That's probably right. I'd try and see it more as an opportunity though. One frustrating thing about Gallagher is that there isn't an obvious way to play to his strengths. He can't be a target man because his first touch isn't good enough. His movement isn't good enough to be an out and out goal scorer. He always seems like a square peg in a round hole. In the last few years under various managers we've tried to be a full possession team, a counter attack team, then JDT and Eustace. At no point did we feel like we had a set of players who complemented each other and suited a particular way - arguably apart from Mowbray's last year. Gally going at least means we can start again and recruit attackers who suit each other. Albeit without a decent budget.

Gallagher's problem was and is a lack of instinct and awareness of being in the right position. If it was down to work rate then he wouldn't have a problem. He lacks aggression to be sure unless someone winds him up. He should be able to use his body much better, but none of that is to do with effort for me.

I'd genuinely be interested to hear what they would say. Because he doesn't do a particularly good job of holding the ball up like Danny Graham did. He certainly didn't directly set them up for many goals with the ball at his feet. He is hard working and powerful (even though he lacks aggression) and seems pretty unselfish, but he hardly seems like a dream strike partner. I'm not one of those who thinks he's useless either. I'd be sorry to see him go in some ways, but he's always played his better football when he wasn't the main man. If we don't replace him then he'll go into next year as needing to be our main man assuming Szmodics leaves, so now seems like a good time to cut our losses.

I know you can read too much into these sorts of stats, but his end product per minute under JDT was way up on where it had been. Admittedly a big part of that was that he was very rarely on the pitch for 90 mins, which maybe tells its own story! There are times where he really can't get into games, but I think they tend to when the team is struggling and he lacks the physicality to impose himself. I think when we have a decent platform, he's more effective than he was a few years ago when he was exciting but a one-trick pony.

A function of his size, unfortunately. Very rare that you get a player as small as Dolan who has decent pace over 30 or 40 yards. It's not a view everyone shares, but I think Dolan is actually doing a decent job of developing as a player given how much of a physical disadvantage he faces.

Hyam really struggled for a few games last season, but I expect that to be a blip. His first season wasn't a fluke, and to be honest we were unlikely to see the best of any of our centre backs after 18 months of JDT. I rated Tomasson hugely, but he was a defender's nightmare in terms of what he asked them to do and the lack of protection they were given. Pears is a different kettle of fish and I agree needs replacing. I can't pretend I'm overly happy with McFadzean but it makes sense if i) he's on buttons and ii) he's been brought in as depth for when we defend deep with three at the back. In those situations he still has a lot to contribute, but if not he's not up to playing with less protection these days.

I'm on to a loser with this, but Sven's record was unbelievably unfortunate. Out on pens vs Portugal after having a perfectly good winner disallowed. Another exit on pens vs Portugal after outplaying them with 10 men. A narrow loss to the last great Brazil team after a freak goal. Also hugely unfortunate with the timings of injuries to key players in Owen, Rooney, Beckham. Give him our recent squads and our routes to the latter stages, I'd wager on him doing at least as well.

It isn't if you're using it as a standard to judge the achievement of the manager/team. Beating teams you're expected to win isn't always straightforward, but it's a hell of a lot easier than beating the top teams! Reaching finals and semi finals in previous tournaments has exclusively been about winning the games where we were big favourites (arguably Germany aside) and getting beat against teams who were somewhere near our level. He still gets the credit for beating the weaker sides, but it's totally fair to point out that the routes to the final have generally been seriously fortunate. I think you're right about people being really resistant to admitting they're wrong. Netherlands and Spain back to back aren't straightforward, so if we win on Sunday then the facts will have changed and so to will my opinions!

That Trippier mark is a joke. He was genuinely threatening yesterday and after the first few minutes he was very strong defensively too. 7 at least. Thought Rice didn't really stand out like he does for Arsenal but him and Mainoo dominated the midfield, so another harsh 5. He was partially responsible for their goal I suppose.

It's not the sort of thing to dwell on after such a great night, but of course it's not meaningless! We've spent decades calling various managers failures for getting knocked out by top Brazilian, Argentinian, Portuguese or German teams, often in games which themselves were very tight. Not having to play teams of the same standard is obviously a massive caveat if we're saying that Southgate's record is better than Sven's, for instance. If we win the thing by beating the Netherlands and Spain, then the thing becomes a bit more of a pointless discussion imo.

