Its Reported Roy Hodgson Approached To Be England Manager

[MrRed]

Good luck to Mr Hodgson it will be interesting the way he goes in the Euro's.

I have a feeling he will stick to his own thing and not worry to much about the media.

[StevieH]

I think Hodgsons selections will mostly be led by the nose of the media, none too inspiring or innovative but which should eliminate some of the dafter picks we saw under Taylor. Though can see him going for a few Crouch/Andy Carroll types

I dont think he would dare to go too alehouse in terms of players picked mind, he wasnt the pressers choice at all. The amount they went on about Redknapp should be a big enough clue

I just think though the players, especially those from CL clubs, will never be won over by him. Hes a throwback and they know it

i reckon this is probably about right. he is a devotee of the hughes/reep school of tactics, he's safety first and frankly that's exactly what england need right now. the always excellent zonalmarking.net gets it pretty spot on in the below:

http://www.zonalmarking.net/2012/05/01/england-appoint-roy-hodgson/

If the decision was between Harry Redknapp and Roy Hodgson, England were choosing between two very different coaches.

The debate should not have been about ‘experience at big clubs’ or ‘how much the players like him’, but about the style of coach required: in Redknapp and Hodgson, the FA were choosing between two men at complete opposite ends of the football coach’s ideological spectrum, the most stark contrast of managerial philosophies you can find.

Redknapp

Redknapp is all about individuals.

, and to imply that he is only a transfer specialist would be unfair; he clearly gets on with people (summed up by his relationships with both players and journalists) and is regarded as a good man-manager and motivator. Whether it is bringing them in or firing them up, Redknapp’s skill is that he gets the best from individuals.

His tactical ineptitude can be overstated – Redknapp is generally very good at making substitutions midway through a game, as he showed, for example, with

– followed by a perfectly reasonable and rational explanation about why he made the changes.

Yet Redknapp’s sides retain a certain anarchy, epitomised by Tottenham’s win away at Norwich late last year, when Redknapp told Gareth Bale and Rafael van der Vaart they could “play where they wanted to”. In that game it worked, as Bale scored two fine goals in a man-of-the-match performance. “He gets in those holes, and when he gets the ball and runs at you, he’s unplayable,” Redknapp marvelled. Yet in recent weeks, Bale’s desire to roam has been indulged at the expense of shape and structure, and Tottenham have been in terrible form.

Van der Vaart is another who has enjoyed that freedom at Tottenham. “There are no long and boring speeches about tactics, like I was used to at Real Madrid,” he says. “There is a board in our dressing room but Harry doesn’t write anything on it. It’s not that we do nothing – but it’s close to that.”

How much does Redknapp value the system? He’s perfectly honest about it. “Whether it’s 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 – the numbers game is no the beautiful game in my opinion,” Redknapp once said. “It is 10% about the formation and 90% about the players.”

Hodgson

Hodgson is the complete opposite, the ultimate ‘system’ manager. His teams are very simple – they defend the same way, with two banks of four supplemented with two outright attackers – either two forwards or a lone striker supported by a number ten. Whereas Redknapp employs an army of coaches to do his work on the training ground, Hodgson personally drills his players relentlessly in training so they’re completely at home with the zonal defensive system, going through the same exercises again and again.

“We work on it every day,” Simon Davies, who played under Hodgson at Fulham, told Jonathan Wilson. “Every day in training is geared towards team shape on the match-day coming up. I’ve been working with the manager three years now and every day is team shape, and it shows… I don’t want to give any secrets away, but he gets the 11 that he wants on a match-day and he drills everything in that he wants. It’s certain drills defensive, certain drills attacking, and we work very hard at it. There are no diagrams. It’s all on the pitch with the ball, nothing unopposed.”

Whereas Redknapp doesn’t care for formations, Hodgson is a member of UEFA’s technical study group and will tell you about 4-4-2 all day long:

“The back four gives you the best possibilities of covering the width of the pitch defensively, and it also gives you great options, in my opinion, to get the the full-backs forward…one can go forward and the other three can shuttle across and you’re still playing with three defenders. When you play with three defenders, you lose that possibility.

The other six players? One could discuss. There’s no doubt you need one forward…you need a point of reference…if you play with two of them, you have the added advantage that whoever receives the ball has someone in close support at all times, and if balls are going to be played forward, you’ve got someone to threat the back of the defence. If you take him (the second striker) out, the threat to the back of the defence has to come from the midfield, you need midfield players bursting forward. It’s interesting to play with two – though these days many teams are playing with them vertically, rather than alongside each other.

