‘Absolute menace’ Jude Bellingham must replace Harry Kane for England | OneFootball

England fans are convinced that Harry Kane is the problem; would they win Euro 2028 with Jude Bellingham up front?

If you’re looking for general World Cup views, then click here. And send all your thoughts to theeditor@football365.com

England might win Euro 2028 without Kane

Sure did look helpful to have someone on the halfway line, challenging for an outball for a beleaguered back line. Enabling talented forwards to chase something; contest something; win something; at least take a modicum of pressure off the defence.

But then we can’t have too much of that. We need Kane dropping deep. We need Kane averaging deeper positions than half of the team. We need Kane having either no, or negligible touches in the opposition box.

It’s just so utterly helpful to have him ignore any form of tactical discipline.

God knows why successive managers have made statements akin to ‘we didn’t instruct the team to drop deeper and deeper’ and find that they do; its entirely coincidental and unrelated to their captain playing in his own box whenever there’s a modicum of pressure.

F365 have long been Kane fans; gaslighting us through the entirety of the last few Euros saying he’s ‘playing as a forward’ when heat map, touch map, and the naked eye suggested the obvious opposite and his pals in the media like Lineker et al were saying the team needed something different.

Put a ‘striker’ in this team and they may win something. Play Kane and the team struggle in pressured scenarios Bayern don’t face in the league, but do in the cups to similar conclusions.

A basis AI search of F365 own player ratings and 16 conclusions strongly and easily find he’s described poorly far far far more than he is positively across the last few tournaments. I’ve been reading more about this tournament, than watching it, and the only mentions of Kane have been almost apologetic rather than praising. But but but that one performance against Croatia….

We won a World Cup playing Jack Charlton and the famous quote of not using the best players, but the players needed. It’s been true for so long at the other end of the field, but ignored, that we’ve diluted the impact of 3-5 players to try and get the best out of one. And he let us down.

Build the team around our increasingly large volume of staggeringly good number 10s and move away from a team trying to accommodate a 9 who decides it’s in the teams best interest to play as a 10.

Bellingham the disruptive egotist lets Saka take a pen when if he’s done so he’d have become an English football record holder. Kane goes on nationally telly to demand a goal be taken off a team mate despite no camera angle showing even a glimmer of a touch, just for a pathetic run at a Golden Boot.

Maybe an England side without Kane wins the Euros, and finds it far easier to hold possession, because a team without Kane holds a formation and so gives beleaguered defenders options other than to row z. Tom G

(We’re not sure we need to gaslight about the best striker England have ever had. Oh and as for that Croatia game…we prefer the DR Congo clash when he literally kept us in the World Cup – Ed)

…After Harry Kane scores 1 non penalty goal with his feet in over 10 hours of World Cup football and England score 6 against pre tournament favourites France without him,  the UK football media asks ‘How will England score goals without Harry Kane?’ Ben Teacher

…Harry Kane is a truly elite centre forward. No doubt about it.

There are, however, some important considerations that will only become more and more pertinent. He is 33 this month. On the one hand, he will inevitably score crucial goals versus Denmark, Slovenia, Croatia, Congo and Panama that are vital to our progress. However, we have had crucial games versus Croatia, Italy, France, Spain and Argentina where his contribution has been minimal. None of us can doubt his ability, so are we mismanaging him, and how can we deploy him effectively as he ages, without falling into the Ronaldo trap?

Jude Bellingham represents hope. He is an absolute menace in the final third, time and again arriving at the right moment in the box. Real Madrid last won the title in the 2023/24 season, where Bellingham played as a deep-lying forward, flanked by Vinícius and Rodrygo. There is a clip from the win at Manchester City. A ball over the top is plucked out of the air, before he releases the runner. A few passes later, Real Madrid take the lead. Bellingham’s run into space on the edge of the box isn’t immediately noticeable. Rodrygo scores, but he was equally well positioned.

