All those asking why they chose Hodgson over Rednapp

Apart from the fact that he used in his defense against Tax fraud the excuse that he's functionally illiterate?
Apart from the sniff of bung hanging in the air?

Ok, lets go with Hodgson has a superior win % as a football manager.

 

And he's managed three national teams (where he got Switzerland to the World Cup and Euro Finals), in a few different countries (in Sweden he topped the league for 5 successive years with Malmo and in Italy he twice managed Inter Milan), took Fulham to their highest ever league position and to the Europa League Final, etc.

Whereas Redknapp has won the FA Cup, and even that was with a team that wasn't paid for. He's also left all his previous clubs just before they went into admin (except West Ham, who avoided it by the skin of their teeth). And he has managed to amass a fortune and lives on the most exclusive street in the UK despite an unspectacular playing and managerial career (how did he do that then?!?).

For me it's no contest that they got the right man. I reckon the 'senior' England players would have preferred the money orientated boss to the one who wants to shake up the structure though, as he's more like one of them.

 

I doff my cap to this thread.

 

The only problem with Hodgson

He'll have to manage the gargantuan egos of the Premier elite - or get shut and build a new team - which will enrage the tabloids who are so far up the arses of such egos and their darling Redknapp that Hodgson's 'honeymoon period' will last precisely 25 seconds.

 

And that's without mentioning the fantastic job he did with Southampton. The FA have gone for the right man.

 

Re: The only problem with Hodgson

Radio Sheffield Sports can't believe it wasn't Harry. He has no personality is their general view, and our 'Arry...........

 

Good appointment in my opinion

Only ever struggled at Liverpool, however he did a better job than Kenny's doing atm, and he spent considerably less.

He's got a proven record managing national sides, albeit with less 'big names'.

He's managed abroad, and probably has a better understanding of the way some of europe's top teams play.

The big names were sucking upto Redknapp as soon as Capello left, meaning we'd have had very little deviation from the 'old favourites' who have constantly failed to deliver in the past, maybe Roy will look at less tried names, rather than rely on ego's.

He worked miracles at Fulham particularly in Europe, the hammering of Juventus at Craven Cottage instantly springs to ming.He has done a fantastic job at West Brom also.

Personally, I would have liked Martin O'Neil, however Roy's got a great track record and for me is a very good appointment.

 

Re: The only problem with Hodgson

I couldn't believe some of the stuff Rob was coming out with about Harry and Roy. He denied it but you could tell he was part of the media love in for Harry the cockney wide boy.

 

Cos harry redknapp is as corrupt as they come, the crooked tw.at...... And the fa know it as well
Hth

 

I like both men

But personally I would have gone for Harry. In my opinion his teams play a superior brand of free flowing football that is much easier on the eye. I would have liked to see England play that way. Or attempt to at any rate. But I wish Roy well. He's a really nice fella and I'd love him to be successful.

 

I was beginning to think I was the only one who didn't want the 'people's choice'. It shows just how low the morals of football in this country have sunk (along with most other things) when he could even be considered for the job.

 

I'm getting really annoyed with hearing journalists on the radio and TV saying "why didn't they go for the supporters favourite?" etc.....the majority of comments I've seen on here and other sites from football supporters are in favour of this decision, it's the media who were pushing for Redknapp and trying to say he was the "peoples choice"

 

I think its Ron Greenwood all over again. Redknapp wouldve been ideal for the job, great motivator of players and wouldve galvanised the fans and media behind the team. We've got Hodgson who's a succession of failures, lacks respect and his methods have been tried and failed with England regimes in the past.

We wont get past the Group stages and dont book your tickets for Brazil.

 

We wouldn't have got passed the group stages anyway.

 

I can't believe you would want Redknapp. Surely he represents more of the same, yet again? He'd play Fat Frank until his mid 40's.

 

At least with Redknapp we wouldve stood a chance of getting the best out of what we've got. He knows the limitations of the English players and more likely wouldve picked a team and formation to at least give us a chance. He did well with Spurs in the Champions League, which is as good an indicator of European football as any. Hodgson will struggle to command any respect or initiate any enthusiasm from the players, and his methods are likely to bore them to death.

 

I'd personally have no problem with an England midfield with Lampard & without Gerrard, based on this season one has achieved one hasnt.

 

Get your money on us winning the Euros everyone, SM is predicting a failure.

 

In the modern era you need someone who can have a vision across the whole England setup. Playing 4-2-4 and telling the team to "go out there and win", just doesn't cut the mustered in the modern game at international level, its about time we brought some professionalism in - Capello was a dinosaur with tactics stuck in the 1990's, Rednapp might be a "players manager" but when the players continue to fall sort (the supposed "Golden Generation") both morally off the pitch and tactically on it then its time they piped down, wore the shirt with pride and did as they were f*cking told.