Time.

Blimey, pre-navel-gazing navel gazing. Should I bother? How is it even possible to say something without scratching-up the stalest of territory – about England, about Southgate, about me sounding like a fan, not some responsible authority? It’s probably not. It’s probably not worth it. But so few of the Bigtime Charlies say anything sharp, or interesting, or tactically right, or with the visceral power or heart of the fan, that *right now*, I’m ploughing back into this. (May bin it; if I feel it neither stays true nor contributes anything worthwhile).

England got beat. Not just that, they got beat too easily, given the Southgate Culture-Matrix. That may have been the signature disappointment from the Three Lions perspective, given the now widely-held view of Garethism as a sort of well-meaning (but maybe not exactly purring) blanket of all-court, essentially defensive integrity with occasional flyers.

Walker and Guehi both made poor errors – lazy lapses – to concede the goals but generally, the team in white were off the pace, unable to intercede, were at some distance from their opposition. Given that Article A of the game plan must have read ‘we have to be on it and we have to stop them playing’ this was a pret-ty fundamental flaw, execution-wise, from England. If we were to seek comfort in the bosom of the obvious, we might say that none of Rice/Bellingham/Mainoo/Foden ‘laid a glove’ on their counterparts.

If it was in the plan to sit and not press anywhere at any time then o-kaaay. That retreat would have to be sensationally durable and watchful. (Meaning it may be theoretically possible but England are nowhere near bright or disciplined enough for that). In any case, whilst of course there was an intention to drop and defend stoutly and compellingly, the almost complete and sustained absence of pressure on the ball gifted Spain the opportunity to show the universe that they are indeed the Best Team in this Tournament by a Country Mile.

You can read this as another crass shout-out for a high, hard press, if you want. Another red-faced fan bawling for more Proper Englishness; more heart; more battle. (I don’t see it that way, but carry on). It’s more that England lacked both the legs and intent to pressure Spanish possession intelligently. When a difference could or needed to be made. Some of that can be coached; some, maybe not.

So, again generally, virtually the whole of the England side looked off the pace – reactive, some would say, in the mould and manner of their coach. Bellingham had that weird slo-mo thing of his going on; looking under-geared, getting caught in possession like some out-of-sync giant. Mainoo and Rice were absent as a force, somehow managing to avoid the bread-and-butter stuff as well as the occasional heads-up thrust. Their defence felt non-interventionist, somehow, as the lads in red simply passed to guys in space, who were routinely showing.

Which brings us to Kane. The fella may have been playing hurt the whole tournament… but he’s simply not been playing. Bollocks to the penalties; his contribution was garbage throughout. (Garbage – yes, a word a fan might use, in anger, probably).

I got bit angry with Kane for his almost complete lameness and unavailability and occasional his feeble exaggeration of contact or injury. He ran nowhere and won nothing. He rarely showed. The skipper may be a trusted player, friend and ally for Southgate but he was patently, for whatever reason, unable to contribute. The gaffer, *finally* – for the ludicrously, much-vaunted ‘bold withdrawal’ in favour of Watkins in the previous game was clearly long-delayed – called Kane in around the hour.

The other sub, Palmer, rather predictably woke England up from their slumber. There was a brief period where a contest threatened to brew, but as Pickford appeared to be the appointed (and arguably sole) pinger of vertical passes, the English Threat melted away relatively weakly. There was no great stirring. What we got from Southgate’s team was more of the low energy, menace-lite holding patterns we’ve seen throughout the competition. Players in deep positions lending other players the ball, partly, in fairness because the lads higher up the park lack the wit, spirit, confidence or freedom to burst into space and either gather and turn or race forward.

Most of that is about culture – about the coaching. Elite coaches create environments but they also groove the moves; Guardiola being the peak example. Spain have certainly been offered ‘the freedom to play’ by their gaffer but they have also been instructed to use their bright, incisive little passes. They’ve practiced getting on their proverbial bikes to find places of danger. De la Fuente plainly not only wants them to play generous attacking football but he has had the understanding and the wit to cultivate and then execute that aspiration. On the plus side, this is precisely why the BTTCM won Euro 24. The negative for England is that Southgate has never understood nor been able to produce this – particularly against good opposition.

Nothing is simple and everything is opinion. Mine is that Southgate is an almost fabulous bloke, who has led his country outstandingly well, in socio-political terms. (This is not a backhanded compliment). But despite his longer-term tournament record ‘speaking for itself’, England have mostly been a poor watch and have been beaten by teams who, like them, have strong playing resources. In this tournament, they played one half of football. One half. Outside of that, they had moments.

