Roy Hodgson Has Resigned - Next England Manager Thread

JinkyJackson

Atlantic Dawn wrote:

I think a non Brit would make life so much easier, from a media point of view it's a hell on earth job for anyone from the UK.

Complete opposite I think. Look how soft Roy got it compared to Cappello and Sven? Big Sam is the best English manager that they could likley get. He's exactly what England need at the moment, He's teams are brilliantly organized, Concede very few goals and are lethal from set pieces.

If he gets the job I think England will reach at least the semis of the world cup

Arghus

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

I think a non Brit would make life so much easier, from a media point of view it's a hell on earth job for anyone from the UK.

Luckily, Allardyce has a brass neck as big as his arse and an ego to match as well. The media pressure won't unduly faze him I'd imagine.

The tournament showed that England lack a cohesive and systematic way to play. Something that seems to breed success at international level, look at Iceland. And he seems to produce teams with a bit of grit and determination about them, which should help - at least in the short term.

It won't be pretty, but I'd imagine that's what Allardyce will provide them with, provided he gets the job of course!

Kobe248

chicorytip wrote: »

Why not consider the likes of Loew or Deschamps who clearly can both oversee teams that are organised, motivated and play attractive, attacking football?

Deschamps

Lol

May as well go after Wilmots

corny

JinkyJackson wrote: »

Complete opposite I think. Look how soft Roy got it compared to Cappello and Sven? Big Sam is the best English manager that they could likley get. He's exactly what England need at the moment, He's teams are brilliantly organized, Concede very few goals and are lethal from set pieces.

If he gets the job I think England will reach at least the semis of the world cup

Yeah. Traditionally the English would see themselves as dogged and tough but the current team are anything but. Allardyce wouldn't be a bad appointment imo.

JinkyJackson

I don't think its right to compare with tiny Iceland because they don't have quality, high paid bitches like England do, but just look at Portugal over this tournament, organized defensively. Same system for every game. Sam will be an expert on the 0-0 or 1-0 games.

Not too sound like the usual "we need to copy them" but England need to just stick with a formation and a group of players and work on it.

Ulysses Gaze

JinkyJackson wrote: »

I don't think its right to compare with tiny Iceland because they don't have quality, high paid bitches like England do, but just look at Portugal over this tournament, organized defensively. Same system for every game. Sam will be an expert on the 0-0 or 1-0 games.

Not too sound like the usual "we need to copy them" but England need to just stick with a formation and a group of players and work on it.

And need to ignore the Media clamour to pick flavour of the month players.

I think Big Sam can do that.

topmanamillion

Allardyce would be a great appointment for them.
He's very similar to Martin O'Neil. They've both had success at smaller clubs and they're good man managers and tacticians.
Hope they make some mad move and go for Belesa or someone daft like that.

JinkyJackson

Exactly. Look at Podolski still in the German squad, that would never happen with English media and a soft manager.

Pick the system, pick the best players for this system and stick with them for 2 years regardless of club form. Sam is the King of getting average players into brilliant defensive units.

Corholio

I always see that a certain manager would 'have them organised' etc. Hodgson was the epitome of having teams 'organised' in his managerial career and it hardly seemed like that at the end. Allardyce would have them to a certain extent but some speak of him as if he's done it at higher levels of football. The England manager job has a habit of making managers become what they may not have seemed before.

Arghus

JinkyJackson wrote: »

I don't think its right to compare with tiny Iceland because they don't have quality, high paid bitches like England do, but just look at Portugal over this tournament, organized defensively. Same system for every game. Sam will be an expert on the 0-0 or 1-0 games.

Not too sound like the usual "we need to copy them" but England need to just stick with a formation and a group of players and work on it.

Ah yeah, I think we're in broad agreement here.

I mentioned Iceland as an example over others because they achieved the most, relatively speaking, thanks to the Allardycian(?) characteristics of organisation, set pieces, the odd bit of quality and lots and lots of determination. Also they had their finest moment against England.

