England Thread

[RhQQ]

Tbh he doesn't offer a whole pile more than Roy apart from a little more realism, good excuse to axe him out and think more carefully about the next appointment

 

[kitchin75]

Tbh he doesn't offer a whole pile more than Roy apart from a little more realism, good excuse to axe him out and think more carefully about the next appointment

the reason we have him is no 1 else wants the job

 

[PafcLad]

If Big Sam is packing his bags then just give it to Eddie Howe. We've gone down the safe hands and experienced route before so why not try something new.

Saying that I reckon it will be a two horse race between Bruce and Pardew.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

Tbh he doesn't offer a whole pile more than Roy apart from a little more realism, good excuse to axe him out and think more carefully about the next appointment

Problem is, aside from the fact the FA couldn't identify the right man if he was stood in front of them with a flashing red light on his head; who is available of any significant standard?

I'm a firm believer, without drudging up that whole debate again, that a manager of a major Country should be a National of that Country. That limits things massively to start with. Howe doesn't want it if you wanted to rip it all up and give a young promising manager time to build some serious foundations. Nobody else coming through. The veteran English managers shouldn't be ANYWHERE near the discussion. Pardew? Please. He's as qualified and clueless as an imbecile like Moyes. Pullis? Yeah, if you want to set English football back 20 years and appoint another archaic dinosaur like Allardyce. Hoddle? Been there. Failed with that.

And any foreign manager of any note is tied up at major clubs.

But the FA are that gutless they'll probably try whitewash this whole situation like nothings happened and lumber on regardless with clueless Sam.

 

[RhQQ]

I respect your belief that the job should be given to an English man, but I really think Klinsmann is the ideal choice, and should've been appointed in the first place as Roy's successor.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

I respect your belief that the job should be given to an English man, but I really think Klinsmann is the ideal choice, and should've been appointed in the first place as Roy's successor.

Klinsmann with Low. Which in reality was Low with Klinsmann just the smiling, happy-go-lucky figure head- Successful combination.

Klinsmann on his own, making the same repeated mistakes and picking the same failed players in the same failed formations/ systems as most American soccer (figure it's an acceptable word for them) would tell you- Not so much.

He's done a lot for the infrastructure out there. (As much as you can with MLS being a completely separate entity that doesn't mesh well with the USSF.). But as a coach he's exceptionally limited.

 

[dilakh2]

Klinsmann with Low. Which in reality was Low with Klinsmann just the smiling, happy-go-lucky figure head- Successful combination.

Klinsmann on his own, making the same repeated mistakes and picking the same failed players in the same failed formations/ systems as most American soccer (figure it's an acceptable word for them) would tell you- Not so much.

He's done a lot for the infrastructure out there. (As much as you can with MLS being a completely separate entity that doesn't mesh well with the USSF.). But as a coach he's exceptionally limited.

This. People clamouring for Klinsmann should do some research, he is very limited as a coach. The England job should've gone to the best candidate regardless of nationality and the best candidate was certainly not Allardicci. P.s Am I the only one who see's this as non news the chances of Sam getting sacked are zero considering its the FA were talking about, integrity and consistency ma ****.

 

[Alcaraz]

I would give the job temporarily to someone. **** if Southgate does not want it then surely someone will (Guus Hiddink?) and then go all put for Wenger next summer.

 

[RhQQ]

No point doing "research", unless he got the England job given the chance to show what he can do with his now built up experience, with a better panel than what he has with the yanks, then there's no logic behind saying he wouldn't do a better job than any of the English candidates. You could do a lot worse than appointing him in my opinion.

Being one of the negative voices on Liverpool signing the 'limited' James Milner, arguably your best team player nowadays, you of all people should know not to "research" too much Dilkah

 

[damola3]

But the FA won't sack him. I've said it before, and I'll say it again-they don't have backbone. No matter how bad something gets they always spin up some **** and bull story and this will be no different.



(#Pardew in #Kappa)

Surely a massive breach like this would supersede that and get them out of it?

If they keep him they'll be an even bigger joke of an organisation than they currently are and the last thread of integrity they may of had will be shot to pieces. And that's not even getting into ALL trust is gone between them and their manager.

Surely the fat gobshite has to be one and done? SURELY?

