So if what Capello has achieved doesn't come into it. Why don't we have Dario Gradi or Barry Fry instead of Redknapp?
I'm sorry SLM, there's so much more to football than winning. It unites nations, brings enemies together, provides entertainment, joy and creates an environment where cares and worries can be put aside.
Anyone who thinks football is all about winning is a glory hunter and doesn't get it and never will
Our manager, Sir Alex Ferguson. Do you think he cares about anything other than winning?
Its quite clear he does because if you watch utd play, we aren't set up to just win games. We entertain and play good football. If he only cared about winning, we would play like Mourinhos Chelsea.
And Capello's winning teams haven't been entertaining?
Did you watch his Milan and Real Madrid teams?
That isn't the statement you made though. You said football is all about winning and I said it isn't.
That's the point we are debating.
Capello is a great manager but has done a poor job with England. Since football is all about winning, we really should have sacked him after the world cup as we didn't win it.
Ok, let me re phrase my thoughts a touch.
Managers and teams are judged by what they've won and to a lesser extent, who they've managed. With all Capello has won, and who he has managed. What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
--------------------------------------------------------
I don't think anyone is certain that Harry would step in and win us a trophy.... this is international football where a trophy is up for grab once every 2 years. It is an unbelievably hard task.
What the general consensus is though... We have had two very successful club managers over the last decade (Sven's record was much better than Harry's too). It has been a fairly huge let down, with the exception of the qualifying campaigns against weaker opponents.
Having a great club manager didn't work, full stop. Perhaps having a really good manager, who also "gets" the England setup, players, media BS etc would be better than a great manager that can't handle the job.
If I had the choice... i'd take Mourinho... He is ideal for England... a great success but also knows how to deal with high pressure, big names and media exposure.
Redknapp has proved successful enough though to be very highly considered, and, more importantly, understand that England job is far more than just coaching football.
comment by SouthLondonManc (U12028)
posted 5 hours, 18 minutes ago
Ok, let me re phrase my thoughts a touch.
Managers and teams are judged by what they've won and to a lesser extent, who they've managed. With all Capello has won, and who he has managed. What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
------------------------
Great point, I agree with you. Capello wasn't cut out for this job. Don't think Harry will do better but I'm sure he won't be as bad.
Sign in if you want to comment
Redknapp vs Capello
Page 2 of 2
posted on 8/2/12
So if what Capello has achieved doesn't come into it. Why don't we have Dario Gradi or Barry Fry instead of Redknapp?
posted on 8/2/12
I'm sorry SLM, there's so much more to football than winning. It unites nations, brings enemies together, provides entertainment, joy and creates an environment where cares and worries can be put aside.
Anyone who thinks football is all about winning is a glory hunter and doesn't get it and never will
posted on 8/2/12
Our manager, Sir Alex Ferguson. Do you think he cares about anything other than winning?
posted on 9/2/12
Its quite clear he does because if you watch utd play, we aren't set up to just win games. We entertain and play good football. If he only cared about winning, we would play like Mourinhos Chelsea.
posted on 9/2/12
And Capello's winning teams haven't been entertaining?
Did you watch his Milan and Real Madrid teams?
posted on 9/2/12
That isn't the statement you made though. You said football is all about winning and I said it isn't.
That's the point we are debating.
Capello is a great manager but has done a poor job with England. Since football is all about winning, we really should have sacked him after the world cup as we didn't win it.
posted on 9/2/12
Ok, let me re phrase my thoughts a touch.
Managers and teams are judged by what they've won and to a lesser extent, who they've managed. With all Capello has won, and who he has managed. What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
posted on 9/2/12
What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
--------------------------------------------------------
I don't think anyone is certain that Harry would step in and win us a trophy.... this is international football where a trophy is up for grab once every 2 years. It is an unbelievably hard task.
What the general consensus is though... We have had two very successful club managers over the last decade (Sven's record was much better than Harry's too). It has been a fairly huge let down, with the exception of the qualifying campaigns against weaker opponents.
Having a great club manager didn't work, full stop. Perhaps having a really good manager, who also "gets" the England setup, players, media BS etc would be better than a great manager that can't handle the job.
If I had the choice... i'd take Mourinho... He is ideal for England... a great success but also knows how to deal with high pressure, big names and media exposure.
Redknapp has proved successful enough though to be very highly considered, and, more importantly, understand that England job is far more than just coaching football.
posted on 9/2/12
comment by SouthLondonManc (U12028)
posted 5 hours, 18 minutes ago
Ok, let me re phrase my thoughts a touch.
Managers and teams are judged by what they've won and to a lesser extent, who they've managed. With all Capello has won, and who he has managed. What makes us think Harry would do a better job?
------------------------
Great point, I agree with you. Capello wasn't cut out for this job. Don't think Harry will do better but I'm sure he won't be as bad.
Page 2 of 2