JinkyJackson

Corholio wrote:

I always see that a certain manager would 'have them organised' etc. Hodgson was the epitome of having teams 'organised' in his managerial career and it hardly seemed like that at the end. Allardyce would have them to a certain extent but some speak of him as if he's done it at higher levels of football. The England manager job has a habit of making managers become what they may not have seemed before.

I don't know, I never saw Roy as man with well organized teams, certainly not in the same league as Sam or Pulis. Roy's Fulham and West Brom teams did well to stay up but often got battered.
I'm not even a bit English, but I'd really love Sam to get the job and do really well. I love his management style, and it's a pity he never got a big job, but he keeps getting ****ty jobs and turning them into decent teams.

StringerBell

All joking aside I actually think he would do a pretty good job. He is great at getting the maximum from a technically limited bunch of players.

~Rebel~

For the life of me I just can't understand where the FA are coming from with their appointments...they keep going for these organized, keep it tight, guys. That's (as far as I can tell) exactly the opposite of what they need every time. The new guy has to be organized, of course, but it should be with an attacking philosophy rather than defensive. They desperately need someone to knit together some sort of cohesive, incisive attacking unit. Sam will do just what the past few coaches have done - keep everything tight, and struggle to break teams down.

It's been ages (Sven probably) since they've had an ethos and an attack that had a bit of flair to it, keeping the ball on the ground, running at players, nifty one-two's, making defenders face the wrong way (towards rather than away from goal). Instead time and time again they get to tournaments, face teams that just want to 'not lose', hit a brick wall, and wind up sending in hopeful crosses and hammering the ball into a sea of bodies. Thats exactly what the more limited teams want.

I've said it already this tournament, but that moment from Sturridge in the last minute against Wales should be their plan A. I'm positive that if they just kept calm, and ran at Iceland, they'd have won. Sure, more attacks would break down, but that's fine. That's the cost of attacking football, and the few times it works out, you work yourself a clear chance.

They're the most predictable team going, and what they desperately need is unpredictability. That is not Big Sam.

StringerBell wrote: »

All joking aside I actually think he would do a pretty good job. He is great at getting the maximum from a technically limited bunch of players.

That's just it though, they're not technically limited. They're not Ireland. Sturridge, Sterling, Alli, Kane, Lallana, Barkley...these are technically talented players. We've seen that from all of them in the past at their clubs at different times, but when they're playing for England, they resort to neanderthal football.

mansize

Anyone else immediately think of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCyivMpgO7c

Magico Gonzalez

Perhaps, they simply aren't producing world class players and the league is being kept afloat by foreign money and foreign players. Perhaps they might as well resort back to being organised long ball merchants.

The FA no longer understands top flight football, it's like watching your an 80 year old trying to play his 13 year grandson at FIFA. No idea.

LeBash

Big Sam is one of the few that would actually want the job. It's the ultimate poison challas.

While he hasn't won anything in football, he's never had a real opportunity either. He's never had a team that really should be top 6.

I think he would be a good choice. He gets everything he can out of players and you can't buy tallent in international.

LiamoSail

chicorytip wrote: »

Are the F.A. simply intent on appointing a high profile Englishman rather than a better qualified foreign candidate?

It's the approach most Englanders want for pretty much every job. No reason why the English managers job should be any different

kfallon

LeBash wrote: »

Big Sam is one of the few that would actually want the job. It's the ultimate poison challas.

While he hasn't won anything in football, he's never had a real opportunity either. He's never had a team that really should be top 6.

I think he would be a good choice. He gets everything he can out of players and you can't buy tallent in international.

And he still won't :pac:

JinkyJackson

~Rebel~ wrote:

For the life of me I just can't understand where the FA are coming from with their appointments...they keep going for these organized, keep it tight, guys. That's (as far as I can tell) exactly the opposite of what they need every time. The new guy has to be organized, of course, but it should be with an attacking philosophy rather than defensive. They desperately need someone to knit together some sort of cohesive, incisive attacking unit. Sam will do just what the past few coaches have done - keep everything tight, and struggle to break teams down.