Please read the article guys. We have no evidence that Allardyce has done anything wrong. I wouldn't be surprised see Allardyce as it would be embarrassing for the FA. All Allardyce did was claim that there are ways to get around the restrictions on third-party ownership. The main question to be asked is did he break FA rules? Finding a loophole isn't the same as breaking a rule.
We know:

• He criticised Roy Hodgson
• He criticised Garry Neville
• Criticised the decision to rebuild Wembley
• Claimed the FA were all about money
• Criticised the decision to pick players that don't start for their clubs
• Agreed a £400,000 speaking arrangement for the fake Far East Sports Management firm
• Claimed that there are ways to get around third-party ownership rules and that clubs/agents do it all the time

None of these points are relevant but the last one. There needs to be an investigation on whether Allardyce broke the rules as manager or circumvented through a loophole. It's only fair to sack him if he's broken the rules although it wouldn't surprise me if they sacked him anyway. The FA would look bad. I don't like witch-hunts so lets wait for the facts to come out.

 

[epic terrorist]

Please read the article guys. We have no evidence that Allardyce has done anything wrong. I wouldn't be surprised see Allardyce as it would be embarrassing for the FA. All Allardyce did was claim that there are ways to get around the restrictions on third-party ownership. The main question to be asked is did he break FA rules? Finding a loophole isn't the same as breaking a rule.
We know:

• He criticised Roy Hodgson
• He criticised Garry Neville
• Criticised the decision to rebuild Wembley
• Claimed the FA were all about money
• Criticised the decision to pick players that don't start for their clubs
• Agreed a £400,000 speaking arrangement for the fake Far East Sports Management firm
• Claimed that there are ways to get around third-party ownership rules and that clubs/agents do it all the time

None of these points are relevant but the last one. There needs to be an investigation on whether Allardyce broke the rules as manager or circumvented through a loophole. It's only fair to sack him if he's broken the rules although it wouldn't surprise me if they sacked him anyway. The FA would look bad. I don't like witch-hunts so lets wait for the facts to come out.

I think if he is mocking Roy Hodgsons speech impediment on camera (I saw a transcript that he referred to him as Woy) then I am sorry but surely that is bringing the game into disrepute? As are some of the others tbf. You can't have the head coach of the English National team meeting a bunch of fake whatever they were and snagging people off and mocking them at will. I work with disabled adults if I mocked any of their impediments I would be sacked on the spot. Allardyce has one of the most prestigious jobs in world football and I am sorry he cannot behave like that so no the last point is not the only relevant one you are very wrong there.

 

[damola3]

I think if he is mocking Roy Hodgsons speech impediment on camera (I saw a transcript that he referred to him as Woy) then I am sorry but surely that is bringing the game into disrepute? As are some of the others tbf. You can't have the head coach of the English National team meeting a bunch of fake whatever they were and snagging people off and mocking them at will. I work with disabled adults if I mocked any of their impediments I would be sacked on the spot. Allardyce has one of the most prestigious jobs in world football and I am sorry he cannot behave like that so no the last point is not the only relevant one you are very wrong there.

Hodgson doesn't have a speech impediment. It's a variety of pronunciation. Everybody has mocked Hodgson's pronounciations. Mocking his predecessor isn't a sackable offence in my opinion. Managers have mocked each other in the public sphere many times. The only thing that's relevant is whether he broke the FA rules.

 

[epic terrorist]

Hodgson doesn't have a speech impediment. It's a variety of pronunciation. Everybody has mocked Hodgson's pronounciations. Mocking his predecessor isn't a sackable offence in my opinion. Managers have mocked each other in the public sphere many times. The only thing that's relevant is whether he broke the FA rules.

Really? REALLY? I cannot even take you seriously, first foremost if you want to get into maybe don't with someone who is training to be a disability nurse. First of all he has a former of rhotacism which is classed as a speech impediment so what are you even talking about?

Also I am not saying just the one thing is a sackable but collectively all of that most definitely is. But I don't even know why I am surprised

 

[damola3]

Really? REALLY? I cannot even take you seriously, first foremost if you want to get into maybe don't with someone who is training to be a disability nurse. First of all he has a former of rhotacism which is classed as a speech impediment so what are you even talking about?

