Dan

He could but I would say the smart money would be on no. I'd agree that he has done more in the game than virtually anybody of his age ever, but players development is rarely linear. Him being better than Messi at 16 doesn't mean he'll be better at 20, for example. He's an absolute star though. I didn't realise quite how good he actually was. Fantastic footballer - as is Nico Williams.

Carsley does seem to have a bit more about his game than Southgate does, but I do fear a bit with England that they're not going to respond to another 'pull' type of manager. I was reading about this once that there are two types of manager, a pull manager and a push manager. The simplest way to put it was the 'pull' manager is very much about bringing everybody together and trying to play above the sum of your parts, a 'push' manager was more about challenging your players and placing expectation on them to deliver. A pull manager would be more suited to a smaller team trying to punch above its weight, a push manager would be more suited to a bigger team expected to win trophies. I think Southgate was very much a pull manager, which was what England did suit back in 2016, but have since become a team who requires the latter. I can see the logic in Carsley but I do think we've hit a point now where we need a manager who will demand trophies of himself and his players. Mourinho for all his style of football criticism I think has become suited to knockout football and it's no coincidence he's won Roma a European trophy, made the final of another (only to hit the most unstoppable of forces - Sevilla in the Europa League) yet probably underperformed in the league. The more I think about who England should appoint the more I think Thomas Tuchel makes sense. I think there is scope for things to go wrong under Tuchel, but he does have a trick up his sleeve in cup competitions.

I'm not somebody who thinks it has to be somebody English at all costs but I do think if it's a foreign manager it needs to be one fairly well connected to the country, has managed here a while etc... this would qualify Klopp, Mourinho but probably discount say Allegri. If it was up to me I'd have it so that the manager has to have the same eligibility as the players. I've never understood why that isn't the rule.

Absolutely nothing about them so far tells me their banter era is over. In-fact the Glazers might've just been the supporting act.

That's fucking annoying. Sounded by all accounts he'd have been a real coup.

I didn't realise how good Nico Williams, Dani Olmo and Lamine Yamal actually were.

It's the right time. He's easily been the best England manager of my lifetime and I'll not take that away from him - the thing that causes the debate is that those who proceeded him were all total failures in the job. The bar has been raised but I can't help but think it was a tournament too many. Euro 2024 was a poor showing despite somehow making the final. Fair fucks though, could've easily stayed on and chose not to. I do wish him well.

Fatawu's really good. Think he immediately becomes our most valuable player.

I dunno if I've become too driven by the overall winners but I find myself putting a minimum of 8 Spaniards in there. I think there were quite clearly the best.

The Belgium example for me was how they seem to get totally different treatment, Belgium, despite their pretty mediocre history were largely deemed a failure under Martinez when having a golden generation, yet England, who've achieved very similar (generally beaten teams you expect, lost when seriously tested) are made out to be OK. How do people simultaneously pan Belgium, yet rim England?

If trophies aren't a measure of success then I'm in the wrong game. If England want to be considered a top team, who have made genuine progress, then they need to be measured by the metrics the top teams are. One trophy in our history is shit. Roberto Martinez gets absolute barrels for what he did (well didn't do) at Belgium - a historically mediocre team due to them having a very gifted generation of players coming through at the time. I'd argue he had it fairly harsh in some ways. Why do England not get held to these standards? We have a similar situation and frankly, are a bigger country, it's a bigger deal here. Why do Belgium get panned, but England don't?

He was lining up Gallagher and Trippier to come on at 1-1 as well. We play like we're Sweden or Norway. Fluking the final is going to ensure nothing changes as well. It's the same old story with England.

Neville needs calling out more. He's not a great judge. I'm fed up of hearing pundits with a conflict of interest.

It is strange how similar to Rooney Kane has become. Remember Hodgson shoehorning Rooney into the team in midfield in Euro 2016. That Trent midfield business was not dissimilar in this tournament. The more analysis I read of this tournament the performance the more I wish Slovakia had just beaten us. It's actually annoying this generally abject level served up can now be rebuffed by hiding behind making a final. One of the biggest fluke runs I've ever seen. Forget Greece & Portugal if we'd gone all the way I think it would've been the worst side I've ever seen win a World Cup or Euros. Even yesterday I've no idea how we kept it to 2-1. It was a hammering.

It's sounding fairly hopeful. It reminds me of the Fofana pursuit - a lot of money, a bit of a gamble, but extremely high upside and enough anecdotes that he could be a genuinely elite level player. I still think Fofana would've been without injuries as well.