Righto, that’s it from us for today. Thanks all for your company and comments; we’ll see you again tomorrow and, in the meantime:
One to ponder: how do we see England moving on from here? If Tuchel stays in post, does he keep doing the same thing, on the basis that it was the players’ fault, or does he acknowledge his errors? What will the team look like at the start of the Euros two years from now? Will the midfield still be comprised of three hulking athletes, or will he accept the need for guile, craft and technique? If i was on the FA board, I’d be wanting answers to these questions…
In and among all the blaming, I’m afraid we must note that John Stones allowed Lautaro Martínez to pull off him before scoring the winner – as he did with Mario Mandzukic against Croatia in the 2018 semi. A lovely footballer, but one who, in mine, needed to play for Pep Guardiola to have his defensive weaknesses obscured.
“Can you remember Koeman lining up a free kick against England in a vital World Cup qualifier back in 1993?” wonders Oliver Dungey. “Can you remember that Seaman had taken the unusual decision to stand next to one post and leave the entire goal open for Koeman to chip into - and that literally the entire country was screaming at their TVs for Seaman to shuffle across before the inevitable happened? That’s what it felt like last night - except stretched over 35 mins - everyone screaming at their TVs to fix the very obvious error unfolding before us. And nobody fixing it. It’s rare that a game of football morphs so scarily into a bad dream, a horror film. But after Barney Ronay described Tuchel as ‘Nosferatu on a golf weekend’, we can’t say we weren’t warned.”
“He’s gonna flick one now. He’s gonna flick one … HE’S GONNA FLICK ONE, AND IT’S IN!”
I indeed remember it, and taking another look at the goal, Seaman is even farther own than I’d thought. What on earth was he thinking? And yes, I see the parallel: as a football writer, I make a point of reminding myself that players and coaches know the game far better than I do, but sometimes a mistake is so obvious we can all grasp it’s being made in real time.
Good news for Liverpool:
Will Szoboszlai be as effective under a new manager playing a different system, and was last season an exceptional outlier or him hitting a new level? We shall see.
“Hi everybody!” begins a jocular Matt Roberts. While I agree that Alexander-Arnold would have added more options for us and was an actual match fit right-back, this England team’s biggest weakness was it’s defensive ability and he would have exacerbated that. I am up for just trying to win every game 4-3, but that approach also fails to win tournaments.
I think leaving out Hall from Newcastle was a problem, given how we just became stretched, and so when Livramento pulled out, that was the issue. Particularly given how Spence grew into the tournament. To me, the cardinal sin in the team selection was Henderson. The midfield was knackered, and we didn’t have options to rotate and support the core of Rice and Anderson without putting other full-backs in there. Henderson should have gone as part of the staff.”
Were I a player, I’d have resented the inference that I couldn’t motivate myself without a cheerleader miles off the standard, and I think including Henderson sent the wrong message to the players. On Alexander-Arnold, I’d only have used him when chasing a game, rendering his lack of defensive ability irrelevant, and similarly, excluding him told the players they needed to confirm to a rigid description, when football isn’t like that. As Juice Terry Lawson liked to say, “Variety is the spice ay life.”
“While Pickford had a great tournament,” asserts Daniel B, “I put some if the blame for the loss on him. In the last 20 minutes or so England struggled to get possession. When they did he continually kicked it long and we lost control of the ball. Why didn’t he slow it down and we play out from the back sometimes? Baffling...”
It’s also his job to get the team out of the box and up the pitch, which I don’t think he did, and I also wonder if a rangier keeper would’ve saved the equaliser. I also felt he should’ve stopped DRC scoring, though he played very well against Mexico.
“I wrote in after the Mexico game saying that the performance in that game was being slightly overrated considering Mexico didn’t offer much in the second half,” says John Brennan. “I think that plan got found out yesterday against a better team. Argentina passed and probed their way through England creating spaces. Even for Fernandez’s goal, Messi holds the ball and draws somebody out of the low block to create the space. Mexico were just lumping that ball into the box and hoping fort he best which suited England.
This is probably nitpicking but Harry Kane saying that England ‘seemed’ to get defensive calls into question did the players know what they were doing. They did get defensive and while it’s not Kane’s natural game, he should have tried to turn into a targetman when England were sitting back. Contest the ball, win a throw in or free kick. Anything to just break the rhythm of the game. I don’t know what him and Bellingham were being instructed to do when England were under so much pressure.”
I think the Mexico game was really damaging for England. Down to 10, perhaps they were right to defend the box, but it was made easy for them by a succession of poor crosses, predictable and easy to clear. It was never going to be like that against Argentina, who were able to give Messi the ball uncontested and let him probe.
On Kane, I can’t help but note that this was another big game in which he no-showed. He’s an amazing player, of course, but his forte, and it’s a crucial one, is making sure you beat the teams you should beat; he rarely produces wonders against the better outfits.
As I set out this morning, I feared for England when Tuchel announced his squad – even before, when he left Bellingham out, like it was at all feasible he didn’t need one of his two top-level players. Not just because of the personnel, but because it told us and, most importantly, his players, that he didn’t consider them talented enough to hang with the best on their own terms.
I was also extremely moved, and not in a good way, but his post-Norway interview. Sure, England have a never-say-die mental strength, problem being it’s a very different quality from the mental strength to trust in your quality against quality opponents. Then, on top of that, he blamed the team for a poor performance, apparently not even countenancing his poor platforming as responsible for a succession of miserable displays. Which was more likely: that, or the overwhelming majority of his players hit a run of poor form at the same time?
Also going on:
“I want to back up something Daniel Harris said,” writes Kári Tulinius, whjo knows how to get his email published. “Deciding to leave out Alexander-Arnold is Tuchel’s original mistake. On the one hand I understand the thinking. A team with Trent in it needs to be built differently than a team with Kane as its focus. My issue is that there are a lot of players like Kane, even if Kane is on another level, but Trent presents problems no teams are used to facing. Argentina would never have been able to commit so fully forward if they had to worry about 60 yard through balls every time they lost possession.”
I actually think that Alexander-Arnold would’ve been a great foil for Kane, able to hit him with passes and crosses. But more than that, leaving him out sent the wrong message to players: the squad wasn’t selected on merit, but according to compatibility with a single flawed and unsophisticated game-model. Is there a single other manager in the world who’d pick Jarrell Quansah instead?
“On Tuchel,” begins Adam Blackwell, “I think this point is worth making clearly: the swing of momentum to Argentina happened after Gordon’s goal and before Tuchel’s first sub. So Tuchel is not guilty of handing control of the game to Argentina so much as failing to seize it back once Argentina had already taken control.
The sequence of subs, though, was still bizarre. My incredibly strong prior is that there’s no chance your median English fan is going to make better decisions than a manager as smart and experienced as Tuchel. On the other hand, I can’t remember a time when the conventional wisdom — in real time, not only with the benefit of hindsight — appeared to be so emphatically validated.”
I guess I accept the basic fact of the point, but it’s Tuchel who was preparing England for the game. He picked a conservative squad, his game-model was based on out-physicalling the opposition rather than out-playing them, and he clearly didn’t trust the one technical midfielder he deigned to select. He created the environment in which his team retreated so, while there’s plenty of blame to go around and no need to be sparing, I can’t let him off what happened even before the specific interference.
