Its a terrible decision that the ref deserves to be blamed for, not the technology. Even the pointless Walton disagreed.

None of Lampard, Rooney and Gerrard would come into the thinking of even yourself if they weren't legends from their playing career. You could say anyone could potentially be England manager if he did x, y and z, absolute nonsense.

What an oddly bitter post 😂

That side would be very slow, I don't get why Grealish starts considering again like Mount he has not really performed to a high level for a long period of time. I will qualify my comments on Bellingham if you are being pedantic by saying on the assumption that Bellingham is not injured, that it would be crazy to drop him for Henderson. I would bring in Foden for Mount, Walker for Trippier and probably Maddison for Sterling, although maybe Rashford and allow Foden more centrally. If the intention is to play a back 5 in the knockouts then I would play it now, and also either start Trippier or Alexander Arnold rather than Maddison, with our 3 attackers who have performed at a very high level across recent months (Foden, Kane and Saka) all starting. Howe and Potter are reasonable shouts on merit as managers, but you just threw in big name former players for no reason. You genuinely cannot look at Lampard, Gerrard or Rooney's mixed managerial careers and think that minus their status as players, that they would come close to being England manager otherwise. It is important but not as much as so as the first 2 games. The likelihood of Wales having anything to crow over is very unlikely considering even a win for them will probably still see them going home. The main objective must be to get back on track and finish top but essentially qualification gives us some room to manoeuvre.

Maybe not a dead rubber but we are already through so not as critical as it could be. He will be putting in Henderson befitting of his inability to get the most of our more attack minded, exciting players in Foden, Bellingham and Saka. Some of your potential managerial choices named to justify this desperation to have an English manager are bizarre. Herdman set his Canadian side up very naively and motivated his opposition with stupid comments in the media, how has he suddenly become in the mix? Then you have just named former players topped off with the hilarious shout of Frank Lampard.

I had assumed that there would be a number of changes due to it being close to a dead rubber. I think of the upcoming games in the next few days, the conclusion of our group is possibly the least exciting.

How do you known that Foden won't play?

Nothing says Gareth Southgate like the rumoured change of Henderson for Bellingham tomorrow night.

I think you struggle to look past your bias with England. Colombia and Denmark missing their main players as well as Sweden and Ukraine are not teams in knock out international football that you would be sad to draw. They are not the cream of the crop like you seemingly have us as. France not only overcame Argentina but also Belgium when they were a serious proposition (and beat us) and also the same Croatia team that beat us.

I don't get why it needs a fixed period of "loyalty" which wouldn't exist if any of us were offered a considerable job upgrade and pay rise. Even if he goes QPR will receive compensation so they will be in profit. They would sack him if he went the other way, its football.

That at least some consideration is given towards supporters attending the games. There should be a limit on moving successive games for one club/games within a specific period of time.

You do this weird thing whereby you repeatedly compare to Eriksson and Capello, as if they prove as a rule that foreign managers shouldn't be considered. They are 2 individuals who underachieved, not one person has suggested getting either back. It would be like me saying that Hodgson was a success because at least he qualified unlike McLaren, why is your benchmark that of an underachiever? I very strongly disagree, ultimately there is no way of proving either way but I know not one single person who rates Southgate and that impression is further strengthened by anything I read about Southgate as a manager. If he had anything about him, Foden would already be a well established key member of our first 11, not someone we turn to when others underperform. Saka has also been performing at a level well in excess of either Sterling or Mount for a long while.

That doesn't make it acceptable, it shows the typical lack of care towards supporters. But I bet that a recently promoted Premier League side will be on TV less than a top 3 Championship one. Managing at an old firm side will almost certainly pay better and will give you regular European nights in front of a full stadium, can understand the appeal.

Canada are a strange side, full of energy and good to watch but so tactically naive.

They haven't been walks in the park but equally we have had favourable draws. We firstly had Colombia who were missing their best player at the time and are far from one of the World's elite even though they have some handy players, and we only just got there via penalties. We then had Sweden who were really average and then we met our match in Croatia who themselves were possibly at the peak of their powers but were still not a France, Brazil or Belgium. It was our inability to beat Belgium that saw us fortunately get onto a much weaker half of the draw in what was an otherwise very poor group. Go forward 2 years when many of the games were in England, comfortable enough group, then the toughest knockout draw we have probably had under Southgate. It was a Germany in transition but it was a really good win, had we gone a goal up early or a goal down obviously it may have been different and either of those situations would not leave me with much optimism in Southgate. Then we got a very easy quarter final and then the most favourable semi finalist, a Denmark side missing their best player and it took a dodgy penalty to win that. So yeah, we definitely have had favourable draws in the last 2 tournaments. Our record under Southgate is good against lower opposition, my fear/expectation is that when we come across one of 5 or 6 heavyweights, our game management would let us down. France have been consistent throughout Deschamps' tenure, he is quite pragmatic and sometimes picks more safety first choices but they always seem in control of the big games.

