He always had a great initial plan. But if anything deviated from that original plan, if the other team scored a fluke goal...he never EVER had a backup plan. The man would sit there like a retard and just take it. When Brazil scored that fluke goal in 02 to take the lead he honestly had no idea what to do. He decided to long ball it for the next 30+ minutes when he should have been pushing everyone forward for the equalizer and sending on offensive substitutions. Instead he made awful ones. If his initial plan worked, we looked awesome. If it didn't, we were buggered. The mark of a great tactician is working with what happens on the field in real time. Changing the formation and tactics on the fly. He could never do that. He couldn't even do it at half time. He was maddening if the team got a 1 goal lead. You knew the moment we got the lead, we'd play 10 or 11 behind the ball for the rest of the match. When England took the quick lead against Portugal in 2004 and Brazil in 2002 I knew we would lose because we would stop trying to score. And both times that was exactly what happened. We had Brazil on the ropes when we scored the opener. Instead of playing for a second and maybe a third, he decided to have us try and defend a one goal lead against one of the most gifted teams offensively in football history. He was over-rated when we got to the tournaments but he always got us into tournaments. Sure, he got us three QFs in a row. The first, in 02, he choked the game away for us. We had a chance to make the semis and actually beat Brazil, the eventual winners. He had no balls and attempted to win 1-0. Against mother********ing Brazil. Even after it was 1-1, he still played like we had the lead. In 04, he did the same thing. Quick lead, defend. In 06, he played for penalties. We're England, who in their right bloody mind takes an England team and tries to play for penalties? The fact of the matter is he had this unprecedented success with those finishes but he also had some of the most talented England squads in decades. We would never win a title with Sven. Not with his coaching style and lack of cajones. Would we always qualify? Yes. If that's all England strives for, Sven should always be coach. If we want to have the potential to win titles, then Sven won't be missed. But even for 2002, he needed Beckham's wonder goal at the death to get us there. Maybe in ten, fifteen years we'll look back on Sven with more appreciation. But the teams that have won the last two world cups have not been "teams of the ages" and Greece in 2004? Besides Spain winning the 2008 Euros, we've had a team that could compete against any of those teams for the trophy. And we didn't accomplish that with Sven. Sven may have squandered our best chances of winning a title and with that, I don't believe he is under-rated at all. He's not a bad coach, he's no twit like McSven. But he's massively over-rated.