At least before, people would give england managers a couple of games before making their mind up too quickly, it looks from this thread that people aren't even giving Hodgson that!

I'm surprised that Richards, Carrick and Sturridge aren't in the team, but I can guess from the squad ow Hodgson will line them up. He obviously wants people to stay out on the wing and get crosses in, which is why Johnson and Sturridge probably missed out. I imagine it will be Carroll and Wellbeck up front to begin with , then Rooney for either of them if we get through the group stages.

I can completely understand why, England for me have always looked more dangerous when crossing a lot of balls into the box. Whether it will work, we will have to wait and see. The worst thing to do though was to try and take marginally better players and try and play like Spain. We are not them, and will definitely fail if we try to be.

At least give him a couple of games before casting full judgement, he deserves at least that.

Rumours are that Richards wouldn't have got on with Terry due to the Anton Ferdinand thing and Carrick refused to be on standby. Hope there's some truth in that but I suspect we're clutching at straws.

comment by carrickature (U12844)
posted 1 minute ago
Sweet Pea. I have already said this today and I hold my hands up. I totally got it wrong about Roy. Anything would be better than what we were subjected today and the Liverpool fans and others who highlighted this were right. I hold my hands up and apologise.
______

Fair enough mate. Wish the FA would do the same!

Well this is a good start to Hodgson's reign if it's true.

comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 1 minute ago
At least before, people would give england managers a couple of games before making their mind up too quickly, it looks from this thread that people aren't even giving Hodgson that!
______________

People dont need a couple of games to make their mind up about Hodgson's style. We've seen it for 30 years. Why would two games change anything?

I could understand your point if everyone was saying he was great, then without him doing anything wrong, or even making a few mistakes, people quickly changed their mind and criticised, but most people know his style very well and it's not what we want to see being employed at all levels in English football.

This squad is consistent with everything he's ever done.

But getting it wide and crossing it into a big man in the box, or, as it should be put, is a dated tactic. It won't work at interntational level as we will not have enough posession of the ball, and there won't be enough men in the box to aim for.

United have struggled this season when we've had very little posession but get the ball wide and cross the ball as there is no support from midfield, and this is from a team with far superior players than England.

Gerrard, Lampard, Barry, Parker, Milner and Carroll are not fast enough to get up the field and get in the box. We will continually cross it to nobody, and will have to endure wave after wave of attacks.

*or, as it should be put, the English style

forgot to put that in there.

Well, his style worked pretty well for Switzerland at international level, what do people actually want? There is no point trying to play a style of football if you don't have the players to do it.

I'm not sure why everyone wants to play just the one way nowadays. If you have a big strong centre forward and good crossers of the ball, then use them. When needed, West Brom have played a passing game as well this year.

Darren,

We would struggle just as much, if not more, if we try and pass it through some teams.

I'm not saying I think it is a good squad, but it was never going to be. I'm going to reserve judgment until at least a couple of games have been played though.

Melton Blue, your theory would work if any of the wide players could actually cross. Young is hit and miss, Walcott can't, Downing hasn't all season so why start now and Milner is a donkey. Oxlade offers some hope but I doubt he'll be given a chance.

As for the full backs, Johnson's crossing is poor as is Cole's, So we can't really hold out much hope for the wide game. I think it's more likely to be players behind the ball and hit on the break with pace.

True, but Downing hasn't had much chance due to the uselessness of Dalgleish, Gerrard the same. I doubt we will play the same game once Rooney is available.

We would struggle just as much, if not more, if we try and pass it through some teams.

----------------------------------------------------------------

We would struggle with this squad because no one can do it. But it only takes one player in the midfield who can receive, pass and retain a ball and the whole philosphy and possession of the team changes drastically. Unfortunately Roy decided to ignore having that option. Even as a plan b it should have been catered for.

If we have players comfortable on the ball we won't struggle as much. We aren't going to try and play like Spain of course, but we can sit deep and hit teams on the counter using pace.

Walcott Rooney Young
Welbeck

Could cause teams a problem on the counter, but we would need a player like Carrick whose good at passing and able to release them quickly.

We'll end up having:
Parker Barry
Young Gerrard Downing
Carroll

and we'll basically end up throwing aimless crosses into the box. Basically we'll be playing like Liverpool. The 8th best team in the premier league.

comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well, his style worked pretty well for Switzerland at international level, what do people actually want? There is no point trying to play a style of football if you don't have the players to do it.
______________

Firstly we should be a little better than Switzerland. Secondly if you want to use just his international record as an example then how about being sacked from UAE, the final straw being 5th in the Gulf Cup.

