Tuchel’s subs questioned after England defeat

England’s World Cup exit to Argentina has sparked criticism of Thomas Tuchel, with his substitutions becoming a focal point. The 2-1 loss followed a familiar pattern—leading early before faltering—but this time, the manager’s choices faced sharp scrutiny.

Substitutions that backfired

Tuchel’s first controversial decision was replacing goalscorer Anthony Gordon with defender Ezri Konsa. With 30 minutes remaining, England lost its attacking presence, and the change seemed to invite pressure. Two more defenders were brought on, reinforcing a defensive stance.

Captain Harry Kane criticized the approach. “Once we went 1-0 up, we seemed to just try and hold on, which at this level is not enough,” he said. Defender Marc Guehi shared the frustration: “It felt like we scored and then the mentality was to go back and defend.”

Dan Burn offered a slightly different perspective. “We got passive after the goal, defended too deep,” he said. “The quality of chances Argentina created made it feel inevitable.”

Mentality or mismanagement?

The substitutions weren’t the only problem. Lautaro Martínez, who scored Argentina’s winner, noted England’s fatigue after 60 minutes of pressing. “They had nothing left, then they dropped back,” he said. Tuchel acknowledged the shift but disagreed on timing. “The mindset changed immediately after the goal,” he said. “We sat deep, not after the substitutions. We played like we had everything to lose.”

This was the issue Tuchel was brought in to address. After Euro 2024, he had criticized England for playing “not to lose.” The Argentina defeat showed old habits remained.

Related: McIlroy slams DeChambeau over Open delay

Whether Tuchel’s decisions caused the collapse or revealed a deeper flaw remains unclear. Swapping Konsa for Gordon may have been a response to England’s defensive shift, but it also weakened their attack.

Tuchel’s direct style has been accepted because of his tactical record. But in high-pressure moments, outcomes matter more than methods. England’s players appeared as frustrated as supporters. If they don’t trust his approach, his position becomes difficult to defend.

The next two years provide few opportunities to change course. The real challenge lies in knockout stages, where England’s history of fading under pressure has become predictable.

• England player ratings: Big guns fail to deliver
• As it happened | Teams | Stats | Knockout bracket
• World Cup day-by-day schedule | Latest: World Cup
• Follow our World Cup coverage in the Sky Sports App

The same feeling, but worse. England exit the World Cup with a 2-1 defeat just as they did twice under Gareth Southgate and in strikingly similar fashion to that semi-final defeat to Croatia eight years ago. They were leading but sat back and subsequently lost.

This was different because England were supposed to have learned. Thomas Tuchel was supposed to have taught them. Instead, he is being lambasted for a series of substitutions so counterproductive that his counterpart Lionel Scaloni might have made them himself.

Ezri Konsa for Anthony Gordon, England’s goalscorer, will go down in folklore for all the wrong reasons. A defensive move that gave the impression of inviting pressure, robbed the team of an out-ball – and all with what turned out to be 30 minutes still left to play.

Two more defenders were introduced by Tuchel prior to Argentina’s late double. And the reaction of England’s players to the defeat hinted that their feelings about the approach were not so far removed from the frustrations of the masses watching back home.

Related: Barcelona hold onto Alvarez amid Arsenal PSG interest

“Once we went 1-0 up we seemed to just try and hold on which at this level is just not enough,” said captain Harry Kane. “We should have carried on pushing,” agreed Marc Guehi. “It kind of felt like we scored and then the mentality was go back, defend.”

“I thought we nailed the game-plan up until we scored,” said fellow defender Dan Burn. “We got a little bit passive after the goal, defended probably a little bit too deep, and the quality of chances that Argentina were creating it felt like it was a matter of time.”

The blame game is in full swing and what might feel like a minor detail could have significant consequences once the dust settles on this disappointment. Were Tuchel’s interventions the cause of that passivity or was he just the coach left trying to cope with it?

There were 17 minutes between Gordon’s goal going in and the Konsa switch. Lautaro Martinez, scorer of the winning goal, identified this as the key period. “England got tired. They pressed for 60 minutes. After that, they had nothing left, then they dropped back.”

That was Tuchel’s reading of events. “It started straight away after the goal. It is basically the reason why we lost,” he explained. “The mindset shifted. We sat deep straight away after our goal, not after the substitutions. We suddenly played like we had a lot to lose.”

Of course, this is the mindset that Tuchel was brought in to change.