When Thomas Tuchel became England’s head coach he spoke repeatedly about wanting his side to adopt a Premier League style. He wanted intensity, pace, full-throttle football. Tuchel offered clarity, his analysis was precise and his squad for the World Cup was built around the idea of overwhelming opponents with physicality and relentless running.
There were roles for specialists and places for individuals who could be trusted to bring the vibes. There were like-for-like alternatives in various positions and Tuchel was granted a lot of leeway. He was bold with his choices and could respond to questions about omitting the creativity of Phil Foden, Cole Palmer, Adam Wharton, Morgan Gibbs-White and Trent Alexander-Arnold by arguing that he had a vision and was going to stick to it.
There were glimpses of England’s high-speed approach when they beat Croatia in their opening game but the illusion was shattered during the surrender from 1-0 up in the semi-final against Argentina. The self-sabotage was astonishing, as Tuchel lost his nerve and handed the game to Lionel Messi. Argentina were there for the taking but Tuchel retreated.
Some England players were said to have been puzzled by Tuchel overseeing a tactical capitulation, unable to understand why he decided to play so defensively. There was widespread surprise that he did not use the pace of Noni Madueke, Bukayo Saka, or Marcus Rashford to hit Argentina on the break.
Tuchel came in for criticism from a host of former players. The former Germany forward Thomas Müller was scathing about how Argentina were invited to attack England. The former England striker Wayne Rooney, a pundit for the BBC, said Tuchel’s tactics were asking for trouble.
How you lose matters. England went out to Argentina in the second round in 1998 but it was an epic performance with 10 men. Atlanta was nothing like that and the Football Association remains in thrall to Tuchel and is desperate not to make a change but it needs to recognise what happened. After all, Mark Bullingham, the FA’s chief executive, said that England’s best performance under Sir Gareth Southgate was their run to the quarter-finals at the 2022 World Cup, even though it was their earliest tournament exit under Tuchel’s predecessor.
The postmortem goes deeper than the end result. How was the mood in the camp? Positive enough. England were together, as they proved against Mexico in the Azteca, but how did they play? There was never any flow or identity – and when it comes to analysing why it is worth going back to how Tuchel configured his squad and then used it.
On one level it is pointless moaning about Palmer and Foden, partly because their domestic struggles hurt their selection chances, but also because there is nothing to suggest Tuchel would have put them on when England were leading against Argentina. Tuchel had fast attackers on the bench and chose not to use them. He veered away from his plan and he showed no faith in Saka’s fitness. The situation seemed made for the winger to come on and run at the 32-year-old Nicolás Tagliafico on the right. Tuchel resisted. Saka has been struggling with an achilles injury and, although he has shown flashes of class in previous games, Tuchel did not trust him when it came to the crunch.
Ultimately, the manager fell into the familiar trap of relying on unfit or injury-prone players. England needed Saka but he remained on the bench. Tuchel restricted his options. The aim was to have wingers going down the outside and creating overloads. Tuchel did not want Palmer and Foden cutting in and clogging up the middle. Yet Madueke, Saka’s direct replacement, was such a disappointment. He fell out of favour after the quarter-final against Norway and it is fair to wonder whether Tuchel missed a trick by not selecting Jarrod Bowen or even Rio Ngumoha given Saka’s fitness issues and Madueke’s faltering confidence. It is damning that Tuchel ended up discarding some of his wide options having placed so much store in them. Rashford, like Madueke, was cast aside after fitful early displays.
Gibbs-White, a direct runner who did not make the squad, may feel he could have made an impact given that he can also play wide and scored 18 goals last season. If only this was just about Saka, though. The problem is that several England players were injury concerns. The Newcastle defender Tino Livramento flew home injured. John Stones was rusty in central defence and needed time to get going. Reece James, another who played in the cursed right-back position, predictably had hamstring trouble and went down with cramp shortly before Argentina’s equaliser.
These were foreseeable problems. Equally, it is fair to say that there were not many other defensive options. Luke Shaw and Lewis Hall are good left-backs but have fragile injury records. Harry Maguire’s bitter reaction to not being selected tells you why Tuchel overlooked him.
after newsletter promotion
Still, Tuchel ended up with a squad containing six centre-backs but only one left-footed left-back (Nico O’Reilly) and four central midfielders. He tied his own hands, not least when it came to reacting to Declan Rice’s neural pain in a hamstring and his lower back.
Rice is crucial to how England play. Their structure disappears without him in midfield. Yet Tuchel knew his vice-captain was struggling to complete games. There had to be a viable alternative but the cover for Rice and Elliot Anderson was Jordan Henderson and Kobbie Mainoo.
Those were mind-bending choices. Henderson is 36 and had made one brief substitute appearance in five games before fracturing a wrist during the celebrations against Mexico. Was he really there in a playing role? The evidence suggests otherwise. In fact Tuchel’s favoured change when Rice was struggling was to put James in midfield. Mainoo, who treats the ball like a friend, has not played. Wharton, another snappy passer, watched from home. Alex Scott, the energetic Bournemouth midfielder, and Myles Lewis-Skelly, who started in midfield for Arsenal in the Champions League final, were also overlooked.
Tuchel never seemed to understand why he took Mainoo. He can complain about England lacking control when they led against Argentina but he left out players who are comfortable on the ball. It was a conscious choice from Tuchel and what makes it worse is that he did not even stick to his plan.
Why did he not make better use of his squad? Tuchel spoke about having 14 or 15 starters. Others were there for specific situations. Ivan Toney was there as battering ram for emergency situations. Not giving the striker a sniff until England were on the verge of going out at least felt logical. However, not using Ollie Watkins was a weird choice. Harry Kane had a poor game against Argentina and should have been substituted. Watkins could have worked the channels and stretched them. The striker was given one brief substitute appearance against Panama, though, and is entitled to feel that Tuchel was too wedded to Kane.
Plenty of England managers have blundered by indulging the star players. Tuchel was meant to be different. Now he looks like many who came before him. The scrutiny will be intense. Some players will wonder about the manager’s negativity. Others will wonder why they were not given a chance. The fans are ready to turn. There was trust in Tuchel. The FA will cling to it but the damage to his aura is vast. He made mistakes and the manner of the defeat makes it hard to look past them.