FIFA World Cup 2026: England Tournament Thread [R]

I think this is a good read from Rob Draper and think it’s pretty much what most people on here can relate to, have a read.

*Deep breath* 🧵
I’ve re-watched game from 56mins to clear my heads on the different thoughts from varying voices + work out whether this was psychological meltdown that is on the players (English DNA)? Or was it Tuchel (TT) losing the plot? Or maybe a mix?

— Rob Draper (@draper_rob) July 17, 2026

 

I have never seen a manager substitute a goal scorer in a WC semi final in my life. Taking Gordon off on Wednesday was the biggest betrayal of our national sport in history. If I previous thought the FA is full of communists I can only assume Tuchel was in on the plan to sabotage our game.

And now he's making his exit plan via a Guardian interview blaming English DNA. Over half the players have no English DNA.

 

This eclipses southgate's eff ups against Croatia and Italy. Because I don't remember watching southgate substituting a forward for a defender and a midfielder for a defender against Italy or Croatia. We might have gone into our shell In those games but Tuchel physicality sabotaged the Argentina game with his changes. This is unforgivable sabotage

 

Yes it really is this simple that one number 6 (two would be nice) and a top class GK and you win the world cup. Since that is not the current reality we have to evaluate what Tuchel did with what he does have and it was not good enough so he should be sacked. He took a tough situation and made it worse.

The thing is even Jude is an 8 he's not really a 10 the way a Zidane/Kaka or even Olmo Bruno Writz are. So it's really three 8's and only one of them is really comfortable protecting a back line which is Rice.

This is also why England leaked roughly two goals against most good teams including a few posts and goal taken back etc. Jude worked hard but he's not a great defender off the ball.

So it's like having three incredible outfielders in baseball playing them at 1st 2nd 3d base and wondering why lesser players in their correct positions are controlling the game. It's not rocket science. Does not matter how crap anyone thinks Parades McAllister DePaul are even Xhaka Freuler were a more balanced midfield same with Odegard Berge Berg.

 

So players make mistakes. Then whos fault is it? The player or the coach. I say it depends.

For single player mistakes.If a keeper makes a mistake like Green in 2010. Then it is Greens fault, but also Capello for picking him. Southgate missing a penalty in 96, for me 100% Vennables fault, because Southgate was the last player that should have been chosen to take the pen. Gerrards attempt to assist henry (?) in 2004, 100% Gerrards fault, Sven could not have seen that happendng. Beckhams 2 penalty misses in the same tournament, not Svens fault as Beckham was someone that could be expected to take a penalty.

More collective mistakes, still maybe the players fault. Like Konsa and Guehi being out of position when DR Congo scored.

But, a collective mistake by 10 players. Like what happend against Argentina. That is the coachs fault. No matter how it happend. If they did it because they were knackered, coachs fault for over using them. If they panicked. If they were demotivated by Tuchels comments after Norway. No matter the reason. It was Tuchels fault.

 

Axing the League cup would financially decimate the EFL unless it’s compensated. A winter break also would not be very popular if it meant cancelling Christmas matches. Everyone had a meltdown about only 1 PL match this season just gone. And because of Europe they is not a lot of time for a January break.

 

Against Norway

Midfield 3
Jude 34 passes
Rice 45 passes
Anderson 86 passes

Berg 34 passes
Berge 103 passes
Odegard 80 passes

Centre backs
Stones 81 passes
Guehi 79 passes

Ajer 45 passes
Heggem 49 passes

 

Wasn't there a winter break, post Christmas, about 3 years ago?

 

A week off split over two weeks with 10 teams each. Removed due to the changes to the European calander.

 

It would be mad to sack Thomas Tuchel — but fans turning can be terminal - Phil Neville
https://www.thetimes.com/sport/foot...-neville-tactics-defensive-coaching-t0vgpjzgb

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

Had England held on for another few minutes against Argentina, we would now be hailing coach as genius who took us to first final since 1966. Instead, we’re piling on

Like every England fan, I was bitterly disappointed to see the team lose to Argentina on Wednesday night.

But I’ve also been disappointed by the reaction towards Thomas Tuchel since that semi-final defeat. He’s been subjected to the kind of pile-on that we sadly sometimes see in our country. I once experienced it as an England player, after the mistake I made at Euro 2000 (conceding a late penalty in a defeat against Romania). And I’m actually quite embarrassed that we’re now treating Tuchel this way.

