i think he's managed inter twice! he's managed udinese, grasshoppers, malmo, copenhagen among others. he is the most experienced english manager since sir bobby robson - its definitely the right choice, even if it doesn't inspire some people. you won't find a more varied CV in football
That really isn't a bad CV. I've always liked Hodgson since he joined Fulham, and he's best mates with Delia so that could increase Holt's chances of going to the Euros!
from what i heard on the radio this morning, the tabloids are already slating the appointment before it has even been made let's back roy.
like i say max, redknapp was always the media's choice because they knew they'd get soundbites from him. hodgson is far more refined and keeps himself to himself, and has negative reactions from the media. well tough - the media shouldn't be allowed to pick the england manager just because they like him. you pick the man who offers the nation the best chance of qualifying and moving things forward. it would have ended up being just like under eriksson, with too many distractions had harry got the gig
I'm quite happy with this if Woy takes the job. I actually think he could turn out to be the best England manager in decades. He never pulled up any trees with Blackburn but we shouldn't hold his stint as Liverpool boss against him, the Scousers had made their minds up about him early doors and he was fighting a losing battle IMHO
At least he is English! He's a nice bloke and conducts very good interviews. If he gets the job I hope he make a success of it
He'd be mad to take it, though maybe he'll feel obliged by "duty" to drink from the poisoned chalice. IMO the England job should be no more than a part-time appointment, reflecting the relative unimportance of international football apart from the World Cup and Continental tournaments. Some full-time FA person such as Brooking could do whatever the England manager does between qualifying games/tournaments, and someone in club management, such as Roy, could be contracted part-time to coach when there are games to be played. It would take a lot of media pressure away if any appointment were known to be short term, for a specific competition only.
Re. my post above, and just in case it seems bonkers, it appears I am not entirely alone! This is from a comment on Phil McNulty's BBC blog: "Why not consider Stuart Pearce (or someone like him in the future) being a well paid (probably 6 figures not 7) full time ENGLAND Manager then appointing (maybe selected several months prior to the tournament starting) a short term Tournament Manager to bring that extra dimension and motivation for a tournament. If this had been the case over the last few years the FA would not have incurred such huge costs (that may mean it is not so easy to justify the wages of the 'men in suits') and 'being stuck with a manager for 2 ,4 or 6 years. In this instance Stuart would managing the qualification games & friendlies, maintaining a short list of squad players, keeping in touch with managers etc. But now - at the end of the season prior to a major tournament (Euros or World Cup) - Harry or Roy (or a non English manager if thought appropriate - Sir Alex, Jose Mourinho) could be brought in to jointly MANAGE the team for the duration of the tournament."
personally i don't like your idea robbie. others may disagree but i think continuity is important and that everyone should know that there is one manager, the man who makes all the decisions - i believe it would be a mess if we went down your route
So Stuart Pearce does all the hard work in hopefully getting England to qualify for major tournaments, then someone else comes in and takes all the glory should we suceed that is ?
I should have said "thinking along similar lines". I agree that whoever is going to be in charge for a tournament, has to be in charge for qualifiers as well -- see my original post. But there's a lot of stuff that has little to do with what happens on the pitch that could easily be done by someone other than a full-time manager/coach. And I suggested a Brooking-like person, not a Pearce-like person, i.e. someone who isn't themselves in the frame for managing/coaching. As for "mess", supers, it's been a mess for years, so there would be no great difference there!
I am surprised at the views expressed. I didn't particularly want 'arry but Woy? Even worse!! I'm not bothered whether the Manager is English or not as long as he can speak english and do a good job. Just a few controversial points. If Rednapp was out of contract and Woy would have cost them £10m would Woy have got the job? No - so he is just the cheap option and not 1st choice. When the men in suits sacked the English Captain without consulting the Manager, Capello, quite rightly, walked. In the same situation 'arry would walk but Woy would say ' thank you for helping me do my job ' so the men in suits know that he won't cause them any trouble. Finally it is widely suggested that Woy failed at Liverpool because he couldn't get the fans or the media on his side and because he couldn't get on top of the big forceful egos in the dressing room. Well from the very start the new England Manager hasn't got the media on his side or the majority of fans either and if he thinks the England egos are easier to deal with than the Anfield ones I suspect that he has a nasty shock coming his way. I just hope that when it goes tits up, as it undoubtedly will , the anger and abuse is not directed at Woy but the waste of spaces in authority responsible for this awful appointment.
An out of contract Redknapp is certainly easier to get, I agree, so in that circumstance I am fairly sure Redknapp would be England manager right now. But that's not the case. Tottenham's form has dropped recently and Hodgson has a good CV that involves international managment, which is good experience. Capello didn't walk because the FA were useless. The FA essentially forced him to walk because he had breached his contract.
IMO, an England manager needs to be a great man-manager, and again, IMO, Redknapp is the best in the business at man-managing. I get the feeling the FA have ignored Redknapp because of money, and what it would cost to A. get him out of his Spurs contract, and B. pay him his yearly wage. To be honest, after the recent managers and the wages they were on, I honestly don't blame them.
But does that make him a good International Manager who has now got to push the England Team forward ? In recent years his success has been getting smaller Clubs with average players to over perform. Can he have the same success with a big International Team full of players who think they are better than they really are? His experience at Liverpool would suggest otherwise. I am not promoting 'arry - I didn't want him either!! Incidentally I really do not think that whoever is England Manager will pick Grant Holt this summer. I would like to see him go but with the number of fouls he commits and the attitude of foreign refs I suspect that the old guard will be considered safer options.
i do think money will have been an issue but i'm glad they haven't paid a fortune to spurs. hodgson has been a very successful international manager already with finland and he guided switzerland to third in the world so i'd say he knows how international management works! redknapp is a great man-manager but he is not tactically astute. you only needed to see how keegan got on with england to see that it takes brains to do that job. plus, the furore surrounding redknapp from the media, everywhere he goes would be a distraction. the players probably wanted redknapp because they knew he'd be a bit soft with them. well, hodgson won't allow that - they'll have to work hard in training and apply themselves in matches. he'll make us hard to beat and seeing as england don't really have a great team at the moment, opening ourselves up 'harry style' would have been a disaster. i can only assume that people are put off by his supposed 'dour football', which may very well be the case, but if you watch international football, it is played at a slow pace and is generally quite negative. he is suited to international football, he'll get them organised and although we have no chance of winning the tournament in my eyes, we have a better chance of progressing with him than the kamikaze football redknapp may have offered. i also think you are over-egging england. they are massive underdogs - thats exactly where hodgson earns his keep - making underdogs winners
