To be blunt, this wasn’t about a lack of quality in the England squad — it was about a manager making the wrong choices at the wrong time. I don’t buy the narrative that they’re just a bunch of overhyped individuals; there’s talent there. The issue was the way the game was managed after the opener. Sitting back and going conservative handed the initiative back to the opposition.

How the shape change killed the rhythm

When you score, you can afford to be cautious for a spell, but you still need an outlet and a way to relieve pressure. Changing to a back five at around 73 minutes — as I saw it — removed any natural route forward. With no clear out ball the side were forced to recycle possession or hoof it, which invited the other team to camp in our half. You could see the tempo drop and the press almost disappear because there wasn’t a structure to play through. That’s football basics: if you switch shape and don’t have a plan for transitions, you hand momentum away.

What I would have done differently

Simple tweaks, nothing fanciful. Drop Kane into a 10 role to link play and free up a striker who can run in behind. Bring Watkins on to give a genuine outlet and stretch the backline. Throw Saka and Rashford on to exploit space on the flanks and push transitions. Those changes keep the opponent honest and maintain a credible counter threat; they give you chances to win the second ball and relieve pressure instead of inviting it.

It wasn’t the players — it was the call

Fair play to the media for the hype, but that’s irrelevant to the tactical decisions on the touchline. The players looked on, waiting for instructions, and the substitutions changed the game more than the lads on the park did. You can blame individuals for poor touches or missed runs, but truth is the manager removed the tools the team needed to close it out. That’s why, for me, the blame should sit with the one who made those calls.

Written by bigbluejim: 2 August 2026

Tags: tactics