Thomas Tuchel Reflects on World Cup Semi-Final Decisions

Thomas Tuchel has launched a fierce defence of the substitutions that will haunt him for the rest of his career.

England were five minutes plus stoppage time from a first World Cup final since 1966, 1-0 up on Argentina, the game apparently under control. Then came the switch to a back five. Then came Enzo Fernandez. Then came Lautaro Martinez. Then came the collapse.

The England manager knows exactly where the blame has landed. On him.

"You can try to kill me here. But it's my scar, it's not your scar," Tuchel says in an England documentary, looking back on the semi-final. "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."

He does, though, accept one thing: the retreat came too early.

The tackle that changed everything

The turning point, in Tuchel’s mind, was not a goal. It was a tackle.

England had survived the first half against Argentina, matching them stride for stride. Anthony Gordon’s goal gave them the lead. Declan Rice and Harry Kane both went close to doubling it. England were growing, Tuchel felt, into the biggest game of their lives.

"I was actually happy and I saw us growing into this match. I felt we were there," he says. "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."

The game suddenly became stretched. England pressed again, lost the ball, and Argentina broke. Giuliano Simeone burst through, one-on-one, until Djed Spence flew in with a desperate, heroic, last-ditch challenge.

"It did something to me, it maybe did something to the players," Tuchel admits. "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 that moment, England stopped doing the things that had brought them there.

"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."

The mindset narrowed. The clock seemed to speed up. And Argentina smelled fear.

‘We will not survive this’

The pressure ramped up. Argentina threw bodies forward, changed shape, abandoned structure. England’s 4-4-2, so disciplined for so long, began to creak.

Then came the moment that pushed Tuchel over the edge.

Jordan Pickford made a crucial save to deny Nicolas Gonzalez just before the final water break. For many, it was a let-off. For Tuchel, it was an alarm bell.

"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," he says.

"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."

Off came Gordon, the goalscorer. On came Ezri Konsa. England shifted into the now infamous back five.

Tuchel had history to lean on. They had finished games against Norway and Mexico in a back five and seen them out. It felt like a logical step.

"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," he says.

"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."

Argentina, though, were not in the mood to play by the book.

‘F*** it football’

Tuchel’s description of what he faced from the opposite dugout is blunt.

"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 tore up the script. They loaded the pitch with attackers.

"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."

The back five, intended as a shield, became a magnet. Pressure poured in. Alexis Mac Allister hit the woodwork. Crosses rained down. England sank deeper and deeper.

The equaliser came. Then the winner. The gamble to protect the lead had turned into an invitation.

Tuchel knows the substitutions have been ripped apart. He has heard the debates, the anger, the bemusement from some of his own players. He has also heard the criticism of his post-match comments about England’s "DNA".

But in his mind, the context matters.

‘It just piles up’

By the time England reached Argentina, they were running on fumes.

"It just piles up through the tournament," Tuchel says. "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."

The semi-final came at the end of a draining route: a comeback against DR Congo, a slog with 10 men at altitude against Mexico, extra-time in intense heat against Norway. Tuchel saw a team that could no longer control games with the ball.

"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," he says.

"But that is a very, very difficult road to have gone down. That can torture you."

He was asked whether he could simply have gone the other way, turned to his bench for more attacking threat rather than another defender.

"Of course you could. No-one knows what would have happened," he replies. "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 off with five?'"

From his vantage point, Argentina’s chaos demanded a response.

"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."

Help, this time, came dressed as caution. Caution turned into retreat. Retreat turned into defeat.

Tuchel will carry that with him. The question now is whether England carry it too, or use that scar to shape the way they chase the next World Cup.