New England manager

[Royal Lady]

As long as whoever is manager gets rid of the likes of Terry, Cole, Lampard, Rooney and Ferdinand and brings in some younger, hungrier and nicer players - I don't care who it is. If it were me, I'd choose players who proved to me that they WANTED to play for their Country, who CARED about playing and who weren't either racist or womanisers - though I realise that narrows it down somewhat! LOL.

[Silver Fox]

I'll just +1 for the lulz @ facaldaqui's crazy statement

[facaldaqui]

Much better? By what measure or criteria?

I believe Harry is a much better manager, because he has made a marked improvement to every team he's managed (except Southampton, in his brief time there).

Why repelled?

The choice of Hodgson repels me for two reasons.

1. Because the FA is a hidebound, Blazer-filled institution with deeply conservative instincts, with whom Hodgson fits right in. They've always wanted to appoint him, right back to when he was at Blackburn, but this is the first time he was actually succeeding in a club role when the vacancy came up. Hodgson is a safe choice, a man who will not give the FA issues to deal with of the sort that Venables, Hoddle, Capello, and even Sven threw up. He will fit in cosily, too cosily.

2. The second reason Hodgson repels me is his nannyish presence on the touchline; his blimpish posturing and cartoonish facial expressions and agitated outbursts nauseate me; and I will take no pleasure in seeing my national manager behaving like a fusspot with a Catherine Wheel up his arse during major international tournaments.

[Royal Lady]

I like Roy and, more importantly, I think he has a presence about him that will ensure the players treat him with respect.

[Royal Rother]

2. The second reason Hodgson repels me is his nannyish presence on the touchline; his blimpish posturing and cartoonish facial expressions and agitated outbursts nauseate me;

Oh dear oh dear. That's really pretty comical. Totally mental and irrational, but worth a hearty chuckle.

[LUX]

nauseate

1.
2. it's nause8
3. He's a good choice.

[facaldaqui]

The FA were faced with a Hobson's choice, and chose Hodgson. Harry is a much better manager, but I didn't want a guy who opened up a secret bank account in Monaco and has "shady" written all over him anywhere near the England job. It would have been Venables all over again and the journos would've dug and dug the dirt until he was turned out.

But I'm repelled by the choice of Hodgson. The best that can be said of him is that he does better with mediocre squads than with top-level ones, so he'll fit right in with England. He's just such an establishment blazer, which is why Bernstein couldn't wait to appoint him: Hodgson's virtually his double--bumbling, blustering blimps the pair of them.

*

I'd rather have seen Pearce given the Euros, then a permanent manager appointed based on how they went. It would seem silly to me to appoint Hodgson for more than the Euros; if he makes a parlous mess of them, we don't want to then be stuck with him for the World Cup. WE've been there before, unable to get rid off Capello after he screwed up the World Cup.

What a load of rubbish, especially the underlined bit.

Redknapp's achievements don't come close to Hodgson's.

Harry is a better manager NOW. Harry has improved and improved as a manager, whereas Hodgson's career is up and down. Ironically, Hodgson's biggest break came when Harry couldn't be arsed to send out a competitive team against Fulham on a certain infamous occasion.

Ask yourself this question: in terms of pure management, who would you rather have managing your team right now, Harry or Roy? In my opinion, Hodgson would be incapable of managing Spurs to the top four.

[Hoop Blah]

@facaldaqui, But much better? Much better than a man that's taken two clubs to European finals, won leagues in multiple countries, including 5 consecutive top of the league finishes with Malmo. He took Blackburn and Fulham into Europe through Premier League placing. A manager that took the Swiss national team into two major tournaments and up to something like 3rd or 4th in the FIFA World Rankings. A manager who recently turned round the fortunes of both Fulham and West Brom when they were looking relegation in the face.

Harry might be a better manager, but I'm not sure how that can be said when looking at their respective records (although I would rather watch a 'Arry team than a Woy team). He certainly isn't a much better manager.

As for being safe. I'm not sure I have a problem with that. The England job has a habit of blowing up infront of everyone and a safe pair of hands that might actually be able to go through 4 years without a major scare or scandle to distract the players and rest of the nation isn't such a bad thing is it?

[Hoop Blah]

2. The second reason Hodgson repels me is his nannyish presence on the touchline; his blimpish posturing and cartoonish facial expressions and agitated outbursts nauseate me;

Oh dear oh dear. That's really pretty comical. Totally mental and irrational, but worth a hearty chuckle.

I'd forgotten that bit.

Is saggy faced Redknapp any less cartoonish?

[facaldaqui]

2. The second reason Hodgson repels me is his nannyish presence on the touchline; his blimpish posturing and cartoonish facial expressions and agitated outbursts nauseate me;

Oh dear oh dear. That's really pretty comical. Totally mental and irrational, but worth a hearty chuckle.

I'm not saying Roy will manage England badly: I expect he will get us to the quarters. But if we do fail under him, mark my words, you will start to feel the same as me about his posturing, as will the whole nation. If ever there was an England manager destined to be a figure of ridicule if he fails, it is Hodgson.

[Royal Lady]

Well, he'd be in good company - they're all ridiculed at some point when they lose a game/tournament or whatever.

