Redknapp would certainly nt be an upgrade on Woy, his real strength as a manager lies in the transfer window and his infamous wheeling and dealing. ask any Spurs fan, he's as tactically naive as they come

The time for Redknapp has been and gone.

I think at one stage when we had a group of top players he would have been a good appointment as players like him and I think he could have got us playing well, albeit in a short term way.

We need a younger progressive mind now though to build a new identity with the younger players.

righteous,

I agree. Not trying to excuse the bloke. Any time in his career he's taken a step-up he's looked out of his depth, I expect a failry comfortable home-win tonight as it happens in our 'biggest game' of the group.

Better managers than him have failed, well depending on your idea of failure that is!

Hodgson is an awesome manager but it's the hardest job in football because English media and population have this wild idea that we as a nation are good at football when we aren't.

We need a overhaul of the whole system. Liverpool, saints etc are doing a good job in bringing through technically capable English players but there aren't enough.

We need a manager that will come through and have a philosophy and then we mustn't sack him!! Roy has absolutely no direction and that's what frustrates me the most.

Pep Guardiola would be excellent. We wouldn't win anything but we might see some life to the national side.

IMO England are just not technically good enough to compete with the top teams. Ball retention is so important at the highest level and England do not keep it as well as others.

--------


I don't agree with this. Ball retention can be coached.

You only need to look at what Rodgers is doing at Liverpool, what Wenger has been doing for years at Arsenal, what Martinez is doing at Everton. All of these teams play good passing football and look at the England players in those teams, Henderson, Sterling, Sturridge, Wilshere, Oxlade, Walcott, Barkley, Stones. These players are going to be England players for years to come. They can all play football. They have technical ability.

The problem is that Roy Hodgson is a negative, fearful, safety first dinosaur of a coach. He won't get these youngsters playing possession, passing football. A good coach could though.

Hodgson is an awesome manager
.........................................................

comment by If anyone can, Emre Can... (U3979)

posted 2 minutes ago

Hodgson is an awesome manager


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

Are you on drugs?

The point about Paul Clement is an interesting one and got me thinking, do England really need a manager? Now, let me clarify. Do we need a manager in the traditional sense, ie. someone who has come out of day to day management in club football? International football is all a out bigger picture, given that players are only with the national team for about two weeks every two months. Do we need to pay a big name a huge wage to come and sit around watching his favourite teams play every weekend (that's what Hodgson does apparently, he hasn't even been to the Liberty Stadium) rather than actually working?

Surely, given this new committee that has been set up, they can work on an overall footballing philosophy, which can be overseen by a team of coaches picked specifically for their experience in coaching rather than management.

Lets be honest, most England decisions are made by the FA not the manager anyway (John Terry situation) So all that's really needed is a mouthpiece for the media. Since the England Captain is apparently such a big deal, why not make it a similar role to the Cricket Captain? And just do away with the traditional manager position altogether?

I meant awful not awesome!!!

Bloody hell that's a typo and a half.

FatJanMolby

The same problems under Hodgson were also experienced by Capello (one of the best CV’s in football) with a vastly superior pool of players to call on.

Not Hodgson’s biggest fan but it’s worth noting that only a few years ago he was voted the best coach in the country by his peers, who I would suggest are in a more informed and better position to evaluate his ability than anyone else.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

they can work on an overall footballing philosophy, which can be overseen by a team of coaches picked specifically for their experience in coaching rather than management.
=======================================================
I read recently that one of the reasons van Gaal fell out with the hierarchy at Bayern (Beckenbauer, Heynckes, etc) was that he refused to adhere to the 'national philosophy' in his style of play, and stuck to his own.

The revealing thing about this is that such a thing should exist....that German club managers would conform to a style of play so that their internationals will be familiar and comfortable with it when they are called up to the national team. (That way, the disadvantage that they only have a week or two to prepare is mitigated).

I don't know how influential this is, (or whether it's entirely true), but the notable advantage Germany had in the last WC was that they played as a team.