On which point, I couldn’t help but look at how Thomas Tuchel treated Kobbie Mainoo and think of Glenn Hoddle’s experiences for England, as well as the Golden Generation choices. At the time, England had two pass-first, technical midfielders – Paul Scholes and Michael Carrick. Scholes was shunted to the left to accommodate Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard, two wonderful players but neither of them a central controller, while Carrick hardly played at all. They did start him against Ecuador in the second phase of the 2006 World Cup, he was their best player in a 1-0 win only to be dropped for the next game.
Don’t get me wrong, I looooove a blood-and-thunder midfielder, examples of one below – though Bryan Robson, like Roy Keane, was also a playmaker ion a way Gerrard and Lampard were not – but at elite level, games tend to be decided by the team which dominates the middle of the park. That’s why Spain have been and are so good, just as it is the main reason PSG have won two Champions Leagues in a row.
More generally, I really enjoyed the Croatia game, but after that, though Mexico was exciting, I found watching England a frustration because they were so much less good than they should’ve been, the mistakes being made so avoidable, obvious and likely to cost them in the end. This was a massive missed opportunity – though I didn’t think they’d have have a great chance against Spain, absolutely not with three units charging about the midfield.
Thanks Luke and hi again everyone. Luke will be elated to know I agree with him on Wharton, even if he doesn’t clap his hands as vigorously as Jordan Henderson. I do, though disagree that a semi-final defeat is fine for England – to begin with, but absolutely from 1-0 up against that Argentina side.
Somehow, I’ve made it this far (the end of my blog stints) without mentioning my belief that Adam Wharton should have been in Tuchel’s squad.
But, you know, Tuchel is the one picking the team, a semi-final defeat is actually fine, and I enjoyed England’s World Cup overall, even if last night was a particularly sore one.
Now, Daniel Harris is back!
A sample question, from those already posted for Nick Ames …
You can post your own question for Nick, of course, and he should kicking off the Q and A shortly.
Rich in Newcastle emails, regarding an earlier reader comment: “In no world is Dan Burn superior to Harry Maguire.”
“I beg to differ, if Dan Burn hadn’t have been included in the squad, he’d have wished the lads well and got behind them team. Maguire instantly ran to the press crying about it before the squad had even been released. Tuchel was obviously aware of such character flaws.”
“Argentinian here,” emails Daniel.
“Do you genuinely care about a banner saying that the islands are ours, when you know full well that they are yours? Wouldn’t this be like your wife’s jilted ex-boyfriend holding a sign that says “she will always be mine“ when both you and her barely think about that guy anymore, except when he shows up with these theatrics? Wouldn’t the commensurate answer be to roll your eyes and move on with your first-world lives?
“Additionally, you would not give a damn about this if you had won the game yesterday. Shouldn’t that give you pause as to whether or not this dramatic hand-wringing is an appropriate response?”
“Post-England-calamity coverage” is exactly what we’re doing here, by the way, thanks for that Oliver.
Come to think of it, I can’t believe I haven’t employed the phrase “surveyed the wreckage” even once, so far today.
Updated
“Why have we not had the once-cherished National Grid half-time cuppa-tea kettle surge stat yet?” writes Oliver.
“This used to be a staple of post-England-calamity coverage, and I for one want it back.”
Great question Oliver. I guess the national grid is just in perma-crisis these days, so it’s not the same:
Updated
Josh emails: “An Egyptian friend of mine says that on Egyptian Twitter, they were ‘roasting the coach for days after we lost for subbing in two attackers at the end instead of defenders. That didn’t work either’.
“Which is a fair point: Egypt were also up against Argentina, subbed in attackers, and lost by one goal. Tuchel was up against Argentina, subbed in defenders.... and lost by one goal. Now England isn’t Egypt, blah blah blah, but it is at least somewhat of a counter-example.”
I agree. We all love to believe that if only we’d been in charge, it would have been different. It’s fantasy thinking of the highest order.
Updated
Well, Argentina have just scored, it’s 1-1, and that’s quite enough punishment for one day.
Here is Billy Munday with Football Daily:
They say never go that far back. In the last half an hour of their end-of-days Geopolitics World Cup semi-final with Argentina, England committed to the bit in the Deep South. No wonder there were gaps. Thomas Tuchel stood and watched national trauma unfold in front of his eyes as towering aerial threats such as Alexis Mac Allister and Lautaro Martínez beat his four centre-backs to cross after cross. Forget the ghosts of ‘66, the spectre of Southgate loomed over his successor as realism reared its ugly head at the business end of an England men’s major-tournament run once again.
Updated
It’s the 84th minute, as I continue to re-watch the end of last night’s match. And somehow, England are still winning 1-0. The more I watch, though, the more I think the responsibility for all this can’t rest purely with Tuchel. This is a collective failure of astonishing proportions and I’m unconvinced that alternative substitutions would have seen it end any differently.
Updated
Tuchel applies the finishing touches in the 82nd minute: Rice and James off, Burn and O’Reilly on.
“No need to go into specifics on the nightmare of last night,” emails Andrew. “But surely with Newcastle having a mare in the window and our strength being attacking, it’s peak time for Eddie Howe to come in?”
Here comes Lautaro Martínez. He isn’t very good. Nothing to worry about.
Updated
Rogers nicks the ball off Messi in midfield and England, at last, offer something in attack – but the Villa forward smacks a shot straight at a defender with better options either side. (79min)
I do suspect though, that even if Tuchel had made some “offensive” substitutions, the overall fatigue affecting the England ranks would have seen Argentina come out on top anyway. They look spent, collectively, while Argentina are growing ever-stronger (just like Croatia did, just like Italy did).
(And yes, I know we all found Tuchel’s substitutions offensive …)
Updated
Mac Allister thumps the post with a header on 76min … England are very much there for the taking, it’s hard to believe it’s nearly 10min before Argentina actually manage to score.
Don’t forget! Get your questions in for Nick Ames here:
Nick will be around from 4pm BST/11am EDT.
Montiel and De Paul come on for Argentina by the 73rd minute … Scaloni twists, Tuchel sticks.
Updated
Messi is moving through the gears. He’s completely bossing this match. Pickford makes a good save from Gonzalez’s header after a stunning delivery by Messi … and at the hydration break, Ezri Konsa comes on for Anthony Gordon.
Updated
66 min: Kane sprays a fine ball out for Reece James (sorry, Harry) and Rice hits a poor shot from an angle.
On 64 min, Scaloni brings on Nico González for Leandro Paredes, and deploys him on the left wing.
Messi immediately picks out an on-rushing González at the far post on the left: a good defensive header by John Stones snuffs out the danger.
Updated
It’s noticeable that the game is passing Kane by completely. He looks tired (fair enough) and is strolling around in front of the midfielders but achieving very little.
(Commentator’s curse: Kane knocks a decent enough ball right looking for Rogers but it’s easily dealt with by Argentina.)
Updated
Now, on 61 min, Fernández hits a shot from distance over the crossbar from distance … All under control? Gordon is still full of running at the other end trying to put the goalie, Emiliano Martínez, under pressure.