The central midfielders do an important job for you, they’re going to protect the back four, and they’re also going to be the catalysts for attacks. The wide players are the ones you’re looking for to use spaces.

With 4-4-2, you’ve got ‘twos’ all over the field. I would always be looking to find a team that can play with a back four. Amongst the front six there a lot more options.”

Decision

So which type of coach is needed? England are in a state of complete confusion. Going into a major tournament having appointed your coach a month beforehand is embarrassing enough. Then there is the problem that Wayne Rooney, the star attacking player, is suspended from the first two games. Jack Wilshere, assumed to be one of England’s key midfielders a year ago, will miss out through injury. A generation of very good individuals (though never remotely a cohesive unit) are now past their peak, while the next crop are not established enough to base a successful team around.

This complete failure to have any long-term project in place deserves first round elimination – an outcome that would have been regarded as ‘best for England in the long-run’, had they not consistently failed to learn lessons from previous failures.

Templates

All this should make even the most ardent England supporter realise that the team is currently a rank outsider. And the only way outsiders have overachieved in recent major international tournaments is by being defensive and functional. Uruguay won the 2011 Copa Americain this fashion, and Zambia triumphed at this year’s Africa Cup of Nations with the lowest pass completion rate in the tournament, something also achieved by Greece in Euro 2004. Uruguay (again) and Ghana were the surprise performers at the 2010 World Cup, both being inherently reactive, defensive sides. It’s difficult to name a recent underdog that has overachieved by playing attractive football.

Only the best sides can contest international tournaments in an open, attractive style and succeed. For the Euros, this is probably limited to Spain, Germany and Holland. (Even they are more cautious than one might expect – this is a Spain side that won the World Cup scoring eight goals in seven games, while Germany who were thrilling in South Africa, but mainly on the counter-attack, and a Holland are considered one of the least ‘Dutch’ sides in history.) Those three can at least hope to play beautiful football. Everyone else must focus upon being well-drilled and rigid.

If a disciplined, organised style of play is perfect for leading an underdog into a major international tournament, there is only one choice. Hodgson’s successes have generally been with underdogs; the only problem anyone can have with his style of management suiting England’s situation this summer is if (a) they refuse to accept England are underdogs, or ( they are frustrated at the confirmation of England’s status as underdogs.

(All this ignores long-term goals: granted, this is a major reason why England are currently in their current situation, but it’s difficult to see what long-term planning England can do between now and the Euros – regrouping after the summer is more logical. Talk of abandoning any attempt to compete at Euro 2012, in favour of a long-term approach looking forward to World Cup 2014, is a nice idea but assumes qualification and a reasonable idea of who would be in the side in two years’ time. Future international XIs are notoriously difficult to predict – predicting this year’s XI is difficult enough. In 2006 England took Theo Walcott to the World Cup, and though he didn’t play, he picked up ‘good tournament experience’, supposedly. This was totally useless when England didn’t qualify for Euro 2008 or when Walcott wasn’t deemed worthy of a place at World Cup 2010, and it was a wasted place in the 2006 tournament. To ‘do a Walcott’ with an entire squad would be suicidal.)

Caveats

There are two questions about Hodgson’s suitability. The first involves whether he’ll have enough time at international level implement his strict positioning correctly. This is a genuine issue – coaches who have had two years to prepare find it difficult, Hodgson only has a month. It will mean Hodgson’s style of football is probably even more boring than usual, as he would focus on defensive drills before planning any attacking moves. In that Davies interview quoted earlier, the Welshman finishes by saying, “We’re two-and-a-half years down the line now, so we’re all converted.” Hodgson does need time – when he arrived at Fulham, the team started poorly before a sharp recovery.

The second question is whether England’s players would respect Hodgson and be willing to follow his instructions. This is a problem for any England coach, though: Fabio Capello was ‘too distant’, Steve McClaren was ‘too chummy’. Hodgson isn’t stupid, and will be able to work out which type of players will be on board – he must be brave enough not to select anyone he believes will be a significant problem.

Conclusion

The point here is not that England have no chance of winning the tournament – it’s that they had no chance of winning the tournament by playing the anarchic football favoured by Redknapp. The type of football Hodgson offers is, in theory, the type of football that will maximise England’s chances of getting out of the group. In the current state of confusion, that must be regarded as a sensible target - although if Hodgson states this or voices satisfaction when this target is reached, he will be slaughtered for lowering expectations.