I don't think that it is anything to do with being a sexy name. Ultimately if he had left prior to this World Cup, then you would have to rate his tenure as a success. But as I said, international knockout tournaments are not necessarily going to conjure up the best team as the winner, as they are massively reliant on luck, if it was a league then every team obviously plays each other home and away but Southgate has had incredible fortune in the draws that we have had. We have flair players that have only really emerged in the last couple of years, but their international form and how they are used is not comparable by a man who is very pragmatic to the point of not getting the best from his players. If we played a big nation in the knockout rounds, I would not trust Southgate to be tactically savvy enough to win a game having scored early, nor would I have faith in him to turn a game that we were losing in. It is a good foundation to have a squad that seemingly enjoy playing for their countries, but that alone won't overcome top sides.

No chance do QPR get promoted under him. His stock was high well beyond what he has actually achieved (literally just a good run of form to start the season) and Rangers are a bigger club than QPR and probably can offer a far bigger wage. I bet he regrets his previous choice to stay. Wolves has just appointed a manager with the calibre far beyond what Beale would offer. An absolute joke, there should be limits on how many games can be moved within a set period of time. Sky as ever putting no thought into supporters.

I don't think that Southgate has lost lots of goodwill in that I don't think he had much to begin with, I think the majority of England supporters (impossible to quantify I admit) don't rate Southgate and would prefer someone else in charge. Agreed on the motivation point, impossible to know for sure on the outside but I think that is what Southgate is good at. That will only take us so far and he for me has obvious tactical deficiencies that will always limit us. The thing with international tournament football is that the best country will not always win, one bad day and you are done and in the last 2 major tournaments we have had incredibly lucky paths to the latter stages with really fortunate draws. Our 2 previous eliminations came against quality opposition whereby we scored early goals and had no tactical know how on how to then adapt from there. I also have never felt that he is the man to get the best out of our better attacking players, notably Phil Foden who Pep Guardiola and a blank chequebook still trusts implicitly to start and perform in the very big games, he is a special talent and should be the main man yet he is so far down the pecking order with a poorer manager who simply cannot get the best from him.

I wouldn't fret too much as we are almost certainly through either way. But Wales are shocking. I don't think its a motivation thing either. Southgate is lacking tactically and it is no surprise that our 2 tournament eliminations have come from an inability to manage an early lead. We also have a lack of ability to control games through our midfield as athletic as it may be, and the inability to build a team around Foden is bizarre.

Just piss poor that well paid pundits know very little about the other teams and everything is about England.

You agreed with bringing Henderson on?! Crazy decision. Mount must know a secret about Southgate as he plays regularly over superior players. I don't want to see constant, regurgitated interviews, I want them to talk about the game they are bloody showing! The lack of knowledge and research is astounding, the pundits should know in depth the various teams but it usually goes half an hour in the England camp, then maybe 2 minutes talking about the main player for the teams playing, always the same one.

Denmark and France was one of the more eye catching games of the group stages, yet the build up will seemingly be dominated by England (and Wales) reaction. Boring.

Absolute crap last night from start to finish and nothing to be excited about against a side that was nothing more than ok. This love affair with Mount is so strange, he is bang average and is not a top level player, all whilst Foden who is the best player aside from maybe Kane is criminally underused. Southgate is a really limited manager and it is not hard to outsmart him. He settled for a draw after an hour and the Henderson sub was laughable.

Yeah he is an odd selection even as a squad player. I think they are much more pragmatic than they have been in years gone by.

People are just commenting on a game in a seperate group in the opposite side of the draw. Brazil were hardly amazing and I dont see anyone implying that they were as such. I have seen loads of people credit England the other day but you seem to have such an overwhelming obsession and paranoia about it that you cannot allow conversation about other teams without assuming that it must somehow be a dig at England. I just dont get it and surely it must remove any potential of you enjoying any game aside from ours?