How Gareth Southgate tried the Tottenham template with England

[kmk]

Your off your rocker

Are you a Hendo fanboy?

He's is average and not going to get any better.

 

[eddiev14]

Sterling has been one of the most productive players in the league and is only going to get better under Pep. Wellbeck is reliable, and solid if you want press. But surely his injury problems will take their toll on his body.

Sorry, this isn't to have a go at you at all, but for me this is actually part of what is wrong with England.

X player is playing well for X club, so he needs to be in the team.

Regardless of the formation, the style, the tactics. Fit him in.

It's not as simple as that.

Now Sterling as an example isn't a great one as I'm sure he could play in the system but this rhetoric blindsides us all the time with England.

"Get Vardy in the team!"
"Where's Sturridge?!"
"Drinkwater just won the league, he should start!"
"Rooney's the captain, where can we fit him in?"
"How do we get the best out of Lampard/Gerrard?"

It's never about the team. Always about individuals.

Why?

Because we have no team, no style that fans can identify with to understand what the hell we are trying to do.

Also the debate on England is very clearly driven by the tribalism of the fans of the club the player plays for, or the media who just want to stir a debate.

The BBC love doing it, as you can see by them canvassing opinion on their website to turn into more headlines to prolong the tedium of the debate.

Rarely do I hear any England fan say 'yes he's playing well but we've got a system and if he shows he can be effective in that system, then he can play'. Basically because no one knows what we're trying to do!

For the FA and England manager, adopting that philosophy takes balls. The last England manager to show some balls to stick to his style was Hoddle, dropping Gazza before France 98 and making Beckham show him he could play a different, more central role in training before bringing him in.

IMO England hasn't had a clearly identifiable system or style of play since and I think that's where we need to start. Picking form players and throwing them together won't change a thing.

 

[Shadydan]

I would swap Henderson for Harry Winks who is already a far superior player.

lol

 

[danielneeds]

Sorry, this isn't to have a go at you at all, but for me this is actually part of what is wrong with England.

X player is playing well for X club, so he needs to be in the team.

Regardless of the formation, the style, the tactics. Fit him in.

It's not as simple as that.

Now Sterling as an example isn't a great one as I'm sure he could play in the system but this rhetoric blindsides us all the time with England.

"Get Vardy in the team!"
"Where's Sturridge?!"
"Drinkwater just won the league, he should start!"
"Rooney's the captain, where can we fit him in?"
"How do we get the best out of Lampard/Gerrard?"

It's never about the team. Always about individuals.

Why?

Because we have no team, no style that fans can identify with to understand what the hell we are trying to do.

Also the debate on England is very clearly driven by the tribalism of the fans of the club the player plays for, or the media who just want to stir a debate.

The BBC love doing it, as you can see by them canvassing opinion on their website to turn into more headlines to prolong the tedium of the debate.

Rarely do I hear any England fan say 'yes he's playing well but we've got a system and if he shows he can be effective in that system, then he can play'. Basically because no one knows what we're trying to do!

For the FA and England manager, adopting that philosophy takes balls. The last England manager to show some balls to stick to his style was Hoddle, dropping Gazza before France 98 and making Beckham show him he could play a different, more central role in training before bringing him in.

IMO England hasn't had a clearly identifiable system or style of play since and I think that's where we need to start. Picking form players and throwing them together won't change a thing.

I agree with your point generally, and it kind of goes with what I've been saying about using the Spurs/Liverpool DNA for England, but Sterling is the actually antithesis of that. The fact that he struggled with a move - and a team who did not know how to use him - made him a scape goat for England. Now he's got a manager who knows how to utilise him he is thriving again. And obviously Pep's style fits in very well with the Poch and Klopp approach. They are the three most modern managers in the PL.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...tottenham-template-with-england-a7357986.html

Interim manager attempted to copy the Spurs tactical plan against Slovenia - but it wasn't a complete success

Gareth Southgate made one particular change to the England team that faced Slovenia on Tuesday night that was fairly widely reported this week.

But the repercussions went further than the England interim manager losing his place on Wayne Rooney’s Christmas card list. The outcome of bringing Eric Dier into midfield for the Manchester United man completely changed the way the team played and had an impact all over the pitch.