England are already clinging on five minutes after the goal, but it’s worth remembering that Tuchel has changed nothing at this point. Same players, same formation, but they are falling ever further back. Isn’t it down to the senior players to sort this out?
Updated
Djed Spence pulls off that sensational diving tackle on Giuliano Simeone on 57min – but the warning signs are there for England’s defence … That follows an Argentinian howler at the back that nearly let Kane in for a shot.
Updated
“Another big call from Tuchel to play Rogers on the right” says Shearer on commentary for the BBC. “Decision … the correct one, putting balls in like that.”
It’s a fair shout.
Updated
Here we go then. 55min on the clock. England have just scored through Anthony Gordon. I am sure the lads will see this one out, probably even win 2 or 3-0.
It’s nearly time for our England 1-2 Argentina second-half watch-along!
“We scored, had something to protect, and went into self-preservation mode,” says Phil Jagielka on Sky Sports News of … well, you know what.
“Argentina threw attacking players on, and had nothing to lose … we’ve all played in matches where the momentum changes, and unfortunately for us, we were on the wrong side of it.”
Don’t miss the latest episode of World Cup Daily with Max Rushden, Jonathan Wilson, John Brewin, Barry Glendenning and Nicky Bandini:
There is talk on the podcast of Tuchel’s defensive reorganisation late in the game … but perversely I don’t think the defensive formation was really the issue.
It was the utter lack of ability to keep the ball, the lack of energy across midfield, a badly fading Harry Kane and Jude Bellingham (among others) … It came down to England’s inability to apply any sort of pressure on Argentina at the other end of the pitch. It became a training game, attack v defence, and what seemed an inevitable conclusion.
Updated
Since 2018, only France have won more games at the Euros and World Cup combined than England. At the World Cup in that span, only Argentina and France have won more. Since 2016, only Spain have won more games at the Euros than England. Of course, the counter-argument is that with that kind of record, England should have won at least one of those tournaments.
Updated
The former England defender Micah Richards was informed of the death of his father shortly before going on air as a BBC pundit for the World Cup semi-final against Argentina.
Richards, who won 13 caps for England, appeared alongside Joe Hart and Wayne Rooney as Thomas Tuchel’s side slipped to a late 2-1 defeat.
However, shortly after the broadcast, he revealed that he had been told of the death of his dad, Lincoln, shortly before the match in Atlanta.
Writing on Instagram, Richards said: “Not long before going on air today, I received the awful news that my father Lincoln had passed away. His death was unexpected, and he has left us all too soon.
“He was my greatest fan. He barely missed a game my entire life.
“He would take me wherever I needed to go when I was a kid and he was the proudest parent possible during my professional career. It was so rare for him to not be by my side.
“I know how much watching England World Cup games means to everyone at home, and how the experience bonds families together across the generations, like nothing else.
“I know, particularly as a proud old-school Yorkshireman, dad would’ve wanted the show to go on this evening. And so it did.
“Thinking of my siblings and all my wider family today as we remember my father Lincoln, my hero and inspiration.” PA Media
Updated
Gordon for Konsa? Nico O’Reilly and Dan Burn for Reece James and Declan Rice: five at the back, and hope to repel a Lionel Messi-inspired Argentina?
Now for some light, World Cup-related content from Michael Cragg:
As the Colombian pop supremo prepares to perform at Sunday’s final, we rate her greatest work, including gossipy takedowns and lycanthropic lyrics:
Updated
A reminder: Nick Ames will be online for a World Cup Q&A from around 4pm BST/11am EDT. You can get your questions in here:
“It’s hard not to say he didn’t get it badly wrong,” says Alan Smith, the former Arsenal and England forward.
“Who can say what would have happened if we put two or three strikers on? But then at least it’s positive … Tuchel was brought in for these moments, and we thought he’d be more positive when push came to shove. He chose the more negative option, to try and see out the lead … in hindsight it was a poor move.”
Updated
Michael Owen just had a chat on Sky Sports News: “Going back in your own box, and kicking it as hard as you can … people think that’s brave. It’s not. Quite the opposite. I can get my local pub team to do that. And that’s where we lost it – celebrating beating Mexico the way we did.
“We did it in my [playing] era … we are so scared of losing, so fearful of failure … it’s purely mentality.”
Updated
Gary Neville was just on telly, correctly pointing out that the momentum decisively shifted in Argentina’s favour before Tuchel changed anything. “There were a lot of experienced players out there,” he said. “This is a theme that’s developed for England.”
On which note: Kane said just hanging on to a 1-0 lead wasn’t enough against that quality of opposition. Wasn’t it partly on him, as the captain on the field, to ensure that didn’t happen?
Thanks Martin. Hi again everyone.
One question that occurred to me about last night: what actually happened? On the basis that it’s all a bit of a blur, I’ll rewatch the last 35mins of normal time plus stoppages, from 3pm BST/10am EDT – so you don’t have to.
Not exactly a retro MBM, but maybe a bit more detail on the play-by-play action of what turned into a horror film for England and Thomas Tuchel.
That is me done for now, I will pass you back to Luke McLaughlin.
In non-World Cup news: Dominik Szoboszlai agrees new Liverpool contract in boost to Andoni Iraola
Peter Walker, our senior political correspondent, has a fuller write-up of the political row brewing in the UK over Argentina players holding a banner about the Falkland Islands/Islas Malvinas at the end of last night’s World Cup semi-final against England.
There is nothing like watching football to make people pull faces that tell you exactly how they are feeling. There are plenty of shots of joyous Argentina fans, but I’ve been drawn in by the wide selection of worried looking England fans, presumably mirroring how I looked last night.
Ryan Benson is asking a very simple question: Why did Manchester United pay Chelsea £48m for Andrey Santos?
24 million people watched England defeat on BBC
England’s World Cup semi-final defeat to Argentina drew a peak audience of 24 million people on the BBC on Wednesday evening.
PA reports it was the highest-rated live television event of the year, with an average audience of 22.1m on BBC1 and the BBC iPlayer, and the biggest live television audience for a live event since 2021, when England lost to Italy in the Euro 2020 final.
The World Cup final will be broadcast live by both the BBC and ITV on Sunday evening. Gabby Logan will front the BBC’s coverage of the final, with Chapman returning to the UK to lead Radio 5 Live’s coverage of the final day of the Open Championship golf.
Downing Street backs calls for Fifa to investigate Argentina players over Falklands banner
Downing Street has backed calls for Fifa to investigate whether Argentina players broke rules by waving a banner in support of their country’s claim to the Falkland Islands at the World Cup.
No 10 echoed remarks made earlier by Business Secretary Peter Kyle that the governing body should “thoroughly” probe the behaviour of the defending champions after they beat England 2-1 in Wednesday’s match in Atlanta.
A Downing Street spokesperson said: “The World Cup might not be ours, but the Falkland Islands definitely are. Our commitment to the Falklands will never waver.”
The official said any potential action is a “matter for Fifa”, but asked whether the Prime Minister agrees with his Cabinet minister that there should be an investigation, they replied: “I would echo that position.”
Asked whether Downing Street agrees with Kyle’s characterisation of the behaviour as an “egregious violation” of the rules, she added: “Any action taken is a matter for Fifa, I’ll leave it for them. I’d point you to the business secretary’s words this morning.”
Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey has called for the Argentina players seen holding the banner to be suspended for Sunday’s final against Spain. Article 34.3 of the tournament’s rules prohibits the display of any political messages or slogans by players before, during or after a match.
Argentina were fined by Fifa after holding up a banner with the same slogan after a friendly against Slovenia in 2014.
Updated
Hearts and Scotland goalkeeper Craig Gordon has announced his retirement at the ripe old age of 43. The final appearance of his career came in Scotland’s World Cup warm-up win against Curaçao in May, and his last club game was for Hearts against Celtic in January.
In a post on Instagram Gordon said: “Everyone has dreams. Mine were probably no different to most kids’, to play for my club and my country, Heart of Midlothian and Scotland. Improbable? Perhaps. Impossible? Absolutely not. Hard work, sacrifices, setbacks, step by step dreams become reality, from supporting Hearts to playing for Hearts. I’m not much of a singer, but I’ve improved a little after 84 renditions of the national anthem. The biggest names at the biggest stadiums on the biggest stages. I’ve savoured every moment of it.”
Hello. I very quickly adapted my to do list today from “Noon-2pm be very smug about it” and instead added “Noon-2pm host continued England post mortem on live blog”. The highlight for me last night in the end was probably the spontaneous booing every time Gianni Infantino was on screen in the place I was watching it, rather than any of the football. I’ve seen that all before.
On the tiredness point, I also wonder if the game-model might’ve taken note of that. England set up to overpower their opponents, despite having games in Mexico City and Miami, after a sapping English league season, and the toll was obvious.
Anyhow, that’s me done for now; here’s Martin Belam to hang with you for the next little bit.
“Benny from Germany here,” says Benny Blaenkner. “My maiden time to feel gutted for an England exit in a major tournament. Isn’t that something? On the Tuchel subs, some German tactics nerds comment they have hardly ever seen a more knackered team in a major game of football after the last hydration break. Making the point it was simply inevitable to throw at least a few fresh players in, sit deep and hope for the best.”
I agree England were tired, but Tuchel had available to him fresh players who’d keep the ball – Mainoo – and offer a threat in behind – Rashford. It just didn’t need to be six defenders on the pitch, serried on the six-yard line.
Also going on:
“I don’t know how much credit to give to Argentina, to be honest,” confesses Felix Wood. “I know that sounds mealy-mouthed, but I don’t feel this was them being mentality monsters. They didn’t need to be. England didn’t just go defensive, they sat in their box. This wasn’t a Ghana-style immaculately coached shutting off of all passing lanes, this was a stand in a line and see if a team can score. Fernandez had had three previous shots not closed down from that sort of range. At some point he was going to beat Pickford. Argentina had done exactly that corner routine twice before. Argentina had been allowed to cross the ball in multiple times from exactly that area and had hit both posts and Pickford had made two really good saves. Against Norway, Tuchel was angry because England weren’t repetitive enough; well. against Argentina they allowed the same two patterns of play over and over and over again. What did they expect?”
I said this yesterday, but I really didn’t like Tuchel’s post-Norway interview. First, the mentality never to give up is not the same as the mentality to play your game under pressure; and second, he blamed the players, seeming not even contemplating the possibility that the principal reason for their under-performance was that he’d platformed them ineffectively in an unbalanced team, which he then made worse with poor changes.
As for Argentina, they seized upon England’s weakness and the deliveries into the box were very good.
When you look at the England squad and seek to identify its best players, all of them – literally all of them – are attackers. So, though it feels like sitting back is the conservative option, actually it’s the risky option because you’re excluding from the game the players you most want involved in it, in order to rely on the weakest aspect of the team. That is a massive gamble, and one taken with no supporting evidence.
Oh man, imagine what a vibe this was.
“We have to give some credit to Argentina,” reckons Chris Holmes. “A lot of the criticism for Tuchel and the England players suggests that it was a conscious decision for them to retreat and hold on after they scored last night. Argentina played a cagey game for the first 50 minutes or so, perhaps not wanting to commit too much until they had to, but the increased urgency after the England goal was what changed the game. England had no answer to the change in pace and the fresh substitutes they brought on. There were several times when Pickford and the defence had the ball but were pressed by a swarm of blue shirts and just couldn’t play out. Their attacks also increased in accuracy. Compare England’s opportunities to cross throughout the game (with the exception of the goal) and they rarely found a white shirt. Once Argentina started moving the ball about with more speed, they found Argentina players in the box on numerous occasions, despite the extra defenders England brought on. I think it’s easy to be critical of England for how they played in the last third of the match but we have to give a lot of credit to Argentina who ultimately changed their approach and England didn’t have the quality to stick with them. No shame in that, they’re the world champions for a reason.”
I agree we have to credit Argentina, who showed the confidence and aggression of a proper football team, but to know it was a conscious decision for England to defend, we need only look at the substitutions. As soon as they were made, the game, which was leaning that in that direction, could only take that direction, and really, it’s the simplicity of the errors that is galling – and again, England aren’t my team, but watching the waste has got me going. If you’re going to defend the box and hope to hold out – a tactic that doesn’t suit England’s players – you still need an out-ball and an attacking threat. If you’ve a couple of players on halfway, the opposition need to respect that, but once you pull everyone back, they’re not going to respect you at, and nor should they.
I wouldn’t mind*, but England’s defence isn’t even any good. I’m not sure there’s any that’s ever existed that I’d fully trust to keep a clean sheet when offering an opponent unrestricted access to their penalty area for half an hour. But Spence-Guéhi-Stones-James isn’t exactly Tassotti-Baresi-Costacurta-Maldini, and once England opted not to contest possession, Argentina no longer had to earn passage upfield – something they’d struggled with not just earlier in that game but in others too – and could commit men forward knowing there was no counter-attack coming, something that, pre-match, they feared. And worst of all, it meant that they could continually feed Messi, perhaps the greatest lock-picker of all time, allowed to work him on to the ball until he made something happen.
*I absolutely would mind
Updated
Thing is, with Southgate I can almost understand it: he spent his career as player and manager with underdogs and led England in that spirit. Tuchel, though, has worked with elite clubs whose culture is to attack yet, as England manager, his conservatism has defined his squad, the question now how on earth his players can ever trust him again.
“Slightly unfair to criticise Gareth Southgate,” writes Andrew Milne, presumably of something said before I took over. “By the end of his tenure, he was making brave substitutions including hooking Harry Kane for Ollie Watkins in the later knockout rounds of the last Euros in Germany.
The England players struggled under pressure reverting to type in falling back. Whilst understandable (albeit still questionable given some of the players’ experience), what was disappointing was that the manager followed suit. He wouldn’t have slung on defenders and permitted his club teams to play that way, so why did he do it with England? It seemed that Tuchel like the side wilted under pressure last night.”
What happened against Argentina wasn’t Southgate’s fault, obviously, but I doubt I was the only one who, when the damage was being done, recalled his reaction to taking the lead against an Italy side there for the taking in the Euro 2020 final.
