Roy Hodgson for England :-(

First topic message reminder :



West Bromwich Albion have today granted permission for The FA to speak with Roy Hodgson regarding the position of England Manager.

This follows an approach from FA Chairman David Bernstein to West Bromwich Albion Chairman Jeremy Peace.

David Bernstein said: "I'm grateful to Jeremy and all at West Bromwich Albion for their co-operation in allowing us to approach Roy, who I have since spoken with.

"Roy is the only manager we have approached and we remain on course to make an appointment within the timescale we set-out soon after Fabio Capello's departure.

"Further conversations will now take place with Roy and my Club England colleagues before any further announcements can be made."

If you want an English manager Pardew or Hodgson are as good as it gets, and AP doesn't want it. From looking at comments, mainly on other forums, its only deluded Liverpool fans/Liverpool media/Those influenced by Liverpool fans who are against Roy. As for Redknapp I've always thought he's an overrated manager. His main strength is the transfer market which he obviously wouldn't be able to exploit at international level. If 'arry was in charge it would also mean Lampard would be in the team until he's 40.

This is probably the first time that all the so-called superstars who regularly turn out for England and the forget to perform have had their opinions as to who should be manager tweeted for all to see. The fact that they all seemed to want Harry was interesting although I don't if in any era a poll of current English players has ever been used to decide the manager.

More interesting was the media's obsession with Redknapp. Were they swayed by the number of managers who came out and said they thought he was the right man for the job?

newballs wrote:This is probably the first time that all the so-called superstars who regularly turn out for England and the forget to perform have had their opinions as to who should be manager tweeted for all to see. The fact that they all seemed to want Harry was interesting although I don't if in any era a poll of current English players has ever been used to decide the manager.

More interesting was the media's obsession with Redknapp. Were they swayed by the number of managers who came out and said they thought he was the right man for the job?

They were swayed because spurs had an 'easy' run of fixtures that they won 10/11 of, playing some good football on the way.

He wasn't as good as that run and isn't as bad as his teams current run.

GG wrote:If you want an English manager Pardew or Hodgson are as good as it gets, and AP doesn't want it. From looking at comments, mainly on other forums, its only deluded Liverpool fans/Liverpool media/Those influenced by Liverpool fans who are against Roy. As for Redknapp I've always thought he's an overrated manager. His main strength is the transfer market which he obviously wouldn't be able to exploit at international level. If 'arry was in charge it would also mean Lampard would be in the team until he's 40.

Yet Kenny has done a much much worse job and they've all still got there tongues stuck up his backside.

the guy hasnt stuck at a job for more than 2 years.. does this fact not worry anyone else- his CV looks like a novel!

brilliant appointment! so much better than Capello! I'm glad the FA have seen sense at last!

i hope your right- because nothing tells me that they have done right here.

I am all for appointing a lesser name and an english one at that- What i dont understand is how this apointment can be considered a good move due to his lack of time spent anywhere. its like marrying someone who has been married 10 times before- and one that doesnt have a great personality, well traveled yes but thats it!

either way though - If he does get the job(which looks certain) i will back him 100%, i just hope the obviously flaws i see are only due to him not having the structure and luck on the employers side and that all the jobs before were not challenging enough for him to stick out!

actually, it was written with some rather heavy sarcasm mysti. I think it's a disaster, but hey, no one ever accused the FA of being sensible I guess.

I think the FA should have waited a little longer. I think this time next week Steve Kean will be ready to sign up as England manager.

oh ok lol madfor

Guardiola's free at the end of the season

Well looks like Roy Hodgson will be appointed this morning, unveiled in the afternoon and have his feet under the desk tomorrow morning. Good luck Roy Hodgson!

mystiroakey wrote:i hope your right- because nothing tells me that they have done right here.

I am all for appointing a lesser name and an english one at that- What i dont understand is how this apointment can be considered a good move due to his lack of time spent anywhere. its like marrying someone who has been married 10 times before- and one that doesnt have a great personality, well traveled yes but thats it!

Who was your choice?

mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Mourinho?

Redknapp, can you honestly justify why?

Pearce? Suicide. He should be held accountable for the lack of stars coming though. The abomination that was the last U21 tournament all but confirmed he should not be allowed near the national team.

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Mourinho would never want a posioned chalice such as the England job and are you seriously saying the England job is more attractive than managing Real Madrid?

Redknapp - some people prefer him, some don't (see the rest of the thread) though there's no guarentee that he'd want the job (has a cushy job at Spurs and a chairman who gives him as much cash to spend as he wants)

And with Pearce - since when has any England manager ever been given time/no pressure even before a major tournament, let alone after 2/3 tournaments?

mystiroakey wrote:i hope your right- because nothing tells me that they have done right here.

