them that they should win. I find this really strange. Is this a crap team or not? Make up your mind.
And that’s how you get plenty of people saying that England’s run to the Euro final and 2018 world cup semifinal doesn’t deserve any kudos because they had mainly easy fixtures. In this world cup alone, we saw Spain and Portugal get knocked out by Morocco (Spain having been knocked out by Russia at the 2018 world cup). Brazil were knocked out by Croatia (a team remember that England got no credit for beating at the Euros). How did the group stages work out for Belgium and Germany? At the last Euros, two members of the elite France and Netherlands were knocked out by teams that are considered below England’s level (Switzerland and Czech Republic). Why on earth do people expect the big team to always have it easy against the lesser ones? Every tournament we see multiple big teams get knocked out by smaller teams but somehow England staying the course shouldn’t count? Again- really strange.
Turiyo Damascene, Kigali, Rwanda
All the reasons to dislike Messi
Who do I want to win? France. It’s unjustified that they should be the first team to win back to back WCs since Pele era Brazil because they aren’t a truly great team.
However I really don’t want Messi to win a World Cup. I hate the hyped up media narrative around him and don’t really see why I should care about his World Cup dream and appointment with destiny any more than I should care about say Daley Blind’s or Dejan Lovren’s.
I want to see Messi cry like Neymar (the Lepidus to Messi’s Octavian and C Ronaldo’s Mark Antony).
Reasons I resent Messi are:
1) We are 15 years into the Messi – CR7 duopoly and it’s boring.
2) I resent the narrative focused on his personal glory. It’s a team sport after all
3) I thought the crying at the press conference when leaving Barcelona to take Qatar’s money was very silly
4) There’s something off-puttingly inhuman about him. Even Ronaldo, with his confrontation with the reality of his own physical decline and his own mortality, has a relatable quality totally missing with Messi.
5) He makes Argentina boring. I miss old school pre Messi Argentina with Ortega, Simeone, Riquelme etc. Now it’s like Messi and his 10 little helpers.
Anyone relate or am I alone with my petty resentment?
Matt, London
Amazing Atlas Stars
After five minutes and the attempts to play injured defenders, I was getting a bit worried. Was this when the wheels would fall off and Morocco would be shown to be frauds?
Far from it. They were magnificent. That overhead kick and the tackle by Amrabat on Mbappe. Ohhhh. They were moments that will make me smile for years.
So very proud of the Atlas Lions and at the bare minimum we will be the fourth best team in the world which is more than I ever hoped for. Thank you to the whole team and a well done to France.
Kal Skye (I told you that Amrabat was good)
Chelsea omens
It almost started with Juan Mata. A year on from Spain’s 2010 World Cup triumph, Mata wore the number 10 shirt for Chelsea. In 2014, Andre Schurrle wore the number 14 shirt for Chelsea and Germany won the 2014 edition. In 2018, Olivier Giroud wore number 18 and France won the 2018 WC. Now in 2022, Hakim Ziyech wears the number 22 jersey for Chelsea. I’m putting up my house in Morocco winning in Qatar…
Gitonga
…It had to end at some time.
Juan Mata won the World Cup in 2010 with Spain and then went on to play for Chelsea wearing the number 10 shirt.
In 2014, forward Andre Schurrle would wear 14 for Chelsea and then go on to Brazil to win the World Cup for Germany.
In January of 2018 another forward maybe noticing this sequence decided to sign for Chelsea and take the number 18 shirt, that summer Olivier Giroud would go on to win World Cup 2018 for France.
So, who wears number 22 for Chelsea in 2022? Incredibly a player who was one step away from the final however sadly for Chelsea number 22 Hakim Ziyech will not be adding to this list….although I heard a rumour Wesley Fofana wanted the 22 shirt when he signed but as it was taken had to take 33.
Cheers,
Paul K, London
Fading star
I have been trying to get a answer from the FA.
Why is our World Cup star on the teams shirts not prominent ,they put a white star on a white shirt and a blue star on a blue shirt and a red star on a red shirt.
Whý not put a white star on a red shirt and so on highlight our star and be proud of it and be proud of the team that one it.
Regards
Clive Butler
Anyone but Argentina
Livakovic did not impede Alvarez’s path, I can’t believe you’re going along with Walton here. Their hips collided. HIPS! If that challenge happens anywhere on the pitch and the players’ hips collide, that’s still not impeding progress, that’s even weaker than a shoulder barge.
Argentina have been gifted a path to the final by dodgy refereeing, as have France potentially, honestly though with the behaviour of Argentinean players throughout this tournament, I hope they get 8-1’d.
Cheers,
R
Spot on, George
I know this doesn’t make for great copy, but I wanted to express my profound appreciation for George writing in to sing the praises of international football and the World Cup. In an era when the money-men (or purse-people) are trying to cram more and more to further dilute the game, it is a nice reminder that sometimes less is actually more. Sometimes the lack of and longing for it makes it better. Maybe constant consumption isn’t all that. It’s a hard thing to learn in life, but sometimes getting all we want isn’t actually what we want. The World Cup is a lovely reminder that less of something makes it special. I could not tell you who played in a Champions League final in any given year, but I can still name the winner and host of every World Cup.
Niall, Annapolis
…read George’s email about how exciting international football is. While I agreed with his point about how most players are a little more committed to national teams than club teams I disagreed with most of the rest.
International football in this tournament has been very dull even by international standards. The pace and pressing of club football doesn’t exist at national level and many teams adopt the sit back and long ball counter tactic which makes games very dull to watch. When everyone is Tony pulis it can be quite a mind numbing experience and I actually fell asleep during quite a few of the matches.
Now it’s true some of the surprise results have been fun but it doesn’t change the fact the matches themselves ( in my opinion) haven’t been fun. Watching two teams nil nil each other is very seldom fun to watch, and that’s happened more at this world cup than any other world cup. Even traditionally attacking flair based team like Brasil has become a turgid defensive team because that’s the style of international football.
The crazy part is most of these players play for teams who do utilise attacking, fast and pressing tactics and yet this is almost never used at national level, everyone is so focused on not losing they forget to try and win or hope to get a lucky break from a long ball.
I haven’t enjoyed national level football since 1998, and I’ve watched every world cup and most of the euros. I’m not really a fan of England so I’m not emotionally invested in the England matches which is maybe why I don’t find it as thrilling as some others do. But as a Liverpool fan who also watches city regularly I’ve been fed on a diet of goals, attacking and pressing. Of teams whose sole goal is to win games and almost never adopt a safety first approach, national level just can’t compare.
Lee
Read more: Every Premier League club’s star of the 2026 World Cup features four English midfielders