I did also blame Southgate in significant part for the 2018 semi-final defeat – he ought to have realised Croatia wouldn’t play as badly in the second half, just as England were unlikely to be as dominant as in the first, and he was passive as that happened. Still, I don’t think they could possibly have beaten France in the final so the damage wasn’t dreadful, just as their defeat to France in Qatar in what was, for mine, the highest-level game of the competition, is something that can happen, especially if your captain lashes a penalty over the bar, and i Euro 2022 they were beaten by a better side.
But the Italy game is one they ought to have won and yesterday belongs in that category, the team hamstrung by the manager’s negativity.
Updated
Gosh, I bet Nick is has some sentiments to express. Tune in to find out.
Finally, in attack, neither Eberechi Eze and Madueke are first-picks for a side that can struggle to create in open play – with good reason. Neither are able to change the pace of a game in the way that Palmer can, nor do either have his goalscoring threat, nor that of Foden and Gibbs-White. It’s true the first two hadn’t had good seasons, but neither had the Arsenal duo.
Updated
In midfield, I have no idea why Tuchel took Kobbie Mainoo. Not because he didn’t need him, he did – he ought to have been brought on against Ghana when England needed a small-space specialist, against Norway too, and absolutely in the Argentina game, when composure and ball-retention were paramount.
This isn’t even a reflection of Mainoo’s abilities, though they are excellent, more that he was the only midfielder in the squad with soft feet under pressure, able to take the ball on the back foot, carry it forward and look after it. But when Henderson was sent on ahead of him against Panama, it was clear that the manager wasn’t going to use him and, because he left Adam Wharton at home, he didn’t have the option of a snappy, line-breaking passer.
Updated
On the other side of the defence, Luke Shaw and Lewis Hall are better defenders than those taken ahead of them, and also offer the balance of a natural left-footer on the left while, in the middle, in no world is Dan Burn superior to Harry Maguire. On which point, wasting a squad-spot on Jordan Henderson, like Burn admired for his personal qualities, sent a message that the rest of the squad were mentally weak, so needed cajoling by players who didn’t earn their selection on the pitch.
Updated
Similarly, Trent Alexander-Arnold is no one’s idea of a top defender. But he offers unique attacking abilities for when you’re chasing a goal, at which point it doesn’t matter that he lacks nous and speed on the turn. Now, I’m not saying he’d have supplied a late equaliser, but leaving him out set a tone.
Updated
Tuchel seemed to have one idea of how to play – which the evidence suggests he couldn’t communicate effectively to his players, but even if he could it wasn’t an especially good one – when tournaments generally offer a variety of different challenges that demand agility in response. In 2006, for example, Italy took, used and got contributions from six strikers, wheres Tuchel picked players and their closest analogues, hence Noni Madueke was preferred to Morgan Gibbs-White, Phil Foden and Cole Palmer.
The cravenness, by the way, did not begin with Anthony Gordon’s goal. The squad Thomas Tuchel selected was itself an expression of misplaced confidence and unnecessary conservatism, omitting game-breakers and mavericks to deny variety and unpredictability, so let’s start there.
Hello there mateys, has everyone recovered? I can’t lie, I don’t even support England and woke up with my head hot; them and Portugal, brilliant talent wasted by craven management, the experience of watching them an exercise in emotional regulation. Let’s debrief!
It ended unhappily and unsatisfactorily for England, as tournaments tend to: but it’s worth keeping in mind that a semi-final defeat by the reigning champions is a more than decent effort from Tuchel and his coaching team.
Daniel Harris is here to take you through the next bit.
Updated
A few BTL comments here. Please keep them coming. You can also mail us with your thoughts on England 1-2 Argentina, or anything World Cup-related.
Are you going to the final? Let us know.
I think it was Bellingham who reacted late to close down Fernándes, but perhaps it was both Anderson and Bellingham who should have been more alert.
Updated
Look, most people were awfully good about it. Our waiter at a restaurant near Plaza de Mayo shook our hands warmly and said nice things about Jude Bellingham. On the metro ride back from the fan zone there was no massive gloating either, just bright-eyed kids in Lionel Messi shirts swept along by the nationwide euphoria. ‘Vamos, Vamos Argentina!’ they sang, barely able to believe their team were once again in a World Cup final.
And to be a stray English bystander in a city totally awash in sky blue and white was … a rare privilege. Some of us currently over here covering England’s rugby union tour have been lucky enough to visit a few iconic sporting cauldrons, but to be in Buenos Aires in the aftermath of Argentina defeating England at a football World Cup is right up there.
From train drivers triumphantly honking their horns at every underground platform to people dancing in the streets and old ladies waving flags from balconies high above the traffic, it made even a frenzied cricket World Cup fixture between India and Pakistan feel like a garden fete. “Tell them you’re Scottish,” advised my Argentinian friend, concerned for our welfare in the event of an English victory. In the event there was no need for any such subterfuge.
Updated
Robert Kitson, our rugby correspondent, is in Argentina …
The debate about playing style and general fatigue is an interesting one. Pre-tournament, Tuchel said this before one of England’s friendlies:
“I think there is a value in recovering the ball high, even if it brings risk, and even if it’s highly intense.
“But I think there’s also a high value in having the ball, and moving the ball and not chasing the ball. In the last tournaments it was very, very important to not chase too much.”
From where I was sitting, England ran themselves into the ground for an hour in Atlanta with their intense pressing. And it worked well … until it didn’t. They were no longer capable of maintaining the same intensity. That is arguably on the manager, more than the substitutions or any perceived waving of a white flag.
Updated
Another email! (There are many …) This one from Adrian, entitled: “The fixture load’s fault?”
“Saka and Rice exhausted, Reece not fit, Stones not fit, Rice having injections for months on end. Then a bunch of games in excessive heat after the typically long attritional Premier League and Cup calendar.
“Isn’t this an argument to reduce the Premier League to 18 teams at least? Are we putting sufficient blame on the workload players must endure, a drum Klopp and others have been banging for years.”
Updated
“Tuchel’s tactics certainly weren’t “unfathomable”; he decided their best chance was to shut up shop and ride it out,” emails Mike. “It worked against Mexico, after all. He brought on Dan Burn because England seemed to have collectively forgotten how to defend crosses. You could as easily characterise this as a collective bottle-job by the players on the pitch, but maybe it’s easier to blame the German than Our Brave Boys?”
Also in praise of Tuchel: could another manager have brought that kind of performance from Djed Spence, who was outstanding off the bench against Norway, and even better starting against Argentina? Morgan Rogers on the right can also be seen as a success, well given his assist for Gordon’s goal. Would this sort of stuff have happened under Steve McClaren or Sam Allardyce?
Updated
Compare and contrast these two emails about England. Was it Tuchel, or was it the players?
“I think the Southgate comparisons are unfair. On Southgate,” writes Peter.
“Croatia, Italy and Spain were superior to England in central midfield. Over the course of a match, that will usually make the difference.
“This was different. England were not struggling. The retreat was entirely deliberate. Other options were available. Tuchel made mistakes and should own up to them.”
And then this, from Ryan: “Our players were lethargic and lost control of the game: we are lucky it wasn’t 4-1.
“We were just not good enough, it’s a simple as that, and the manager is taking the brunt of the blame as per usual. But our players stopped pressing and chasing and blocking and marking, they were not aggressive enough, the game was lost by the team.”
