Capello resigns - Hodgson appointed England boss

[BarmyArmy]

Why the **** are English fans always so ****** negative, no matter what happens the fans never give anyone a chance before they have even done anything. Roy Hodgson may not be the best choice, but he is one of the best English managers and he will show more passion than Capello ever did, that can only be a good thing. Hopefully it can rub off onto the players and we can be strong at the back (not give away goals like we did against Germany in the World Cup) and have some freedom upfront, not sure about attacking wise under Hodgson but I think he is a very capable English Manager. Give the guy a ****** chance before you start judging, especially to you Liverpool fans. Kenny has not done anything better worth to shout about and he has spent 100m.

I don't think anyone is denying Hodgson's credentials or his potential as an England manager. Where I think the criticism is coming from, or at least as far as I'm concerned, is that Redknapp is undoubtedly a better manager. I have nothing against Roy and I'm sure he'll do a great job as England manager. The thing that's annoyed me is the lack of ambition shown by the FA. Firstly, the fact that they'd have to pay out £10m to spurs to buy out Harry's contract has, whatever anybody says, been a major factor in their decision to approach Hodgson rather than Repknapp. Which is f***ing stupid after the amount we paid to get Fabio in and then out of the job. Secondly, Harry is obviously the best man for the job and, as we saw with Martin O'Neill (another stupid decision on the FA's part), Harry will never take the job now that he has been robbed of it and that is a real shame.

My favourite thing about this is the fact that Redknapp has been talking about getting himself the job for months, and now he's not. It's funny because a) He's a prunefaced **** and b) Tottenhams results have suffered for nothing

I love this entire situation. Roy Hodgson also pwns btw, people who are bummed need to remember him pre-liverpool and post-liverpool. One 5 month period means nothing.

I assume you're English? If so, where has our sense of patriotism gone? They could appoint Neil Warnock (the f***ing anti-christ as far as I'm concerned) and provided he was the best man for the job, as Harry is, I'd be fully behind him. Screw club loyalties, it should be about the best man for the England job, and I can't see how anyone can argue that it isn't Harry Redknapp.

 

[Zebedee]

Hodgson completely remodelled Swiss football in the 90's after 30 years of not qualifying for anything and it's worked out very well for them although they just missed out on qualification for 2012. I'm not sure how much control he'd get over the way youth's play but I know at Fulham, we restructured our academy whilst Hodgson was in charge and he appointed Malcolm Elias and Huw Jennings. Since that appointment, we've won the Under 18 League two seasons in a row and our under 14 side beat Barcelona under 14 in a tournament.

Roy hasn't won anything major but what English manager has? He's done international football before so he's got tournament experience. I think we should give him a chance before we start to lambast him. I'm not expecting any real success because I wouldn't expect anything from a manager given so little time before a tournament to be successful.

Switzerland is an interesting example. He did well with players used to forms of how he set up teams, when the Swiss youth system began to produce players who weren't, things went a bit pear shaped.

Elias definitely has a good eye for young players and Jennings is a really good youth coach by all accounts. Question for you though - how relevant is a club academy based upon being better at identifying and recruiting talent to the England job, even if the academy fell under Hodgson's remit (did it? it certainly didn't at Liverpool!)?

He is what he is Jack and I'm trying hard not to throw mud at him. I think he can be moderately successful if he gets a lot of time pre-tournaments and the players don't begin to turn on him. Think you can predict better than many how he'll have England setting up. As long as England fans and the press tailor expectations to suit, then everything'll be fine. To be honest, I think it's a problem that the FA and press are tubthumping xenophobes and demand only an English manager. Capello's record with England in qualifying (given other managers struggles just on that) is a good one, and the idea that he's some passionless drone couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[Ben]

Hart
Richards - Terry - Lescott - Konchesky
Heskey - Parker - Murphy - Milner
Crouch - Zamora
​

A good solid 4-4-2 I weckon.

 

[Mike.]

Switzerland is an interesting example. He did well with players used to forms of how he set up teams, when the Swiss youth system began to produce players who weren't, things went a bit pear shaped.

Elias definitely has a good eye for young players and Jennings is a really good youth coach by all accounts. Question for you though - how relevant is a club academy based upon being better at identifying and recruiting talent to the England job, even if the academy fell under Hodgson's remit (did it? it certainly didn't at Liverpool!)?