England must attempt to win the tournament; the chances are extremely slim, but have marginally increased with this appointment. England don’t have good enough players to be open and indulge individuals, and therefore Hodgson’s system-first approach makes sense.

[smokie36]

How boring.

[LucidLucifer]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

[StevieH]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

[rixalex]

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

I think your aim is a bit off there Stevie. Or does one Spurs supporter speak for all?

[StevieH]

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

I think your aim is a bit off there Stevie. Or does one Spurs supporter speak for all?

oh i was just trying to get a rise out of carmine rix. nothing more to read into it.

edit: though i do find it weird any football fan could find zonalmarking boring. their stuff is generally great and always interesting.

Edited May 2, 2012 by StevieH

[rixalex]

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

I think your aim is a bit off there Stevie. Or does one Spurs supporter speak for all?

oh i was just trying to get a rise out of carmine rix. nothing more to read into it.

I see. Thought he might pay for all those ""Liverpool way" is silly nonsense" posts he's been making.

[tigerfish]

big hoo hah on talk sports Alan Brazils breakfast show today about The Suns front page head-liner taking the mick out of Hodgsons speach impediment. with the line " bwinge on the eulos "

totally insensitive, nothing what so ever to do with football and what the man has done in the game and brought to the table. regardless of what they ,i or anyone else thinks of whether or not he is the right man for the job, not even funny !

must be because they have had their noses put out of joint, with it not being old Harry getting the job and them not getting a sniff on breaking the story.

the self righteous little @#$%^& !

Edited May 2, 2012 by tigerfish

[Kan Win]

Hi Folks,

Good to see that the FA (up to you to read into that one)=(could be Sweet FA) for the English Fans, but having said that, Roy has Bussed coached 3 National Teams and he did not go to Court (for Fax evasion) and the most important statisticis, that he has no Lion Heart problems (ops), so all in all I wish him the very best of health, good luck and Poland to win the EU Cup (fat chance of that may I add )

Well were there is hope there is always a believe

Win

Edited May 2, 2012 by Kan Win

[balo]

Roy Hodgson has never been a great manager , I remember when he was the manager in Viking Norway, he didnt impress me much.

So this is another terrible decision by the FA .

[salty]

I imagine he is underwhelmed by the confidence shown in him. Might I suggest all you "little Englanders" wait and see.

For everyone's benefit who wish to make equally "complimentary" responses I am Irish not Scottish.

[mommysboy]

I think Hodgsons selections will mostly be led by the nose of the media, none too inspiring or innovative but which should eliminate some of the dafter picks we saw under Taylor. Though can see him going for a few Crouch/Andy Carroll types

I dont think he would dare to go too alehouse in terms of players picked mind, he wasnt the pressers choice at all. The amount they went on about Redknapp should be a big enough clue

I just think though the players, especially those from CL clubs, will never be won over by him. Hes a throwback and they know it

i reckon this is probably about right. he is a devotee of the hughes/reep school of tactics, he's safety first and frankly that's exactly what england need right now. the always excellent zonalmarking.net gets it pretty spot on in the below:

http://www.zonalmark...nt-roy-hodgson/

If the decision was between Harry Redknapp and Roy Hodgson, England were choosing between two very different coaches.

The debate should not have been about ‘experience at big clubs’ or ‘how much the players like him’, but about the style of coach required: in Redknapp and Hodgson, the FA were choosing between two men at complete opposite ends of the football coach’s ideological spectrum, the most stark contrast of managerial philosophies you can find.

Redknapp

Redknapp is all about individuals.

, and to imply that he is only a transfer specialist would be unfair; he clearly gets on with people (summed up by his relationships with both players and journalists) and is regarded as a good man-manager and motivator. Whether it is bringing them in or firing them up, Redknapp’s skill is that he gets the best from individuals.

His tactical ineptitude can be overstated – Redknapp is generally very good at making substitutions midway through a game, as he showed, for example, with

– followed by a perfectly reasonable and rational explanation about why he made the changes.

Yet Redknapp’s sides retain a certain anarchy, epitomised by Tottenham’s win away at Norwich late last year, when Redknapp told Gareth Bale and Rafael van der Vaart they could “play where they wanted to”. In that game it worked, as Bale scored two fine goals in a man-of-the-match performance. “He gets in those holes, and when he gets the ball and runs at you, he’s unplayable,” Redknapp marvelled. Yet in recent weeks, Bale’s desire to roam has been indulged at the expense of shape and structure, and Tottenham have been in terrible form.

