Thomas Tuchel has opened up on England’s World Cup semi-final capitulation and how Argentina’s “f***-it football” left his team “waiting for death”.
England achieved their best World Cup finish since 1966 this summer, taking home bronze after defeating France 6-4 in a thrilling third-place play-off in Miami.
However, their campaign was defined by gut-wrenching semi-final failure against Argentina, which saw England surrender a lead to the defending champions before losing in stoppage time.
The tide of the match seemed to shift in Argentina’s favour after Tuchel went heavily defensive, going to a back-five by bringing on Ezri Konsa with 20 minutes to play, before having the team sit back.
Tuchel received a torrent of criticism for his tactical decision-making, something that was highlighted as his outstanding quality when he was appointed England boss, and the German has now reflected on the “agony of epic proportions” he experienced on that night in Atlanta.
After taking the lead through Anthony Gordon in the 55th minute, Tuchel felt that an Argentina counter-attack – one that was snuffed out by Djed Spence’s famous sliding challenge – led to a psychological change for England, which brought about their downfall.
“It did something to me, it did maybe something to the players, and we suddenly shift into a mindset, ‘Let’s just overcome it’; that’s how we played.” he told Daniel Sturridge in the FA’s Reflections documentary. “We played like there are four minutes left, but it was actually 30-40 minutes left to play.
“From execution, the details of execution, playing around in the deep build-up, playing around Messi, bringing them to one side, switching the side, bringing the game in the opponent’s half, making them suffer, have time to recover physically, mentally in ball possession. We were lacking all these things.
“Argentina then plays very, very quickly. Sorry for the language, ‘f*** it’ football. ‘We have nothing to lose, so let’s f*** it.’ They play two wingers, two strikers, and Messi. So they just take a six off and put a 10 in. At some point they play 3-1-6. And we struggled.”
Tuchel recalls the moment that he decided to make the call and go to a back-five, a strategy that worked in England’s previous two knockout-stage triumphs against Mexico and Norway.
He added: “I think a key moment, if I look back at it and think about what happened and what happened to my decision-making, we conceded a big, big chance right before the water break. And I thought, ‘Okay, we will not survive. This is waiting for death.’ We don’t have ball possession. We’re not defending good. We’re not defending properly in our 4-4-2. We need help.
“Coming with this mindset and coming with the experience that we ended the game against Norway in a back-five, we ended the match against Mexico in a back-five, and we did it. I thought they [Argentina] rely heavily on crosses. They have four strikers in the last line. I think like, ‘Okay, let’s play a back five here.’”
The decision proved ill-fated, and when asked by Sturridge if a different strategy might have played better for England, pressing higher and giving Argentina something to think about defensively, Tuchel said: “ No one knows what would’ve happened. We could have done it and maybe lost 2-1 and people would go like, ‘Is he crazy? Against Norway, he finished the game with five. Why not finish the game off with five?’
“I think from what I saw and the experience and the information and the level of craziness that Argentina put in, change after change after change, it was one offensive change after the other, that was just my solution to the problem.
“I tried to help, that’s what the intervention of a coach is.I tried to help. You don’t try to implement anything for you ego or whatever. You just try to help.
“If we would have been more stable in the game, let’s say with more percentage of ball possession, I would have not changed the structure – why would I? And I would’ve gone for offensive changes.
“But that is a very, very difficult road to go down that can torture you and you can try to kill me here, but it’s my scar. It’s not your scar. I have to live with it. Not you have to live with it. I have to live with this. I am in charge here, and I take these decisions. It’s the players’ scar, and it’s my scar, and I have to live with it and keep on going.
“No one is more hurt than me. No one wanted it more. And you can now endlessly torture you and think if I would have done a different substitution, then we would’ve won the match. You just don’t know it.”