For a squad including Bellingham, Foden, Saka, Kane, Rice – you name the ones you rate – this both matters and (for me) should be weighed in. There is or should be an aspiration and a will to play entertaining football; particularly if you have ‘players’. In qualifiers, England have sometimes offered quality and even verve. At the major events? No. Largely caution and game-management of a dour, life-squishing kind. In Germany, during a tournament lit up by the fluency and threat of a free-spirited but well-drilled Spanish side, England were poor, despite making another final.

I am happy for Southgate to be knighted. With our respect and our thanks. He should also go – unquestionably. It’s just time.

Disappointments.

I don’t know anybody who actually thought Southgate would ‘ring the changes’ at half-time, last night. (Did the pundits actually expect that? I muted, early-doors but not before hearing Neville saying something hugely bold and generous about Trent: fair dooos, for a United Man). But the no subs thing became like some Uber-Gareth phenomenon, eh, as the deathly stasis wore on? There became something Ansel Adams-like about both the epic, barren non-performance of his side, and the vacant-but-rich flat-lining image we innocent bystanders were conjuring of the post-match interview, pre-Bellingham.

It would have been some vista, that, with Southgate’s magnificent chin set hard against an ominously swirling backdrop of plastic pint-pots, bratwursts and in then out-of-focus flags. He would have said something about ‘belief in the boys and the process’ before the lads from St Jan’s Ambulance dragged him away by the legs.

But Bellingham – out-of-form, largely; laboured and even a little lame with some of his in-box theatrix – did happen. He did conjure something spectacular and mad: in all this dullness. Gareth was spared – we were all, all spared. The Exceptional Reality that us Inglish inhabit got another nick in the bedpost… and those laughable hours of non-intervention by the coach turned out alright. Gareth could march once more through the miraculous madness/genius corridor and fight (or flee) another day.

I don’t know anybody who is crediting Southgate for any of this: I genuinely don’t think I know anybody who thinks he was right to wait and wait. And this is not because we lack patience or understanding; most of us respect the idea that faith in players is or can be both wonderful and (wot’s the word?) redemptive. The gaffer can and will make the argument that a) he was right in theory and b) (obvs) that he was right in practice. Kane may have been every bit as non-interventionist as his coach, during the tournament and the game, but the bloke nodded the winner. So it’s true that things worked out… and true that most of the universe raged against what felt like patent and even cowardly inaction from the England coaching staff.

Fabulous, ‘deadly’, daft contraflows remain. Those of us who have been angry at and critical of Southgate are the opposite of chastened and appeased. Despite noting the egg on our faces and the bare, extraordinary facts – and the undeniable decency of the man – we are unable to get with Gareth’s theory. (If there is one). The performance was yet again so dispiritingly one-paced and so dull that we dip into the weirdly abstract. How can we enjoy that stuff? In what way is this meant to lift or entertain us? (Even with that Late Drama it still registered as something closer to profound disappointment and embarrassment than to joy). Can’t we do better than this? With that fekkun line-up, surely we can do better than this?

I’m not sure that passage through trumps enjoyment, I’m really not. Friends and family have been saying since the first game that they don’t want England to go through playing like that. (Fact!) They’d rather someone else wins it, playing watchable or hopefully exciting football.

The Meedya barely registers this: as though *things really are* only about winning. There’s this assumption that fans only care about those bedpost notches – I assume because that plays in (or helpfully conforms to) the corporate/’Premier League’ mentality around buying into bigness. Sure we hear plenty loudmouthed donkeys on phone-ins adding fuel to that blinding fire: but I hear and I feel a whole lot more generosity from fans, than that. We care about levels of effort and commitment and heart and we value entertainment.

England are no doubt committed and no doubt they love their country – whatever that means. But there’s a heavy dollop of delusion in there, too. They probably do believe their dull pattern is ‘doing a decent job’. They probably think that ball retention is an end in itself, because ‘chances will come’. Bellingham probably did enjoy sticking it to all of us critics, by sticking that ball in the net. There probably is some truth in all of these views. Patience may be key, may be proven to be key. 2-1. Onward.

England may yet go on and win this tournament. But even if things change now, and they turn dramatically into a thrillingly inventive and creative side, fans local and distant will be underwhelmed. In one sense it’s already too late. There really is a Bigger Picture. We’ve seen a whole series of poor performances. Truly fine players have looked lost in a matrix of sluggishness. A team featuring Foden, Bellingham, Saka and Kane has offered almost no threat. That’s a disappointment: yes?