He is what he is Jack and I'm trying hard not to throw mud at him. I think he can be moderately successful if he gets a lot of time pre-tournaments and the players don't begin to turn on him. Think you can predict better than many how he'll have England setting up. As long as England fans and the press tailor expectations to suit, then everything'll be fine. To be honest, I think it's a problem that the FA and press are tubthumping xenophobes and demand only an English manager. Capello's record with England in qualifying (given other managers struggles just on that) is a good one, and the idea that he's some passionless drone couldn't be further from the truth.

Its this xenophobia that has set us back in the last 15 years. Capello made mistakes, but the treatment of him was nothing short of appalling, guttersniping and character assassination by the week. If it wasn't for the whole english manager ideal, i'd give it to Ralf Rangnick.

 

[Mike.]

I don't think anyone is denying Hodgson's credentials or his potential as an England manager. Where I think the criticism is coming from, or at least as far as I'm concerned, is that Redknapp is undoubtedly a better manager. I have nothing against Roy and I'm sure he'll do a great job as England manager. The thing that's annoyed me is the lack of ambition shown by the FA. Firstly, the fact that they'd have to pay out £10m to spurs to buy out Harry's contract has, whatever anybody says, been a major factor in their decision to approach Hodgson rather than Repknapp. Which is f***ing stupid after the amount we paid to get Fabio in and then out of the job. Secondly, Harry is obviously the best man for the job and, as we saw with Martin O'Neill (another stupid decision on the FA's part), Harry will never take the job now that he has been robbed of it and that is a real shame.





I assume you're English? If so, where has our sense of patriotism gone? They could appoint Neil Warnock (the f***ing anti-christ as far as I'm concerned) and provided he was the best man for the job, as Harry is, I'd be fully behind him. Screw club loyalties, it should be about the best man for the England job, and I can't see how anyone can argue that it isn't Harry Redknapp.

Why exactly is Harry the best man for the job? It cant be for his man management, which some Spurs fans point out isnt actually that good. It cant be for his tactical nous, as he has shown he has nothing past plan A. It cant be for his ability to lead the way for clubs as to how english talent should be developed and used.

 

[BarmyArmy]

I think it's a problem that the FA and press are tubthumping xenophobes and demand only an English manager. Capello's record with England in qualifying (given other managers struggles just on that) is a good one, and the idea that he's some passionless drone couldn't be further from the truth.

I disagree; I think the fact that there has been such a call for an English manager is a reaction to 2 things, both caused by Capello.

1) He didn't understand the English game. I know you could say it's an advantage knowing how the way that the rest of the world, or at least Europe, plays, but the fact is that our players weren't used to or even capable of playing this 'European' style of football and it was a mistake to try to make them play a style of football that they were completely new to.

and 2) He had a terrible rapport with the media, the fans and most importantly, the players. And can this be blamed on anything but his poor grasp of English? The answer is no. Firstly, 4 years working for England, bearing in mind that he was only in contact with the players for a few weeks a year and therefore had plenty of time for English lessons, is more than enough time to learn English and the fact that his English was so terrible after such a long time is, in all honestly, shameful. Secondly, as anyone in football will tell you, the most important thing in football management isn't tactics, it's getting the players to play for you and as we saw under Capello, being unable to communicate successfully with the players was a huge hindrance that ultimately cost us.


Do I think English managers are the best around? Not even close.
Do I think the England team need an English manager? Without a doubt.


EDIT: I agree with you about your point about being "passion-less". But disagree completely with the xenophobic comments

 

[Mike.]

Our best run of recent times came under a bespectacled Swede. Twice were shades away from semi-finals. England doesnt need an English manager. Nationality does not dictate success.

 

[Mike.]

I disagree; I think the fact that there has been such a call for an English manager is a reaction to 2 things, both caused by Capello.

1) He didn't understand the English game. I know you could say it's an advantage knowing how the way that the rest of the world, or at least Europe, plays, but the fact is that our players weren't used to or even capable of playing this 'European' style of football and it was a mistake to try to make them play a style of football that they were completely new to.

and 2) He had a terrible rapport with the media, the fans and most importantly, the players. And can this be blamed on anything but his poor grasp of English? The answer is no. Firstly, 4 years working for England, bearing in mind that he was only in contact with the players for a few weeks a year and therefore had plenty of time for English lessons, is more than enough time to learn English and the fact that his English was so terrible after such a long time is, in all honestly, shameful. Secondly, as anyone in football will tell you, the most important thing in football management isn't tactics, it's getting the players to play for you and as we saw under Capello, being unable to communicate successfully with the players was a huge hindrance that ultimately cost us.


