The Irish Times was impressed to see the near-unanimity with which the English media and football public, and indeed many international observers, followed its lead in condemning Thomas Tuchel’s tactics in England’s 2-1 defeat to Argentina.Everyone from the Daily Mail’s Jeff Powell (“Cry God for England, Harry and St George is clearly not in the lexicon of the German manager who could not bring himself to pay lip service to his team’s national anthem”), to Gary Lineker (“I just wonder whether Thomas Tuchel’s like a German spy?”) to Ian Wright (“He’s actually insulting our intelligence, we watched the game”) to Thomas Müller (“I cannot believe and understand how England approached this game after they’re leading”) was in agreement that Tuchel had cocked it up.England crumble in Atlanta: Gavin Cooney and Kevin Kilbane on Tuchel's handbrake and Argentine spirit Listen | 47:00Yet such unanimity must always create misgivings. Has something been missed here? Has the Irish Times been intoxicated by its own lust for blood, ignoring the complexities of reality to join with the mob in gleefully rending the anointed scapegoat? On considered reflection, no. Tuchel’s management of the game was a career-defining fiasco and his comments since then have arguably only compounded his problems. [ ‘Pure football cowardice’: English media react to World Cup semi-final defeat by ArgentinaOpens in new window ]After the game the coach tried to project an unruffled, treat-these-two-imposters-just-the-same sort of vibe. “No regrets,” he said. Isn’t “no regrets” a thing you say before you go out and play a semi-final – the sense being “[let’s make sure there are] no regrets” – rather than an appropriate reaction to losing one in dreadful circumstances? Even if Tuchel did not feel regret on behalf of the players who had fumbled their chance to win the World Cup, how could he not regret trashing his own reputation as a tactical savant and more importantly, as a ‘winner’? Tuchel is said to be an Anglophile. And why wouldn’t he be? Where else can a top coach earn £10 million a year or more? But his strong feelings for England are no longer reciprocated. The English love Dunkirk-type games – heroic escapes against the odds – like the 0-0 draw away to Italy that sealed qualification for the 1998 World Cup, or the 3-2 win with 10 men against Mexico and the mountain earlier in this tournament.But this wasn’t the retreat from Dunkirk. England did not escape with honour intact. In their preferred second World War terms, this was the entire army captured on the beaches and the new PM Lord Halifax suing for peace with Hitler. Already the briefing from inside the dressingroom has started. The Daily Telegraph reports that some England players were “stunned” at the negativity of the tactics coming from their manager. By the time those players revealed their shock and horror to the people who revealed it to the Telegraph, they would have seen comments from their coach that suggested he was guilty of nothing worse than trying to help players who had already collectively abandoned hope in the mission.“Straight after our goal, without any substitutions, we conceded way too many crosses and way too many chances, so we tried to help,” said Tuchel.The front page of The Daily Telegraph shows a dejected Jude Bellingham following England's World Cup semi-final defeat to Argentina on Wednesday. Photograph: Gareth Cattermole/Getty Images He rejected the suggestion that switching to a back five had sent the wrong message to the players. “We were not active enough in any structure. We were not active enough in a 4-4-2, in a 5-3-2, or a 5-4-1. Active meaning we didn’t fight any duels, we couldn’t get close anymore to play on the ball, we struggled to defend the crosses.”But all Tuchel’s substitutions were reactive – Argentina have added a winger and now have four in the front line, I’d better switch to a back five! He never tried to change the direction of the game, challenge his players to move up the pitch, or make a change that would force Argentina to do something they did not want to do. For example, why not replace the clearly-exhausted Kane with a pacier attacker like Marcus Rashford, Ollie Watkins, Bukayo Saka or even Noni Madueke, whose mere presence on the field could have prevented Argentina from committing totally to attack? Tuchel preferred to talk about bigger-picture issues: “I think ball possession plays a crucial role. It’s maybe not in our DNA like it is in the Spanish DNA or Argentinian or Brazilian DNA.”But how can Tuchel lament that the English football DNA is simply deficient in some crucial ball-possession gene, when it was his decision, and his decision alone, to leave arguably England’s three best passers of the ball out of his squad? If ball-possession is as crucial as Tuchel now says, maybe he should have picked players like Cole Palmer, Adam Wharton and Trent Alexander-Arnold who are good at looking after the ball? Cole Palmer was one of the high-profile omissions from Tuchel's World Cup squad. Photograph: John Walton/PA You could have sworn that Tuchel felt pressing, not possession, would be the crucial factor in this campaign. How else to make sense of his systematic preference for physical players over technical ones? Jordan Henderson over Wharton, Madueke over Palmer or Phil Foden.Jarell Quansah and Trevoh Chalobah over Alexander-Arnold is a decision that only gets more amazing with time. Alexander-Arnold, veteran of three Champions League finals, supposedly makes too many mistakes for Tuchel’s taste. The coach cleverly concluded that it was too risky to include a defender like that in a tournament where one mistake can cost the whole campaign.Which is how the young centre-half Quansah ended up playing right-back for England at the Azteca, scything down an opponent with a wild challenge and being sent off. Alexander-Arnold has played 423 matches for England, Liverpool and Real Madrid without ever being sent off, or even suspended for accumulated bookings.The Argentinian players occupied the field for half an hour after the England team had departed. Like a victorious army rifling the pockets of the enemy dead, they came across some battle trophies. Several Argentinian players could be seen examining the penalty shootout instructions that had been affixed to Jordan Pickford’s abandoned water bottle. This document, with precise instructions for Pickford as to what to do when faced with any of 23 possible Argentinian penalty takers, was a reminder of how grandly-resourced the English football operation is, how many people make up the technical pyramid, atop which Tuchel sits. How many of the members of that pyramid can still believe in the man at the apex?World Cup Wallchart