Roy was not the right decision.
The merry-go-round with England managers is like changing the Captain on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. the set-up is wrong
Not now anyway. But you wonder if Greg Dyke had been in charge at the FA at the time whether Harry would now be the England manager.
Not a chance, it was a unamious decision taken by a panel.
Being the England manager is not just about results it is also about being an ambassador. That is why only in their own heads was there a chance of Clough or Redknapp getting the job.
Shows his complete unawareness of what is going on around him if he thought he was gonna get a rise and not the sack when he had his meeting with Levy
Yeah, forget the results, it's knowing which knife and fork to use when dining at Buckingham Palace that's important.
Ambassador, my ****. Sums up everything that's wrong with the FA.
We'll see about that next week.think this autobiography has proven them right in their decision tbh.
I'm still not over it!They ****ed up big time by not going for Clough. Forget the fact that he was the public's choice, he won the league with two different clubs and back to back European Cups with a provincial side (at the time). Our greatest ever manager and an absolute joke he was never appointed.
We'll see about that next week.
Personally, I think Redknapp would get more out of an average England squad than Hodgson has so far, but that's not really my point. The problem is that the FA would always prefer someone in a blazer than someone in a tracksuit, safe rather than risky, Greenwood or saint Bobby rather than Clough. The only two occasions in forty years they haven't done that, with Venables and Hoddle, produced the two best England teams since 66.
Trouble is, even when they play it safe like with that **** Eriksson it still blows up in their face.
Harry is right about them being clueless.
The problem you have with the FA Set Up is, and always has been, one of class.
The FA are made up of an upper middle class boys club. Football in the UK is (was) mainly a working man's game, more in terms of players than supporters. Supporters come from all backgrounds now, most English players do not. Players go on to become Managers. The FA have never been able to relate to the fans, let alone the players. They are different types of people completely.
Footballers can be maverick, and the very notion of football is an illogical one so yes a lot of Football Managers and Players are very illogical in what they say and the way they act. But not in the footballing world. There it is normal. But the FA isn't really part of that football world. So instantly you have confusion and distrust. The FA want their England Manager to be refined, eloquent and unlikely to cause any embarrassment to their establishment. They don't want some common peasant in charge because that's just not cricket old boy. They can't have a common man invited to a potentially posh UEFA party, a man that could cause a scene. That would be a disaster! To be honest, a lot of Chairman have the same problem also.
Only it keeps backfiring in their face, although they haven't had a Hoddle/Sven type scandal for a while now, because there has been a massive lack of success during a potential golden era. The same thing happened in the 80's when they hired bumbling Bobby over Cloughie.
The recent exception to the rule was Venables, but even he only lasted two seasons and they didn't really want him in charge. It was a marriage of convenience.
So sorry folks, England won't be successful unless a good middle class Englishman becomes a successful football manager. We'll get far more Bobby Robsons, Taylors and Hodgsons than Cloughs or Venables.
The bit in brackets undermines your argument. Glenn tries to portray himself that way. But you can't just wash off your working class roots that easily. But he was certainly less of a risk than Venables was or dear old Cloughie would have been!Hoddle wasn't a risk in their eyes. He was a mild mannered, well spoken Christian and now middle class in lifestyle and attitude (although he wasn't always so!). They just didn't count on the fact that he is massively eccentric when it comes to his religion.
The problem you have with the FA Set Up is, and always has been, one of class.
The FA are made up of an upper middle class boys club. Football in the UK is (was) mainly a working man's game, more in terms of players than supporters. Supporters come from all backgrounds now, most English players do not. Players go on to become Managers. The FA have never been able to relate to the fans, let alone the players. They are different types of people completely.
Footballers can be maverick, and the very notion of football is an illogical one so yes a lot of Football Managers and Players are very illogical in what they say and the way they act. But not in the footballing world. There it is normal. But the FA isn't really part of that football world. So instantly you have confusion and distrust. The FA want their England Manager to be refined, eloquent and unlikely to cause any embarrassment to their establishment. They don't want some common peasant in charge because that's just not cricket old boy. They can't have a common man invited to a potentially posh UEFA party, a man that could cause a scene. That would be a disaster! To be honest, a lot of Chairman have the same problem also.
Only it keeps backfiring in their face, although they haven't had a Hoddle/Sven type scandal for a while now, because there has been a massive lack of success during a potential golden era. The same thing happened in the 80's when they hired bumbling Bobby over Cloughie.
The recent exception to the rule was Venables, but even he only lasted two seasons and they didn't really want him in charge. It was a marriage of convenience.
So sorry folks, England won't be successful unless a good middle class Englishman becomes a successful football manager. We'll get far more Bobby Robsons, Taylors and Hodgsons than Cloughs or Venables.
The bit in brackets undermines your argument. Glenn tries to portray himself that way. But you can't just wash off your working class roots that easily. But he was certainly less of a risk than Venables was or dear old Cloughie would have been!
Top post!
We played the best football that I can remember England playing under Venables. Euro 96 was the last time I consistently enjoyed watching us play and I was heartbroken when we lost to Germany on penalties.
Do you think Clough would have won the World Cup in 1990? Bit before my time but from what I've seen from old highlights and what my old man told me is we didn't actually play that in the tournament as a whole (typical England really) apart from the semi final when we were genuniely unlucky not to win the game.
We did OK against Holland too in 1990, but you're right. Other than that we were poor which is an embarrassment when you look at the players. I'd say 1986 was even worse. In 1986 we had a potentially great team. Yes Argentina had Maradona, but we had a far better team. We completely blew it.
Under Clough we would have had more flair and I do believe we would have been far more competitive in 86, 88 and 90 had he stuck around that long. The talent pool from that era was freakishly good like it is for Spain now or it was for France 15 years ago. It really was a massively missed opportunity.
People talk about Rooney being the most talented English player at the moment but I can safely say that the likes of Lineker, Barnes, Hoddle, Gascoigne, Waddle, Beardsley, Robson were all higher quality than he is. And they were all around at the same time. And I said at the time that I felt Sheringham should have been at Italia 90. Steve ****ing Bull. Unbelievable decision. Right up there with Sven's Walcott moment.
Hoddle wasn't a risk in their eyes. He was a mild mannered, well spoken Christian and now middle class in lifestyle and attitude (although he wasn't always so!). They just didn't count on the fact that he is massively eccentric when it comes to his religion.