Should Hodgson go?

[mad4city]

I'm surprised anyone wants to keep Hodgson. He's mediocre.

England need a manager who is defensively organised. Someone who can get crazy workrate friom the players to make up for the lack of talent. Persisting with Hodgson is a waste of time.

He has all the demeanour of a low-ranking civil servant and not surpisingly sets up his teams to perform with all the swagger of a low-ranking civil servant.
His apologists repeatedly tell us that he's "a decent man" and "a true football man", as if these attributes were rare and outstanding virtues rather than fundamental pre-requisites for the position he holds.
In truth, he's in the job because he's the safest option amongst a hoarde of spivs, chancers and assorted bumblefucks. He won't get caught kerb crawling, fiddling HMRS or snorting coke with a fake sheik from the Daily Scum. He'll turn up on time with a world-weary smile and a likeable, avuncular disposotion. Sure, he'll do nothing to excite the fans but, perhaps more importantly to the FA at this point in its evolution, neither will he disturb the sponsors.
So Wembley gets paid for and the blazers can still have the surf and turf washed down with a surprisingly decent local pinot grigio at that week long FIFA conference in Mauritius, whilst of course bemoaning Thatcherites selling off all those playing fields, thirty years ago and grumbling that there are far too many greasy Johnny Foreigner types in the Premier League, playing rings around stand up chaps like Squadron Leader Scotty and Stevie Me.
In a sane world, Roy Hodgson would never have got within an ass's roar of the England manager's job but this is not a sane world. This is the FA's world where sanity laughed itself all the way to the puzzle factory, yonks ago. These are the self-perpetuating guardians of the game who'd arrange FA Cup Finals at midnight on a wet Wednesday in Mogadishu, if they thought it made them more money and they could pass it off as being a politically correct thing to do.
Hodgson's job is safe because Hodgson himself is safe. It's a clear case of the bland leading the bland. There's no other reasonable explanation for his appointment in the first place. The question shouldn't be should Hodgson go; the question ought to be should England finally just give up the pretence and tog out in beige.

 

[OB1]

Hodgson should never have had the job in the first place and definitely should go. I realise that he does not have the greatest resources to choose from, it's no coincidence that the champions of England have very few English players, but he still managed to make team and squad selection errors. Tactically: nothing.

 

[Lavinda Past]

Hodgson is an old man in an old man's job.

The FA had the right idea appointing a foreign coach but appointed the wrong ones. They'll stick with what they know from the old days... I wouldn't be at all surprised if they stick with Hodgson until we fail miserably (again) in the Euros, and will then appoint Hoddle or Venables, with Gerrard as assistant.

I fully expect 20 more years of hurt (shite).

 

[sir baconface]

No !!!!!!!! . For a starter if we got the best manager in the World we wouldn't be any better . Capello proved that when he was manager . To me the F.A had the right man in Trevor Brooking but even he couldn't make the changes to make us better . As for Greg Dyke the blokes a waste of time and we need a better man that knows about football not television .

Not sure what Brooking achieved. Always seemed like a chocolate teapot to me.

 

[Bozzie]

The real problem with the England job is that you select a manager based on his achievements in club football and then expect him to perform under an entirely different set of circumstances. No day to day involvement with players, no opportunity to develop players, obviously no transfer opportunity just the 'luxury' of selecting a 23 Man squad made up of Englands finest. Unfortunately for Hodgson, and England, we are blessed with shite fullbacks, one half decent centre back and no one up front who can match the 2 chances = 2 goals ability that someone like Suarez possesses. Whoever the manager is, he needs to get the balance of the team right. You can't play Sturridge, Rooney, Wellbeck and Sterling, unless you playing Malta it's suicidal. Getting back on track, who would want the England job at the moment? Fat Sam of course, Harry, and that's about it, I think even Hoddle has 'ruled himself out'. Simply because there is no one else I think we have to stick with Hodgson and hope a decent right back emerges and that Sterling develops a football brain and maybe Jones actually proves Fergie right.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

If a proven international manager like Guus Hiddink was available, then I'd get him in. But he's the next Holland manager.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

You ask 10 City fans which Premiership player they would like City to sign and I reckon at least 8 would say Barkley, yet Hodgson did not start him. It wasn't rocket-science.

But surely this is part of the problem? Every 18 year old who has a great season is treated like the second coming of Gazza and expected to transform our shit team into world beaters. I think Roy's done the right thing in putting the system ahead of the individuals, hence choosing some more unfashionable players like Welbeck and Henderson, when we might have other players with more individual talent on the bench. If he'd just played the 11 best players, people would've been moaning about that, like they were throughout the Gerrard/Lampard era.