Van der Vaart is another who has enjoyed that freedom at Tottenham. “There are no long and boring speeches about tactics, like I was used to at Real Madrid,” he says. “There is a board in our dressing room but Harry doesn’t write anything on it. It’s not that we do nothing – but it’s close to that.”

How much does Redknapp value the system? He’s perfectly honest about it. “Whether it’s 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1, 4-3-3 – the numbers game is no the beautiful game in my opinion,” Redknapp once said. “It is 10% about the formation and 90% about the players.”

Hodgson

Hodgson is the complete opposite, the ultimate ‘system’ manager. His teams are very simple – they defend the same way, with two banks of four supplemented with two outright attackers – either two forwards or a lone striker supported by a number ten. Whereas Redknapp employs an army of coaches to do his work on the training ground, Hodgson personally drills his players relentlessly in training so they’re completely at home with the zonal defensive system, going through the same exercises again and again.

“We work on it every day,” Simon Davies, who played under Hodgson at Fulham, told Jonathan Wilson. “Every day in training is geared towards team shape on the match-day coming up. I’ve been working with the manager three years now and every day is team shape, and it shows… I don’t want to give any secrets away, but he gets the 11 that he wants on a match-day and he drills everything in that he wants. It’s certain drills defensive, certain drills attacking, and we work very hard at it. There are no diagrams. It’s all on the pitch with the ball, nothing unopposed.”

Whereas Redknapp doesn’t care for formations, Hodgson is a member of UEFA’s technical study group and will tell you about 4-4-2 all day long:

“The back four gives you the best possibilities of covering the width of the pitch defensively, and it also gives you great options, in my opinion, to get the the full-backs forward…one can go forward and the other three can shuttle across and you’re still playing with three defenders. When you play with three defenders, you lose that possibility.

The other six players? One could discuss. There’s no doubt you need one forward…you need a point of reference…if you play with two of them, you have the added advantage that whoever receives the ball has someone in close support at all times, and if balls are going to be played forward, you’ve got someone to threat the back of the defence. If you take him (the second striker) out, the threat to the back of the defence has to come from the midfield, you need midfield players bursting forward. It’s interesting to play with two – though these days many teams are playing with them vertically, rather than alongside each other.

The central midfielders do an important job for you, they’re going to protect the back four, and they’re also going to be the catalysts for attacks. The wide players are the ones you’re looking for to use spaces.

With 4-4-2, you’ve got ‘twos’ all over the field. I would always be looking to find a team that can play with a back four. Amongst the front six there a lot more options.”

Decision

So which type of coach is needed? England are in a state of complete confusion. Going into a major tournament having appointed your coach a month beforehand is embarrassing enough. Then there is the problem that Wayne Rooney, the star attacking player, is suspended from the first two games. Jack Wilshere, assumed to be one of England’s key midfielders a year ago, will miss out through injury. A generation of very good individuals (though never remotely a cohesive unit) are now past their peak, while the next crop are not established enough to base a successful team around.

This complete failure to have any long-term project in place deserves first round elimination – an outcome that would have been regarded as ‘best for England in the long-run’, had they not consistently failed to learn lessons from previous failures.

Templates

All this should make even the most ardent England supporter realise that the team is currently a rank outsider. And the only way outsiders have overachieved in recent major international tournaments is by being defensive and functional. Uruguay won the 2011 Copa Americain this fashion, and Zambia triumphed at this year’s Africa Cup of Nations with the lowest pass completion rate in the tournament, something also achieved by Greece in Euro 2004. Uruguay (again) and Ghana were the surprise performers at the 2010 World Cup, both being inherently reactive, defensive sides. It’s difficult to name a recent underdog that has overachieved by playing attractive football.

Only the best sides can contest international tournaments in an open, attractive style and succeed. For the Euros, this is probably limited to Spain, Germany and Holland. (Even they are more cautious than one might expect – this is a Spain side that won the World Cup scoring eight goals in seven games, while Germany who were thrilling in South Africa, but mainly on the counter-attack, and a Holland are considered one of the least ‘Dutch’ sides in history.) Those three can at least hope to play beautiful football. Everyone else must focus upon being well-drilled and rigid.

If a disciplined, organised style of play is perfect for leading an underdog into a major international tournament, there is only one choice. Hodgson’s successes have generally been with underdogs; the only problem anyone can have with his style of management suiting England’s situation this summer is if (a) they refuse to accept England are underdogs, or ( they are frustrated at the confirmation of England’s status as underdogs.