~Rebel~ wrote:

It's been ages (Sven probably) since they've had an ethos and an attack that had a bit of flair to it, keeping the ball on the ground, running at players, nifty one-two's, making defenders face the wrong way (towards rather than away from goal). Instead time and time again they get to tournaments, face teams that just want to 'not lose', hit a brick wall, and wind up sending in hopeful crosses and hammering the ball into a sea of bodies. Thats exactly what the more limited teams want.

~Rebel~ wrote:

I've said it already this tournament, but that moment from Sturridge in the last minute against Wales should be their plan A. I'm positive that if they just kept calm, and ran at Iceland, they'd have won. Sure, more attacks would break down, but that's fine. That's the cost of attacking football, and the few times it works out, you work yourself a clear chance.

England scored in every game. It was the calamitous defending which cost them. There problem isn't that they need to keep calm, its that they are too calm.

GavRedKing

I reckon Allardyce wouldnt be a bad shout, look at what a well organised and dogged Portugal just done in the Euros. Iceland and Wales despite not being as good as Portugal man for man, had great tournaments too.

He'd be a huge loss for Sunderland though.

kfallon

Kevin Nolan will be coming out of retirement!!!

GavRedKing

Allardyce next England manager and Roy Hodgson resigned thread have been merged.

listermint

'Arry' still seems to want that job listening to him on Off the Ball last week. Seemed keen as anything

Nesta99

An option out of left field that ticks the boxes Is Quique Flores (although he is no longer out of work). From Real Madrid to Watford via a winning the EL with Atletico, quarter finals of the CL with Valencia at 40 he has no shortage of experience of footballing cultures. Took a limited Watford side to safety and top half of the table and semi-final of the cup and bar a nutty owner and Ranieri was considered by many as manager of the year He is young enough to be a long term appointment, international experience with Spain, plays a expansive game based on a well organised defense when not in possession. Grafting teams and free flowing teams have been put together depending on club and resources. Di Stefano isn't too bad a man to have had in the life of a footballer and manager. Ok I'm a Watford fan and this chap is one that got away and I thought Jocanovic would have been irreplaceable. But Flores has been adaptable to whatever the individual circumstance of a cubs is and improved them, with the odd glitch. Speaks perfect English and can get his tactics across to even the more limited thinker in the dressing room, Troy Deeney's assessment. Ok enough of the cheer leading.

If the FA are ging around former players for ideas wouldnt it be prudent to go 'round the former managers from Venables on, some very intelligent and experienced coaches to find out their opinion on what went wrong during their tenure?! Could be an eye opener for the FA too. Anyway if my thoughts are daft they carry some more sense than Alan Shearer!

SantryRed

Flores is already back in management at Espanyol.

Beefy78

Three decades of abject failures, missed penalties, heartbreak, getting soaked leaving Wembley when we lost to Croatia in 2007 to fail to qualify, that goal vs San Marino and obviously getting to witness in person that 'performance' vs Iceland two weeks ago...none of it has killed my enthusiasm for England even a fraction of the amount that learning that Sam Allardyce is favourite for the England job has done.

Skylinehead

Beefy78 wrote: »

Three decades of abject failures, missed penalties, heartbreak, getting soaked leaving Wembley when we lost to Croatia in 2007 to fail to qualify, that goal vs San Marino and obviously getting to witness in person that 'performance' vs Iceland two weeks ago...none of it has killed my enthusiasm for England even a fraction of the amount that learning that Sam Allardyce is favourite for the England job has done.

Would learning that Steve Bruce is the other contender help?

sReq | uTeK

Beefy78 wrote: »

Three decades of abject failures, missed penalties, heartbreak, getting soaked leaving Wembley when we lost to Croatia in 2007 to fail to qualify, that goal vs San Marino and obviously getting to witness in person that 'performance' vs Iceland two weeks ago...none of it has killed my enthusiasm for England even a fraction of the amount that learning that Sam Allardyce is favourite for the England job has done.

