Thomas Tuchel under scrutiny after England's World Cup exit to Argentina but were his substitutions really the cause?

The same feeling, but worse. England exit the World Cup with a 2-1 defeat just as they did twice under Gareth Southgate and in strikingly similar fashion to that semi-final defeat to Croatia eight years ago. They were leading but sat back and subsequently lost.

This was different because England were supposed to have learned. Thomas Tuchel was supposed to have taught them. Instead, he is being lambasted for a series of substitutions so counterproductive that his counterpart Lionel Scaloni might have made them himself.

Ezri Konsa for Anthony Gordon, England's goalscorer, will go down in folklore for all the wrong reasons. A defensive move that gave the impression of inviting pressure, robbed the team of an out-ball - and all with what turned out to be 30 minutes still left to play.

• England player ratings: Big guns fail to deliver
• As it happened | Teams | Stats | Knockout bracket
• World Cup day-by-day schedule | Latest: World Cup
• Follow our World Cup coverage in the Sky Sports App

Two more defenders were introduced by Tuchel prior to Argentina's late double. And the reaction of England's players to the defeat hinted that their feelings about the approach were not so far removed from the frustrations of the masses watching back home.

"Once we went 1-0 up we seemed to just try and hold on which at this level is just not enough," said captain Harry Kane. "We should have carried on pushing," agreed Marc Guehi. "It kind of felt like we scored and then the mentality was go back, defend."

"I thought we nailed the game-plan up until we scored," said fellow defender Dan Burn. "We got a little bit passive after the goal, defended probably a little bit too deep, and the quality of chances that Argentina were creating it felt like it was a matter of time."

The blame game is in full swing and what might feel like a minor detail could have significant consequences once the dust settles on this disappointment. Were Tuchel's interventions the cause of that passivity or was he just the coach left trying to cope with it?

There were 17 minutes between Gordon's goal going in and the Konsa switch. Lautaro Martinez, scorer of the winning goal, identified this as the key period. "England got tired. They pressed for 60 minutes. After that, they had nothing left, then they dropped back."

That was Tuchel's reading of events. "It started straight away after the goal. It is basically the reason why we lost," he explained. "The mindset shifted. We sat deep straight away after our goal, not after the substitutions. We suddenly played like we had a lot to lose."

Of course, this is the mindset that Tuchel was brought in to change. "Watching the Euros, I felt tension and pressure on the shoulders of the players. It felt they were playing not to lose." That was his own verdict on watching England lurch through Euro 2024.

Others saw parallels with the Euros prior to that. "It was very similar to the Euros final against Italy," said Sky Sports' Gary Neville. "It is about mentality and belief for England, and a bit of quality to keep the ball. I cannot believe how many times I have seen this."

There had been glimpses of a shift. There was that brief period in the second half of England's 4-2 win over Croatia when Tuchel appeared to have infused his players with belief and Declan Rice was wowed by his words during half-time. That feels a lifetime ago now.

Management is a confidence trick. When players see that what you say will happen actually happens, they become convinced. England defended resolutely against Mexico with 10 men and it worked. But when the biggest moment came, it absolutely did not.

Norway was more of a qualified success, Tuchel flailing a little with his changes. The spiky disagreement with Jude Bellingham was sold as a positive. Healthy debate and all that. But the fall-out from this Argentina defeat could be far more divisive in its own way.

Tactical nous is fundamental to Tuchel's appeal. His abrasive style can be indulged if it means winning the games that Southgate could not win. Any assessment of his England reign was always going to be defined by what he did in those minutes that matter most.

Konsa for Gordon. Was it a logical reaction to dropping deep or a move that exacerbated the issue? Nico O'Reilly for Declan Rice. Was it an attempt to shut down Lionel Messi's space or a missed chance to add a counter-attacking threat? Maybe it was all of that.

The public will have their view. Southgate has been open about his sense that when the criticism started to fly, he knew that his own England journey had to come to an end. The mood of the nation has the power to make Tuchel's future with England untenable.

But what will really define what happens next is whether the players themselves think that he was responsible for this capitulation. Can Tuchel convince them that it is their mentality that needs to change and that they too have lessons still to learn from this?

The narrative will ossify quickly and the fear is that if Tuchel does intend to stay on until Euro 2028 to put this right on home soil there will be precious few opportunities to convince before then. The answers will come in the knockout stages two summers from now.

England just keep hoping those answers will be different.

(c) Sky Sports 2026: Thomas Tuchel under scrutiny after England's World Cup exit to Argentina but were his substitutions really the cause?