Unless there nobody suitable? It's an indictment of the lack of managerial/coaching talent imo. Explain baseball and England rugby (until this autumn) The lack of coaching talent seems to flow with money. The more we have the less we develo0 ourselves as money allows imports
Tough ****, the same as if you don't have good enough players. You have to have a national affiliation to be a player, so why not make it a rule that the manager has to as well? I'm not saying I actually advocate this, btw - just thinking through the argument. Of course it'd never work, we'd have all sorts of shenanigans going on to try and prove some spurious link that was somehow hitherto undreamt of.
That's true but the argument was should the manager of the national team be of the same nationality. I was just pointing out that so far every World Cup winning manager has followed that pattern.
but its also a case of causality or correlation. The world cup is won by "big countries" and in general "big countries" can train thier own coaches better. there's plenty of examples of managers not form countries doing well. the current morocco coach in moroccan. Great, but he was born in france. played all his career in france until he moved to morocco for his final club for a year. lets look Brazil parreira france Jacquet brazil scolari italy Lippi spain Del bosque germany low france 2018 Deschamps We have only had managers moving about more since say 2000. its a litany of big big countries who will generate by in large thier own coaches and they pick the most experienced guy going again we look at england and the coaching coming up We went from capello as an extremely well known and experience man to the less regarded but extremely experienced hackers like hodgson and allardyce. we then found no options so have gone for the unproven and inexperienced southgate and let him learn on the job what do we do if southgate (too focused on not losing to think about winning bar on pens) goes? Who can take a squad like say conte did for italy in 2020/21 euros and go win it as an experience high performance coach? Potter cooper howe lampard gerrard thats literally it. nobody else meets the criteria unless we want a retred hacker like allardyce or warnock or a not retired type like wilder or rooney or smith or DYCHE If you think like this: 1. you have a squad of 23-35 players to pick from including some absolute top talents for 2024 euros. Bellingham, rice, phillips, foden, saka blah blah blah. 2. you don't have a coach you thin could take on a national team and work within 23 players for 7 games over 3 weeks and change his system and make decisions on the night to win those games just out of what he has right then and there. 3. you have a criteria that says only pick english players. nobody else. what can you do bar end up with sean dyche? Theres plenty of countries that don't win the trophy and just one that does but if you want to try win it you really need a coach who can think on their feet and make changes on the fly. A good example here would be the thought that klopp would make a good national coach for germany. He'd be awful. why? well we all love der klopper but the man has plan a and plan a. when plan a works and players are right its great but how many times have we seen him stood on a line looking at players beating head against a wall and wondered when will he make a change. doesn't happen much tbh. IMO southgate is not the man for the job cos he stood there at 1-1 v france with them on the back foot and never looked back at his bench til he was 1-2 down. never even crossed his mind to try win this game. He then threw random ****e at it when the game was lost. mount. - did he play in tourmanent other wise?? i don't know Grealish (can't stand that fall over rubbish) sterling (**** form, revert to type sub i presume, was not even in training) Rashford( at least he did somehting in tournament) when level what would southgate to to go win a game that needs winning? i have no idea. but i know he'd rather just not lose. Southgate has 2 tournament behind him. an incredibly easy run in 2018 ended by first decent side met in croatia, a run to final at home (in fornt of home crowds is massive, and only "decent" side met was germany who have been poor for a number of years, and this tournament where france were first real side met as senegal were massive inexperienced line up. southgate has done all the learning but has failed in similar ways each time. first real challenge and we go out. IF the only criteria is enlgish then i'm afraid its sean dyche. Clubs have changed thier ways a bit with youth and development but they are simply not putting any effort into coaching development. There is no experienced high performance english coach.
dunno..... i think poch is done. peronsally his claim to fame is a streaky run to a CL final. nothing else to note. Tuchel has dirtied his bib with the later cheslea career but that first 6 weeks built a cl win just by imposing a system and he got it across. who else is there tbh? hardly that many candidates.
Former Liverpool midfielder Lucas Leiva has been removed from training with his Brazilian club Gremio after a routine examination found a potential heart problem. Fingers crossed hes all good
I picked up the manager stat on a video a while ago. Another interesting fact, Pele was injured for the World Cup final in 1962 so didn't play, having played every other game. According to the rules at the time, only those playing in the final received a medal so Pele didn't get a winners medal. (He did get one about 30 years later when FIFA decided he should have one). Conversely, Brazil's Kongolo received a medal for playing just one minute of World Cup football.
