It's been a good effort overall. Think back to when the squad was announced. Many people called it the weakest England squad ever picked for a major tournament.
There are so many positives, despite the obvious limitations. There's no point being angry with them or thinking that we're somehow entitled to be a contender in international tournaments. To claim that they have underachieved is bizarre.
The way that Southgate has mitigated the limitations of the team and used their strengths so cleverly is a positive. Here's the truth about that whole "problem" that we don't score enough from open play. We aren't good enough to create tons of chances in open play. We are however the best in the tournament at dead ball situations. So we've played to that strength. A lot of time in the final third, we are actually looking to win corners. There's no shame in that - it's not quite like someone like Stoke, lumping it forward and playing anti-football, but it is pragmatic. By doing that, and playing to a plan, England have done better than they have for nearly thirty years.
With the likes of Macguire, Rashford, Kane (who's still only 24) Stones, Alli, and the generation of players coming through, there's encouragement that Southgate could mould those young players into a team with a plan, rather than previous managers who have selected a group of more talented individuals, and they've got to the tournament looking like just that - a bunch of individuals.