Of course he was, this is the player who made 328 sprints before the semi-final. The most by an England player. Possession won in the final third five times, again the top ranking. Runs in behind? Top scorer? You guessed it. In comparison, Messi made 124 sprints before they coincided in Atlanta. There, one player picked his moments; the other was exhausted. So, how do we maximise his output for England? Well, less could be more. Too much exertion, too much charging around, diminishes the efficiency of his best work, so why not set the team up to allow him to operate strictly in the opposition’s half? Slide that heat map data 1cm to the right.

This could answer the other question, too. Kane could become an intermittent starter and an option from the bench, while Bellingham gets to operate in the central role, flanked by Saka and Gordon. Ngumoha and Dowman, maybe. This allows for two number 8s, with Anderson screening in front of the back four. Rogers is an option, if you are looking to drive forward, or Alex Scott, if he continues to develop. We saw against France and Argentina that the wide players can contribute goals when brought into play. Equally, Rice’s workload being shared can only pay dividends.

Ancelotti had his employment of Bellingham at an optimal level, but he was then given Mbappé to accommodate. No title since. Ultimately, a more measured use of Kane and advanced deployment of Bellingham should lead to a less predictable and more energised England, especially during the later stages of tournaments. It is not just outlets. We had Palmer, Saka, Watkins, Palmer and Bellingham on the pitch versus Spain in 2024 and the game followed the same pattern of us being unable to retrieve or keep the ball. Outcome? 2-1 to the team that could manage intensity levels effectively. AC in Milan

In praise of England

To start with I appreciate the pain of the semifinal exit. Against France in 22 it felt like we gave everything and got beat by a better team. This time, it felt like we let them have it, which is why everyone is hurting so bad now.

But it has to be taken in context. In 2014 we exited after eight days and after scoring two goals. In 2010, after being happy just to qualify after the 2008 carry-on, we managed three, one coming in a drubbing by Germany. This tournament has seen us score twenty. If my numbers are right, four goals shy of the total number scored in World Cups between Bobby leaving in 90 and Gareth’s appointment.

After the shambles and pain of Iceland in 2016, if you’d offered me in the next five tournaments we’d get to two finals, two semis and one quarter, I’d tear your arm off. Not to mention two wins in the euros for the women and two wins in the euros for the u21s. There’s no win for the men’s senior team yet, yes, but this has to be viewed as the most successful period in the national team’s history. It’s no accident, too. The England DNA project that we teach the kids on a Saturday morning is working – the level of technical players being produced in the country is unprecedented. Look at what has happened in Italy, even Brazil, where talent production has stalled.

There are still issues. There are still too few opportunities for English players in the Prem, but luckily they’ve figured this out and started to play overseas. Let’s not forget – there us another Bellingham, and he’s 20! Johnny B, Bedford

…Thomas Tuchel was right in March 2025 when he said “England are more afraid to lose and drop out of a tournament than excited and hungry to win it”.

He hasn’t been able to fix that in his first tournament and the press, pundits etc… are using that quote against him.

BUT…

England have NEVER reached a World Cup SF outside of Europe (until now).

The route to other SF’s:

1966 (in England) – one knock out round 1990 (in Italy) & 2018 (in Russia) – two knock out rounds 2026 (North America) – three knock out rounds.

It’s the longest route to a Semi Final, with the harshest travel and climate challenges. Let us not forget England were eliminated by the CHAMPIONS, who have secured consecutive World Cup Final appearances and have the GOAT. Said elimination was: By. Two. Late. Goals.

*It is unquestionably England’s second best World Cup campaign ever.*

Tuchel has made mistakes, but this is no Graham Taylor or Schteve McClaren levels of f**kery.

He’s an elite Manager.

The biggest problem Tuchel & England have had is a lack of elite opponents in high pressure matches before this tournament.

They have that now. And the Nations League will give more exposure in the coming months.

Let him learn from this tournament, and he will. Then let’s see what 2028 brings.

I can’t help but think the attempts to pile the blame on him is made easier by the fact he’s German. Naz, Gooner

No, England need Pep

England’s World Cup campaign ended in familiar fashion.

A narrow defeat in a major knockout match. Questions over substitutions. A team that retreated after taking the lead. Supporters left wondering what might have been.