Even with Finland his so called achievement was glorious failure to qualify.

With Switzerland he inherited a good team from a coach who was the only guy to have a winning record with the national team, and yes they qualifiedfor the WC where they then lost to Columbia, drew with USA and beat Romania, before then losing to 3-0 to Spain. OK they're just Switzerland but this is the amazing tournament record people on about and that was the best Swiss team for 30 years.

Have you looked at the rest of his club record? Aside from some great results in Scandinavia, particularly in the 70s, he consistently failed when he went to top leagues. He failed at Inter and got pelted with coins and lighters by the fans, so off back to Scandinavia, he tried England with Bristol City and got sacked after 4 months, then off back to Scandinavia. He tried Udinese back in Italy and got sacked again after 4 months, and then guess where he went.

He refused to resign at Blackburn so Walker sacked him when they were doomed. He failed at Liverpool without much chance. He had one good cup run with Fulham, and led West Brom to 10th. Hardly stunning. He's a safety first, average Prem manager, so dont expect anything special.

Whatever happens we're stuck with him for at least two years because the FA won't want to lose face.

We'll end up having:
Parker Barry
Young Gerrard Downing
Carroll

Oh god, that is painful just looking at it

To be honest mate, that reads more like a Wikipedia entry than a critique of his tactical prowess! I think you are really underestimating what he did with Switzerland and also with Fulham and West Brom, particularly with the resources at his disposal. You coul argue he hasn't done great with big teams, but as you say, Liverpool, he just wasn't given a chance and again, Dalgleish has a lot to answer for for that.

I am not saying I think he is great (although I am still glad it is him and not Redknapp), I just think people should at least give him a chance.

I wasnt trying to critique his 'tactical prowess' as you call it Melton Blue, I'd already previously given a view of that previously. I was simply responding to you building him up off that back of one International job from his entire CV, which wasn't exactly amazing anyway, and ignoring the other 30 years.

ALL his teams play safety first conservative football where nicking a goal at the business end is secondary, which is why he tends to get his best results with relatively weak teams pluckily holding out or nicking it against the big boys.

The problem is England should be one of the big boys of International football and when he's needed to be the dominant attacking side e.g. with Inter or Liverpool he doesnt have the answers. There's no creativity, there is no flair, their is no evidence of a tactical ability to be the attacking team breaking down the plucky defensive set up he normally manages.

You say at least give him a chance, but all myself and many others are doing is making it clear that we aren't in favour of his appointment, and certainly not this squad. Should we just keep quiet and then get accused of only speaking in hindsight?

Even those who are half heartedly trying to defend or support him dont really think he's a good choice, certainly not their ideal choice. You like many of the pro camp know he's not great (as you said yourself) but you are just glad he isnt another person. What a ringing endorsement that is.

I'm not too worried about the Euros, because it's not as if we were going to win without Hodgson, so ultimately he can only do worse than failing at the knock out stages anyway, and I dont expect us to do well with Hodgson in charge full stop going forward, but my main concern is the bigger picture i.e. his technical influence on English football through the age groups in his Burton role. That could end up a generational disaster, and this is why unlike you I'm not happy to sit back and simply watch it happen in silence. I want to at least express my disapproval.

Stupid article.

You play your best team. How can you progress when better players haven't appeared?

Likes of Terry, Cole and Lampard have been key for getting their side to a Champions League final. Gerrard and Rooney are also obviously two of your best players.

@Renegade - Your best player point might hold more water if Hodgson had taken Rio as well after his consistently good performances holding an inexperienced back 5 together to joint top of the Premier League on points. Then not picking him because he's only played a few England games in the last 1-2 years, whilst taking Gerrard and making him Capt when he's missed most of the season through injury, only played 34mins of International football for 19mths, and been in relatively poor form for his club when he has strung any games together.

Also hasnt Sturridge 'appeared' given he's been regularly playing in that Chelsea team you mention, scoring goals, playing in multiple positions/formations? He's not even going when we are a striker down off the bat.

Shouldn't Carrick be in our best team if Parker is?

Has Richards 'appeared' for title winning City this season? Plays RB and CB.

Is Downing clearly the best player given he has zero assists and zero goals all season in the Prem compared to say Johnson of City, who would be fresh and more exciting, talented option?

etc etc etc

Carrick should be there no doubt. Richards as well. There will always be one or two that are left out.

The point on Rio is a more difficult one, its not been his best season in my opinion. Although Roy has said the choice was football reasons, I would expect harmont came into consideration. If he was picked, eveyone would be asking what the dressing room is going to be like with Rio and Terry. Its a lose lose situation.

