With no obvious British candidates currently then we really have to stick with Roy for the foreseeable future. I can't see Alladyce, Pardew or Pulis in the role as they haven't really achieved much other than getting their teams to finish above mid-table at some point. Brendan Rogers, could be a future contender, if he does make further progress in getting Liverpool back to being a top 4 club, but it does point to a foreign manager being just as likely.
Like most fans I take far more interest in club football than international football and see the international breaks as a distraction.
All I would say tho is that after the last WC the majority of countries changed their manager - even ones who did relatively well - sorry I do not have the stats on this but I do know it is true. Yet again England had a shocking showing and yet despite this the idea of changing manager did not seem to be even contemplated. This implies that the FA bosses were happy with the teams and managers performance - perhaps we should be, perhaps all these other countries are wrong and patience and not changing every 5 minutes is the best policy.
I'll leave it to others to decide who is right - England or the other countries - but I know what I think and it isn't England
Btw all this there is no alternative to Roy stuff - nonsense - altho obviously we need to be prepared to have a foreign coach which tbh enlightened countries should be. Also obviously the tabloids are an issue - some would say that we get the manager we deserve given what some of the papers print and I'd agree.
The way the game in England has developed with the mega money PL greatly disadvantages home grown players and therefore the international team as does the lack of a mid season break (never used to think that but I have been converted to that pov comparing the second half of the season performances of players in leagues with a break to ours). The current discussion about restricting non EU players has some merit but you can't help thinking it should have been done ages ago and trying to impose it now will be very problematic.
The way the game in England has developed with the mega money PL greatly disadvantages home grown players and therefore the international team as does the lack of a mid season break (never used to think that but I have been converted to that pov comparing the second half of the season performances of players in leagues with a break to ours). The current discussion about restricting non EU players has some merit but you can't help thinking it should have been done ages ago and trying to impose it now will be very problematic.
I am unsure as to how the PL and the other leagues greatly disadvantage homegrown players?
On the contrary, with the rules the FA has put in place to ensure that teams have a minimum number of homegrown players, surely it advantages them?
So let me get your argument correct, you believe that there are too many foreign players in the PL.
However, those that play in the PL like Aguero, Ozil, Costa, Toure, Courtois, Hazad, Oscar to name but a tiny fraction, are also lacking a mid-season break.
Would goalkeepers really benefit from a mid-season break?
Physically? No. Mentally? Yeah probably.
Who doesn't feel a bit better and refreshed after a week off work to unwind? Can't see why it'd be any different for a footballer under immense pressure.
Doublethink. For all the moaning over the last few years about how England have "never been good enough" or "never will be good enough", it seems odd that it's all Roy Hodgson's fault in this particular thread. How much better could a more talented manager do?
I think Hodgson's a good manager, if not a great one. He did a good job to get a team in disarray after Capello's resignation to top a tough group at the Euro's (not that there really is such thing as an easy group at the Euro's), he probably played an unnecessarily defensive game against Italy in the quarter-finals, but it almost worked out.
He qualified for the World Cup with relative ease despite being having a few tricky ties (although the media tried to make out we were on the brink of failure all along), and then it all fell apart in a dire World Cup. I said all along that he probably deserved to stay a bit longer all things considered, and these Euro qualifiers couldn't have gone any better, really.
I'd say Hodgson has done a decent job albeit with a disastrous World Cup, just like Capello did a great job albeit with a disastrous World Cup, but probably on twice the wages.
Anyway, it seems that respected former internationals being groomed after a period of time to take charge of the national team is not a new thing elsewhere, and I'm almost certain that's what the FA are doing with Gary Neville.
I agree with the above post. Any decent manager would not pick a dros Townsend!
In no way has hodgson done a decent job. Any dummy could have got us to the finals, and the euros. The minute we play decent teams we are useless tactically.
We had the worst World Cup ever for England, and still we carry on with this idiot.
I heard pundits talking about Roy winning the European cup! Utter garbage.
I agree with the above post. Any decent manager would not pick a dros Townsend!
In no way has hodgson done a decent job. Any dummy could have got us to the finals, and the euros. The minute we play decent teams we are useless tactically.
We had the worst World Cup ever for England, and still we carry on with this idiot.
I heard pundits talking about Roy winning the European cup! Utter garbage.
exactly,we are lucky we are in such a weak euro group.
Welbeck's international goals suggest it is beneficial.
Who is to say Austin wouldn't have scored the same/more? Welbeck is surrounded by world-class players. Austin has to accept delivery from seriously medicore players yet has scored four times more goals.
Also Austin has been a prolific goalscorer since his Swindon days. He's never been a failure at any club. Welbeck had a whole season at United where he scored 1 goal. At Arsenal he's also been a flop. Why do we reward such underachievement?
Oh great, a manager who thinks picking Welbeck over Austin is actually beneficial to the England team.
Yep, that's 4 goals in a top 4 side versus 15 goals in a side seriously struggling.
Really, really, really annoys me.
I am no apologist for Danny Welbeck but it has to be said if you watch his England performances he has to be in the team - both for his goal scoring and his other contributions.
In fact tbh I'd even say that his AFC displays this season have merited reward as on the whole for me he has had a good season - being much more likely to be picked as opposed to his MUFC days has helped I think,
I am no apologist for Danny Welbeck but it has to be said if you watch his England performances he has to be in the team - both for his goal scoring and his other contributions.
In fact tbh I'd even say that his AFC displays this season have merited reward as on the whole for me he has had a good season - being much more likely to be picked as opposed to his MUFC days has helped I think,
He's not exactly nailed on to start for Arsenal though week after week is he?