(All this ignores long-term goals: granted, this is a major reason why England are currently in their current situation, but it’s difficult to see what long-term planning England can do between now and the Euros – regrouping after the summer is more logical. Talk of abandoning any attempt to compete at Euro 2012, in favour of a long-term approach looking forward to World Cup 2014, is a nice idea but assumes qualification and a reasonable idea of who would be in the side in two years’ time. Future international XIs are notoriously difficult to predict – predicting this year’s XI is difficult enough. In 2006 England took Theo Walcott to the World Cup, and though he didn’t play, he picked up ‘good tournament experience’, supposedly. This was totally useless when England didn’t qualify for Euro 2008 or when Walcott wasn’t deemed worthy of a place at World Cup 2010, and it was a wasted place in the 2006 tournament. To ‘do a Walcott’ with an entire squad would be suicidal.)

Caveats

There are two questions about Hodgson’s suitability. The first involves whether he’ll have enough time at international level implement his strict positioning correctly. This is a genuine issue – coaches who have had two years to prepare find it difficult, Hodgson only has a month. It will mean Hodgson’s style of football is probably even more boring than usual, as he would focus on defensive drills before planning any attacking moves. In that Davies interview quoted earlier, the Welshman finishes by saying, “We’re two-and-a-half years down the line now, so we’re all converted.” Hodgson does need time – when he arrived at Fulham, the team started poorly before a sharp recovery.

The second question is whether England’s players would respect Hodgson and be willing to follow his instructions. This is a problem for any England coach, though: Fabio Capello was ‘too distant’, Steve McClaren was ‘too chummy’. Hodgson isn’t stupid, and will be able to work out which type of players will be on board – he must be brave enough not to select anyone he believes will be a significant problem.

Conclusion

The point here is not that England have no chance of winning the tournament – it’s that they had no chance of winning the tournament by playing the anarchic football favoured by Redknapp. The type of football Hodgson offers is, in theory, the type of football that will maximise England’s chances of getting out of the group. In the current state of confusion, that must be regarded as a sensible target - although if Hodgson states this or voices satisfaction when this target is reached, he will be slaughtered for lowering expectations.

England must attempt to win the tournament; the chances are extremely slim, but have marginally increased with this appointment. England don’t have good enough players to be open and indulge individuals, and therefore Hodgson’s system-first approach makes sense.

That's a very long winded way of saying Hodgson gets the best out of otherwise fairly mediocre players, which indeed he does. And that is very important as far as England is concerned.

[spongeman]

Regarding the Sun quotes, this kind of nonsense does not happen in Spain, Germany etc, ie countries that win things.

[carmine]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

Huh? Please explain? I ticked the "like this" box. I actually found that piece rather interesting and well written.

You'll never understand what it is to be a Spurs fan mate!

Edited May 3, 2012 by carmine

[rixalex]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

Huh? Please explain? I ticked the "like this" box. I actually found that piece rather interesting and well written.

Couldn't quite fathom it myself either. You surely post enough crap without Stevie having to make up new stuff.

[StevieH]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

Huh? Please explain? I ticked the "like this" box. I actually found that piece rather interesting and well written.

You'll never understand what it is to be a Spurs fan mate!

i'm terribly sorry carmine, i meant, of course, 'smokie'. apologies mate.

[carmine]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

Huh? Please explain? I ticked the "like this" box. I actually found that piece rather interesting and well written.

Couldn't quite fathom it myself either. You surely post enough crap without Stevie having to make up new stuff.

You just don't understand Rix

Actually i thought it was a very good piece. Could have written it myself!

[carmine]

I found that quite compelling StevieH.

Well written stuff and many points to moot.

glad you liked it mate, most of the stuff on zonalmarking.net is always worth a read.

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

Huh? Please explain? I ticked the "like this" box. I actually found that piece rather interesting and well written.

You'll never understand what it is to be a Spurs fan mate!

i'm terribly sorry carmine, i meant, of course, 'smokie'. apologies mate.

Apologies accepted Stevie.

[carmine]

ignore carmine, it just went way over his head i expect.

I think your aim is a bit off there Stevie. Or does one Spurs supporter speak for all?

oh i was just trying to get a rise out of carmine rix. nothing more to read into it.

edit: though i do find it weird any football fan could find zonalmarking boring. their stuff is generally great and always interesting.

There is was convinced you didn't want to play and were simply ignoring me! To be honest i'd given up on trying to get a reaction from you mate!