Do I think English managers are the best around? Not even close.
Do I think the England team need an English manager? Without a doubt.


EDIT: I agree with you about your point about being "passion-less". But disagree completely with the xenophobic comments

He understood the english game very well. Capello preferred a 4-3-1-2, oe even a 3-4-1-2. He was playing a very english 4-4-2 and shading it into a 4-2-3-1 to get the best from rooney. The media went after him from the get go.

 

[BarmyArmy]

Why exactly is Harry the best man for the job? It cant be for his man management, which some Spurs fans point out isnt actually that good. It cant be for his tactical nous, as he has shown he has nothing past plan A. It cant be for his ability to lead the way for clubs as to how english talent should be developed and used.

Can you honestly criticise his work anywhere he's managed? He took over at Pompy, Southampton and Spurs when they were all struggling and turned the clubs completely around. And on a similar note, I think the fact that he got Defoe and Crouch to follow him to Portsmouth and then back to Tottenham shows the relationship he has with his players.

And yes, I agree, he doesn't have a plan B, but when you can get your players to overperform as he does, I think that's much more important and arguably more successful than having the tactical knowledge to ask your players to go out and do a defensive job. I mean getting draws at Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge is great and all, but it means nothing in an international knock-out tournament.

He understood the english game very well. Capello preferred a 4-3-1-2, oe even a 3-4-1-2. He was playing a very english 4-4-2 and shading it into a 4-2-3-1 to get the best from rooney. The media went after him from the get go.

That's true, the way that the media attacked Capello was inexcusable, and he did a decent job for England and his ability as a manager is irrefutable. But the fact is that his rapport with the players was awful and that can only breed failure.

 

[Mike.]

Can you honestly criticise his work anywhere he's managed? He took over at Pompy, Southampton and Spurs when they were all struggling and turned the clubs completely around. And on a similar note, I think the fact that he got Defoe and Crouch to follow him to Portsmouth and then back to Tottenham shows the relationship he has with his players.

And yes, I agree, he doesn't have a plan B, but when you can get your players to overperform as he does, I think that's much more important and arguably more successful than having the tactical knowledge to ask your players to go out and do a defensive job. I mean getting draws at Old Trafford or Stamford Bridge is great and all, but it means nothing in an international knock-out tournament.





That's true, the way that the media attacked Capello was inexcusable, and he did a decent job for England and his ability as a manager is irrefutable. But the fact is that his rapport with the players was awful and that can only breed failure.

Lets start with Spurs. He total lack of rotation and Plan B has led to Spurs stalling massively, his best players are all burnt out, becuase he couldnt utilise his whole squad. His relationship isnt that good, Crouch gone, Defoe is looking for a way out, he isolated Bent. If you are going to be coach for 4 years and 3 tournaments, and when your remit is to lead the way for english clubs in how they use their young english talent, you sure as **** need a plan B.

As for Capello, actually a good number of players liked him. This is another thing peddled by the media. The only player who openly didnt like him was Micah Richards.

Hodgson isnt the perfect answer by any means, but he is still probably a better than Redknapp.

 

[BarmyArmy]

Lets start with Spurs. He total lack of rotation and Plan B has led to Spurs stalling massively, his best players are all burnt out, becuase he couldnt utilise his whole squad. His relationship isnt that good, Crouch gone, Defoe is looking for a way out, he isolated Bent. If you are going to be coach for 4 years and 3 tournaments, and when your remit is to lead the way for english clubs in how they use their young english talent, you sure as **** need a plan B.

As for Capello, actually a good number of players liked him. This is another thing peddled by the media. The only player who openly didnt like him was Micah Richards.

Hodgson isnt the perfect answer by any means, but he is still probably a better than Redknapp.

To be fair I think the spurs players being burnt out is just as fabricated by the media as anything else. With the exception of Bale who has underperformed in the second half of the season I can't think of any of their players that I'd describe as being burnt out. They have struggled recently but lets not forget that under Redknapp they've overperformed for the past few years and I think missing out on 4th place is only seen as a failure because of the success that Spurs fans have become accustomed to under Redknapp.