Hahaha

Paully D

Beefy78 wrote: »

Three decades of abject failures, missed penalties, heartbreak, getting soaked leaving Wembley when we lost to Croatia in 2007 to fail to qualify, that goal vs San Marino and obviously getting to witness in person that 'performance' vs Iceland two weeks ago...none of it has killed my enthusiasm for England even a fraction of the amount that learning that Sam Allardyce is favourite for the England job has done.

Snobbery of the highest order.

He has done an excellent job virtually everywhere he has went, and the only place he is deemed to have failed is at Newcastle, where he left them in a higher position than when he took over and they went on to get relegated the next season.

He'd be an excellent appointment. If The FA want to stay English, he's the only manager who should be considered.

rob316

JinkyJackson wrote: »

England scored in every game. It was the calamitous defending which cost them. There problem isn't that they need to keep calm, its that they are too calm.

Drew a blank with Slovakia. Scoring goals and creating clear cut chances was definitely there biggest problem.

Skylinehead

Paully D wrote: »

Snobbery of the highest order.

He has done an excellent job virtually everywhere he has went, and the only place he is deemed to have failed is at Newcastle, where he left them in a higher position than when he took over and they went on to get relegated the next season.

He'd be an excellent appointment. If The FA want to stay English, he's the only manager who should be considered.

Honest question - what has Sam Allardyce achieved, that, say, Roy Hodgson hasn't?

Beefy78

Paully D wrote: »

Snobbery of the highest order.

He has done an excellent job virtually everywhere he has went, and the only place he is deemed to have failed is at Newcastle, where he left them in a higher position than when he took over and they went on to get relegated the next season.

He'd be an excellent appointment. If The FA want to stay English, he's the only manager who should be considered.

Call it snobbery all you want. Doesn't bother me. I don't want that man anywhere near the national team job. You're more than welcome to him.

I can accept England being ****e, I can't accept that man being in charge. Steve Evans aside I'd accept anyone else. The only reason he's in the conversation is he is so buddy with the media.

Beefy78

Skylinehead wrote: »

Honest question - what has Sam Allardyce achieved, that, say, Roy Hodgson hasn't?

Nothing. Allardyce doesn't have anything like Hodgson's CV.

Look how West Ham have been transformed by having a proper football manager there.

greendom

Beefy78 wrote: »

Nothing. Allardyce doesn't have anything like Hodgson's CV.

Look how West Ham have been transformed by having a proper football manager there.

Look where Bolton are without him

Good article on him here...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/these-football-times/2015/mar/04/praise-sam-allardyce-manager-bolton-wanderers-premier-league

Think Allardyce would be a decent choice...except for the pesky bung allegations and his relationship with the BBC afterwards. The last thing the FA need is that being aired again, or anything else to come out.

LuckyLloyd

Who cares? Until the psychological context that imprisons England in major tournaments changes they will be doomed to failure.

~Rebel~

JinkyJackson wrote: »

England scored in every game. It was the calamitous defending which cost them. There problem isn't that they need to keep calm, its that they are too calm.

They scored with a direct free against Russia (worst team in the tournament).
They scored a pen against Iceland.
They didn't score against Slovakia.

The only goals they scored from open play in the tournament were against Wales.
That's a problem.

When it came down to it against Iceland, they made literally no attempt to play through a vastly inferior set of players, instead just crashing against the walls of an organized defense with high crosses, and smashed shots from distance into a box packed with players. They looked like they could have played another hour without scoring from play in that game.

Yes, the defending was poor, and of course the foundation of any good team has to be a decent defense. But if you have any aspirations towards actually going far in a tournament, much less winning it, you have to be able to cut through inferior teams. For every Greece or Portugal (who themselves were FAR more effective attacking than England), there are hundreds of teams that try the 'all out defense' approach and fail.