I think this kind of conformity is inconceivable in England....it is just not in the British mentality...can you imagine what Tonly Pulis would say if he was told to conform to a 'national philosophy'?

comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 46 seconds ago
FatJanMolby

The same problems under Hodgson were also experienced by Capello (one of the best CV’s in football) with a vastly superior pool of players to call on.

Not Hodgson’s biggest fan but it’s worth noting that only a few years ago he was voted the best coach in the country by his peers, who I would suggest are in a more informed and better position to evaluate his ability than anyone else.

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

Did Capello really have a better pool of players? Gerrard, Terry, Lampard, Rooney and Cole aside, the rest of the team were pretty average. Crouch, Heskey, Upson, Green, James, Lennon, Warnock.

This is the squad we took to the 2010 World Cup

1. David James
2. Glen Johnson
3. Ashley Cole
4. Steven Gerrard
5. Rio Ferdinand
6. John Terry
7. Aaron Lennon
8. Frank Lampard
9. Peter Crouch
10. Wayne Rooney
11. Joe Cole
12. Robert Green
13. Stephen Warnock
14. Gareth Barry
15. Matthew Upson
16. James Milner
17. Shaun Wright-Phillips
18. Jamie Carragher
19. Jermain Defoe
20. Ledley King
21. Emile Heskey
22. Michael Carrick
23. Joe Hart

And to be honest, I thought Capello did ok. We qualified easily for the WC and EC, he got to the knock out stages of the World Cup, despite there being some really poor performances. Capello's problem was the man management side of things. He couldn't speak English, the captaincy issue was a mess.

As for Hodgson being named manager of the year by his peers, I wouldn't look into that too much. He did well to take Fulham to the UEFA Cup final but there is an element of giving it to the plucky English manager about it. Carlo Ancelotti should have won it really. The same year Harry Redknapp was named Manager of the Year by the PL sponsors, and Steve McLaren was given a special merit award for winning the league with FC Twente. All managers won awards; are they really that good?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I read recently that one of the reasons van Gaal fell out with the hierarchy at Bayern (Beckenbauer, Heynckes, etc) was that he refused to adhere to the 'national philosophy' in his style of play, and stuck to his own.

The revealing thing about this is that such a thing should exist....that German club managers would conform to a style of play so that their internationals will be familiar and comfortable with it when they are called up to the national team. (That way, the disadvantage that they only have a week or two to prepare is mitigated).

I don't know how influential this is, (or whether it's entirely true), but the notable advantage Germany had in the last WC was that they played as a team.

I think this kind of conformity is inconceivable in England....it is just not in the British mentality...can you imagine what Tonly Pulis would say if he was told to conform to a 'national philosophy'?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I see your point. It would be unrealistic to expect all clubs to adhere to a national philosophy.

That being said, virtually every grassroots team plays 4-4-2. We already have a national philosophy, it's just outdated and ineffective.

If we were to have this new FA comittee come out and say "This is how we want the England team to play"and then offer training courses for grassroots coaches in that philospohpy, and promote it from the time kids are 6 or 7, by the time that generation is playing first team football, they will know how to play it.

I think, realistically, this isn't a short term fix. Chaging the manager hasn't worked in the past, and won't work now.

the whole national setup needs some fundamental changes. The Germans did it, and won a World Cup inside of 15 years.

That's what this FA comission thing has been set up to do, but so far there seems very little movement.

The way I look at it, the national side is a shambles at the moment. Is doing something drastically different (a team of selectors and a team of coaches) really going to make it any worse? If we lose tonight, I think it's fair to say we've hit rock bottom, and it's Hail Mary time at this point.

the whole national setup needs some fundamental changes. The Germans did it, and won a World Cup inside of 15 years.
===========================================================
Yes, they did. But they are able to get a kind of conformity from the clubs which I think is inconceivable in Britain.

I agree that is more fundamental problem than just who the manager is, or the number of foreign players, but I think we'd have to find our own way of doing it, because most of the most talented kids will be coached at clubs, who won't conform to a common philosophy).

I take your point about some kind of general conformity in the way kids are coachhed, though....though. But before we can address that, we have to address the fact that we have far fewer youth coaches than most of the other European countries in the first place.