Plenty of appearances from the bench,much like his Utd days.
He's not exactly nailed on to start for Arsenal though week after week is he?
Plenty of appearances from the bench,much like his Utd days.
Prior to posting I had not looked it up and him being more likely to play for AFC this season than MUFC last was just my impression. I have since googled it and after doing so I still think that is the case but what did surprise me I must admit is the number of times he played for MUFC in the past 2 seasons - over 20 both times. He has not been sub very much for AFC this season and I honestly think AFC seem to value him more than MUFC did with RVP, Falcao and Rooney as competition for a place. Even LVG said he was more likely to play at AFC than MUFC when discussing his sale.
Comments
All I would say tho is that after the last WC the majority of countries changed their manager - even ones who did relatively well - sorry I do not have the stats on this but I do know it is true. Yet again England had a shocking showing and yet despite this the idea of changing manager did not seem to be even contemplated. This implies that the FA bosses were happy with the teams and managers performance - perhaps we should be, perhaps all these other countries are wrong and patience and not changing every 5 minutes is the best policy.
I'll leave it to others to decide who is right - England or the other countries - but I know what I think and it isn't England
Btw all this there is no alternative to Roy stuff - nonsense - altho obviously we need to be prepared to have a foreign coach which tbh enlightened countries should be. Also obviously the tabloids are an issue - some would say that we get the manager we deserve given what some of the papers print and I'd agree.
The way the game in England has developed with the mega money PL greatly disadvantages home grown players and therefore the international team as does the lack of a mid season break (never used to think that but I have been converted to that pov comparing the second half of the season performances of players in leagues with a break to ours). The current discussion about restricting non EU players has some merit but you can't help thinking it should have been done ages ago and trying to impose it now will be very problematic.
I am unsure as to how the PL and the other leagues greatly disadvantage homegrown players?
On the contrary, with the rules the FA has put in place to ensure that teams have a minimum number of homegrown players, surely it advantages them?
So let me get your argument correct, you believe that there are too many foreign players in the PL.
However, those that play in the PL like Aguero, Ozil, Costa, Toure, Courtois, Hazad, Oscar to name but a tiny fraction, are also lacking a mid-season break.
It affects everyone equally.
Physically? No. Mentally? Yeah probably.
Who doesn't feel a bit better and refreshed after a week off work to unwind? Can't see why it'd be any different for a footballer under immense pressure.
I'd wait for the Euros TBH but then the potential list of candidates isn't inspiring.
I think Hodgson's a good manager, if not a great one. He did a good job to get a team in disarray after Capello's resignation to top a tough group at the Euro's (not that there really is such thing as an easy group at the Euro's), he probably played an unnecessarily defensive game against Italy in the quarter-finals, but it almost worked out.
He qualified for the World Cup with relative ease despite being having a few tricky ties (although the media tried to make out we were on the brink of failure all along), and then it all fell apart in a dire World Cup. I said all along that he probably deserved to stay a bit longer all things considered, and these Euro qualifiers couldn't have gone any better, really.
I'd say Hodgson has done a decent job albeit with a disastrous World Cup, just like Capello did a great job albeit with a disastrous World Cup, but probably on twice the wages.
Anyway, it seems that respected former internationals being groomed after a period of time to take charge of the national team is not a new thing elsewhere, and I'm almost certain that's what the FA are doing with Gary Neville.
Yep, that's 4 goals in a top 4 side versus 15 goals in a side seriously struggling.
Really, really, really annoys me.
In no way has hodgson done a decent job. Any dummy could have got us to the finals, and the euros. The minute we play decent teams we are useless tactically.
We had the worst World Cup ever for England, and still we carry on with this idiot.
I heard pundits talking about Roy winning the European cup! Utter garbage.
exactly,we are lucky we are in such a weak euro group.
Who is to say Austin wouldn't have scored the same/more? Welbeck is surrounded by world-class players. Austin has to accept delivery from seriously medicore players yet has scored four times more goals.
Also Austin has been a prolific goalscorer since his Swindon days. He's never been a failure at any club. Welbeck had a whole season at United where he scored 1 goal. At Arsenal he's also been a flop. Why do we reward such underachievement?
with a manager who should be pensioned off
If we go on the past, let's bring Peter crouch back!
We should pick on form, and Austin deserves to be at least on the bench.
If Kane was starting, i may even be persuaded to watch. As it is, I'm just waiting for the next pl game.
No player should be picked for England unless they are playing regular club football and on form.
No player should be dropped for England if they're top scorer in qualifying and validated the selection by scoring again.
I am no apologist for Danny Welbeck but it has to be said if you watch his England performances he has to be in the team - both for his goal scoring and his other contributions.
In fact tbh I'd even say that his AFC displays this season have merited reward as on the whole for me he has had a good season - being much more likely to be picked as opposed to his MUFC days has helped I think,
He's not exactly nailed on to start for Arsenal though week after week is he?
Plenty of appearances from the bench,much like his Utd days.
Not even worth the bother.
Prior to posting I had not looked it up and him being more likely to play for AFC this season than MUFC last was just my impression. I have since googled it and after doing so I still think that is the case but what did surprise me I must admit is the number of times he played for MUFC in the past 2 seasons - over 20 both times. He has not been sub very much for AFC this season and I honestly think AFC seem to value him more than MUFC did with RVP, Falcao and Rooney as competition for a place. Even LVG said he was more likely to play at AFC than MUFC when discussing his sale.