With the possible exception of Germany in the last Euros, that was our best night under Southgate. Bit of luck with the penalty, but a thoroughly deserved win nonetheless. Also it was against Koeman, so we can call it quits for 93! This has been such a weird tournament. Southgate's tenure has basically been about making short work of beating the teams we should beat and then really struggling to get results against the better teams. So far we've totally reversed that, which augers well for the final. I've been really critical of the manager over a number of years but performances and results are the way to shut people like me up. Delighted that we've got another final to look forward to and whilst Spain have looked impressive, they're certainly beatable. A mixed England/Spain XI has plenty of our players in it.

Completely agree with this. How many teams go through international tournaments playing consistently well and then go on to win them? The great Spain team dominated pretty much all comers. Apart from that? Not many. Knockout football is all about staying alive and then striking whilst the iron is hot. Two things that England have not been good at over the last sixty years it has to be said.

The players would have (deservedly) got absolute pelters if they were knocked out, so I don't mind them going a bit mad over a last minute equaliser. If we go on to do something at the tournament it will end up being an iconic goal. If we get knocked out by the Swiss...

It was Trippier, but I agree. Missing both our left sided defenders might end up forcing us into changing approach vs the Swiss though, which would be no bad thing.

Obviously you never wish injuries on your own player, but Trippier not being available is a blessing. A useful right back, but he has been a total waste of a shirt so far.

Happy to admit that Croatia were a very good side. I still think we should've won after going a goal ahead, but my point is that Southgate's record generally consists of beating the teams we should beat, and struggling as soon as we play someone decent.

I think it's possible to overdo the Southgate bashing, but I can't agree that his record is fantastic. The team in 2018 wasn't brilliant, which is probably why he got so much credit for beating some other pretty average teams before playing Croatia. But the players you mention were still in the main starters for Champions League teams, so given the very fortunate route it would still have been a serious failure to not reach the semis. Really, it was a failure not to beat Croatia too, but obviously they were a good team. But from 2020 onwards the squad has on the whole been really good, and how many decent teams have we beaten in that time? Germany at Wembley was a good result, no question. But apart from that? Scraping past Denmark in extra time with a dodgy penalty is the next best 'scalp'. I suppose you could say that he's been effective in beating the teams that we should be beating in knockout games. Iceland in 2016 shows that you shouldn't take that as a given. But for a good record you've got to be showing that you're getting the most out of the players you have available, and I don't think you could every really say that about Southgate's England. Not even in 2018.

Definitely, and if that's the most difficult game you have en route to a final then you'd be delighted. Although in fairness the Italian and Dutch fans will be saying exactly the same about England having seen our group games.

Going off what I've seen so far, the Dutch will have a real test in the QF assuming they get there. I'd still make them favourites against Austria/Turkey, but it's very possible that they could be out by the time we would have to play them. Having said that I think that a quarter final with Italy is still a serious test. On paper they're obviously not the team they were but that would still not be an easy game, even if our form picks up.

They won't be going all out attack, but they'll have enough confidence in their own ability to get more on the front foot and higher up the pitch, which in itself should create more space. As bad as yesterday was, we had almost all the ball and were camped in their half for long spells. The better teams won't let us do that, but they'll have to sacrifice some defensive solidity to stop us.

Just to add to this, your average 18-21 year old earns a bit over £22k a year before tax. This goes up to around £30k for your average person in their mid/late 20s. These numbers will be lower in Lancs, but it's obviously the period of your life where you tend to see a rapid change in how much you earn. So then imagine you're a struggling second division club with a half empty stadium, a modest catchment area and adult ST prices which are at the upper end of what is realistic for the area. Having a discounted young adult category to make sure that at least you don't price out fans who have just entered the world of work strikes me as such an obvious, uncontroversial idea I can't believe that we're even talking about it!

Not a coincidence, sadly. Look at the places that have growing, younger populations with a few more quid in their back pocket, and you're mainly talking about London, large university cities and the wealthier areas of the South of England. The opposite to most large towns & small cities in the North & Midlands, so it's inevitable that more investors, players and fans are going to available to teams in the South unfortunately.

The worry I have is playing a team who are still happy to frustrate us, but have the players to hurt us on the break. A team who genuinely want to go toe-to-toe with us will result in a totally different game to those that we've seen so far. Obviously I'd rather have Slovakia (for example) in the next round than the Netherlands, but you almost think playing the Dutch is exactly what we need just now,

No. It's all about which groups the four best 3rd place teams are in. It's either going to be A, C, D & E - meaning that we play the 3rd placed team in group D (Netherlands). OR the Czechs (group F) win tomorrow, replacing Hungary (Group A). Which means we then play whoever comes third in group E, who could literally be any of them as things stand!

Just looked at the different permutations for the next round. I think it basically comes down to the Czech Republic result. They win, we play 3rd place from Romania, Belgium, Ukraine and Slovakia. They don't win, and we'll be playing the Netherlands.