GHoddle said:Sure but Hodgson was just as bad if not worse at Liverpool plus there's something to be said for all the players pretty much wanting Harry and now getting Roy.mancboy123 said:Or maybe you might have considered that they may have started watching his games and started asking why in 2 consecutive seasons you have shown relegation form going into the back end of the season and alarm bells started ringing and the press myth of appy arry started to look just what it is.
Thing about Harry is that yes he is tactically inept and he's destroyed our season but he also has a charm/charisma about him (if you can believe it) that really makes the players feel good. That's probably why all the English players wanted him and now they are getting Roy who seems incredibly dour and boring although idk if that is really the case. Idk whether that will affect the mentality of the players at the tournament but I suspect it will.
With Harry I think we would have gone all guns blazing and played some good football and failed. With Roy I think we will play dour football with no enthusiasm, and still fail, so from that point of view Harry would be a better choice.
-- Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:33 pm --
Harry has another year on the contract.carlos92 said:There lies the problem. How long has Harry got on his contract at Spurs? Roy Hodgson was on a rolling contract which was up for renewal so less compensation.
So he must still be on a wedge as well? A safe option from the FA with Hodgson