On the surface, it felt uncomfortably similar to previous tournaments.

That is precisely why Thomas Tuchel’s post-match comments matter.

Leadership is tested most severely after failure. When things go wrong, supporters expect honesty, accountability and reflection. Instead, Tuchel suggested England’s problems were rooted in his players and the nation’s footballing “DNA”.

That explanation immediately raises a difficult question.

If England’s mentality and decision-making were already embedded in their DNA, then what exactly was Thomas Tuchel brought in to change?

He was appointed because Gareth Southgate had taken England close but ultimately fallen short. The Football Association didn’t simply want continuity; they wanted evolution. They wanted someone with elite club experience who would make England more proactive, more adaptable and more ruthless in the biggest moments.

Against Argentina, however, the opposite appeared to happen.

England led 1-0 and gradually surrendered control.

Rather than retaining possession, controlling midfield (utilising players capable of that) and continuing to dictate the game, England dropped deeper and invited pressure. Argentina grew stronger, equalised and eventually won.

That tactical pattern looked remarkably familiar. Deja Vu personified.

It is impossible to say with certainty that one substitution alone would have altered the outcome. Football rarely works that simply. But what is beyond dispute is that England lost control of midfield during the final stages.

For many supporters, one omission stood above all others. Kobbie Mainoo’s!

Mainoo has already demonstrated, at both club and international level, an unusual ability to receive the ball under pressure, slow games down when necessary, resist the press and keep possession moving

forward. Those qualities become especially valuable when protecting a narrow lead.

Instead, England never regained control. That decision inevitably invites scrutiny.

Equally difficult to understand has been Mainoo’s overall role during the tournament. Despite injuries, fatigue and changing personnel in midfield, one of England’s most naturally gifted young midfielders barely featured.

Managers make difficult decisions every day. Every supporter has players they believe should play more often.

But when a tournament ends in defeat, those decisions become part of the conversation.

The criticism of Tuchel should not be that he selected the “wrong” players simply because England lost.

It should be that the tactical objective after taking the lead appeared unclear.

Elite international football is rarely won by defending deeper and deeper for extended periods. The best sides continue to manage possession, control tempo and force opponents to chase the game.

Spain have shown it. Even Argentina themselves demonstrated it once momentum shifted.

England did not.

To Tuchel’s credit, there were (albeit a few) positives.

His response in the third-place play-off against France showed flexibility.

Rather than retreating after establishing a commanding lead, he introduced Jude Bellingham and Elliot Anderson. England regained control, attacked with purpose and eventually won 6-4 in the tournament’s most entertaining match to date.

The scoreline should not disguise some poor defending from both teams, and France created enough chances that the game could easily have developed very differently.

But the substitutions themselves were significant.

They demonstrated proactive management rather than reactive management.

They demonstrated trust in technical midfield players rather than simply protecting territory.

That was encouraging.

Perhaps the most important lesson from the tournament isn’t tactical at all. It concerns leadership.

Great leaders own defeat before they explain it.

Nobody expects perfection. Nobody expects every substitution to succeed.

Supporters can forgive mistakes.

They find it much harder to accept explanations that appear to move responsibility elsewhere.

Acknowledging that your own decisions may have contributed to defeat requires courage (Tuchel showed a sincere lack of courage in both leadership and tactical astuteness).

So does adapting. So does learning.

England possess one of the most talented groups of young footballers in world football.

Bellingham. Rice. Mainoo Saka. Gordon. Foden. Palmer. Dowman. Ngumoah

(4 of which were not selected and 1 that got no minutes at all) This generation does not need to be told that failure is embedded in England’s DNA.

It needs a manager prepared to shape a different future. That, ultimately, is why Thomas Tuchel was hired.

The coming months will determine whether this World Cup semi-final becomes another chapter in England’s long history of near misses—or the moment that finally forces meaningful change.

Because leadership is never defined by victory alone.

It is defined by what happens after defeat. It is defined by character of the human spirit.

