Dan

Signings have to be taken in the context of the whole summer and squad as well. Is Ayew in our best XI? Probably not. Is Reid? Probably not. Is Okoli? Debatable. We'll find out. Is Golding? Highly doubt it. Is Fatawu? Yes, but he was here last season. As it is now, even with this signing, our first XI would be weaker than a year ago! They're not getting the full slaughtering from me until the summer is over and there's been no action. The Soule approach tells me there is money there and that they could yet go for it. But fuck me. That first game is coming around soon and it's all just so uninspiring at the minute. I want us in for players like Matt O'Riley and Seb Nanasi. Types with real upside. They're both stepping up to come here as well. If Southampton can be in for O'Riley then get straight on it.

I'm slightly more receptive having read the above but I just don't really see the need in signing both him and Bobby De Cordova-Reid. He's 33 in September and Leicester being Leicester will go and give him a silly contract because our director of football is absolutely hopeless and couldn't sell avocado to a vegan. If this was a free transfer and we'd not already signed Reid, I'd have gotten it a bit more, but you just know we're going to somehow end up shelling out £6mil and a £10mil contract over three years when we'd never get anything like that for our equivalent. The direction under Cooper is already worrying me. I think because of Marinakis' behaviour he was given a lot of a pass for their recruitment approach but I'm already seeing that he's going to be quite a costly operation. There's more to football than a sell on fee but we're not in a healthy position at the minute and we'd be better served going for younger prospects - and nobody will convince me we can't attract them.

Full backs became basically redundant for us. Doyle on the left becoming like a centre back. Ricardo on the right becoming like a centre mid. It could make it a quite tricky game for the wingers at times.

I liked the look of him. I can't really hate him for this though. He wanted something else. No hard feelings.

As I predicted, James inverted wing back from the right, Colwill inverted full back from the left to make a three. This is essentially what he did with us with Ricardo and Doyle respectively. Similar profile of player. The big conundrum for me was how effective truly are his tactics. I don't think it was ever put to any serious test. He had a team much too good for the division. He got over the line but not convincingly in the end after a rapid start. I think you can get away with things like Ricardo in midfield when you're generally better all over the pitch than the opposition. You won't have quite the level of luxury. Red flags appearing already for me. Trust the process as a phrase rings alarm bells for me. To hear it in July... yikes.

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.

I get your point, but I think if this had happened, or had we lost to Slovakia, we'd have been forced to make some tough decisions. I don't think this outcome forces that. So it's better in the short-term to make a final rather than go out in the groups, but I think it removes a bit of that drive to improve. I could be wrong but I've seen this before with England, we'll convince ourselves it was a good showing and we'll plod on. I actually think Southgate himself while clearly limited (almost surely beyond any debate at this point) is going to take a lot of criticism away from players who didn't turn up either. Some rotten individual showings. Guehi, Palmer, Watkins and arguably Mainoo are probably the only ones who come out of this higher than they went in.

There is a case that England had the worst tournament we could've possibly had. We've fluked it far enough to breed the illusion that it was a good tournament performance, meaning that there won't be any proper reflection or anywhere near the criticism that there should be, but not enough luck for us to actually break our duck and get a trophy secured. We've had our numbers come up on the lottery and not bought a ticket. I've no doubt Southgate gets 2026. I've no doubt it goes similarly. We would've been better in the long run to just lose to Slovakia. Force action. Embarrass us into striving for better. As it is now we can just trot out the same stuff we hear all the time after a tournament failure. Ignore all objective criticism because we threw four sixes in a row with the draw. I've not forgotten the gobbing off after the Slovakia win. You don't get to do that without the trophy. Where is it?

2021 worse for me, on home soil and against an Italy side who aged terribly. Make no mistake though I only feel like this because we performed below the sum of our parts all tournament anyway. Once again, the first serious opposition for England and it's curtains.

The truth is always revealed in the end. The truth is England weren't even close to the second best team in this tournament - let alone the first. A tournament from our perspective that will be remembered for individual moments of magic. Individual quality and one of the kindest imaginable runs to a final have pushed an illusion that this was a good tournament from England. It wasn't. In terms of the actual level I would argue it was Southgate's worst yet. Well done to Spain - truly worthy winners from day one to the end.

This one feels a bit too good to be true to be honest but it's quite clear there's truth in the rumour. I can only assume we'd see his future at number 10 as Fatawu on the right is arguably now our best player.