If Roy gets out of the group he should have been given more time
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I think it is difficult to compare any manager due to the variable factors surrounding all different jobs/clubs....
Im sorry...i couldnt stay with you
If I had wings would I be able to fly?
"with pretty much the same squad".....except for spending £35m on Carroll and £23m on Suarez.
WBA are a few points behind LFC and have a tiny tiny budget. Roy took Fulham to 7th (LFC fans can only dream about ending 7th) and a Europa League Final.
His methods will always take time to instill...that is why I hold limited hope for these Euros. Given backing and support Roy could have achieved a lot a Liverpool.
LFC are only "exciting" to watch due to some of the individuals they now have in their team....Bellamy, Suarez, Downing, Enrique....such players were not available to Roy.. not sure how he was suppposed to entertain with what he had available to him.
Liverpool would have had a great season had we won every game
I stopped reading at "wins".
England will not win the Euro's and Hodgson should never have been given the Liverpool job!
His experience at managing international teams in major competitions may help.
But let's face it, his teams are dour and defensive and I believe that the real reason he was appointed was because his contract with WBA expires in the summer.
The FA wanted a yes man and he fitted the bill. He also saved them millions in compensation.
When Roy took over, the side was fully fit and completely built around 4-2-3-1 and a more continental style of football.
He shoved them in two rigid banks of 4 and told them to defend, hoof and counter. And it failed miserably for obvious reasons. The players didn't know and hated old school English kick, hoof and rush football.
The current (dire) group of England players are perfectly suited to old school English kick, hoof and rush football.
I actually think Roy's a good choice when you look at the current England side. They were made for each other.
redconn you optimistic then?
I reckon quarters.
This lot grew up playing Royball.
Redconn's point is something which had crossed my mind.
However, a bad Euro's may mean that Roy' s tenure may quickly follow the normal route and the media will be on his case and the Ing-ger-lund fans baying for blood.
Apparently the lower end tabloids are already ripping the pash out of him after one whole day in the job.
we've got a tough group mind
the margin for error is tiny
I think if he achives quarter finals, it will be seen as a success. Also there is low expections which may suit Roy style
Again the whole footballing world is laughing at England & FA.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
If England win Euro 2012
Page 1 of 1
posted on 2/5/12
If Roy gets out of the group he should have been given more time
posted on 2/5/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/5/12
I think it is difficult to compare any manager due to the variable factors surrounding all different jobs/clubs....
posted on 2/5/12
Im sorry...i couldnt stay with you
posted on 2/5/12
If I had wings would I be able to fly?
posted on 2/5/12
"with pretty much the same squad".....except for spending £35m on Carroll and £23m on Suarez.
WBA are a few points behind LFC and have a tiny tiny budget. Roy took Fulham to 7th (LFC fans can only dream about ending 7th) and a Europa League Final.
His methods will always take time to instill...that is why I hold limited hope for these Euros. Given backing and support Roy could have achieved a lot a Liverpool.
LFC are only "exciting" to watch due to some of the individuals they now have in their team....Bellamy, Suarez, Downing, Enrique....such players were not available to Roy.. not sure how he was suppposed to entertain with what he had available to him.
posted on 2/5/12
Liverpool would have had a great season had we won every game
posted on 2/5/12
I stopped reading at "wins".
posted on 2/5/12
England will not win the Euro's and Hodgson should never have been given the Liverpool job!
posted on 2/5/12
His experience at managing international teams in major competitions may help.
But let's face it, his teams are dour and defensive and I believe that the real reason he was appointed was because his contract with WBA expires in the summer.
The FA wanted a yes man and he fitted the bill. He also saved them millions in compensation.
posted on 2/5/12
When Roy took over, the side was fully fit and completely built around 4-2-3-1 and a more continental style of football.
He shoved them in two rigid banks of 4 and told them to defend, hoof and counter. And it failed miserably for obvious reasons. The players didn't know and hated old school English kick, hoof and rush football.
The current (dire) group of England players are perfectly suited to old school English kick, hoof and rush football.
I actually think Roy's a good choice when you look at the current England side. They were made for each other.
posted on 2/5/12
redconn you optimistic then?
posted on 2/5/12
I reckon quarters.
This lot grew up playing Royball.
posted on 2/5/12
Redconn's point is something which had crossed my mind.
However, a bad Euro's may mean that Roy' s tenure may quickly follow the normal route and the media will be on his case and the Ing-ger-lund fans baying for blood.
Apparently the lower end tabloids are already ripping the pash out of him after one whole day in the job.
posted on 2/5/12
we've got a tough group mind
the margin for error is tiny
posted on 2/5/12
I think if he achives quarter finals, it will be seen as a success. Also there is low expections which may suit Roy style
posted on 2/5/12
Again the whole footballing world is laughing at England & FA.
Page 1 of 1