I'm not saying that the players disliked Capello. But they didn't play for him as they might have another manager and I honestly believe that a breakdown in communication is to blame for it. I mean look at Chelsea, they had a high-profile manager and were awful then Di Matteo comes in, an unproven manager at the highest level, and suddenly they are a different team. Not because they're playing a different style, not because he's picking different players, but because they want to play for Di Matteo which they didn't want to do for AVB. In both instances they're communication (with the players and the press) was poor and I don't think this is a coincidence.


Management is very simple. It's a case of getting your staff (or in this case players) to work well for you. Of course tactics are an important aspect and even if Redknapp isn't the best tactician in the world, he's not a stranger to the idea of tactics otherwise he wouldn't be where he is. But there are few countries out there that have a better overall team than us and tactics are less important to the better team. As far as we're concerned playing a 'Plan B' should only be needed against the likes of Spain or Brazil, which I'm sure most fans would be okay losing to. It's when we struggle against lesser teams because too much emphasis has been put on the tactics rather than player performances that the fans get frustrated.

 

[Zebedee]

I disagree; I think the fact that there has been such a call for an English manager is a reaction to 2 things, both caused by Capello.

1) He didn't understand the English game. I know you could say it's an advantage knowing how the way that the rest of the world, or at least Europe, plays, but the fact is that our players weren't used to or even capable of playing this 'European' style of football and it was a mistake to try to make them play a style of football that they were completely new to.

and 2) He had a terrible rapport with the media, the fans and most importantly, the players. And can this be blamed on anything but his poor grasp of English? The answer is no. Firstly, 4 years working for England, bearing in mind that he was only in contact with the players for a few weeks a year and therefore had plenty of time for English lessons, is more than enough time to learn English and the fact that his English was so terrible after such a long time is, in all honestly, shameful. Secondly, as anyone in football will tell you, the most important thing in football management isn't tactics, it's getting the players to play for you and as we saw under Capello, being unable to communicate successfully with the players was a huge hindrance that ultimately cost us.


Do I think English managers are the best around? Not even close.
Do I think the England team need an English manager? Without a doubt.


EDIT: I agree with you about your point about being "passion-less". But disagree completely with the xenophobic comments

I can't agree with your first point. Don't think it's true at all. The ease with which England qualified for major tournaments under Capello would maybe suggest a different conclusion to the one you draw.

Do agree, in parts, with your second point. Though languages aren't something which a relatively elderly gentleman should obviously pick up quickly. I also think there was a lot of games playing by Capello with the media. Mancini does the same sort of thing. Playing a bit with their ability to understand a question to avoid answering one they don't like. What seemed to come out of Capello's period in charge is that there were cliques of players who responded badly to any attempt to impose discipline upon them. It happens. Most club managers shift out players like that pretty quickly. A national manager may not have that option and so may compromise, as Capello did.

However, there is a strong element of xenophobia within our game in England. Has been for decades and decades and decades. Look back to when England were stuffed by Hungary at Wembley all those years ago. Rather than being a wake-up call that times had changed and English football had fallen behind, it was glossed over as being a minor hiccup and on things went.

Look at the calls for an atypically English manager when a top club's job opens up - even if that club hasn't played in an atypically English way for generations! It's a huge problem within the English game.

There's some lingering idea that grit and determination will always triumph over those cunning furriners. Which kind of means we give up on trying to figure out how to match those cunning furriners at playing and settle for being faster and stronger rather than more skillful.

It's interesting that the clubs who embraced a passing game have won 7 European Cups here in England - when you marry that grit and passion and strength and speed with skill and tactical nous, good things happen. That's the shame which niggles away at me whenever I watch England play.

England has produced three great managers who had prolonged success in close to forty years now - Sir Bobby, Uncle Bob and Ole Bighead. That's a track record which has to be addressed before the door can be shut on foreign managers being appointed to the post - even if you think that's the right way to go. Course there's a lot of irony in the fact that Sir Bobby got absolutely slaughtered every step of the way as England manager.

 

[BarmyArmy]

I can't agree with your first point. Don't think it's true at all. The ease with which England qualified for major tournaments under Capello would maybe suggest a different conclusion to the one you draw.