While some of the points being made by journalists, fans and pundits are valid, I’ve also read and heard some absolute nonsense. One ex-player was speaking on a podcast and said a Sir Alex Ferguson team would never have employed the low block; defended so deep. That just isn’t true.

I remember when Arsenal came to Old Trafford in the autumn of 2004, looking to extend their unbeaten run to 50 games. They had been christened “The Invincibles” and they were planning to mark the occasion, we later discovered, by wearing special “50” T-shirts.

Well, I can tell you there was no way either Sir Alex or the United players were going to let that happen. Not at our ground. We defended deep that day, and kicked the shit out of them.

I played in central midfield. From memory, I might have even been man of the match. But I remember how we defended for our lives, fighting like dogs in what the manager made very clear was a win-at-all-costs game. We scrapped and battled to a 2-0 win in much the same way Argentina have played at this World Cup.

During the Treble season in 1998-99, we met Inter Milan in the quarter-finals of the Champions League. We had won 2-0 at home but still had to face them at the San Siro, against a team that had Ronaldo, Roberto Baggio and Javier Zanetti. I ended up on the left wing, coming off the bench as a replacement for Ryan Giggs. Ronny Johnsen started the game alongside Roy Keane in central midfield. We basically had six defenders on the pitch. We dug in and ground out a result, to advance to the next round.

There are many ways to win a football match, and elite managers know when to use them. Just as there are many ways you can lose a game, including when you employ an approach that has worked for you in the past.

Some are now suggesting that Tuchel is not a world-class coach. Never mind the fact that he has won the Champions League, and did such a brilliant job in guiding the team to the semi-finals in the first place.

When Carlo Ancelotti watched his side surrender a three-goal lead in a Champions League final and lose to Liverpool on penalties, did that make him a bad coach? Unfortunately, this can be the nature of football.

England have played well at some points during the tournament but at other times they have struggled, and it owes much to the astute management of Tuchel that they got as far as they did. They have not been the best team at this World Cup. They were not the best team on Wednesday. The last four was probably their level on this occasion, and it should be considered a success.

Even so, they were five minutes away from beating a side I regard as the best in the world, with Lionel Messi its heartbeat. Five minutes. If England had stuck to the script, closed down and blocked the shots, cleared those crosses and final balls, displayed exactly the kind of fighting spirit that Argentina seem to have in abundance, Tuchel would now be hailed as a genius who took England to a World Cup final.

To instead claim he should be sacked, is not actually up to the job, is reactionary and completely ignores the reality of tournament football

I’ve been on the touchline at a World Cup, as the coach of England’s women, and I can imagine what was going through Tuchel’s mind. He was looking at players suffering from fatigue after those gruelling contests at altitude in Mexico City and in the heat of Miami. So he opted for a formula that had already served them well out here, switching to a back five to protect their lead. He did the same against Mexico, and against Norway, and it worked on those occasions.

Tactics didn’t cost England the game. Argentina simply had a more ruthless mentality in the final moments, and took advantage of the fact that England lacked at a critical time in those key areas.

England know Enzo Fernández, and yet before he scored they had allowed three unchecked shots from the edge of the box. Nico O’Reilly was brought on specifically to stop the service from wide areas, yet the crosses kept coming. Ezri Konsa and Dan Burn were deployed to provide aerial protection, yet Lautaro Martínez scored with a header.

The manager always takes responsibility but this is on the players. Tuchel’s plan had worked for the best part of half an hour so they have to take some accountability for lacking the mental toughness to see out those final five minutes. Some of them did look shattered. Declan Rice was gone and John Stones was clearly exhausted too. Reece James and Djed Spence appeared to have bouts of cramp. Jude Bellingham had run himself into the ground. Perhaps Tuchel could have sent on someone like Bukayo Saka but he clearly wasn’t fit. He would have started otherwise.

We live in a country where we look to destroy the England manager, and sometimes the players, when things go wrong, but that is not the way forward here.

I worry that it will not be sustainable if the fans continue to turn on Tuchel. Sir Gareth Southgate decided it was time to go when the supporters went for him and it does become very difficult. I left my job at Portland Timbers recently when I realised the crowd had turned against me.

But the FA is right to stand by Tuchel and I only hope that they can ride this out. They have built a system that works at St George’s Park, with the England senior men’s and women’s teams having now reached eight semi-finals and five finals between them since 2018.