[smokie36]

That was great. Cheers leetle Englanders...

[carmine]

That was great. Cheers leetle Englanders...

Stevie was referring that you are a dunce mate!

[smokie36]

That was great. Cheers leetle Englanders...

Stevie was referring that you are a dunce mate!

Yes but I can rise above it mate. We understand such things north of Carlisle.

[smokie36]

Its a brave decision by the FA this. If he loses all three games in the Euros(please please!!) then he'll probably be hounded out by the press.

I can see the board following as well....

[carmine]

big hoo hah on talk sports Alan Brazils breakfast show today about The Suns front page head-liner taking the mick out of Hodgsons speach impediment. with the line " bwinge on the eulos "

totally insensitive, nothing what so ever to do with football and what the man has done in the game and brought to the table. regardless of what they ,i or anyone else thinks of whether or not he is the right man for the job, not even funny !

must be because they have had their noses put out of joint, with it not being old Harry getting the job and them not getting a sniff on breaking the story.

the self righteous little @#$%^& !

Yes they've had their nose put out of joint but did you really expect better from the gutter press.

The media over there is wonderful isn't it.....they sound off about having not won major trophies for years yet seem to do everything in their power to destroy morale and confidence of successive managers and teams. Then you have to listen to hacks like Brian Woolnough giving his oh so important take on what went wrong and how football journo's like him know best.

Sickening bunch the lot of them

[smokie36]

big hoo hah on talk sports Alan Brazils breakfast show today about The Suns front page head-liner taking the mick out of Hodgsons speach impediment. with the line " bwinge on the eulos "

totally insensitive, nothing what so ever to do with football and what the man has done in the game and brought to the table. regardless of what they ,i or anyone else thinks of whether or not he is the right man for the job, not even funny !

must be because they have had their noses put out of joint, with it not being old Harry getting the job and them not getting a sniff on breaking the story.

the self righteous little @#$%^& !

Yes they've had their nose put out of joint but did you really expect better from the gutter press.

The media over there is wonderful isn't it.....they sound off about having not won major trophies for years yet seem to do everything in their power to destroy morale and confidence of successive managers and teams. Then you have to listen to hacks like Brian Woolnough giving his oh so important take on what went wrong and how football journo's like him know best.

Sickening bunch the lot of them

It astonishes me the amount of vitriol dished out to successive England managers. Yeah I'm surprised the papers haven't been sued.

The turnip head was funny tho...

Edited May 3, 2012 by smokie36

[carmine]

big hoo hah on talk sports Alan Brazils breakfast show today about The Suns front page head-liner taking the mick out of Hodgsons speach impediment. with the line " bwinge on the eulos "

totally insensitive, nothing what so ever to do with football and what the man has done in the game and brought to the table. regardless of what they ,i or anyone else thinks of whether or not he is the right man for the job, not even funny !

must be because they have had their noses put out of joint, with it not being old Harry getting the job and them not getting a sniff on breaking the story.

the self righteous little @#$%^& !

Yes they've had their nose put out of joint but did you really expect better from the gutter press.

The media over there is wonderful isn't it.....they sound off about having not won major trophies for years yet seem to do everything in their power to destroy morale and confidence of successive managers and teams. Then you have to listen to hacks like Brian Woolnough giving his oh so important take on what went wrong and how football journo's like him know best.

Sickening bunch the lot of them

It astonishes me the amount of vitriol dished out to successive England managers. Yeah I'm surprised the papers haven't been sued.

The turnip head was funny tho...

Its really very sad that seemingly so many football fans view what this buch have to say as having so much credibility anyway. when they are not slagging off the coach or undermining the team morale they talk rubbish about technicalities.

A good example of someone worth listening to was commenting on the Spurs game last night. David Pleat. He has so much football knowledge and interesting insights and views on the game. He also an excellent commentator. I also seem to remember the press destroying him too for activities hardly linked to football however ill advised.

No doubt the viewing public back in the UK will be subjected to the ever charismatic Alan Shearer again for these euros!

[smokie36]

Alan "I reckon Phil should have got the nod ahead of Ashley. What do ya think Gary?"

Gary "<stunned silence>"

[MrRed]

Who is the Scotland manager ?

[rixalex]

A good example of someone worth listening to was commenting on the Spurs game last night. David Pleat. He has so much football knowledge and interesting insights and views on the game. He also an excellent commentator.

You are not the only one here a fan of Mr Pleat, and whilst i concede he does know his football, i find his commentating manner and style generally a bit dull and tedious.