So. Let’s go get Pep (as Klopps gone) Eddie Valetta

Not sure who to blame for England

England never looked fluid the entire tournament except for a brief period against Croatia. Yes, they never looked as bad as Spain against Cape Verde or Argentina is when they are not trailing or France against Senegal. But they never looked as good as any of these teams in their best moments.

I don’t remember Tuchel’s teams dominating possession or even being known as good on the ball teams. They are usually very strong rigid mid block or high press who attack very quickly taking as few passes as possible. So England would never have closed a game out hogging the ball (was Denmark the only match they ever closed the game keeping the ball?). Even in the semis, Argentina had a lot more 10+ passes sequence than England before the first goal.

I think the team started believing, especially after Mexico, that they are capable of defending with backs to the wall till death. That’s when Bellingham’s comments post Norway match makes sense. Why does he think a midfield of 300mil+ (surely Bellingham is worth 100mil+?) is not expected to dominate the ball against Norway? This should be extremely concerning for English fans and Tuchel.

Like many have written, players retreated way before Tuchel’s substitutions signalled to the team. At 58 off mins, they are in freaking back 6 albeit temporarily. Both Gordon and then later Bellingham couldn’t defend well against Messi. Tuchel was right to bring in O’Reilly and think Spence+ O’Reilly would defend well against Messi and have the energy to go forward whenever they win the ball. At one point O’Reilly is pressing alone on his own far ahead of Kane and Jude and starts jogging back. Only Stones was pleading the team to push up at 82min.

Really, Kane and Bellingham should have realized this and pushed up and Tuchel for not substituting either when they didn’t push forward.

Also, what was Tuchel thinking leaving them on after firmly putting all eggs in the defend the 1-0 and win in normal time. Surely, they couldn’t have played ET either.

Saka has been out of form for 2 yrs now. Wonder when Rice will have the physically not well asterisk removed after every performance. And Foden has gone off as well. Madrid fan

Make young players be referees

The post-mortem on England’s recent World Cup semi-final exit against Argentina focused heavily on the familiar tactical tropes. We lamented Thomas Tuchel parking a cowardly defensive bus, and we rightly fumed at Ismail Elfath letting the Albiceleste sit on our chests with a masterclass in unpunished, first-half cynical fouling that prevented the team from building up any rhythm for and entire half.

But the real issue isn’t tactical; it’s systemic. We are consistently out-litigated on the pitch because our players are too honest, too sarcastic, or too quiet. While rival captains actively prosecute a legal case to the official, Harry Kane is left offering looks of deadpan disbelief and impotent sarcasm as he fluffs his appeals.

I want to propose a radical, mandatory addition to the FA’s Elite Player Performance Plan (EPPP): Every single English academy graduate must referee a set of competitive lower-league matches before making their Premier League debut.

The PFA and PGMOL have recently introduced a scholarship to fast-track ex-pros into officiating, but we need to weaponize this concept in reverse. We don’t just need better referees; we need highly litigious, street-smart players.

Forcing an elite 17-year-old prospect out of their pristine academy bubble to referee a gritty, high-stakes Sunday League or regional match would yield immense benefits:

Mastery of the Statutes: To get certified, players would have to learn the IFAB Laws of the Game “chapter and verse.” They would return to their playing careers equipped with the technical vocabulary to cite Law 12 for persistent infringement or tactical blocks (SPA) directly to an official, rather than screaming emotional abuse.

Understanding Referee Psychology: To catch a thief, you have to think like one. By holding the whistle, young players would see firsthand how a referee’s line of sight is blocked, how easily officials can be manipulated by early group pressure, and exactly what triggers a card.

Building “Lawyer” Captains: Dealing with aggressive adult players and roaring touchline managers forces a teenager to grow a thick skin and command a room. It would fast-track the creation of vocal, authoritative on-pitch generals who treat the pitch like a courtroom.

Football matches are no longer just athletic contests; they are legal battles over marginal gains. Until our academies stop teaching players to simply “grin and bear it” and start teaching them referee management, we will continue to be bullied out of tournaments by nations that treat the rulebook as a weapon.

Let’s put the whistle in their hands for a summer. It might just teach them how to win. Dan McG LFC