I am all for appointing a lesser name and an english one at that- What i dont understand is how this apointment can be considered a good move due to his lack of time spent anywhere. its like marrying someone who has been married 10 times before- and one that doesnt have a great personality, well traveled yes but thats it!

Mourhino has already managed 6 clubs in 12 years as a manager, he doesnt like to cool his heels too much either.
I love Jose but I think it would end in disaster with England and Harry, for me, just isnt worth the compensation and the salary.
Im not exactly inspired by Hodgson as a choice but I think he could pull off a suprise and do pretty well this summer. The way he sets his sides up should suit what England has at its disposal in terms of player talent.

Diggers wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:i hope your right- because nothing tells me that they have done right here.

I am all for appointing a lesser name and an english one at that- What i dont understand is how this apointment can be considered a good move due to his lack of time spent anywhere. its like marrying someone who has been married 10 times before- and one that doesnt have a great personality, well traveled yes but thats it!

Mourhino has already managed 6 clubs in 12 years as a manager, he doesnt like to cool his heels too much either.
I love Jose but I think it would end in disaster with England and Harry, for me, just isnt worth the compensation and the salary.
Im not exactly inspired by Hodgson as a choice but I think he could pull off a suprise and do pretty well this summer. The way he sets his sides up should suit what England has at its disposal in terms of player talent.

You forget England have worldclass players at their disposal, and with the right manager will win everything before them with ease - at least according to the press and some fans!

i am 100% behind england- whoever we picked. i just hope they know more- ask your self this- what other top(and i mean as high as it gets 'top') job would be given to someone with something like 18 jobs in 20 years!!

mourinhio may have had a few jobs- however he has had top jobs and succeded every where he has gone- hodgson isnt comparable

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Mourinho would never want a posioned chalice such as the England job and are you seriously saying the England job is more attractive than managing Real Madrid?

Redknapp - some people prefer him, some don't (see the rest of the thread) though there's no guarentee that he'd want the job (has a cushy job at Spurs and a chairman who gives him as much cash to spend as he wants)

And with Pearce - since when has any England manager ever been given time/no pressure even before a major tournament, let alone after 2/3 tournaments?

so what is your point?

mystiroakey wrote:

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Mourinho would never want a posioned chalice such as the England job and are you seriously saying the England job is more attractive than managing Real Madrid?

Redknapp - some people prefer him, some don't (see the rest of the thread) though there's no guarentee that he'd want the job (has a cushy job at Spurs and a chairman who gives him as much cash to spend as he wants)

And with Pearce - since when has any England manager ever been given time/no pressure even before a major tournament, let alone after 2/3 tournaments?

so what is your point?

My point is that of the 3 managers you listed as preferable 1 (Mourinho) wouldn't want it, 1(Redknapp) it's debatable if he's better than Hodgson and 1 (Pearce) wouldn't be given the time to improve up to international standard - and has also stated that he'd only want to do it as a caretaker for Euro2012.

mystiroakey wrote:i am 100% behind england- whoever we picked. i just hope they know more- ask your self this- what other top(and i mean as high as it gets 'top') job would be given to someone with something like 18 jobs in 20 years!!

mourinhio may have had a few jobs- however he has had top jobs and succeded every where he has gone- hodgson isnt comparable

What makes you put the England job in this bracket? Apart from salary?

Also Mystiroakey - you've yet to answer King Beer and justify why you think Redknapp would be a preferable choice.

Also the more I think about Pearce the more reasons I can think of why he should never be given a shot - he is part of the reason why so many of our youngsters get injured for so long, severely stunting their development as he insists on playing youngsters who have been chosen for England and who have played for in the Prem for the U21's regardless of if they may be injured or not.

He hasn't brought through many youngsters, just insisted on playing players who have already been developed by the big Premier League clubs and have broken through into their 1st team (so they are already on their way to an England cap regardless), he then continues to play them while they are playing for the full England team so his U21's can do well in tournaments, making him look good but burning out the young players he's meant to be developing.

Personally I can think of a lot of managers who would have been preferable to Hodgson. Unfortunately none of them are English. Like it or not, for some reason a lot of people think that it's better to have a mediocre Englishman in charge than a good foreigner, so that brings us down to about three choices: Redknapp, Hodgson or Pearce. I can't say I'm bothered out of those three that much. I'll support Hodgson, but he's an uninspiring choice IMO.

Do we really think England will be better with him in charge instead of Capello?

Not sure as to why anyone would put Redknapp above Hodgson. I mean geez when he was first in charge of Spurs he bought back all the players they sold!! Chimbonda, Defoe, Crouch, Kaboul. Hardly inspiring.

Hodgson is the perfect fit for the England job. He understands International football. Redknapp doesn't, I don't even think Mourinho would be successful at that level. Their are some coaches who a good at International Coaching and their are those who are good at Club Management. Sometimes there are those who are good at both. Hodgson falls under the latter.