Gerrard in my opinion is still one of your best players and deserves the captaincy. I don't agree his form has been poor. Wasn't that long ago he put in one of his best ever performances in a Liverpool shirt against Everton.

Would Sturridge start for England? I don't think he's a guaranteed first pick for Chelsea. Wouldn't say he's established himself as someone who obviously deserves a place in the England squad. He always seems to selfish to me. Could also be argued not being able to hold a regular position is a bad thing. Chelsea's success this season has been in the Champions League where Sturridge has featured far less. Wellbeck is a player who has came into the fold ahead of Sturridge. So there are players that have came in.

A.Young is most likely considered as a starter now. I think Wilshere would be in the team if not for injury. Carroll, Jones and Chamberlain are in the squad. Injuries also affected likes of Smalling, Rodwell and Cleverley.

Yes, but you haven't. Inter, for example, took him back as caretaker, it was no where near as acrimonious as you make out. After I posted earlier, I looked at the Wikipedia entry for Hodgson and it is extremely similar to what you posted. Remember, most of the stuff on there is written by people that are very set in their opinion an from very dubious sources. I watched Hodgons Switzerland side and they were definitely not always safety first.

I can't see how you think all his teams play safety first - I have only seen his sides do that when they are definite underdogs (which, I agree, is a lot of the time due to the stature of the clubs), but he did not do that as Switzerland manager and if you look at this season, for example, West Brom were 5th in terms of goals scored away from home, hardly sitting back.

Regarding Rio, hasn't Ferguson said only a couple of days ago that he wouldn't be able to cope with games every four days? If his own manager openly says that, how can Hodgson then take him?

In all likelihood, you will be right. All I am saying is that the man is better tactically than some people on here are giving him credit for. Liverpool were far too hasty to judge him and replaced him with the fans choice, maybe if they had been a bit more patient, they wouldn't have spent so much money for so little return in the league this season.

Be careful for what you wish for ...... people wanted an English manager....now you have one. Result is the same auld donkey's. Although I can't blame Hoddy totally....he doesn't really have much to pick from. But how do you go about changing the way we play with the usual players on-hand. We shall see no doubt.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4321421/Michael-Carrick-in-Three-Lions-retirement.html

I think carrick was right to, afterall he never got to play last time and he has more experience then gerrard in the big vchampions league games.

Melton Blue - I'm not sure why you are being so deliberately argumentative, especially when you say yourself Hodgson is not great. Why can't people simply not be happy about Hodgson's appointment? You say give him a chance in reply that unhappiness, but that's totally irrelevant from whether people are pleased with the appt or even the squad selection.

If Terry Connor became City boss I assume you would be on here telling City fans to give him a chance and not express a negative word about that appt until he's had a few games.

re 'yes, but you haven't' - I'm sorry if you are referring to not adding every single Hodgson job since the mid 70s into my reply, but it was already long enough, and not only would that have been dull and pointless given the ones I covered, it's ridiculous to expect anyone to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of Roy Hodgsons every stop anyway. The point was to add a bit more meat onto the bone instead of simply picking out one role from 30 odd years which is what you did.

The Inter comment about the fans is actually factually accurate, so you can interpret his time there any way you want, it doesn't change that fact, and nor does a brief subsequent caretaker stint a couple of years later. The fans feeling was a lot like the Liverpool fans, and even more vociferous at times.

Re your comment about Wiki that's a tad hypocritical considering you looked there yourself or are you trying to unbelievably claim you just had a hunch some of my stats were from wiki. Course you did. Anyway it's no crime using the resource even if it's not always 100% reliable, it depends what you need. I checked there before writing my reply to double check factual things like the results of the 94 WC because my memory of exact Swiss scores from their footballing history is maybe not as hot as yours. No shame in that and I've every confidence it's accurate, but feel free to cross reference it on the official FIFA site.

I've been a football fan for 40 years and remember Hodgson managing Inter and some of the roles since including the international ones you refer to and his teams were all set up similarly. He's a safety first conservative 4-4-2 man, and always has been from my memory including with Switzerland. It doesnt matter if he almost always had weak teams, it's still true. He was even like it at Liverpool, not a weak team. The football was so dour and defensive. You may have found some of his teams attacking and exciting but I dont agree with that interpretation.

I dont recall things like his Scandi club ventures in the 70s/early 80s but who would, he was a nobody then to most people, it's a back water, and pretty irrelevant to England in 2012 and that's the point.