Also I am not saying just the one thing is a sackable but collectively all of that most definitely is. But I don't even know why I am surprised

I thought I read on the BBC once that he didn't have a speech impediment. Even Fulham where he's a club legend had a banner saying "in Woy we twust". I don't even think that's relevant here and I don't think that the telegraph should have included irrelevant bits to the article. The only thing that's relevant is whether he broke the FA's rules or not. I think doing so should make it a sackable offence.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

Hodgson doesn't have a speech impediment. It's a variety of pronunciation. Everybody has mocked Hodgson's pronounciations. Mocking his predecessor isn't a sackable offence in my opinion. Managers have mocked each other in the public sphere many times. The only thing that's relevant is whether he broke the FA rules.

I'd love to know what other jobs you think such insubordination would fly in after you listed all the insolence about his employers to an outside source.

And that's to say nothing of the trust that's now been lost between they and him before you even start on the 'rule breaking.'

How you think that position is tenable is beyond me?

 

[epic terrorist]

I thought I read on the BBC once that he didn't have a speech impediment. Even Fulham where he's a club legend had a banner saying "in Woy we twust". I don't even think that's relevant here and I don't think that the telegraph should have included irrelevant bits to the article. The only thing that's relevant is whether he broke the FA's rules or not. I think doing so should make it a sackable offence.

Just because you read it on the BBC means absolutely jack ****. Here is the facts, Roy Hodgson has Rhotacism which is classed as a speech impediment. And let's make something else clear, whether you think it's relevant here is absolutely irrelevant.

Also let's put another slant on it, you have a sibling who has rhotacism, a person in a position of power mocks your siblings. Would you not feel offended by that?

Also stop with the FA rules bullocks, whichever way you want to dress it up he has brought the game into disrepute.

But I'm done talking to you about this till you get your head out your ****

 

[damola3]

I'd love to know what other jobs you think such insubordination would fly in after you listed all the insolence about his employers to an outside source.

And that's to say nothing of the trust that's now been lost between they and him before you even start on the 'rule breaking.'

How you think that position is tenable is beyond me?

I do think that it's been overblown. No sympathy for him if he is guilty of wrongdoing, however it think that it's turned into a bit of a witch-hunt. I genuinely don't see anything wrong with his opinions. The dodgy part is to do with circumventing the rules on third-party ownership. I don't see what trust there is to lose here. Trust that he'll agree with any decision the FA make? He will surely be sacked or the FA will be left with egg on their faces. I just think that this is overblown.

 

[Equilibrio]

How's Garry Monk doing nowadays?He could be good candidate for manager if you go purely for English guys.Otherwise, th FA should give Laurent Blanc a look.

 

[damola3]

Just because you read it on the BBC means absolutely jack ****. Here is the facts, Roy Hodgson has Rhotacism which is classed as a speech impediment. And let's make something else clear, whether you think it's relevant here is absolutely irrelevant.

Also let's put another slant on it, you have a sibling who has rhotacism, a person in a position of power mocks your siblings. Would you not feel offended by that?

Also stop with the FA rules bullocks, whichever way you want to dress it up he has brought the game into disrepute.

But I'm done talking to you about this till you get your head out your ****

I do agree that the mocking of Hodgson is disrespectful in this context. With the sibling analogy, it's completely hypothetical and depends on relationship. There's a big difference between bullying and friends mocking each other. I do agree that it was disrespectful. If being disrespectful was a stackable offence, wouldn't Mourinho have be sacked 50 times?

As I've said, we need the full facts before starting a witch-hunt. Apparently, he may have broken the ownership rules when purchasing Enner Valencia. If it's true, he must be sacked.

 

[ninjaskill]

Problem is, aside from the fact the FA couldn't identify the right man if he was stood in front of them with a flashing red light on his head; who is available of any significant standard?

I'm a firm believer, without drudging up that whole debate again, that a manager of a major Country should be a National of that Country. That limits things massively to start with. Howe doesn't want it if you wanted to rip it all up and give a young promising manager time to build some serious foundations. Nobody else coming through. The veteran English managers shouldn't be ANYWHERE near the discussion. Pardew? Please. He's as qualified and clueless as an imbecile like Moyes. Pullis? Yeah, if you want to set English football back 20 years and appoint another archaic dinosaur like Allardyce. Hoddle? Been there. Failed with that.

And any foreign manager of any note is tied up at major clubs.

But the FA are that gutless they'll probably try whitewash this whole situation like nothings happened and lumber on regardless with clueless Sam.

Pulis is Welsh