Before kick-off Southgate pointed out the swap was not like for like in terms of personnel – but it also utterly changed the tactics.

England adopted the Tottenham technique – nearly.

Tottenham’s title challenge last season and their impressive start to this has been built on manager Mauricio Pochettino playing with his full-backs, Kyle Walker and Danny Rose (who happen to be the England full-backs), high up the pitch when his team are in possession, providing attacking options, strength in numbers and crosses into the box. In order that the defence is not exposed, Dier drops in between the centre-backs who move wide to cover the marauding full-backs.

Southgate, emboldened by having the same trio in his team, tried the same trick. But there were key differences, and subsequently problems, all over the pitch.

Full-backs Danny Rose and Kyle Walker are key to the way England - and Tottenham - play
When Rose and Walker push on for Spurs, the “wide” midfielders ahead of them in the 3 of their 4-2-3-1 formation are Christian Eirksen and Erik Lamela both of whom are not really touchline-hugging wingers. They are happy to drift inside and pick up the ball in dangerous areas outside the area. They have a neat touch, great vision.

For England the wide midfielders in their 4-2-3-1 against Slovenia were Theo Walcott and Jesse Lingard who are much more traditional ‘chalk on your boots’ wingers. The result was Walcott and Lingard looking cramped and crowded out with their full-backs invading their space and treading on their toes.

Walker and Walcott, in particular, spent the evening on completely different wavelengths with the former often remonstrating with the latter about where he should or should not be. At one point, Walcott tried to drop a five-yard pass to Walker but underplayed it because the pair were almost holding hands. There just wasn’t the space was for two wingers on one side. As a result, Walcott had fewer touches of the ball than any England starter, including Joe Hart.

Lingard fared little better down the left. The pair tried to drift inside to receive the ball – Lingard managed it a little better in the game’s dying stages - but were not found by their team-mates. When they were, Walcott in particular does not have the touch of an Eirksen and it made for a frustrating night for the Arsenal man. He was hooked after an hour.

But it wasn’t just in an attacking sense that England failed to pull off the Tottenham technique.

When Rose and Walker attack in the white of Spurs the central defenders Jan Vertonghen or Toby Alderweireld move wide to cover but both are used to playing as full-backs (Vertonghen often does it for Belgium) so it is not an alien concept for them.

Jesse Lingard and Danny Rose (either side of Andros Townsend) leave the pitch at the end of the draw with Slovenia (Getty)
When Roes and Walker attack in the white of England it is Gary Cahill and John Stones who are asked to cover. Cahill played on the right of the two central defenders against Slovenia and is an old fashioned centre-half: good in the tackle, strong in the air. However, he doesn’t have the experience of playing full-back so asking him to cover for the marauding Walker is asking for trouble – which duly came England’s way to the extent that they were fortunate to bring a point home from the World Cup qualifier.

Cahill, whose distribution was awful and whose habit of diving in was so nearly exposed, will struggle to stay in the team if Southgate persists with this way of playing. John Stones is much more adaptable and much more comfortable on the ball and looks like a fixture for years to come.

There is a school of thought that England should play 4-4-2 so blessed, comparatively, are they in the striking department. But the Tottenham tactical plan could work, too, if it is built around the five Spurs players of Rose, Walker, Dier, Dele Alli and Harry Kane. Many World Cup-winning teams have been constructed around a nucleus of players from the same club: Germany and Bayern, Spain and Barcelona for example.

With that thought, though, we might just be getting ahead of ourselves…

Jesus that sounds familiar:

That was a lot like watching Spurs early on this season, hardly surprising really, lots of our players and a very risk averse 4231. I do feel for Southgate a little because I think he's missing England's best player over the last 12 months in Lallana and a newly confident Sterling, who at least give the attack some guile and craft and a different balance of skills and tenacity in the forward press.

Walcott and Lingard are just direct fuckers that don't really bring any inventiveness or craft and Sturridge is not the fulcrum that the others can hub off, he just plays for himself.

Dier was pretty poor, should have cost England a goal and IMO, if he's going to play it needs to be as the central DM off which two more progressive players can play each side, like Henderson, Alli or Wiltshire or he should be moved back to CB, and provide England with two ball playing CB's but with Dier offering a little more robustness to balance off Stones footballness.