I agree with that: I don’t think Tuchel can shoulder all the blame for the way the team shut down after going in front.
Regarding the point about Croatia being better in midfield, as I wrote in this piece in 2024, Southgate’s set-up for that 2018 semi-final was conservative from the start: it was about containment rather than trying to dictate.
The Euros final against Italy was all about Roberto Mancini unloading his bench while Southgate persevered with the same exhausted players. At least Tuchel used his bench, but you can clearly argue against the way he did so.
Updated
On the way out of the dressing room in Arlington, Luis de la Fuente gathered his “family” and delivered one last message before the World Cup semi-final against France. He had long known what he was going to say, if not exactly how – it’s what he has been saying for 50 days and more. “I’ll tell them that this is a unique stage, the kind of moment that may never be repeated again, and that we have to be ourselves,” he had suggested 18 hours earlier; now that idea crystallised in a line. “We’re facing one of the best lineups in the world,” the Spain coach told them, “but we’re the best team in the world.”
By the time they made their way back in again, a voice was heard above the shouts, another line to encapsulate it all, to define this. It belonged to Marc Cucurella and it said: “What a fucking recital!” A call came in to De la Fuente, King Felipe on the phone saying pretty much the same thing, if a little more politely. On went the music, Jamaican (Bam Bam) blasting out, pizza was passed around, and they bounced about. Some did, anyway. Some just sat there taking in what they had done. “It was written: we started in Atlanta and we end in New York,” Dani Olmo said, but a semi-final is not supposed to be like this.
Updated
Given the fact that England were the better team for an hour or so in Atlanta, do we make Spain favourites for Sunday’s final? Coming up, a piece on the European champions, by Sid Lowe.
Just in case you missed any of it: England 1-2 Argentina match report by David Hytner | reaction from Matt Hughes | player ratings from Ed Aarons | analysis by Jacob Steinberg | Argentina analysis from Pablo Iglesias Maurer | England fan reaction by Priya Bharadia | Barney Ronay on Lionel Messi | Reaction from Thomas Tuchel by Ed Aarons | World Cup Daily podcast with Max Rushden and team | Plus! This morning’s news about Argentina’s post-match Falklands banner antics:
Updated
“A lot of the criticism for Tuchel and the England players suggests that it was a conscious decision for England to retreat and hold on after they scored last night,” writes Chris on email. “Argentina played a cagey game for the first 50 minutes or so, perhaps not wanting to commit too much until they had to, but the increased urgency after the England goal was what changed the game.
“England had no answer to the change in pace and the fresh substitutes they brought on. There were several times when Pickford and the defence had the ball but were pressed by a swarm of blue shirts and just couldn’t play out. Their attacks also increased in accuracy. Compare England’s opportunities to cross throughout the game (with the exception of the goal) and they rarely found a white shirt.
“Once Argentina started moving the ball about with more speed, they found Argentina players in the box on numerous occasions, despite the extra defenders England brought on. I think it’s easy to be critical of England for how they played in the last third of the match but we have to give a lot of credit to Argentina who ultimately changed their approach and England didn’t have the quality to stick with them. No shame in that, they’re the world champions for a reason.”
The Argentina players celebrated their World Cup win over England with a banner saying “Las Malvinas son Argentinas”, making reference to the 1982 Falklands war.
Argentina were 1-0 down with five minutes to go of the semi-final in Atlanta but rallied and scored twice in quick succession to reach a second straight World Cup final, where they will face Spain in New Jersey on Sunday.
The banner refers to the dispute over the territory, which is referred to as the Falkland Islands in Britain and Islas Malvinas in Argentina, which led to a 74-day conflict 44 years ago. More than 900 people – 649 Argentinians and 255 Britons – lost their lives in the conflict.
Updated
The captain, Harry Kane, who is on six goals before England’s third-place playoff on Saturday against France – two behind Messi and Kylian Mbappé in the race for the Golden Boot – conceded England had been too defensive after taking the lead.
“Once we went 1-0 up we seemed to just try to hold on, which at this level is not enough,” he told the BBC. “I’m just gutted for the boys, gutted for everyone, the team, the staff, the fans. We played a good game for the large majority of it.
“I’m just gutted because we’ve worked so hard to be here. The lads have given everything – every last bit of running, sweat, blood, tears, whatever it is. To fall short like we did today is just gutting.”
“Before yesterday’s match I had several patients (I’m a psychoanalyst) describe their fear of humiliation at the hands of Argentina,” emails Daniel.
“I am expecting their next sessions to be difficult after last night when fear was precisely what left England so vulnerable. The vibe was best captured in a piece that just appeared in The Athletic which wrote “Tuchel made a tactical alteration that will go down as one of the most consequential mistakes ever by an England manager in a big game”. Well said.
“I was 11 when I saw England win in 1966 and in every World Cup since I have seen the team lack the courage of the Alf Ramsay team and the only thing that helped make this bearable was a lifetime of disappointment as a dedicated Gas Head (AKA Bristol Rovers fan). Lions don’t lie down when the hunt is on. That’s the lesson that has to be learned.”
“My biggest takeaway from last night, apart from England inevitably retreating to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, is that Enzo Fernàndez may well be the heir to Luis Suárez,” emails James. “An incredibly unlikeable character, but one who is pretty bloody good at football. Oh, to have someone like that on the England team.”
On that note, didn’t Fernàndez essentially smack Anderson in the head early doors? How did he get away with it?
Priya Bharadia has some reaction from fans in Manchester:
“To be honest, I’m just happy we’ve made it this far,” Lucas Clapham, 25, with a shrug. “We’ve got to enjoy such a long period in this tournament. We’ve even got another game to play off the third, regardless.”
The England players “deserve a hero’s welcome” for their performance, said Rachel George, 30, who sat outside the now-empty Castlefield Bowl with friends Connor Ford and Amnre Judge.
“I was crying when we lost. It’s very sad, it’s a very sad time. But we go again in four years’ time,” she said. “We had a pub booking for Sunday. We’ll go see the final anyway, we’ll be supporting Spain.”
“People were celebrating too early as well, there were fireworks going off,” said Ford. “But the players should be really proud of their performance.”
Updated
The first Argentina goal – that came from Pickford touching a Martínez shot that looked to be going safely over the bar for a goal kick – reminded me of England v Colombia in 2018. Back then, if memory serves, Pickford made a spectacular save of a shot that wasn’t actually going in, conceded a corner, and Yerry Mina did the rest.
So if that Fernandez shot was actually going over, can we say it was all Pickford’s fault? Juuuuuust kidding.
Updated
Lineker describes Tuchel tactics as 'unfathomable'
Gary Lineker has described Thomas Tuchel’s tactics in England’s World Cup semi-final defeat by Argentina as “unfathomable”.
England took the lead early in the second half through Anthony Gordon but paid for a negative approach thereafter as Enzo Fernández struck in the 85th minute before Lautaro Martínez’s stoppage-time winner.
England boss Tuchel made several defensive substitutions, bringing on Ezri Konsa, Nico O’Reilly and Dan Burn, but they could not stop Lionel Messi setting up both goals from the right wing.