Whoever comes in desperately needs to find a way to get them to attack together, intelligently.

Cortina_MK_IV

Sunderland manager Sam Allardyce has yet to be contacted by the Football Association about the England job.

It is also understood no official approach has been made to the US Soccer Federation about Jurgen Klinsmann.

This week, it was reported that Allardyce would be interviewed about succeeding Roy Hodgson, who resigned after England's Euro 2016 exit.
It was also claimed Klinsmann has had discussions over the role, with the German thought to be in California. Bournemouth manager Eddie Howe has also been linked with the job.

Hodgson's successor will be chosen by a three-man panel of FA technical director Dan Ashworth, chief executive Martin Glenn and vice-chairman David Gill.

They have already spoken to former internationals - including Frank Lampard, Rio Ferdinand and Gary Lineker - as part of its review and have not ruled out an interim appointment, with World Cup 2018 qualifying beginning in September.

England Under-21s boss Gareth Southgate has already ruled himself out of the running.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/36766990

Mec27

English complicate their appointments too much, just go with someone whose ethos you have faith in, a good international manager is not the same as a club manager. There is no recipe for success, do you think if Chris Coleman took over England they would do well? There is no formula, Big Sam is the logical choice but he will be undermined by the media, fans etc and what he'll be left doing is playing the likes of Delle Alli on the back of a few months of decent performances.

Nesta99

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Who cares? Until the psychological context that imprisons England in major tournaments changes they will be doomed to failure.

Interesting observation when you consider the results and against whom. As mentioned a score draw with the worst team in the tournament, Russia's solitary point; Scoreless draw with Slovakia who everyone else socred against, and then curtains againts Iceland.

Now why the result v Wales, semi-finalists - changes were rang at HT went on the front foot and Wales eventually caved. There has to be some psychological aspect to England playing a 'home' nation side where they genuinely believe they are better and will win. There have been exceptions in the past, of course, especially in qualifying where they have been toppled eg N.Ireland in Windsor few year back. I'm not saying they were great against Wales but you felt that they believed they would get the goal and they did. Every other game that was chased they looked, well, scared stiff, rudderless and certainly didnt have any sort of belief, panicking*. Wales in contrast you felt really believed they would progress even beyond the Semi. We believed we could get out of the groups and then beat the hosts and runners-up and we weren't far away. I dont think that we would have feared Iceland at all (though they would say the same abut us) and had that innate feeling of going on to the semis. Not England though so where did that fear come from, knowledge that the managers neck was on the block, ultimatums from the FA, the media were relatively quiet by usual standards until they were out??

*I thought it was interesting that Stephen Kenny (yes I'm a Dundalk fan too) when asked why Dundalk managed to score in the last 10 minutes of 18 of 33 league games last season and 9 in 15 this season, batted away that it was to do with fitness levels. He said that the players have belief in the system regardless of the phase of the match - they dont change tactic by pinging long balls in desperation in the closing stages no more than the opening 15 minutes. No i'm not suggesting SK for the England job but if he can instill that 'belief' in Dundalk players well what the hell is wrong in the England set-up with a bottomless pit of resources. They say winning becomes as habit and it is true to a good extent but England were hardly shabby in qualifying!!

LuckyLloyd

Yeah I'd have to wholeheartedly agree. The overriding thing that stood out during England's last 20 minutes against Iceland was the sense of panic and complete absence of composure. That allied to the booing by their own fans in the stands is a toxic mixture that no manager would overcome. For all Hodgson's faults, I cannot imagine that Rashford was ever a designated corner taker or had been instructed to take over such duties when being introduced. Yet following a good run where he wins one, he immediately grabs the ball and rushes over to take it before failing to miss the first man. Awful stuff.

You just needed to look at Rooney, an extraordinarily technically gifted and hugely experienced player who was missing simple 20 yard passes by a mile repeatedly once England went a goal down.

