Thomas Tuchel has passionately defended his controversial defensive substitutions during England’s World Cup semi-final defeat to Argentina.
England were 1-0 up and were five minutes plus stoppage time away from a first World Cup final since 1966.
But goals from Enzo Fernandez and Lautaro Martinez turned the game on its head, after Tuchel had gone to a back five midway through the second half.
Tuchel – who made controversial comments about England’s DNA after the semi-final loss – did admit that he may have played a defensive style of play too early in the semi-final.
But he also added that England’s growing fatigue throughout the tournament and Argentina’s crazy tactics meant he simply had to make those changes.
- England news and analysis | Follow our England blog
- Some England players bemused by semi-final substitutions
- Neville: I have a big problem with Tuchel’s DNA comments
“You can try to kill me here. But it’s my scar, it’s not your scar,” said the England manager, when reviewing the entire tournament in an England documentary.
“I have to live with it. It’s not you having to live with this. I’m in charge here and I take these decisions.
“No-one is more hurt than me, no-one wanted it more. They can endlessly torture you and think: if I had done different substitutions, then we would have won the match. You just don’t know it.”
Read below for the England manager’s views in full on how the Three Lions lost the World Cup…
‘The Spence tackle did something to me’
Remember that huge Djed Spence tackle that kept England 1-0 up? That was the moment things started to change in Tuchel’s head.
England had just led through Anthony Gordon and had two more chances to extend the lead through Declan Rice and Harry Kane. But an Argentina break saw Giuliano Simeone run through on goal, leaving Spence to make a last-ditch tackle.
Tuchel said: “We did quite well in the first half, it was totally an even match. We had good ball possession moments. I was actually happy and I saw us growing into this match. I felt we were there.
“From the start of the second half, I felt us on the back foot. I felt Argentina were more liberated and free in their movements, finding better solutions. Then we score, we have the next chance straight away.
“We go after them, we have a ball win, we have a chance, we have another half chance, we lose the ball in another attack and it’s the Spence tackle and they almost score from a counter-attack.
“It did something to me, it maybe did something to the players. And we suddenly shift into a mindset of: ‘let’s just overcome it’. We played like there were four minutes left, rather than 30.
“From executions, the details of execution, playing around in deep build-up, playing around Messi, playing to one side then switching the side, bringing the game in the opponent’s half, making them suffer, having time to recover physically and mentally in ball possession, we were lacking all these things.”
‘I thought, we will not survive this’
Jordan Pickford produced a big save to deny Nicolas Gonzalez just before the final water break of the match. That prompted Tuchel to make a change. Off came goalscorer Gordon and defender Ezri Konsa arrived.
England were in the controversial back five.
Tuchel said: “Argentina then play very, very quickly. Sorry for the language, [they played] f*** it football. ‘We have nothing to lose. Let’s f*** it.’
“They played four strikers. They played two wingers, the two strikers and Messi. They took a No 6 off and put a No 10 in. A central defender off and played a No 6. At some points they played 3-1-6. And we struggled.
“A key moment if I look back at it and what happened to my decision-making, we conceded a big, big chance right before the water break. And I thought: 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.
“I wanted to give the players something: this is what we do. This is what we do now.
“Coming with this mindset and this experience, 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 Argentina relied heavily on crosses, they have four strikers in the last line. I think: let’s play in a back five.
“I changed to a 5-3-2, we changed the structure. Because I believe we can handle the width better and we still have three central defenders in the middle if crosses still fly in. We changed then to a 5-4-1. Even my mindset is maybe like: let’s just overcome it. And it’s too early. Too early for that mindset.”
And the pressure did not stop. Alexis Mac Allister struck the woodwork just after the break. England were under the cosh. The Argentina goals came shortly after.
‘If we were better on the ball, I wouldn’t have changed it’
Tuchel believes that the emotional toil of winning late on against DR Congo after trailing so long, then playing with 10 men in the Azteca altitude, then beating Norway in extra-time in the intense Miami heat played its part against Argentina.
Tuchel said: “It just piles up through the tournament. Congo, 70 minutes trailing 1-0, Mexico the altitude, flying to Miami and playing against Norway. We are tired. And still we hang on until the 88th minute.”
Asked if could have made attacking subs instead, Tuchel added: “Of course you could. No-one knows what would have happened. We could have done it and maybe lost 2-1 and could have gone: ‘Is he crazy? He finished the game against Norway with a back five, why didn’t finish the game of with five?’
“I think from what I saw and the experience, the information and the level of craziness from Argentina put in – change after change after change, it was just one offensive change after the other. That was my solution to the problem.
“That’s what the intervention of a coach is. I try to help, you don’t implement anything for your ego or whatever. You just try to help.
“If we would have been more stable in the game, with more percentage of ball possession, I would have not changed the structure, why would I? And I would have gone for offensive changes. But that is a very, very difficult road to have gone down. That can torture you.”