Speaking on The Rest is Football podcast, former England forward Lineker said: “I found it absolutely unfathomable that, if your tactic is to sit everyone deep, you do that against the greatest player ever to play football.
“I think he’s just cementing that game after game after game. Most goals in the World Cup, most assists in the World Cup. And he moves to the right, and you play a back five, and you still don’t go and get tight to him.
“Just put someone on him. He had so much space. He just whipped ball after ball after ball into the box.”
Former midfielder Joe Cole cited a negative mentality in sight of victory after England lost a third successive World Cup semi-final.
Cole said: “It was deflating, wasn’t it? Because we’ve been here before. I think it’s the same problems. If you ever take England on and get it done, you have to get over the hurdle where the fear of failure just paralyses England teams.
“Twelve per cent possession after we scored the goal, that tells you there’s something there. It’s a mindset. We could talk about tactics, substitutions and everything like that, but ultimately it comes from a manager.
“Too many times, it’s like a panic sets in when we’re nearly there. We’ve got it, and then we just trip over our own feet.” PA Media
Updated
“I think the criticism of Tuchel is justified,” emails Jon in Kent. “However, if he had have gone with more attacking subs earlier (ie Rashford for Gordon) and we conceded, then he would have been criticised for not being defensive as well. Damned if he did, damned if he didn’t, but as much as he got right during the tournament, he got it badly wrong at the worst time.
“I do think questions need to be asked about the fitness of the squad – no Saka in a game of this magnitude was very strange, even for the last few minutes.
“Overall, the team did so well getting to where they did, but the curse of the final hurdle remains.”
Argentina players' behaviour with Falklands banner 'entirely inappropriate', says government minister
Argentina’s players’ behaviour was “entirely inappropriate” when they waved a banner in support of their country’s claims to the Falkland Islands after their World Cup semi-final win against England, senior minister Peter Kyle has said.
Argentina, the defending champions, beat England 2-1 in Wednesday’s match in Atlanta. Argentina fans celebrated their victory jubilantly, with some near the pitch holding a banner which read “Las Malvinas son Argentinas” – “The Falkland Islands are Argentinian”.
The banner made its way to the players, who held it up as they revelled in their win. They could face the prospect of disciplinary action from governing body Fifa for violating rules banning political messaging on the pitch.
Asked about the Argentinian players’ move, the Business Secretary Mr Kyle told the BBC: “My reaction is that it was entirely inappropriate. Politics needs to be separate from football.
“In fact, the World Cup has one of its central tenets that politics is separate from football. That is now a matter for Fifa. I expect Fifa to do its investigation thoroughly.”
He continued: “We expect Fifa to undertake an investigation into this. I think it was certain to happen because it was such an egregious violation of the the rules of not having political activity as part of the football.”
Political tensions linger between Argentina and Great Britain over the Falkland Islands, which boiled over into war in 1982.
Buenos Aires has repeatedly claimed sovereignty over the islands, which are about 8,000 miles from Britain and 300 miles from mainland Argentina.
Argentina boss Lionel Scaloni had said before the game he did not want the fixture to become about the conflict over the British overseas territory.
The country’s vice-president Victoria Villarruel had described England as “invaders” and “usurping pirates” in the buildup to the fixture, and posted a victory message on X at full-time by saying, “it wasn’t just another match” alongside a video of what appeared to be Argentinian soldiers. PA Media
Updated
Until Argentina intersected with England in the World Cup semi‑final on Wednesday, their good fortune at this summer’s tournament had been preserved by a very particular, chaotic cocktail, one that sometimes felt more mythical than real. And for just a moment, it seemed like that mysticism was about to run out.
And then Argentina did what they’ve done all summer. They sent the bulk of a stadium – and an entire country – into hysterics. La Albiceleste scored twice in the dying moments of the match, erased the English lead and advanced to the final. After the second of those two goals – a Lautaro Martínez strike in second‑half stoppage time – supporters from both sides were openly weeping, for wildly different reasons.
“Didn’t you consider trying to win 2-0 or 3-0?” … is clearly a very armchair-fan type question. (Tuchel: “That’s brilliant! I never thought of that, thank you.”)
But given how the game went after England scored and the substitutions that were made, it’s a valid question all the same.
I suspect part of England’s problem was simply physical exhaustion. As Tuchel said [below], nothing was changed immediately after the goal. So was it a mentality issue, with a place in the final in sight? Was it fatigue? Was it that Argentina simply upped their level to something England couldn’t deal with?
I am surprised Tuchel didn’t hook Kane – one thing I really thought he’d improve on from the Southgate era was to recognise when Kane needed to be replaced in these big, draining knockout ties.
Updated
“Of course we wanted to go for the second goal,” Tuchel told the BBC last night. “But I had not the feeling that offensive substitutions would help. We stayed in our 4-4-2 but we became passive, more and more passive, we couldn’t win any balls, couldn’t keep the ball, so I think it was not a structural problem. We changed nothing after the [England] goal, but the match changed completely. Again, it’s no problem, I can understand it – these discussions are out there … there are a million coaches, after the game, who know it better.”
“That’s all on Tuchel last night,” emails Daniel. “Those who learn nothing from the past are set to repeat the same failures. I can accept losing when you’ve had a right good go but from 67 mins that last night we almost waited to be beaten.
“That being said, I said at the start at the tournament, we had our time in 2021 and 2024 but unfortunately we blew it. Both squads in my opinion were better than the current one. I can’t remember who said it on the Athletic podcast a few days ago, but they were right international football is about timing. We’ve had eight years of some good and very good players, maybe not world-class mind. For me and many, Italy at Wembley will always be the one that got away.”
Thanks Martin. Hello everyone.
Were England afraid to win? Did Thomas Tuchel get it horribly wrong, after getting so much right? Were Argentina playing for something deeper and more profound than football? And … who will the final on Sunday?
We can have a crack at all those questions and more after a momentous World Cup semi-final in Atlanta. Send us your thoughts on email.
Updated
Thanks for following along – and perhaps even starting your day – as we started to dissect England’s defeat and what comes next for Argentina. Luke McLaughlin will take the reins from here …
FA backs Tuchel in wake of England’s exit – reports
Under-fire Thomas Tuchel retains the Football Association’s backing after England’s disappointing World Cup semi-final loss to Argentina and looks set to stay on as head coach for Euro 2028, per PA Media.
The 52-year-old former Chelsea boss was named Gareth Southgate’s successor in November 2024 and was widely cited as having the necessary tactical acumen to go one step further than his predecessor, who lost in back-to-back European Championship finals as well as in a World Cup semi-final.
The German coach’s negative decision making has put him under intense scrutiny, but it is being reported that he maintains the FA’s support. Tuchel’s initial deal had only covered this World Cup but in February he signed an extension until 2028, when he fully intends to lead England into the home Euros.
Speaking after the Argentina loss, the head coach said: “I have a contract until the home Euros and I’m looking forward to that even like now it is difficult to look that far ahead.”
England flew back to their Kansas City base after Wednesday’s agonising loss in Georgia, where the FA chief executive Mark Bullingham praised Tuchel:
It is heartbreaking to be so close. The players and Thomas gave it everything today and the squad, coaches and staff could not have worked harder during the tournament. I would like to thank them all – and also give my heartfelt thanks to our wonderful fans here in the USA and at home. We felt your support every step of the way and we are all so disappointed not to go further.”