Against Wales, they kept playing and pushing and working it until they forced a deserved winner. If you could merge the spirit and mentality of our playing squad with the technical ability and physical prowess of England's squad you'd have something on your hands that could consistently fight its way into the latter stages of a tournament. The analysis post the Iceland game of how the Premiership is overrated and the players don't have the technical ability is utter nonsense imo. An appealing narrative, but one that doesn't stand up to a shred of scrutiny. Once again, a European Championship has been won by a well drilled and gritty outfit with one or two stars. The assertion of some vast chasm in skill level existing between England and the semi finalists is a nice dream. Because accepting the alternative, that they simply bottle it in part because they are set up to fail by their fans and their press is entirely unpalatable.

Hire Allardyce or Ferguson or Pep Guardiola - it won't make a blind bit of difference until the mentality of the English national team is fundamentally overhauled.

Mec27

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah I'd have to wholeheartedly agree. The overriding thing that stood out during England's last 20 minutes against Iceland was the sense of panic and complete absence of composure. That allied to the booing by their own fans in the stands is a toxic mixture that no manager would overcome. For all Hodgson's faults, I cannot imagine that Rashford was ever a designated corner taker or had been instructed to take over such duties when being introduced. Yet following a good run where he wins one, he immediately grabs the ball and rushes over to take it before failing to miss the first man. Awful stuff.

You just needed to look at Rooney, an extraordinarily technically gifted and hugely experienced player who was missing simple 20 yard passes by a mile repeatedly once England went a goal down.

Against Wales, they kept playing and pushing and working it until they forced a deserved winner. If you could merge the spirit and mentality of our playing squad with the technical ability and physical prowess of England's squad you'd have something on your hands that could consistently fight its way into the latter stages of a tournament. The analysis post the Iceland game of how the Premiership is overrated and the players don't have the technical ability is utter nonsense imo. An appealing narrative, but one that doesn't stand up to a shred of scrutiny. Once again, a European Championship has been won by a well drilled and gritty outfit with one or two stars. The assertion of some vast chasm in skill level existing between England and the semi finalists is a nice dream. Because accepting the alternative, that they simply bottle it in part because they are set up to fail by their fans and their press is entirely unpalatable.

Hire Allardyce or Ferguson or Pep Guardiola - it won't make a blind bit of difference until the mentality of the English national team is fundamentally overhauled.

Meh so overthought. International tournaments are hard to win, its not that big of a deal that they have struggled, one year they will win it and you'll come on here talking about how the 'mentality has been overhauled' but reality is it was just their time, luck was on their side and the stars alligned for them to win it. They clearly care, look how sad they were at the final whistle.

LuckyLloyd

Mec27 wrote: »

Meh so overthought. International tournaments are hard to win, its not that big of a deal that they have struggled, one year they will win it and you'll come on here talking about how the 'mentality has been overhauled' but reality is it was just their time, luck was on their side and the stars alligned for them to win it. They clearly care, look how sad they were at the final whistle.

Do you think bowing out to Iceland; drawing against Russia and Slovakia was a reasonable result given the ability of their squad? If the answer is no (and it should be an easy no) then it is utterly reasonable to question the mentality and the pressure they operate within. For sure there is variance in International knockout tournaments, but the Costa Ricas, Algerias and Icelands are a constant for English teams.

Mec27

Iceland drew with Portugal and I'd have the Portugal 11 over England's so these things happen unfortunately. In 2014, they found themselves in a group with Uruguay and Italy, again much of a muchness, you'd expect them to have a chance of getting through but as it turned out they didn't. 2010 they got knocked out by an amazing Germany team at their fast free flowing attacking peak.

I couldn't have imagined a midfield of Dier, Alli and Rooney being European champions. That actually looks like a **** midfield to me when you think they were once able to call on Gerrard, Scholsey and Lampard. I think you overrate the English team tbh, this mentality thing did hold back when they had their golden generation from 2002 to 2008, but not so much anymore, a quarter final would have been a stellar effort by Roy and the boys.