Do agree, in parts, with your second point. Though languages aren't something which a relatively elderly gentleman should obviously pick up quickly. I also think there was a lot of games playing by Capello with the media. Mancini does the same sort of thing. Playing a bit with their ability to understand a question to avoid answering one they don't like. What seemed to come out of Capello's period in charge is that there were cliques of players who responded badly to any attempt to impose discipline upon them. It happens. Most club managers shift out players like that pretty quickly. A national manager may not have that option and so may compromise, as Capello did.

However, there is a strong element of xenophobia within our game in England. Has been for decades and decades and decades. Look back to when England were stuffed by Hungary at Wembley all those years ago. Rather than being a wake-up call that times had changed and English football had fallen behind, it was glossed over as being a minor hiccup and on things went.

Look at the calls for an atypically English manager when a top club's job opens up - even if that club hasn't played in an atypically English way for generations! It's a huge problem within the English game.

There's some lingering idea that grit and determination will always triumph over those cunning furriners. Which kind of means we give up on trying to figure out how to match those cunning furriners at playing and settle for being faster and stronger rather than more skillful.

It's interesting that the clubs who embraced a passing game have won 7 European Cups here in England - when you marry that grit and passion and strength and speed with skill and tactical nous, good things happen. That's the shame which niggles away at me whenever I watch England play.

England has produced three great managers who had prolonged success in close to forty years now - Sir Bobby, Uncle Bob and Ole Bighead. That's a track record which has to be addressed before the door can be shut on foreign managers being appointed to the post - even if you think that's the right way to go. Course there's a lot of irony in the fact that Sir Bobby got absolutely slaughtered every step of the way as England manager.

Just to be clear - I don't think he was a bad manager and I think the way that he was treated by both the FA and the media was appalling. I'm simply saying that in terms of appointing the next England manager, I can completely understand why 'the people' have called out for an English manager as there were fundamental problems caused by the fact that Capello had a poor grasp of English and the obvious solution to this is for his successor to be English.

On a different note though, you talk of players responding badly to discipline and of course that's not his fault. Do you not think, though, that a manager of his experience should know that a harmonious squad with a little less quality/experience is better than having a dressing room that is better on paper but going to have problems motivating themselves to play to their potential? I mean Lampard is a prime example of this - when he isn't happy he causes massive disruption in the dressing room - yet we have players that are perfectly capable of replacing him without having the issues he brings. I mean its not as if an England manager is short of options in terms of the players to put into his squad.

 

[Mike.]

To be fair I think the spurs players being burnt out is just as fabricated by the media as anything else. With the exception of Bale who has underperformed in the second half of the season I can't think of any of their players that I'd describe as being burnt out. They have struggled recently but lets not forget that under Redknapp they've overperformed for the past few years and I think missing out on 4th place is only seen as a failure because of the success that Spurs fans have become accustomed to under Redknapp.

I'm not saying that the players disliked Capello. But they didn't play for him as they might have another manager and I honestly believe that a breakdown in communication is to blame for it. I mean look at Chelsea, they had a high-profile manager and were awful then Di Matteo comes in, an unproven manager at the highest level, and suddenly they are a different team. Not because they're playing a different style, not because he's picking different players, but because they want to play for Di Matteo which they didn't want to do for AVB. In both instances they're communication (with the players and the press) was poor and I don't think this is a coincidence.


Management is very simple. It's a case of getting your staff (or in this case players) to work well for you. Of course tactics are an important aspect and even if Redknapp isn't the best tactician in the world, he's not a stranger to the idea of tactics otherwise he wouldn't be where he is. But there are few countries out there that have a better overall team than us and tactics are less important to the better team. As far as we're concerned playing a 'Plan B' should only be needed against the likes of Spain or Brazil, which I'm sure most fans would be okay losing to. It's when we struggle against lesser teams because too much emphasis has been put on the tactics rather than player performances that the fans get frustrated.

You need a plan B against every side, not just the so called big sides. Smaller sides can frustrate you just as much. If a smaller side goes 4-5-1 to counter you 4-4-2, then you need to ready to adapt, and go 4-2-3-1, matching their midfield, but then getting one on one with their fullbacks, Harry doesnt have an answer to anything outside that. Tactics doesnt just go out the window because a team might be inferior to you. Tactics are always important no matter who you are. Even the best club team in the world understand that, Barcelona frequently make tactical adjustments, gong 3-4-3, or drawing messi deeper/to the left/ pushing fabregas beyond him.

