The biggest criticism centres on Tuchel’s decision to use a five-man defence against Argentina. He argued that the system would release the wing-backs and provide greater protection in front of the centre-backs, but the execution failed to convince.
Reports suggest some players were unhappy with the more defensive approach. That has made the formation a symbol of a wider concern: England appeared to move away from the attacking identity that had carried them deep into the tournament when the pressure was highest.
Public opinion has been unusually direct. In a post-elimination poll of 2,500 people, 56% named Tuchel as chiefly responsible for the result. A further 37% blamed the manager and players equally, while only 7% held the squad alone responsible.
England’s route to the semifinal was physically demanding. The team had already played at altitude in Mexico, needed extra time to overcome Norway in the quarter-final and endured more travel than Argentina, including repeated journeys to Kansas City.
Jude Bellingham, widely viewed as England’s standout player, was reportedly showing signs of fatigue before the semifinal. That context strengthens Tuchel’s case for managing risk, but it also raises a tactical question: whether caution protected tired players or simply reduced England’s threat.
The Football Association continues to back Tuchel, who is contracted until 2028 and was not considered for dismissal after the tournament. That support matters, but it does not remove the scrutiny. The semifinal was precisely the type of high-pressure match for which Tuchel was appointed.
His next test arrives quickly: Spain at Wembley, away fixtures against the Czech Republic and Croatia, followed by another home meeting with the Czechs. The squad announcement will show whether Tuchel responds to the criticism through selection, formation or simply a clearer commitment to his original plan.