Thomas Tuchel’s Changes Out of Fear Weren’t Nearly England’s Biggest World Cup Problem
“Watching the Euros, I felt tension and pressure on the shoulders of the players,” Thomas Tuchel surmised when reflecting on Gareth Southgate’s final tournament as England manager, “they were more afraid... they were playing not to lose.”
Tuchel’s first tournament in charge of the Three Lions ultimately crumbled in an atmosphere of rampant fear. The revered tactician brought in to guard against the kind of helplessness which gripped England at the biggest moments under Southgate watched his side flail all the same.
While England wilted as a consequence of Southgate’s indecision, Tuchel’s proactive approach still couldn’t tear down this culture of destructive terror. It begs the question, was there anything anyone could have done?
The Most Pitiful 20 Minutes in England’s World Cup History
“When we went 1–0 up we seemed to try and hold on,” Harry Kane accurately reflected, “which at this level is not enough.”
In a semifinal between two flawed sides, England had the better of the game while it was still goalless. After a first half which was more of an arm wrestle than any sort of team sport, it was the Three Lions who offered the longest snatched sights of attacking fluency, with Tuchel’s fingerprints all over Anthony Gordon’s opener in the 55th minute.
Kane, that bastion of Tuchel’s reign, dropped deep to fling a characteristic ball over the top. The knockdown was collected by Morgan Rogers, a surprise starter on the right while Bukayo Saka and Noni Madueke watched the entire contest unfold from the sidelines. The Aston Villa man, who Tuchel picked off a “feeling” in his stomach, slid a sumptuous pass across the box for Gordon to adroitly wrangle over the goal line.
The replacement of Gordon, the game’s goalscorer, for an extra center back in the form of Ezri Konsa in the 72nd minute gave way to the most timid, pitiful and defeatist 20 minutes England has ever produced on the World Cup stage. Dan Burn and Nico O’Reilly were also introduced during that spell as the Three Lions lined up with six defenders.
Match Stats Between 72’ and 90’+2
Stat | England | Argentina |
|---|---|---|
Goals | 0 | 2 |
Possession | 8% | 92% |
xG | 0.05 | 1.63 |
Shots | 1 | 8 |
Shots on Target | 0 | 3 |
Touches in Opp. Box | 0 | 11 |
Stats via WhoScored.
Argentina’s Lionel Scaloni recognized Tuchel’s hurried attempts at damage limitation and emptied his bench of strikers, another extreme example of coaching which could very well have been punished had England not gone so dramatically the other way.
England completed just six passes while Argentina racked up eight shots. The one sniff in transition which the frazzled set of white shirts was able to conjure collapsed when Rogers blasted the ball into Cristian Romero.
Eventually, the walls of dark blue closed in on England. No heroic save from Jordan Pickford or the post could thwart Enzo Fernández’s long-range strike which hauled Argentina level. It was telling that Tuchel made no adjustments during the six minutes which followed as the defending champion romped in front, with Lionel Messi once again drifting out wide to whip the ball in for Lautaro Martínez.
Tuchel was justified in his dismissal of the hindsight criticism, scoffing at the “million coaches” who will point out where it went wrong for England from their bar stool, couch (or desk). Yet, Emiliano Martínez could also see it coming from Argentina’s goal: “We felt them going backwards and backwards rather than going forward. Sometimes when you are winning, you have to go forward anyway. You can’t change the game plan.”
This is exactly the kind of situation the South Americans love. Argentina’s players have spent so much time in the Last Chance Saloon at this World Cup they know the bar staff by name and have memorized all the records in the jukebox. Once England got sucked into this familiar territory, there was only one outcome. Yet, Tuchel’s changes were an attempt to solve the problem rather than its cause.
England’s ‘DNA’ Comes to the Fore
Before taking over the senior team, Southgate was a key figure behind establishing what “England DNA” actually meant in tangible terms. Back in 2014, the future World Cup semifinalist set out his golden ideal of a “possession-based game” with “intelligent players, decision-makers.” Yet, the meek shunning of the ball that played out against Argentina is much more inherently English.