The second half wasn't as bad as the last game, at least England were trying to pass the ball but Southgate has always been a manager who talks the talk but fails to walk the walk, he did exactly the same with the U21's last summer, saying he wanted to play a pass and move progressive way then after one good performance but unlucky result he reverted to picking players counter intuitive to that, dropping the likes of Carroll, Hughes etc for a bunch of big powerful athletes.

Since getting the big job he's been banging on about wanting players to take "risk" then he picks Dier and Henderson in a CM2 and a bunch of fucking whippets who just get in the way of the full back whippets.

There were elements that yield small promise. England at least try to play out now, even if they did make the odd mistake doing it, and I think if Southgate goes back to the 433, fucks off Rooney, gets Lallana, Sterling and Kane in the front three, gets the FB's overlapping, the CM3 right, England could actually start to look like a young team with a bit of vim.

 

[Frozen_Waffles]

I agree with the idea, we just need to add Sterling and Lallana to the setup and it will be pretty decent.

As for a controversial statement, I actually think Lingard could get better in that role and play on the left albeit a bit narrower.

Having that type of team and playing the press could work. We are just missing someone to replace Cahill at the back.

 

[Hoops]

I was past the point of caring about engand 4 tournaments ago. I wish they would bore off.

 

[oskathegobshite]

For me we must now go -

------------------Hart

Walker Smalling Stones Rose

--------------Dier Alli

Sterling Lallana Welbeck

--------------Kane

I know Alli is not too clever at centre mid but I believe he will end up playing there. You can stick Henderson or Drinkwater in if you are trying to keep it tight away from home.

Other players I would have in my set up - Rashford, Vardy, Sturridge, Clyne, Shaw, Barkley, Butland, Keane, Walcott, Winks

Don't think I am missing anyone...

 

[eddiev14]

I agree with your point generally, and it kind of goes with what I've been saying about using the Spurs/Liverpool DNA for England, but Sterling is the actually antithesis of that. The fact that he struggled with a move - and a team who did not know how to use him - made him a scape goat for England. Now he's got a manager who knows how to utilise him he is thriving again. And obviously Pep's style fits in very well with the Poch and Klopp approach. They are the three most modern managers in the PL.

Yeah I'd go along with that. Like I said, I was more using what you said to make another point about how we look at the England team.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Sorry, this isn't to have a go at you at all, but for me this is actually part of what is wrong with England.

X player is playing well for X club, so he needs to be in the team.

Regardless of the formation, the style, the tactics. Fit him in.

It's not as simple as that.

Now Sterling as an example isn't a great one as I'm sure he could play in the system but this rhetoric blindsides us all the time with England.

"Get Vardy in the team!"
"Where's Sturridge?!"
"Drinkwater just won the league, he should start!"
"Rooney's the captain, where can we fit him in?"
"How do we get the best out of Lampard/Gerrard?"

It's never about the team. Always about individuals.

Why?

Because we have no team, no style that fans can identify with to understand what the hell we are trying to do.

Also the debate on England is very clearly driven by the tribalism of the fans of the club the player plays for, or the media who just want to stir a debate.

The BBC love doing it, as you can see by them canvassing opinion on their website to turn into more headlines to prolong the tedium of the debate.

Rarely do I hear any England fan say 'yes he's playing well but we've got a system and if he shows he can be effective in that system, then he can play'. Basically because no one knows what we're trying to do!

For the FA and England manager, adopting that philosophy takes balls. The last England manager to show some balls to stick to his style was Hoddle, dropping Gazza before France 98 and making Beckham show him he could play a different, more central role in training before bringing him in.

IMO England hasn't had a clearly identifiable system or style of play since and I think that's where we need to start. Picking form players and throwing them together won't change a thing.

Winner.

I saw it in the Euros. Hodgson had a clear remit from the FA to work to their new "DNA" of possession based team that played dynamic systems (433/diamond) and who played on the front foot. Then all we heard was how Vardy should be playing or Drinkwater should be in the squad. When they had just won the league playing for a team who were the opposite of the direction England were moving in - a team who had the below 50% possession most matches and played counter attacking football.