Updated
Thomas Tuchel might have delivered mixed messages after the semi-final defeat to Argentina, but our own Jacob Steinberg was clear in his thinking the England head coach had not earned a free pass.
This was a tale as old as time. There was a chance for England to push on after Anthony Gordon fired them ahead early in the second half, but they reverted to type. The mentality was passive and they looked scared to win. No one put a foot on the ball and offered control. Harry Kane? Invisible in another game. The midfield? Outplayed, outrun and outclassed by Alexis Mac Allister and Enzo Fernández. Thomas Tuchel? Outwitted by Lionel Scaloni, whose substitutions made a difference, and too quick to retreat when there was so long left for England to defend their lead.
Tuchel takes blame, but says 'no regrets'
Thomas Tuchel had already shown this week he’s not someone who is prone to mere pleasantries after a game. The head coach shouldered the blame for England becoming too passive after taking the lead against Argentina, but at the same time said he had “no regrets”.
I don’t believe so much in an English thing and a curse or whatever. It’s repeating itself in different moments. It’s different coaches, different players, different situations.
What cost us today was that we were not active enough in any structure. I can understand these discussions are out there and of course a million coaches after the game know it better. You can discuss this with a million coaches. I have to make a decision on the pitch. It’s how I analyse the match and I take the responsibility.
At the moment no regrets.
Updated
pping has had enough time to analyse where it all went wrong for England:
“What surprised me most about this game was that I was surprised by it. I was surprised that Argentina started the shithousery in the first minute, when I should have expected it. It was smart, they went after the younger guys, the guys most likely to get thrown off by it, or see the red mist …
“I was surprised that Tuchel tried to hold the one goal lead, this wasn’t Mexico, we had seen the threat already. I was surprised Tuchel didn’t seem to grasp that Harry Kane isn’t fast enough to be the pressure relief for the low block, but you would rather have him on than off.
“I was surprised that there was no review of the goal – Messi clearly caught Spence late, and the usual completely irrelevant bollocks – no intent, a coming together, limping on the wrong leg, etc. When we’d seen VAR rewind to the previous days training to find a foul in the build up to other goals. I was also surprised by how many people thought Messi had a great game. He was largely invisible, in the pocket of Spence/Anderson/Rogers, etc. He had more meaningful touches on England players than the ball.
“Mostly I’m surprised that I keep coming back, only to fall out of love with what the game has become … See you in two years for the Euros. Maybe. Might just go back to watching the local club.”
Updated
It will of course be tough for the England players, and broader camp, to come to terms with giving up a 1-0 lead and a spot in the World Cup final in the dying stages of their semi-final against Argentina. But the pain is likely all too familiar for them and their fans.
David Wall is among the first to write in and presents an admirably considered view: “A number of people have said this, but I think this is more disappointing than previous defeats at a similar stage in tournaments. Southgate was criticised for not acting and making changes to stop England becoming more defensive and passive after they went ahead in games. But here Tuchel made a conscious choice to become more defensive and passive after they went ahead.
“Rather than being unable to stop us edging back to the edge of the cliff he actively lowered us down over the edge to cling on by our fingertips. He seemed to assume that because that approach worked against Mexico and Norway in very different conditions [i.e. with 10 players or in exhausting heat and humidity] it would work here. His post-match interview didn’t seem to recognise that. Perhaps that’s just because it was immediately after the final whistle but if we’re going to do better in the next Euros then he needs to so he doesn’t make a similar decision again.”
The Argentina players could not resist doubling down on their triumph over old rivals England as they celebrated their World Cup win with a banner saying “Las Malvinas son Argentinas”, making reference to the 1982 Falklands war. Lisandro Martínez and Giovani Lo Celso held up the banner, grinning, and waved to fans in the stands.
Fifa’s stadium code of conduct bans “banners, flags, flyers, apparel and other paraphernalia that are of a political, offensive, and/or discriminatory nature” inside stadiums, so expect to hear more about this one either way.
The emotions were the polar opposite in Argentina including in Buenos Aires where tens of thousands of fans flooded the streets to celebrate the side’s win over England.
Some screamed, others cried – and the most frenzied sprinted shirtless through the streets, their bodies painted in blue and white national colours. Young men and women scaled lamp-posts and traffic lights, waving Argentina flags in a collective eruption of joy.
The England captain had little influence on the game against Argentina and fell well short of his usual high standards. Barney Ronay pulled no punches in saying, “Harry Kane basically did some light cardio quite close to a World Cup semi-final”.
Kane then had to try to find the words to explain the defeat and the heartbreak that the players and wider England camp were feeling in the immediate aftermath, saying: “I think there’s not much to say. For now, everyone has to process what’s just happened.”
Updated
Barney Ronay was at Atlanta Stadium as Lionel Messi helped turn the game against England. The Argentina captain only occasionally breaks into a run these days. He often looks bored by what is unfolding around him. But it is hard to imagine Messi as anything other than the most impactful footballer on the pitch even as he is about to become the oldest outfield player ever to appear in a World Cup final.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. Well, not to this lot anyway. On a day of ceaseless rolling noise under Atlanta’s vast refrigerated dome, England reached the end of the road, the end of their own capacities at this World Cup, the end of the gears within this team. Mainly they ran into Lionel Messi, who wasn’t ready to be done just yet. Not like this anyway.
With 55 minutes gone England were actually winning this game, 1-0 up thanks to Anthony Gordon’s goal, the only real moment of clarity they produced all match. At which point they simply disappeared as an animate entity from the stage.
Lionel Messi will play in a third World Cup final at the age of 39 after helping to drag Argentina over the line with a pair of assists in their semi-final win against England.
But was Messi’s effervescent best enough to earn a perfect rating? And what score did England’s captain Harry Kane earn as his side failed to hang on to their spot in a World Cup final in the dying stages? Ed Aarons was at Atlanta Stadium marking the players as the action unfolded.
Jude Bellingham Fired up from the start, came close to losing his rag in injury time – couldn’t save England this time.
Anthony Gordon Has come of age at this tournament. Will never forget scoring in a World Cup semi-final.
There was pleasure and pain inside Atlanta Stadium and far beyond. Here is a little taster with a full picture gallery of shots from the England and Argentina semi-final below …
Preamble
And then there were two. Whether you’ve been celebrating Argentina’s come-from-behind triumph or commiserating England’s World Cup exit with a heavy heart, the focus will soon turn toward the final between the reigning champions and Spain.
But before we reach that point, there is still time to catch up on Argentina’s semi-final win against England, and all that happened and was said in the aftermath of yet another memorable World Cup clash between the bitter rivals.
And where better to start than David Hytner’s report from the thrilling match at Atlanta Stadium.
England’s destiny is tournament heartbreak. The only question concerns when it comes and how the fates will contrive to make it as painful as possible. This was an implausibly brutal new low.
If you have any thoughts on the World Cup semi-finals, early predictions for the final or just feel the need to vent – shoot me an email, or find me on Bluesky @martinpegan.bsky.social. Let’s get into it!