This natural inclination to drop back has been evident for years. It’s what cost Southgate’s side in the last World Cup semifinal it reached against Croatia in 2018 and the lost final of Euro 2020. As Dan Burn unwittingly admitted on Wednesday: “It’s only human nature.” It’s definitely part of England’s nature.
Tuchel waxed lyrical about Argentina’s innate confidence to step up the pitch and throttle England with a monopoly of the ball. “I think it’s in the culture basically of the Argentinian team, of South American teams, this ball possession plays a plays a crucial role,” he explained. “Ball possession taught from a young age, and it’s in the DNA.
“It demands a lot a lot of self confidence, natural self confidence to always want the ball, to always be in the gaps, to always define yourself through the ball, through the ball possession.” England’s natural style is fear rather than finesse.
As Tuchel was quick to point out, his tactical changes were simply a way to help England better protect itself in a style of play which the team had collectively decided without his input. In the time between Gordon’s opener and Tuchel’s first substitution, the Three Lions had already given up the ball, boasting just 17% possession.
“You can defend active in any formation,” the German coach argued. “You can get ball possession in any formation. We struggled.”
By that logic, the choices made some sense. If his players were too scared to do anything other than defend after going 1–0 up, why not toss on every defender available? The real issue is why the team was so defiantly passive in the first place. Unfortunately for Tuchel, that has been a theme of the summer (and beyond).
The Warning Signs Had Been Coming
Tuchel has been trying to plug the gaps in a ship that has been sinking throughout the knockout stages. In each of England’s last four matches, the team has suffered sustained black outs.
The first 25 minutes against DR Congo in the round of 32 were particularly dire; the 15 minutes between Jude Bellingham’s second goal and the halftime whistle at the Estadio Azteca were comfortably England’s shakiest in a bonkers match which also saw them play almost the entire second half with 10 men; and Norway completely caught Tuchel’s side dozing after the first hydration break of the quarterfinal.
A better side than DR Congo would have taken advantage of such a fast start while Mexico’s limitations were exposed when England resorted to a back five. The return to that approach wasn’t warranted against Argentina because Tuchel had a full complement of players on the pitch and there was no altitude or heat to combat in the air-conditioned Mercedes-Benz Stadium. While it’s all very well and good letting Roberto Alvarado swing in endless crosses, Messi has a slightly more impressive track record of creating goals for teammates.
Tuchel’s first batch of changes against Norway were much worse than his semifinal decisions but he still had time to rectify the error of completely gutting his midfield. That reprieve was largely thanks to the lack of threat offered outside of Erling Haaland and Martin Ødegaard. Stopping Messi is one thing, but then you also have to think about closing down a $145 million midfielder.
By Tuchel’s own spiky admission, England had been lucky to get to the semifinals. It would have taken another slice of undeserved fortune to make the final.
Where Does This Leave England?
“No regrets.” Tuchel repeated those words in the immediate aftermath of England’s World Cup exit in an attempt to convince BBC Sport’s Kelly Sommers. The manager himself certainly appeared to believe them.
The English Football Association share Tuchel’s confidence in his tactical changes. The mood heading into the tournament was pretty boisterous: the FA were so concerned about Tuchel getting poached by an elite club they handed him a contract extension through the 2028 European Championship all the way back in February. After elimination, FA chief executive Mark Bullingham insisted: “The players and Thomas gave it everything today and the squad, coaches and staff could not have worked harder during the tournament.”
Tuchel already had one eye cast towards the competition which will be co-hosted by England, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland. “Of course we keep on going with the contract until the home Euros,” he offered up, “and I’m looking forward to that.”
Yet, if Tuchel is to be believed that England’s retreat was imposed by the players rather than his own game plan, that would suggest there must be a major psychological change in the years to come.
It can be done, as both World Cup finalists can attest. Spain was even more of a timid failure than England for decades before the possession revolution propelled La Roja to new heights from 2008 onwards. Even with Messi in his prime, Argentina went 28 years without winning a major piece of silverware before Lionel Scaloni welcomed in a youthful influx after the 2018 World Cup.
“These are the games you dream of,” Tuchel beamed ahead of kickoff, pursing his lips in that rueful smile of his. In the end, this match turned into an all too familiar nightmare for England.
READ THE LATEST WORLD CUP NEWS, ANALYSIS AND INSIGHT FROM SI FC
feed