#1 Playing Raheem Sterling
The biggest question that lingers in every England supporter's mind is was Sterling the best attacking option for the Three Lions? Of all the England players who donned the jersey, Sterling was given the most opportunities to perform and flopped at every turn. Isn't the manager supposed to crack the whip if players underperform?
England had 20-goal a season Jamie Vardy on the bench who could naturally slot into the second striker position. Also, there was Marcus Rashford at his disposal who was often called upon to influence the game from the substitute's bench.
So was Sterling deployed to cause problems to the towering three 6 ft plus centre-backs for Belgium? The same Sterling who could not score into an empty net against Sweden let alone square the ball to two of his free teammates to do so?
If ever England needed some creative spark and more importantly goals against a superior team then surely Sterling would not be the answer. Even substituting him at halftime did little to redeem Southgate's image as a poor tactical decision maker. His blind faith in Sterling in some way contributed to England not having a chance to finish better than fourth which in its own right is an achievement.