Its not fabricated, Parker, VDV, Bale and Modric's stats are all down based on the first half of the season, they picked up 12 points since february. With Lennon out he didn't have answer, so he stuck modric out wide, anyone can tell you that is a waste of his supreme talents and it showed as their form plummeted. Not sure what success they are accustomed to, they have only been in the CL once.

You need both parts of the game, Harry has just about one half, and not enough of the other, and certainly none of what is required to play a leading role for clubs in terms of how they work with young English talent.

 

[Mike.]

Just to be clear - I don't think he was a bad manager and I think the way that he was treated by both the FA and the media was appalling. I'm simply saying that in terms of appointing the next England manager, I can completely understand why 'the people' have called out for an English manager as there were fundamental problems caused by the fact that Capello had a poor grasp of English and the obvious solution to this is for his successor to be English.

On a different note though, you talk of players responding badly to discipline and of course that's not his fault. Do you not think, though, that a manager of his experience should know that a harmonious squad with a little less quality/experience is better than having a dressing room that is better on paper but going to have problems motivating themselves to play to their potential? I mean Lampard is a prime example of this - when he isn't happy he causes massive disruption in the dressing room - yet we have players that are perfectly capable of replacing him without having the issues he brings. I mean its not as if an England manager is short of options in terms of the players to put into his squad.

The obvious solution would be to find a manager with a better grasp of english, there are plenty of foreign managers who are very good english speakers. We need to stop with this notion that the manager needs to be English. Wanting him to be English and needing him to be English are two very different things.

 

[BarmyArmy]

You need a plan B against every side, not just the so called big sides. Smaller sides can frustrate you just as much. If a smaller side goes 4-5-1 to counter you 4-4-2, then you need to ready to adapt, and go 4-2-3-1, matching their midfield, but then getting one on one with their fullbacks, Harry doesnt have an answer to anything outside that. Tactics doesnt just go out the window because a team might be inferior to you. Tactics are always important no matter who you are. Even the best club team in the world understand that, Barcelona frequently make tactical adjustments, gong 3-4-3, or drawing messi deeper/to the left/ pushing fabregas beyond him.

Its not fabricated, Parker, VDV, Bale and Modric's stats are all down based on the first half of the season, they picked up 12 points since february. With Lennon out he didn't have answer, so he stuck modric out wide, anyone can tell you that is a waste of his supreme talents and it showed as their form plummeted. Not sure what success they are accustomed to, they have only been in the CL once.

You need both parts of the game, Harry has just about one half, and not enough of the other, and certainly none of what is required to play a leading role for clubs in terms of how they work with young English talent.

One could argue that Roy has no plan B either though to be fair. He is very good at making his team frustrate the opposition and has a great record of snatching 1-0 wins. I don't want to draw too much attention to his reign at Liverpool as it's proven to be a horrifically difficult job but what it showed is that when his team are favourites and need to be the more aggressive side in the match, he has struggled.

The obvious solution would be to find a manager with a better grasp of english, there are plenty of foreign managers who are very good english speakers. We need to stop with this notion that the manager needs to be English. Wanting him to be English and needing him to be English are two very different things.

Agreed, but you forget that football fans are, for the most part, a simple people. And the simple solution to Capello's problems is to have an English manager.

EDIT: I'm not saying it's right, and I'm certainly not saying that I agree with it. I'm just saying that I can understand why the public have called out for an English manager. Maybe it is optimism on my part but I'd like to think it's not just blind xenophobia that's behind it.

 

[Mike.]

One could argue that Roy has no plan B either though to be fair. He is very good at making his team frustrate the opposition and has a great record of snatching 1-0 wins. I don't want to draw too much attention to his reign at Liverpool as it's proven to be a horrifically difficult job but what it showed is that when his team are favourites and need to be the more aggressive side in the match, he has struggled.



Agreed, but you forget that football fans are, for the most part, a simple people. And the simple solution to Capello's problems is to have an English manager.

This has not been the case at west brom, nor was it the case at fulham, nor for switzerland. He definitely isnt perfect, but he is more astute than Redknapp, if not as exciting.

That is why you ignore what the fans want, and go with what is needed. Fans are largely fickle and incredibly stupid. Harsh, but true. That is why you employ experts. Listening to the fans is a hiding to nothing.