==========================================================
That's what this FA comission thing has been set up to do, but so far there seems very little movement.
==========================================================
I don't have a lot of faith in that.
How much coaching experience do Danny Mills and Rio Ferdinand have between them? I don't understand the basis on which they've been elected to it.

I think the "golden generation" actually did okay but went out on penalties at key stages. Those quarters become sem-finals and the semi finals finals. I do think we were unlucky on this point.

With regards to Roy it beggars belief he is still setting up with a 4-4-2 (especially as he flirted with a 4-2-3-1 in the WC - I thought the actual performances were okay). It's maddening.

The one thing this England side has that many other foriegn sides do not is genuine pace front to back. Now I don't want to get all Ricardo Lux on this but I do feel the team could be managed better. Do we make enough of the pace and power in the side available? Are we creating swift counter attacks? Do we move the ball quickly enough?

With regards to philosophy I don't think Chile, Switzerland and Costa Rica will have a National code to adhere to at club level but they do play as a team or have when I have seen them.

We looked instantly better when we switched to a diamond against Norway and that was with bringing Fabien Delph on.

They are mangement issues for me.

Essentially though none of this England team team tonight can pass the ball long and short and that is not Roys fault.

talksrubbish you old chancer. you owe me a forfeit still..

I don't have a lot of faith in that.
How much coaching experience do Danny Mills and Rio Ferdinand have between them? I don't understand the basis on which they've been elected to it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I completely agree with that. The whole thing seems to be based on big names and, more recently, ticking minority boxes.

It's made up of people who haven't been relevant at the top level for a long time. Glen Hoddle who has been out of the game for almost a decade. Howard Wilkinson who has proven time and again he's a dinosaur akin to Hodgson and nowhere near progressive enough. Danny Mills who was never up to much as a player, and has dropped off the footballing radar previous to this commission. Some player from Chesterfield, Dario Gradi from Crewe, who's, despite their reputation for youth development, last Academy graduate to make the England team was Danny Murphy.

It's hardly a stellar group. The ask is of course, made more difficult given the cushy jobs at Sky and BT available to retiring pros meaning that the top talent doesn't necessarily go into management, meaning a smaller pool of potential candidates.

But I think it shows how just changing the manager is the tip of the iceberg. We need a better level of footballing education in this country overall. From Grassroots coaches obtaining UEFA licences through to ageing pros being encouraged to undertake their badges while still in the game. We need to move away from this idea of having either "football people" or "business people" at the top of the FA, and start grooming candidates earlier in their playing careers and encouraging extra curricular learning in business to allow footballers to step into the business side of the FA after their careers.

As much as I don't like Roy, I don't really see the point of firing him and paying him a big chunk of money, without having any real plan in place beyond appointing the current flavour of the month English manager.

ticking minority boxes
----------------------------

Well Danny Mills is bald I guess.

I may be mistaken but I think there is a law here that does not exist in Spain which limits the amount of time an U16 can train per day (1.5 hours I think). The weather does not help here either.

The FA are making changes such as enforcing smaller pitches (which means the bigger kids don't have an advantage and smaller spaces to ensure more technical play).

I do think England is too hung up on football though as if there was a decathlon of sports from motor racingto to athletics to boxing to Rugby and so on England would pretty easily beat the rest of the world. We're actually very good at sport all things considered.

just an idea, but how about if the coaches at the academies took all the English kids to the England coaching centre, for two days every week.
all the kids can get some time to play football with the other clubs kids, not just in their own age group, but can include the groups above and below as well.

not saying it'll work, but given time, once a youngster is breaking into the full England squad, at least there'll be a good chance he's already regularly played with a large number of the squad, and so can slot in a lot easier. he'll know what/where they're expecting and they'll know what/where he's likely to do anything/make a run etc.
far too often the national team play like a group of strangers, and youngsters being bought in to cover injuries are just increasing that problem.

I know if not explained it very well, but i'm sure you'll get the idea.

Now now mito you know I hang on your every word!

you've been hanging a while then!