There's a video going round of Pele doing all sorts of tricks and the mirror clip of a global star doing the same. Be it Maradona, cruyff, messi, roaldo, Zidane or whoever you care to mention. It's amazing how few even look to see if thry have an opinion on a player from yesteryear before going full on messi is goat or ronaldo is the goat. There's some amazing clips out there
Same could be said for players. Countries with more money tend to develop better players. No one is saying that Mbappe should play for England.
What's the biggest difference between managing at club and national level? Apart from the obvious that national coaches have a team of the best players. Is it heavier on tactics and less so about developing? It sounds like a national team manager should have an easier job yet England haven't managed to find a good one since Alf Ramsey.
well the efforts made to have HG players (8) has helped england We were struggling there for a while with one or two players a team max and some with none at all and not bothered. since that rule came in the rich clubs have paid a premium for enlgish talent and ego trips by city and cheslea has meant they generated some too. IF you pay a premium for **** like grealish and sterling (bit harsh i know but still) then clubs below the top level are also incentivised. Theres a huge list of english talent of various types now. 34% of the premier league squad lists are english apparently. This gives southgate a potential squad pool of 165 players. obviously most are average players or young squad fillers or james milner but still. on the other hand we look and see no such rules for coaches, managers cna in effect import an entire staff with them from whatever country. We only need look at oursevles. german manager Dutch assistant (was at club) german assistant dutch gk coach (was at club) brazilian gk coach portugese elite youth coach german fitness coach german dietitian german head of recovery Dr is enlgish though as are physios etc we have absolutely no incentive nor desire to develop a beale or a gerrard or whatever through academy up into the senior squad and hve someone who might be a future english coach.
well club football is about assembling a team to go do what you want. buying a team to play your way. international football is more about taking what you have, selecting the best of the lot and finding the best way to use them. then over time thats fine but in tournament football its 7 game sin 3 weeks and rolling with the punches. I personally find international football more all down the middle than anything else and fairly obvious tactics given players assemble for a couple days and start playing. then you lose your best cb or whatever.... and have to adapt your style. I'm sure england have had good managers just not the players or not the luck or just bad appointments. Bobby robson was a good manager, massively respected across europe. don revie followed Ramsey yeah? greenwood rather than clough robson Taylor (who the actual **** chose graham bloooy taylor btw) venebles (not half bad tbh but dodgy geezer) hoddle (weird) keegan (terrible choice, a classic up and at them lads type) eriksen capello hodgson (snore) allardyce (disgrace) Southgate I'm pretty sure IBWT is right that the teams with best players, not the teams that think they are best actually win these things. even now its a struggle to get english players to act professionally, (see greenwood, foden, grealish partying etc) I wonder if sometimes it really is players letting managers down or not enough good players We do love to hear about parties and dentist chairs and sex partying in the tabloids rather than results as a nation? England need a man that can stand on the line and see the flow of the game and adjust. not just subs but adjust tactically to exploit weaknesses in the opponent. southgate is just not that. as i said a read of the match report for france indicates england were losing a second time when he first made a sub. did he actually change anything druing that game. I don't know what i do know is prior tournaments were all similar. don't lose, pack the defense, track back. very dull to wathc and maybe catch the set peice break off the big cbs. england now have loads of different types of players. 3 or 4 gks, rbs, dozen cbs, a couple lbs, lots of dull cms, a pletora of attacking cm/wingers and a few strikers. what it is still short of is real desire in players and professionalism. It was shocking seeing toney think he was fine to get an england cap and think he could play in the world cup off his club form but ignoring his gambling issues. Watching grelaish stagger about or fodens antics or greenwoods disgusting behaviour makes me wonder if they are really getting amy more disciplined.
In fairness I haven't had much interest in England team for a long while. Also I haven't watched them - or anyone else - in this WC so I can't talk about tactical nouse or substitutes or team selection. I see the results, the headlines and the chatter from those who have watched it and they aren't very praiseworthy. It looks on paper like we have had some great players, the golden generation etc. who failed to win big competitions. That then suggests it's the manager's fault or at least he bears the biggest responsibility for the underachieving. If we use the premise of best man for the job should get it, how do you determine who is the best man for the job? In club football it's easier to say who will and who won't fit the profile.
Back in the day barnes was accused of being **** for England too. The game just goes down the middle more imo and always has Imo the best man for job should not be someone "building" but delivering. If the players are there then it's about being tournament ready but not messing up qualification in doing so. The right man should be able to do a tuchel on Chelsea and walk in and get a tune out of players Rugby focuses on 4 year cycles also but jones just got chopped 9 months prior now so....
From one country only. Club managers have a far bigger pool to fish from - manage a rich club and the world's your oyster. Even those who aren't swimming in dosh can assemble a working team if they have the tactical nous. Sorry for all the watery metaphors.