The fact is, Tuchel will have learned a massive amount from this tournament; about his players and the unique demands of international football. He may look back and realise he made some mistakes. Perhaps he should have taken a different type of match-winner, like Phil Foden, Cole Palmer or Trent Alexander-Arnold.

But you do not sack a manager who just took you to the brink of a World Cup final. You continue to invest in them and maintain stability.

Here in the United States, they still have a game to play. I got some stick when I dismissed the third-place play-off as a waste of time at the 2019 Women’s World Cup.

But Tuchel should try to use it to lift spirits and provide a bit of optimism, because if they can beat France to a bronze medal that will amount to England’s best result at a World Cup since 1966. I certainly hope the players consider it something worth fighting for.

 

Rice played only 45 minutes, what's your point?

 

Mainly the version of Milner at Liverpool under Klopp. And yes, i'm aware that he was highly trusted to play in different positions throughout his career by different managers and he played at the highest level until he was 40. I don't think any of that is necessarily a bad thing.

And saying 'but Milner played out wide before he played CM' doesnt engage with anything I actually said earlier. I was comparing their positional profiles as CM, I never, ever, once claimed they played identical roles throughout their careers..

If you think the comparison is wrong, explain why in actual footballing terms. Otherwise, we're just wasting time talking past each other on some public forum. Try addressing the actual argument rather than opening with 'give it up mate' then ending with 'ai generated cack'. none of that makes any sense...

 

Oh sorry that's right Eze came on and added 14 passes to the midfield in the 2nd half.
The point is Norways midfield controlled the game because even with lesser players they have 3 players that play a different role. While England have three number 8s which is why the CBs have to play so many passes. Englands midfield is very unbalanced even though individually they are all great players.

 

🗣️ "The FA or Tuchel, they could both change their minds if it continues to be really vociferous."@GeorgeElek and @D_C_W discuss Tuchel's future as England manager on our new pod. pic.twitter.com/UEsxQ95Ezi

— The England Pod (@England_Pod) July 17, 2026

 

Jude scored off the goal kick he made a great run but it was not from controlled play or creativity or passing it was a run which is what he is great at.

Norway had 56% possession in the 2nd half more shots more big chances created more corners more touches in opponents box and they hit the cross bar and had a goal pulled back.

It's not that they dominated the game at all but it is Norway it is Berg Berge Odegard against what was maybe what a 400m midfield? The point is that when you play three number 8s even against Norway you will lose control for large stretches. Norways midfield was better made far more passes broke the press better and that should not be the case.

 

Excellent post, I think it was also you who posted even before the Argentina game about Tuchel being praised for things Southgate never would have been (or praised for things Southgate would have been criticised also).

It seems to me that a lot of people don't really pay that much attention and they judge games based on preconceived notions, so Tuchel has won a champions league, therefore its good. The amount of times I saw Tuchel praised for how much more exciting England were than Southgate's England was bizarre for example. Or claiming he won games that Southgate wouldn't which just didn't stand up to Southgate's record at all.

Or the common one of praising how good Tuchel's in game decision making which even before the Argentina game was a mixed bag. All tournament we've struggled with midfield changes due to have zero like for like replacements to slot in.

For balance its certainly not been all bad either, but you'd have to say that very few of the many unconventional decisions he made ended up being justified (really just his use of Spence). I have never seen a manager pick a 23 man tournament squad, yet alone a 26 man squad, that limited their options as much as Tuchel managed to do.

 

Wayne Rooney says Tuchel should be only sacked if Guardiola is willing. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c304ldrmmero

 

This was clearly a big issue in the Norway game but in general a lot of these formation changes ended up being because we didn't have any actual central midfielders to come on so we'd have to adjust the entire side to make any changes in that position.

The Mainoo situation will remain a curiosity for the ages. He never seemed a good fit for what Tuchel wants but its remarkable he didn't make it on at all. He must surely have only decided against using Mainoo after the tournament started also, otherwise surely, surely he would have replaced Livramento with a central midfielder.

 

According to the Daily Mail Tuchel was unimpressed with Mainoo in training during the group stage and had been considering starting him against Ghana before that.

 

To me that suggests a lack of trust in a way of playing. Change formation if you're chasing the game or to close out the last 5-10 minutes but changing it multiple times per game is nuts. The players are going to struggle keeping to the formation if they have to play out of position. There isn't a lot of time to coach multiple formations either.