 

[Wretched Vengeance]

I'm surprised anyone wants to keep Hodgson. He's mediocre.

England need a manager who is defensively organised. Someone who can get crazy workrate friom the players to make up for the lack of talent. Persisting with Hodgson is a waste of time.

He has all the demeanour of a low-ranking civil servant and not surpisingly sets up his teams to perform with all the swagger of a low-ranking civil servant.
His apologists repeatedly tell us that he's "a decent man" and "a true football man", as if these attributes were rare and outstanding virtues rather than fundamental pre-requisites for the position he holds.
In truth, he's in the job because he's the safest option amongst a hoarde of spivs, chancers and assorted bumblefucks. He won't get caught kerb crawling, fiddling HMRS or snorting coke with a fake sheik from the Daily Scum. He'll turn up on time with a world-weary smile and a likeable, avuncular disposotion. Sure, he'll do nothing to excite the fans but, perhaps more importantly to the FA at this point in its evolution, neither will he disturb the sponsors.
So Wembley gets paid for and the blazers can still have the surf and turf washed down with a surprisingly decent local pinot grigio at that week long FIFA conference in Mauritius, whilst of course bemoaning Thatcherites selling off all those playing fields, thirty years ago and grumbling that there are far too many greasy Johnny Foreigner types in the Premier League, playing rings around stand up chaps like Squadron Leader Scotty and Stevie Me.
In a sane world, Roy Hodgson would never have got within an ass's roar of the England manager's job but this is not a sane world. This is the FA's world where sanity laughed itself all the way to the puzzle factory, yonks ago. These are the self-perpetuating guardians of the game who'd arrange FA Cup Finals at midnight on a wet Wednesday in Mogadishu, if they thought it made them more money and they could pass it off as being a politically correct thing to do.
Hodgson's job is safe because Hodgson himself is safe. It's a clear case of the bland leading the bland. There's no other reasonable explanation for his appointment in the first place. The question shouldn't be should Hodgson go; the question ought to be should England finally just give up the pretence and tog out in beige.

Thumbs up from me. A good post, laced with wit and humour.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

I'm surprised anyone wants to keep Hodgson. He's mediocre.

England need a manager who is defensively organised. Someone who can get crazy workrate friom the players to make up for the lack of talent. Persisting with Hodgson is a waste of time.

He has all the demeanour of a low-ranking civil servant and not surpisingly sets up his teams to perform with all the swagger of a low-ranking civil servant.
His apologists repeatedly tell us that he's "a decent man" and "a true football man", as if these attributes were rare and outstanding virtues rather than fundamental pre-requisites for the position he holds.
In truth, he's in the job because he's the safest option amongst a hoarde of spivs, chancers and assorted bumblefucks. He won't get caught kerb crawling, fiddling HMRS or snorting coke with a fake sheik from the Daily Scum. He'll turn up on time with a world-weary smile and a likeable, avuncular disposotion. Sure, he'll do nothing to excite the fans but, perhaps more importantly to the FA at this point in its evolution, neither will he disturb the sponsors.
So Wembley gets paid for and the blazers can still have the surf and turf washed down with a surprisingly decent local pinot grigio at that week long FIFA conference in Mauritius, whilst of course bemoaning Thatcherites selling off all those playing fields, thirty years ago and grumbling that there are far too many greasy Johnny Foreigner types in the Premier League, playing rings around stand up chaps like Squadron Leader Scotty and Stevie Me.
In a sane world, Roy Hodgson would never have got within an ass's roar of the England manager's job but this is not a sane world. This is the FA's world where sanity laughed itself all the way to the puzzle factory, yonks ago. These are the self-perpetuating guardians of the game who'd arrange FA Cup Finals at midnight on a wet Wednesday in Mogadishu, if they thought it made them more money and they could pass it off as being a politically correct thing to do.
Hodgson's job is safe because Hodgson himself is safe. It's a clear case of the bland leading the bland. There's no other reasonable explanation for his appointment in the first place. The question shouldn't be should Hodgson go; the question ought to be should England finally just give up the pretence and tog out in beige.

Post of the World Cup - great stuff

 

[mancity1]

Irrespective what we think when the players and the scribes that can fire him come out in support of him in glowing terms he is as good as gone.

He won't do a KK but no doubt the England job is the poison chalice to beat them all.

Roy won't manage in the top tier of any league of note again after he gets the flick but as others have said he is safe.

His employers want safe especially if it comes at the expense of success.

It would probably end Jose's managerial career as well and he is smart enough to know it.