Your reasons for disliking him are just LOLable though. Do you like Brian, even though he's bald, wears glasses and is very understated?

[soggy biscuit]

Redknapp us the better manager if you let The Sun do your thinking for you

[Blue Hooped Moose]

As long as whoever is manager gets rid of the likes of Terry, Cole, Lampard, Rooney and Ferdinand and brings in some younger, hungrier and nicer players - I don't care who it is. If it were me, I'd choose players who proved to me that they WANTED to play for their Country, who CARED about playing and who weren't either racist or womanisers - though I realise that narrows it down somewhat! LOL.

Say what you like about Rooney but I think his desire to play for his country isn't in doubt. And shagging some prossies doesn't make him a womaniser; just desperate. Agreed with sacking off Terry and Lampard, but stick with Cole (if only because we don't have any other viable LB's)

[facaldaqui]

Well, he'd be in good company - they're all ridiculed at some point when they lose a game/tournament or whatever.

Your reasons for disliking him are just LOLable though. Do you like Brian, even though he's bald, wears glasses and is very understated?

Brian seems genuine to me; whereas Hodgson postures on the touchline. Hodgson is actually very measured when interviewed, but he talks like a newspaper report; Brian comes over naturally, I think. Wonder what the odds are on Hodgson and Brian facing each other as international managers? (If we do well in the prem, I tip Brian to be the next Ireland manager).

[cmonurz]

I’m all for selection based on personal agenda and not being an utter fcuktard, anything that sees Terry nowhere near the squad, but you’d be mad to leave Rooney at home, 34 goals this season, he remains our only world-class forward.

[facaldaqui]

As long as whoever is manager gets rid of the likes of Terry, Cole, Lampard, Rooney and Ferdinand and brings in some younger, hungrier and nicer players - I don't care who it is. If it were me, I'd choose players who proved to me that they WANTED to play for their Country, who CARED about playing and who weren't either racist or womanisers - though I realise that narrows it down somewhat! LOL.

Say what you like about Rooney but I think his desire to play for his country isn't in doubt. And shagging some prossies doesn't make him a womaniser; just desperate. Agreed with sacking off Terry and Lampard, but stick with Cole (if only because we don't have any other viable LB's)

My guess is that far from dropping Lampard Hodgson will select him. They seem made for each other.

[Hoop Blah]

Before Woy took over, the Swiss national team hadn't qualified for a World Cup in 6 attempts (from '66 through to '90). He got them into the '94 tournament on the back of one defeat (away to Portugal, they beat and drew against the Italians).

They'd never qualified for a Euro's in their history. Under Woy they qualified comfortably at the top of their group, having lost just one game (away to Turkey). He left before the tournament to take over Inter Milan though and they finished bottom of Englands Group, losing 2 and drawing one (against England obviously).

I think that looks like a decent record and the result of good management.

[facaldaqui]

Before Woy took over, the Swiss national team hadn't qualified for a World Cup in 6 attempts (from '66 through to '90). He got them into the '94 tournament on the back of one defeat (away to Portugal, they beat and drew against the Italians).

They'd never qualified for a Euro's in their history. Under Woy they qualified comfortably at the top of their group, having lost just one game (away to Turkey). He left before the tournament to take over Inter Milan though and they finished bottom of Englands Group, losing 2 and drawing one (against England obviously).

I think that looks like a decent record and the result of good management.

The distant past is the distant past. So would you have McGhee back as Reading manager?

NB. I just looked Hodgson up on Wikipedia. It includes this: Hodgson's second season with Blackburn did not match the relative success of the first, due to numerous injuries, dressing room unrest, the failure to find an adequate replacement for departed central defender Colin Hendry, and a succession of poor buys – notably the £7.5 million Kevin Davies. As a result, Blackburn had a disastrous start to the season and Hodgson was sacked on November 21, 1998, with the club bottom of the league table.

I think that was when I started to doubt him. It was unfortunate for Roy that Blackburn plummeted, because the FA look like they would've appointed him England manager. As I say, his record is patchy, whereas Redknapp's is an upward curve. Mind you, I don't necessarily believe that records are everything for an England manager. You have our best players to choose from, so coaching and motivational skills are at a premium.

[cmonurz]

Before Woy took over, the Swiss national team hadn't qualified for a World Cup in 6 attempts (from '66 through to '90). He got them into the '94 tournament on the back of one defeat (away to Portugal, they beat and drew against the Italians).

They'd never qualified for a Euro's in their history. Under Woy they qualified comfortably at the top of their group, having lost just one game (away to Turkey). He left before the tournament to take over Inter Milan though and they finished bottom of Englands Group, losing 2 and drawing one (against England obviously).

I think that looks like a decent record and the result of good management.

The distant past is the distant past. So would you have McGhee back as Reading manager?

How can you compare Hodgson's record since the Switzerland job with McGhee's since he left Reading? They are nothing alike.

[Pepe the Horseman]

2. The second reason Hodgson repels me is his nannyish presence on the touchline; his blimpish posturing and cartoonish facial expressions and agitated outbursts nauseate me;

Oh dear oh dear. That's really pretty comical. Totally mental and irrational, but worth a hearty chuckle.

I'd forgotten that bit.

Is saggy faced Redknapp any less cartoonish?