It would not be logical to overlook him.

Are there any similarities between Hodgson for England manager, and Toshack for Wales manager?

Most of the England players themselves have had international experience, playing in the Champions League, Europa Cup, as well as for England.

Not really. Toshack never held any international posts prior to his appointment and what expectations were there for the job? Granted he had been around the block, but I would hardly put him in the same category as Toshack.

I would argue that Hodgson's track record suggests he's very good at getting the best out of ordinary sides with low-ish expectations (such as his stint in Sweden, his very good record with Switzerland, and the good job he did at Fulham). The big question remains over his ability to turn a good side into a very good one (didn't do that well with Inter, was a disaster with Liverpool). Given that's what he's expected to do with England (for all our moaning England are a good side) I think we're right to question the appointment somewhat.

On the positive side, he does have experience in managing international teams and was successful at it.

Still don't think the FA should have gotten rid of Capello mind you, whose managerial record had everything Hodgson's had and more...

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Redknapp has 2 qualities, man management and dealing. He's 50% down already taking the England job as he can't trade. His man management will probably be reflected by playing the perenial waste of space Frank Lampard but otherwise he might bring in some spirit and conhesion. He is, however, tactically naieve/weak - not a quality wanted in an international manager.

And Mourinho would never touch the England job, England are cack and he prefers top sides (or one's with a hope of being so). Why would he ruin his CV with the poison chalice of the England manager role?

TopHat24/7 wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Redknapp has 2 qualities, man management and dealing. He's 50% down already taking the England job as he can't trade. His man management will probably be reflected by playing the perenial waste of space Frank Lampard but otherwise he might bring in some spirit and conhesion. He is, however, tactically naieve/weak - not a quality wanted in an international manager.

And Mourinho would never touch the England job, England are cack and he prefers top sides (or one's with a hope of being so). Why would he ruin his CV with the poison chalice of the England manager role?

You forgot about his 3rd quality - bankrupting teams by overspending, though I suppose that wouldn't be a problem with England (unless he has another tax scam with them )

TopHat24/7 wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Redknapp has 2 qualities, man management and dealing. He's 50% down already taking the England job as he can't trade. His man management will probably be reflected by playing the perenial waste of space Frank Lampard but otherwise he might bring in some spirit and conhesion. He is, however, tactically naieve/weak - not a quality wanted in an international manager.

And Mourinho would never touch the England job, England are cack and he prefers top sides (or one's with a hope of being so). Why would he ruin his CV with the poison chalice of the England manager role?

your right - if the fa would have had a shot at taking him they would have to offer 12 mill plus, but all the same is a perfect world situation from my pov. i just named two managers that would have been possibilities. Almost everyone has a price

mystiroakey wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Redknapp has 2 qualities, man management and dealing. He's 50% down already taking the England job as he can't trade. His man management will probably be reflected by playing the perenial waste of space Frank Lampard but otherwise he might bring in some spirit and conhesion. He is, however, tactically naieve/weak - not a quality wanted in an international manager.

And Mourinho would never touch the England job, England are cack and he prefers top sides (or one's with a hope of being so). Why would he ruin his CV with the poison chalice of the England manager role?

your right - if the fa would have had a shot at taking him they would have to offer 12 mill plus, but all the same is a perfect world situation from my pov. i just named two managers that would have been possibilities. Almost everyone has a price

You named 2 managers - 1 of which wouldn't accept the job no matter what, so I'm not sure how he's a possibility.

I quite like Wrexham, and it's a bit like me saying that they could be in the Prem in the next 4 years if they get Guardiola as manager as he's definately a possiblity, he's available and Wrexham could do with an international class manager...

As long as the best players (Rooney, Gerrard etc) are never performing well then England will always fail. Hodgson won't even be allowed to pick his own players he will be another Yes man. Redknapp is tactically inept anyway so let's be glad it wasn't him.

Roy is by no means a yes man. Take his stint at Liverpool, Gerrard threw his toys out the pram and refused to work with Hodgson in terms of performing on the pitch.

I can't see that Roy will play the whole you can't pick him game. If he says picks Rooney for a friendly and Fergie moans, do you think Roy will beg Fergie? Not a chance. Roy will shrug his shoulders, pick the next best player and move on. It will be Rooney that sh!ts out. Not Roy and not Fergie.

LK

Hodgson has to pick a certain amount of players that have big sponsors. That's the way the FA operates. Doesn't matter who is the manager, the way some people are going on you would think Redknapp is the new Brian Clough (but what has Harry won exactly?)

Hodgson ticks the FA's set of FA boxes that need to be ticked for the FA to appoint their England manager. These boxes have remained the same for a long period of time.

JM,

Picture this scenario. Say Welbeck is picked for England during a friendly. Rooney is picked and doesn't get to go because Fergie said so. Welbeck takes his chance and starts to lead the attack and England go to the World Cup. Rooney is out of the picture. I would imagine the conversation would go like this.

