Clough wasn't a "yes man" but he said in hindsight he gave the worst possible answer ever when asked why he thought he was the right man to lead England.
"Because i'm a winner, i'll win you things".
We live in a fecked up world when that's a bad answer.
I agree you can't do what 'Big Sam' did. But we have this habit of going for 'squeaky clean'
But when selecting an Englishman for the job, we always seem to go for integrity over 'the best man available for the job' well with the exception of perhap 'Reggie' Venables.
And Cloughie never got the England job.....
posted on 29/9/16
Does all this mean that Sam would qualify
for FIFA
posted on 29/9/16
Clough was shunned by the F.A because of his outspoken comments to the press and his out spoken criticism of other managers, Don Revie and his Dirty Leeds team being a prime example.
His reliance on a drink and obvious ill health in later was brought about by winning too many Bells Manager Of The Month awards. The award being the biggest bottle of Bells Whisky that you have ever seen. They used to be presented to him on the pitch by the way.
-----------------------------------------------------
I am in my early 40s so I admit I was not old enough to understand what was being reported at the time.
However neither were you unless you were a party to the conversations. The fact is there has been a concerted effort to whitewash history when it comes to Brian Clough in order to promote him to saint hood. It is not right. Clough was a great manager at club level and you don't know what the reasons were for the FA to reject him at International level because we were not present at the meeting when it was decided h wouldn't get the job. (And btw those illnesses could have just as well have been induced by his drinking not the other way round.) Even those who have made an effort to research him are not going to publish anything that weakens Clough extra ordinary public image.
My point however was something different. Many fans and this article have made two terrible assumptions. One is that the FA doesn't take risks. I am not one to defend the FA, but appointing Sven and Capello were not safe options. And the second assumption is the implication that flawed men are going to do a better job than those with morals or ethics. If you look at the managers who have won the world cup, you will find that most were understated and you wouldn't even remember their names! Its always about the players. (apart from Argones who inherited a Barca team at the top of their form and frankly he should have been fired for making racist comments)
posted on 29/9/16
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 29/9/16
The FA is a terrible organisation that does not reflect the players or the football in this country. Unfortunately like the BBC it is still run by fat old white men. Whats worse is that because they know they are out of touch they react to the media for the wrong reasons rather than reforming. Fat Sam should have NEVER been appointed.
posted on 29/9/16
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 29/9/16
Capello didn't know a word of English. Hardly safe tbh.
posted on 29/9/16
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 29/9/16
I think the FA are reactive which is far from 'safe'. How does a man whose is best quality in footballing terms is finishing 4th from bottom get the job? Just consider what history Fat Sam had. All this was very predictable.
posted on 29/9/16
What I find silly is when people say "Well we've gone foreign, and it hasn't worked".
Not only have we only gone for just 2 foreign managers out of all the foreign ones that are out there, but we'd snatch the hand off a manager who could get us to 3 QF right now, like Sven managed.
posted on 29/9/16