HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Or Poch, or Potter, or Klopp or anyone else not in a role at the timeIt's an 18-month contract, is that right? So when we get Ko'd in the last 16 at the WC, Pep will step in....
Swango1980
Well-known member
Its a worry if the FA would only wait until a manager is out of work. Probability wise, the best managers are usually likely to have a job. The ones not in a job have probably either been sacked, or taking time out
Orikoru
Tour Winner
Never understood this argument. Would he be better if he missed the penalties then? Plenty of top strikers have not been good penalty takers - Agüero springs to mind for example, missed plenty. Even Messi's penalty ratio isn't great. Scoring penalties is a skill as much as anything else. They all count as one goal.
Bdill93
Undisputed King of FOMO
But if he wasn't on the pitch - someone else would just bag it. That's the point - its not a goal he's created himself by a piece of great play or anything.
You're telling me that this year, when you watch England you actually think we look better with Kane on the pitch than Watkins? Not sure what you're watching if so!
I'm also not fussed if its not Watkins, I'm happy with another option too - this isn't a "He's a Villa player" thing - we just do look way better when our striker is stretching defences and pressing everywhere.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Probably a good thing England have a player who is decent at taking penalties though.
Transfermarkt says Kane has scored 80 penalties out of 91 (88%). Watkins has scored 4 penalties out of 9 (44%).
I'm guessing Kane is also miles ahead of Watkins in many other attacking statistics. Perhaps all of them? In the last year, when Kane hasn't scored and played poorly my people's judgment, it isn't necessarily because he is a weaker player. Often, the whole England team were poor. Southgate probably wasn't playing a style that could get the most out of Kane, and Kane was also not likely fully fit for a few of those games. There is no guarantee that had Watkins or Solanke played instead, suddenly England would have been fantastic and they would have scores loads of goals.
For me, Harry Kane is miles ahead of any other English striker right now, when fit. It is up to the manager to find a system that suits him. Trying to play Kane, Foden and Bellingham all in attacking roles probably didn't suit the team, as they all try and get into the same position.
Bdill93
Undisputed King of FOMO
EXACTLY! Which is the point I'm making - England look better with Watkins on the pitch.
Watkins wouldnt take the penalties, that's not actually something he's good at! Palmer would or Bellingham or Saka - we have penalty takers in the team.
I have not said and will not say that Watkins is a better player overall than Kane - of course he isn't! He suits the current setup better though.
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Didn't we have this debate during the Euros?
Swango1980
Well-known member
It depends on the formation and players then that you want to pick. Obviously, having 3 or 4 players in the Number 10 role doesn't seem logical. I get it, your idea is to remove Kane and have Watkins running in behind. Yes, that has got to be better than what England were doing.
For me, I'd have Kane up front, but make a choice between Bellingham or Foden as the attacking minded midfielder, not play both (unless Bellingham can play deeper, which is what he used to do before his attacking role for Madrid last season). Then have two attacking wide players that can run in behind when the space is there (e.g. Saka and Gordon, or Palmer if he is decent on the left?)
I tried to create a poll where I'd list all potential English players, and people could pick the ones they'd want to see in their starting 11. Would have been interesting to see what the votes were. Sadly, a poll only allows up to 10 options to select from, not the 20-30 I needed
Bdill93
Undisputed King of FOMO
Orikoru
Tour Winner
Or they might miss. I shouldn't need to tell an England fan of all people the virtues of actually being good at penalties. And he is well known for being able to win penalties himself.
Kane is a better all-round player than Watkins and a better goalscorer. Watkins has more pace, that is about it. When you bring him on in the last 20 minutes against a tired defence, of course he looks good. That is literally why you use him that way. Starting games I don't think he would have as much impact.
We've said it time and time again but there just needs to be a system that works for our best players. Get Palmer and Saka playing off Kane and getting beyond him, the way Dele and Son used to do for Spurs in our better years.
Yes.
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Good. I thought I had drifted back in time to a twilight zone
Orikoru
Tour Winner
Pretty good summary of this thread really. I'm sure we were having the same debates in 2017, except the other player was Vardy instead of Watkins.
Bdill93
Undisputed King of FOMO
Vardy would have been a better option then... proven winner
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
Something a little different to the Kane debate - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ckg23yj959ro
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
One thing I will say on Tuchel,he needs to shave his head.
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Do all the haters saying we should have an English manager support teams that have a foreign manager? Should Manchester City fans be calling for Pep to be sacked and replaced by a Manc or should Liverpool only ever have a scouser in charge? Some people have very narrow minds when it comes to football
RichA
Well-known member
Just watching the news conference. The combover is disappointing. As is the FA CEO's centre parting.
AmandaJR
Money List Winner
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I agree Kane is out of position to much.
Coming to deep he just gets in the way .
If he does get the ball and plays a nice ball wide the winger can’t cross it as there is nobody in the box then.
Maybe Tuchel is just what England need .
A no nonsense man who will do his own thing ,not an FA yes man.
That’s the reason he didn’t go to UTD he would not be in control allegedly!
Swango1980
Well-known member
No. But I've never had an expectation that all Man Utd players must be from Manchester, and I'm sure Liverpool fans have no expectation their players should be from Liverpool. So, I don't expect that condition on the manager either. Of course, any local lad that plays or manages a club side usually always gets more leeway and fan support, all things being equal.
I'm personally not dead against hiring a foreign manager for an international side, although I wouldn't mind it if the manager had to be the same nationality as the side they managed. I also think it adds more controversy when a manager is hired from a nation in which you are pretty big rivals with. Given England have pretty big rivalries with Germany and Scotland, a manager from those locations doesn't feel like the optimum decision.
I also guess national football is where a lot of fans get to show their national pride, which doesn't really exist in club football. So I get why they would prefer and an English manager. You win together, and you mourn together