Wayne: So Danny you're going to Brazil this summer with the lads.
Danny: Yeah. It's gonna be messy. What you doing this summer Wayne?
Wayne: Well the gaffer didn't want me hurting myself, so me and Coleen are going to a spa.
Danny: Rather you than me mate.
Wayne: Yeah tell me about it.

Now don't you think that Rooney will try and force Fergie's hand should this situation arise? I can guarantee that Roy will not be at the mercy of these managers.

I never said Rooney would turn his back on the team. I said he will not play as hard as he does for Man United. The same goes for Lampard and Gerrard btw.

LK

Sidestepping your bizarre way of bringing across an arguement what makes you think that Roy is any different to any of the previous England managers? It would be an unbelievable surprise for the likes of Rooney, Lampard and Gerrard not to be picked if Roy is in charge for Euro 2012 - but on form would you pick any of the last 2? Probably not.

And what's this about Gerrard and Roy at Liverpool? When did Gerrard throw his toys out of the pram and what exactly did Roy do about this? I suspect you are making this up as you go along as Gerrard was heavily involved in the appointment of Roy at Liverpool, so he was doing everything in his power to keep him in the job to vindicate his choice of manager. He was probably a shadow of his former shelf quality wise for the most part, but it was not due to lack of effort.

Liver,

So who was it that came out and publicly and criticised Roy for not using him more effectively? Why could have Gerrard not privately discussed this?

I think you are making things up.

JM,

Hodgson could be the man that actually inspires a bit international pride and ambition with players who may seem disillusioned by international football.

BBC have now officially confirmed Roy is the new manager. 4 year deal. Congrats are in order.

Maybe the debate should now be moved on to future assessment: What targets should Roy Hodgson be given?

Targets for Roy Hodgson
Expected achievement
Above target achievement ...
Below target achievement ... with possible "disciplinary" measures (including sacking).

legendkillarV2 wrote:Liver,

So who was it that came out and publicly and criticised Roy for not using him more effectively? Why could have Gerrard not privately discussed this?

I think you are making things up.

Like in this article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jul/01/roy-hodgson-liverpool-steven-gerrard

Or this on maybe:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/sport/football/roy-hodgsons-just-perfect-says-steven-gerrard-6487124.html


Nope no criticism of him anywhere. So stop making up ridiculous stories to suit your point. Either use facts or say nothing.

I think for Euro 2012 - Quarter Finals expected. Semi's and better is over achievement. 2014 World Cup qualification. I think looking beyond that gets a bit hazy. Not sure what they would include on the friendlies side of things. Ensure that the quality of performances does not decline over the next 2 years.

Smirnoffpriest wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:mourinhio or redknapp would have been 2 of my choices above hodgson. I would have also preffered a scenario whereby we gave the reigns to pearce with no pressure and gave him a long contract and only judge him after the next few tournys.

Redknapp has 2 qualities, man management and dealing. He's 50% down already taking the England job as he can't trade. His man management will probably be reflected by playing the perenial waste of space Frank Lampard but otherwise he might bring in some spirit and conhesion. He is, however, tactically naieve/weak - not a quality wanted in an international manager.

And Mourinho would never touch the England job, England are cack and he prefers top sides (or one's with a hope of being so). Why would he ruin his CV with the poison chalice of the England manager role?

your right - if the fa would have had a shot at taking him they would have to offer 12 mill plus, but all the same is a perfect world situation from my pov. i just named two managers that would have been possibilities. Almost everyone has a price

You named 2 managers - 1 of which wouldn't accept the job no matter what, so I'm not sure how he's a possibility.

I quite like Wrexham, and it's a bit like me saying that they could be in the Prem in the next 4 years if they get Guardiola as manager as he's definately a possiblity, he's available and Wrexham could do with an international class manager...

everyone has a price

i named 3 managers

Liver

http://blogs.bettor.com/Daniel-Agger-blasts-former-manager-Roy-Hodgsons-tactics-a55562

Agger has claimed here that Stevie was not confident or happy.

So shut up!

legendkillarV2 wrote:JM,

Hodgson could be the man that actually inspires a bit international pride and ambition with players who may seem disillusioned by international football.

Unfortunately the way I see it that Hodgson will be the England manager that the press don't like and that some fans will be on his back from the start, then as soon as he doesn't select one of the 'big' players, he'll get dragged over the coals by the press (who will probably call him something along the lines of turnip head) and then he'll be blamed for England not winning the Euro's and thrown in the bin

I really dont understand why we needed to get some second rate manager tat has had more jobs than hot dinners, why didnt we just let pearce continue as caretaker and if he did/does well then give him a shot at the job- like di matteo at chelsea and SL in england rugby!!

england are not expecting this euros- its a dumb move from my pov.