 

[Zebedee]

Just to be clear - I don't think he was a bad manager and I think the way that he was treated by both the FA and the media was appalling. I'm simply saying that in terms of appointing the next England manager, I can completely understand why 'the people' have called out for an English manager as there were fundamental problems caused by the fact that Capello had a poor grasp of English and the obvious solution to this is for his successor to be English.

On a different note though, you talk of players responding badly to discipline and of course that's not his fault. Do you not think, though, that a manager of his experience should know that a harmonious squad with a little less quality/experience is better than having a dressing room that is better on paper but going to have problems motivating themselves to play to their potential? I mean Lampard is a prime example of this - when he isn't happy he causes massive disruption in the dressing room - yet we have players that are perfectly capable of replacing him without having the issues he brings. I mean its not as if an England manager is short of options in terms of the players to put into his squad.

Think the Lampard/Terry issue is what I mean by cliques within dressing rooms (they get singled out a lot, so fair to say there are undoubtedly others). Yet the English manager who drops one of the media darlings can be assured of getting slaughtered at the first defeat without them. The press plays a key role here - at least in terms of public perceptions, players airing grievances and the absolutely spineless FA when faced with criticism.

Absolutely agree with you that the solution is the manager dropping the players. Don't have Michels' book in front of me right now, but he mentioned that Germany had an issue with a similar situation in one tournament and performed badly. The manager was given the backing to drop the players who couldn't play second fiddle and did better in the next. (I think it was 1984 European Championships and 1986 World Cup, but could be wrong - might have been in the 90s instead of the 80s). But I guess the issue is whether a manager would be given that latitude to retire players. Sven was terrible for playing even injured players for fear of the backlash. Both Owen and Beckham should not have started against Brazil, but on they went, and off Owen came, and one of Brazil's goals came from Beckham not covering because he wasn't able to get there while carrying his injury. It's nuts.

Don't think being English should preclude other managers. If the problem was a language barrier, then surely the answer is to find someone who speaks the language better? Really don't think the language issue was as much of a problem for the players as it was for the press. And really, if the press are wielding that much influence, they need to be slapped down rather than pandered to. And I guess that they do and they should be. Need the FA to grow a pair though. Just think it's insane that you limit the field to at best two or three people when there may be much more suitable candidates out there even if they have the 'wrong' nationality.

 

[Mike.]

One could argue that Roy has no plan B either though to be fair. He is very good at making his team frustrate the opposition and has a great record of snatching 1-0 wins. I don't want to draw too much attention to his reign at Liverpool as it's proven to be a horrifically difficult job but what it showed is that when his team are favourites and need to be the more aggressive side in the match, he has struggled.



Agreed, but you forget that football fans are, for the most part, a simple people. And the simple solution to Capello's problems is to have an English manager.

EDIT: I'm not saying it's right, and I'm certainly not saying that I agree with it. I'm just saying that I can understand why the public have called out for an English manager. Maybe it is optimism on my part but I'd like to think it's not just blind xenophobia that's behind it.

Barmy i wish it wasnt just blind xenophobia, but when you read the number of articles i did about capello, there is a seriously nasty undertone. I'm especially looking at Richard Williams of the Guardian.

EDIT: talking mainly about the press here

 

[BarmyArmy]

Mike - Roy's style at West Brom has been a very defensive one. Not unsuccessful for the assets he has at his disposal but I wonder if, given a strong bunch of players, he can handle being the better team. If I'm honest I don't remember anything previous to his time at Fulham so it would be unfair for me to comment.

Zebedee - I do believe that the language barrier was a major obstacle, not in terms of getting across what he wanted from them, but in terms of motivating the players. I mean it's hard to be passionate when you have to think about every word you say. But as Mike alluded to, football fans have a habit of being stupid and I don't disagree that it isn't necessary to have an English manager. Unfortunately, though, lots of people do and that's enough for the FA to bend to their wishes and disregard anyone who isn't English.



But in my opinion it all boils down to one thing - the FA showing a lack of bottle and ambition. I firmly believe that they originally wanted Harry and for whatever reason they haven't had the nerve to go for it. And secondly they haven't had the nerve to say "sorry, we know you wanted an English manager, but we think that <whoever> is the best man for the job"