Wow. Things move fast in football. Just two days after my article about Lee Carsley sticking to his guns, England announced Thomas Tuchel as their new boss. 

The fact that it all appeared to happen so quickly seems to suggest that something triggered the FA into action. Was it England’s dodgy performances against Greece and Finland and the accompanying media outcry? Most ordinary fans seemed willing to forgive Carsley’s failed experiment but the suits at the FA and the mainstream news would appear to have seen it differently. It does suggest, though, that Carsley may have been the preferred option until that point. Hence the action – or reaction – this week.

On reflection, England have definitely ended up with the most qualified coach available. If England lift the FIFA World Cup in New Jersey in 2026, nobody will much care how or why we ended up here. But one is left to wonder what took the FA so long. The above hypothesis – that England’s first choice was one of their own – seems the most likely. But the FA have a responsibility to appoint the best coach available to lead the country, and Tuchel has been the best coach available ever since Southgate announced his departure last month. One could even argue that the FA should have had a succession plan in place long before the commencement of the European championship, with Southgate coming toward the end of a lengthy tenure.

Tuchel’s record is an impressive one. A career win percentage of 57% comes despite a slow start at Mainz. For context, it exceeds that of compatriot Jurgen Klopp (54%), who followed a similar career trajectory from Mainz to Dortmund. Tuchel moved on to Paris Saint-Germain, Chelsea, and Bayern Munich winning three league titles and a UEFA Champions League. Despite his domestic success, Tuchel has developed a reputation as something of a knockout specialist, owing primarily to his teams’ performances in Europe. That ability to tactically prepare for a one-off fixture must have been attractive to the FA.

There is a theory that coaches of the England national team should be English and there are various reasons for this. Misguided nationalism, for one, such as the article in a national newspaper that tried to invoke outrage over Tuchel’s GERMANness. How dare he. Others argue that if the players have to be English then the staff should have to be too, and I am far more sympathetic to that argument. The rules are the rules though, and many countries prefer to opt for a foreign option. In fact, there are several Englishman leading other countries around the world. These include Terry Connor and Steve McLaren in the Caribbean, and Ashley Westwood who was recently appointed to his post in Hong Kong. 

The fear for the more level-headed England fans is not necessarily that the coach of the national team is not English, but rather why there was no leading English suitor. Carsley has no high-profile experience to his name and, despite his success with the England youth teams, it was always going to be difficult to convince the numerous stakeholders that he was the right man for the job. Other English names such as Eddie Howe and Graham Potter have impressed in their careers to date and may yet be afforded the opportunity in the future, but their records don’t even begin to compare to Tuchel’s at this stage. Remember, since the (arbitrary) inception of the Premier League, an English manager has never lifted the trophy.

The fact is that there is no excuse for the lack of English coaching talent. Others have suggested that the price of the crucial UEFA A Licence may be a factor. That’s nonsense, of course. Many up-and-coming coaches are sponsored through their badges by a club, and those who aren’t probably won’t be managing national teams any time soon. It could be the additional scrutiny in England which puts off potential candidates. A punditry career is a far more cushty gig. 

There has been an awful lot of investment in English football in recent years. The building of the National Football Centre at St. George’s Park was supposed to signal a new beginning. Domestic clubs – fuelled by Premier League television revenue – have invested hugely in their own academies to develop young talent. In amongst the spending, has the need for quality coaching been forgotten? 

It would be great if England could develop a national footballing identity. Italy have always been renowned as organised and disciplined. The recent Belgian boom was built upon a 3-5-2 formation played by every academy in the country and, though they may be frustrated by not having won a tournament, they have punched above their weight for a number of years. What is England’s national identity?

In my view, there should be a pool of coaches at St. George’s Park doing their badges each year. Potential talent should be hand-picked from experienced players at clubs, just as talent is at all other stages within the football pyramid. And a range of clubs should be included. There is no correlation between a prolific playing career and coaching success. Of the recent world cup winning managers, Didier Deschamps and Vicente del Bosque won numerous trophies as players, whereas Lionel Scaloni and Joachim Löw enjoyed more modest careers. All of the football league clubs should be able to nominate a player or two – aged 30+ or long-term injured – for intense, FA sponsored, UEFA coaching courses.

In the short term, though, let’s get behind Tuchel. Tracksuit Tom. Tommy T. The playing talent is there. So what if it takes a German manager to extract the best from it? 

SUPPORT THIS WEBSITE - buy from Amazon using this link: https://amzn.to/4dBv022

By Leon Parrott