LuckyLloyd

You're entitled to your opinion.

Beefy78

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Yeah I'd have to wholeheartedly agree. The overriding thing that stood out during England's last 20 minutes against Iceland was the sense of panic and complete absence of composure. That allied to the booing by their own fans in the stands is a toxic mixture that no manager would overcome. For all Hodgson's faults, I cannot imagine that Rashford was ever a designated corner taker or had been instructed to take over such duties when being introduced. Yet following a good run where he wins one, he immediately grabs the ball and rushes over to take it before failing to miss the first man. Awful stuff.

You just needed to look at Rooney, an extraordinarily technically gifted and hugely experienced player who was missing simple 20 yard passes by a mile repeatedly once England went a goal down.

Against Wales, they kept playing and pushing and working it until they forced a deserved winner. If you could merge the spirit and mentality of our playing squad with the technical ability and physical prowess of England's squad you'd have something on your hands that could consistently fight its way into the latter stages of a tournament. The analysis post the Iceland game of how the Premiership is overrated and the players don't have the technical ability is utter nonsense imo. An appealing narrative, but one that doesn't stand up to a shred of scrutiny. Once again, a European Championship has been won by a well drilled and gritty outfit with one or two stars. The assertion of some vast chasm in skill level existing between England and the semi finalists is a nice dream. Because accepting the alternative, that they simply bottle it in part because they are set up to fail by their fans and their press is entirely unpalatable.

Hire Allardyce or Ferguson or Pep Guardiola - it won't make a blind bit of difference until the mentality of the English national team is fundamentally overhauled.

I think there's a lot I agree with in this but don't agree at all that it is either the fault of the fans or the media. I was at the Iceland game, you saw it on TV, from both of those perspectives I'm sure we agree that England could have played for a long, long time after the final whistle without seriously troubling the keeper but the big problem was the tactics, or the lack of them.

It isn't the media's fault that in all four games the England players seemingly didn't have any single tactic to exploit the weaknesses of the opposition. It isn't the fan's fault that Roy Hodgson's sole plan to going behind was to chuck more strikers on. It wasn't either's fault that the squad was so unbalanced in key areas.

Roy Hodgson can't be blamed for Wayne Rooney failing to complete straight-forward ten yard passes or for Harry Kane over-hitting corners that he was apparently taking well in training, but he did put both players in that position in the first place.

I agree that we've seen another tournament won by a team who were not the best side there but they were well-coached. I like Hodgson but I don't think it is scapegoating to suggest that he should take a large proportion of the blame for what happened.

Skylinehead

I think it comes down to two things, tactics and mentality.

Tactics, England were clearly deficient. Unbalanced side with too many players in the wrong position - namely Sturridge on the right, and Rooney in central midfield. Neither are suited to those positions - Sturridge can be a bit selfish, which is not a bad thing in front of goal but further away, it becomes a problem. He wouldn't naturally think to track back either. As for Rooney, he's decent technically, but he doesn't have the brain to play that role. Players like Ozil, Iniesta, Kroos - they receive a ball to feet and already know what to do with it beforehand, so the ball is moved into space quickly. Rooney has to think for 3 or 4 seconds what to do, so that amplifies Englands already slow and ponderous football.

Still though, even with dodgy tactics and talented players playing out of position, they should have put a better performance in during most of the games this tournament. Their mentality isn't that they come into matches against smaller teams thinking they've already won, or they wouldn't do so well in qualifying. No, I think it's fear - they're terrified of losing, once Iceland scored thoughts creep into your head, things start going wrong, with the result that even players like Rooney just pass 5 yard balls straight at opposition players. I'm not a psychologist though, so this could be totally wrong.

Both of those things can be fixed by the right manager. Tactics is easy for anybody competent. Lloyd, I agree with most of your points about mentality, but not with the manager part. A good manager can fix this. Mourinho, Simeone, Ferguson wouldn't stand for performances like Slovakia or Iceland - they have a winning mentality and the means to get that to the players.