The media and knucklehead football fans don't get it though. They seem to think all you have to do is pick the best 11 players put them on the pitch and then they will play amazing attacking football and smash every team 5-0. I find it puzzling. We give club managers whole pre-seasons to train their squad every day to the way they want to play. Then also expect them to bring in players that fit "their philosophy" before most level headed fans starting judging performance.

But when when it comes to an England manager fans expect him to pick players from all different teams playing different styles and then, in Southgates case, expect him to coach a fully functioning fluid attacking unit in only a few training sessions. It makes no sense.

Now, i'm not saying Southgate will be good or bad but there is no way i'm judging him after his first few couple of games and a few training sessions.

 

[Danners9]

Sorry, this isn't to have a go at you at all, but for me this is actually part of what is wrong with England.

X player is playing well for X club, so he needs to be in the team.

Regardless of the formation, the style, the tactics. Fit him in.

It's not as simple as that.

Now Sterling as an example isn't a great one as I'm sure he could play in the system but this rhetoric blindsides us all the time with England.

"Get Vardy in the team!"
"Where's Sturridge?!"
"Drinkwater just won the league, he should start!"
"Rooney's the captain, where can we fit him in?"
"How do we get the best out of Lampard/Gerrard?"

It's never about the team. Always about individuals.

Why?

Because we have no team, no style that fans can identify with to understand what the hell we are trying to do.

The same thing applies to finding a manager.

If Southgate does well in these 4 games - against Malta, Slovenia, Scotland and a friendly with Spain - give him the job - say the press. After the first game, more of them came out and said it. Including Sir Trevor Brooking. Being able to beat Malta (2 wins in their last 30 games) doesn't prove anything.

Trying to implement a new system in three days is as ambitious as it is naive, and illustrates the problem with international football. Spurs and Liverpool should provide the basis of the team if this is the way they want to go because the Man Utd and Arsenal players undo all the good work. Hodgson played a youthful side against Germany before the Euros, and won, and then went against it for the actual tournament.

This is England, rinse and repeat.

I liked it when Southgate said: 'I'm involved in a sport I love in an industry that, at times, I don't like' - at least he sees it for what it is. Maybe he is the right one for this job, or maybe not, but whoever is in charge needs free reign to do whatever they want - even if it means losing a few. Sadly, the past has shown that the managers revert to what has previously worked - not necessarily worked well, just enough to get them out of the qualification stage - and nothing changes.

 

[degoose]

Funny before I read it my immediate thought was but England don't have Eriksen and Lamela

Mine was instantly England don't have two good centre backs. Stones is way too lightweight and has crap distribution plus he thinks he is Toby with his ball control(he wishes) and Cahill is now just awful. You need good mobile defenders for the system to work and pushing high.

 

[TaoistMonkey]

Getting an England cap now is like being called up for Jury Duty.

 

[mickdale]

Getting an England cap now is like being called up in front of a Jury.

 

[Mornstar]

I was playing around on BBC earlier on and they had a make your own England squad. I adopted the spurs formula and went with the following.



Edit: just seen that a near identical team has been posted above.

Agree except I would play Dier and Ali in mifield together, and fit rashford somewhere amongst the attacking three behind Kane. Henderson and Dier is just too defensive for me.

 

[TaoistMonkey]

All i can think of when I hear his name is......

"Gareth Southgate Badger"

 

[bceej]

Exactly. The whole team needs to do it.

Interestingly the best England have played in the high press, full-backs-in-play style was when we played Germany away.

We had the Spurs boys in the team, plus Lallana (Poch/Klopp), Henderson (Klopp) and Welbeck, who is possibly England's only recognised wide forward.

And that is so important. The whole team needs a lot of experience in being trained to play that way or it simply doesn't work.

If you drop Rooney, Lingard, Walcott into that setup they won't do it right. You'll invite far too much pressure on your midfield and won't get the full backs into the game.

This basically nullifies the principal threat of the system and, as a result, you end up creating very little. Which seems to me exactly what happened to England last night.

Exactly. The English system should reflect a style that the most elite players play in. In the Premier League it is the time of the press. This isn't a flash in the pan so I'd expect it to be embraced.

Us, City and Liverpool seem to be the main perpetrators...

 

[mpickard2087]

The only way it resembled Tottenham was the 4-2-3-1 shape and that it featured a few of our players. Apart from that all very tenuous.