I want to win tournaments obviously and we couldn't have finished any closer than we did here. We went through the tournament undefeated and largely untroubled. You're pessimistic so state that we were flat as a fart for long periods in practically every game. I look at it and see that no team really troubled us, every game up to the final we won comfortably and with something in hand. We don't need to blast every team away for me to think that we are doing well. I could see Southgate had a game plan and it was working as we got better and better as we were growing into the tournament.
But we came within a whisker of winning a tournament. You can't expect to control every game. Conceding posession and soaking up pressure is a valid tactical choice which has served us well. Its judicial use has got us to penalty kicks in a Euros Final. Seems to me, the questions that need asking are "why can't we graciously accept defeat and look forward to this team developing further in time for the World Cup?".
If they were “there fir the taking “ (which they never were at any point in the tournament) then how was the win fully deserved? Surely they were lucky we didn’t “take” them and therefore lucky to win? It can’t be both! they were lucky to win in the end. Despite being so tactically naive, Southgate managed to take this to a penalty shoot out. It came down to their keeper being a better guesser and nothing else
Or defeat from the jaws of victory. We were nowhere near winning from twenty past eight last night. Sometimes I wonder who's more terrified of an England win - England fans or Scotland fans.
How many attackers do teams normally play in a 5-3-2 formation? Personally thought the 2 was the attackers, the 3 was the midfiders and the 5 the defenders. Unless I’m tactically naive.
Only 2 attackers and the rest were midfielders and defenders. I was wondering how many attackers he wanted on the pitch in a final
I must think like exile 2 because I bet every neutral watching after the first 10 minutes would be backing Italy to win, it was bloody horrible watching us, defeat was written all over the team.
Our first ever major final in the European Championship and undefeated throughout the tournament It's not 'standing off' or 'desperate to be on the back foot' - It's called keeping the ball and killing the game off. See Denmark in extra time for how apt and professional we are at doing that.
Yet they weren't defeated playing football in 120 minutes. I thought we'd win 1-0 tbf, I thought we'd see the game out.
Except we didn't keep the ball against Italy, did we? We sat on the edge of the D for seventy minutes and barely strung two passes together.
We were winning until the 67th minute. And then weren't losing until we got to penalties. We held out against an Italy side that arguably contained more world class players than our side for the majority of the game. Taking the lead so early may actually have been detrimental to us as it meant that the onus was on Italy to attack.
I saw the BBC say something similar to that last sentiment, how he was the difference. Didn't they both save two a piece?
They were the better team once they changed their system and we should have. But they created little. Pickford made 1 great save and one worldy. Unfortunately the worldy dropped the Italian way off the post. We didn’t lose the game. We lost the tie on penalties. Almost on the toss of a coin in reality
Good point actually. Both keepers saved 2. We missed one (the miss reminded me of Jeff Whitley’s penalty)! We may still not have won, but we wouldn’t have lost as quickly.
I don't think it's unfair to say that allowing Italy so much possession was taking a big risk. Both of their centre backs were booked but we gave them an easy ride. We obviously settled for penalties, presumably because Southgate thought we could win and exorcise the demons of his past. That's the impression I got, could be totally wrong.