Nesta99

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Hire Allardyce or Ferguson or Pep Guardiola - it won't make a blind bit of difference until the mentality of the English national team is fundamentally overhauled.

Phew...I agree and disagree with points in the last few posts and it's not been overthought at all Mec27! If you dont believe that lots of preperation, really dull stato stuff played a part in Portugal's win, including the psychology of the side especially in the final well stick to Football Manager or at least stay away from football coaching, indeed any sports coaching if you really believe its down to luck, the stars alligning, someones time. Actually the last bit 'somones time' has some merit in stats as over an endless period of time England or anyone could very well win something. For England after they've exorcised their demons, for us when we become less EPL/SPL obsessed and see domestic league growth, no matter...

I dont see it as simply the mentality of the English national team that just needs a few tweaks - it a national identity across society thats needs some retuning. Not a cheap shot with over a decade studying and living in England and I loved my time there. Now this is overthinking it probably but the whole country seems as lost as the bloody England national team. Maybe other successful English wins in other sports are either more cerebral in ways or they are just not football! where most English sports fans desire success and hence also a solid mark of national identity and international prestige. Footballers are not immune to any of this probably long before they became pros and are all to well aware of the burden of expectation - they were expectant fans before they were footballers themselves. Ok waffle maybe but it is hard to put a finger on exactly but there is issue there.

I dont believe Hodgson went in to this tournament unprepared tactically. I feel that the players didnt stick to the game plan so Hodgson ended up winging it. Players selection was questionable early doors and agreed throwing on strikers to chase a game is often counterproductive (the Dutch in Landsdowne 2002 WC do or die game is the best example I can think of to support such thinking). But what else could Hodgson do if players were going awol or doing their own thing. It hints that there could have been something in the reports of friction between the coaching staff. Whatever the reason the players were obviously unconvinced by something to deviate so much from any coherent tactic for 20+ minutes of a game to go. Team Captain didnt do any job of getting his players to take a breath and drop the premature panic. Rashford grabbing the ball to take a corner could be put down to youthful exuberance but could you imagine it happening with a young RoI player?? Nope so why did he think it was ok to do such a thing that the manager would not have endorsed.

It's been 1990 since England last had a great tournament and undoubtedly needed a rub of the green in the semi-final but they rode their luck v Cameroon. Successive 'golden' generations have come and gone and with all the top manager appointments, it was thought each time - from English talismen Hoddle types, the crafty Venables, recruitment from within the English set up with McClaren, the 'nice' top foreign guy in Sven, to the Italian Tyrant in (Lippi) oopps meant Capello. Now the 'arm round the player type' nice guy Hodgson has folded. Players have the ability I believe and an English side with some grit could out Portugal Portugal. There is a common denominator somewhere.

I think punditry in England especially on the BBC is a bit watery, often condescending (think Allardyce especially at Bolton). Former players who have flopped (Shearer, Hoddle as manager) giving their nuggets of wisdom...maybe Steve Bruce is the right man, no more than Allardyce but neither faces fit really!

Ive too much time on my hands today!!!!:o

Paully D

Allardyce pictured leaving England interview today, per tomorrow's Daily Mail.

Left Back on the Bench

Nesta99 wrote:

It's been 1990 since England last had a great tournament and undoubtedly needed a rub of the green in the semi-final but they rode their luck v Cameroon. Successive 'golden' generations have come and gone and with all the top manager appointments, it was thought each time - from English talismen Hoddle types, the crafty Venables, recruitment from within the English set up with McClaren, the 'nice' top foreign guy in Sven, to the Italian Tyrant in (Lippi) oopps meant Capello. Now the 'arm round the player type' nice guy Hodgson has folded. Players have the ability I believe and an English side with some grit could out Portugal Portugal. There is a common denominator somewhere.

Semi finals in Euro 96 too and should've beaten Germany.