Should Roy Hodgson be sacked as England manager?

[Hotchilidog]

Nice to see that the good old-fashioned knee-jerk reaction is still alive and well on this thread. Truth is this was not a disastrous tournament at all. It was disappointing no doubt, but England did not disgrace themselves in my view. In 2010 we were an utter shambles, too much reliance on a discredited old guard content to rest on their ill-gotten reputations. This time we finished the group stage with a team half of which is under the age of 25 and lacking in champions league experience. They did ok, Sturridge and Rooney yet again spurned good chances to win the game, but for a yard here or there we would have had three points. Against Italy and Uruguay we were not outplayed but were just let down by momentary lapses of concentration and a lack of a clinical finish in front of goal.

This team is inexperienced and is only just starting out on it's road to recovery. The rebuilding process will take time. We have some promising talent going forward but it will need TIME to develop, and we simply do not have any depth in defence. A lot of work is required to get England back up to speed, and people are just going to have to be patient.

I'm just glad that after the last two tournaments of utter shite and obnoxious players I'm finally left with an England team I feel good about supporting, even if it isn't a particularly good one. I am glad that Hodgson has taken the bold step of blooding the new generation of players, it's something most fans have been crying out for for ages. Sadly this means initially we may not get the results we want, but hey-ho that's football. Time to enjoy the rest of the tournament, Viva Chile, Vamos Colombia, and Viva Mexico let the flair-o-nauts entertain us.

 

[keaton]

He's got to go. Paid £££ for choosing the best team? clearly didn't work..

What was our best team then?

The defence and goalkeeper pretty much pick themselves. He picked the inform youngster everyone wanted him to pick, he picked the top scoring English strikers, he picked the team bar one or two players every pundit and fan or would have picked.

 

[keaton]

Decent article from Football365

If somebody had said two weeks ago that England would end the their Group D campaign having had the most shots (38), allowed the opposition the fewest attempts (25), dribbled past twice as many opposition players (41) as their rivals and had a pass completion rate of 85%, our only question would have been whether that was enough for first place or we would have to settle for a runners-up spot.

England have, quite bizarrely, recorded the statistics of a team who have started this World Cup with the form of potential semi-finalists, rather than a team who have ended their sorry sojourn with just one point. Which shows you that a) statistics can sometimes be incredibly misleading and b) England really have failed by fine margins.

England are not Spain, the world and European champions who saw their creaking system and players torn apart by Holland and then Chile; they are not Portugal, who have once again been exposed as a one-man band without a tune; they have simply been narrowly beaten twice by teams of very similar strength and then drawn a dead rubber 0-0 after fielding a much-changed side. It's the kind of 'not quite' run that even the greatest teams and the greatest managers will 'suffer' at least once a season. But this is international football and there is no looming run of games where the 'not quite' can quickly become the 'just about'.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this English team in their tactics, their attitude, their desire; they simply lack a little bit of quality and, in this tournament, a little bit of luck. The difference between England finishing top or bottom of that group were a scuffed shot here, a poor refereeing decision there, a failure to track here, a header an inch too high there. I am no more depressed about this England side on the evening of June 24 as I was on the morning of June 14. It still has the same strengths (attacking players who can run at the opposition, the promise of youth, hard-working wide players) and weaknesses (an average defence, a lack of holding midfielders, no truly world-class player to make the difference in close encounters). It is a side good enough to beat most but rarely good enough to beat the best.

It's incredibly lazy to talk about a lack of passion, it's incredibly crass to cite war metaphors, it's incredibly short-sighted to blame the manager, it's incredibly forgetful to blame a foreign influx and it's incredibly boring for the rest of us when club loyalties take over and individual players are cited. The rather dull truth is that England came up narrowly short. Play those games again with the same players and the results may have been different enough to see England through as champions. Play them a third time and we may not score a goal or claim a single point.

There are still a handful of reasons to be cheerful and many reasons to be cheerless about England's future - you'll read plenty about the latter in the coming weeks because of what happened in ten pretty unsurprising days in Brazil, but the former will be forgotten for the same reason

 

[Hotchilidog]

Decent article from Football365

If somebody had said two weeks ago that England would end the their Group D campaign having had the most shots (38), allowed the opposition the fewest attempts (25), dribbled past twice as many opposition players (41) as their rivals and had a pass completion rate of 85%, our only question would have been whether that was enough for first place or we would have to settle for a runners-up spot.

England have, quite bizarrely, recorded the statistics of a team who have started this World Cup with the form of potential semi-finalists, rather than a team who have ended their sorry sojourn with just one point. Which shows you that a) statistics can sometimes be incredibly misleading and b) England really have failed by fine margins.

England are not Spain, the world and European champions who saw their creaking system and players torn apart by Holland and then Chile; they are not Portugal, who have once again been exposed as a one-man band without a tune; they have simply been narrowly beaten twice by teams of very similar strength and then drawn a dead rubber 0-0 after fielding a much-changed side. It's the kind of 'not quite' run that even the greatest teams and the greatest managers will 'suffer' at least once a season. But this is international football and there is no looming run of games where the 'not quite' can quickly become the 'just about'.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong with this English team in their tactics, their attitude, their desire; they simply lack a little bit of quality and, in this tournament, a little bit of luck. The difference between England finishing top or bottom of that group were a scuffed shot here, a poor refereeing decision there, a failure to track here, a header an inch too high there. I am no more depressed about this England side on the evening of June 24 as I was on the morning of June 14. It still has the same strengths (attacking players who can run at the opposition, the promise of youth, hard-working wide players) and weaknesses (an average defence, a lack of holding midfielders, no truly world-class player to make the difference in close encounters). It is a side good enough to beat most but rarely good enough to beat the best.

It's incredibly lazy to talk about a lack of passion, it's incredibly crass to cite war metaphors, it's incredibly short-sighted to blame the manager, it's incredibly forgetful to blame a foreign influx and it's incredibly boring for the rest of us when club loyalties take over and individual players are cited. The rather dull truth is that England came up narrowly short. Play those games again with the same players and the results may have been different enough to see England through as champions. Play them a third time and we may not score a goal or claim a single point.

There are still a handful of reasons to be cheerful and many reasons to be cheerless about England's future - you'll read plenty about the latter in the coming weeks because of what happened in ten pretty unsurprising days in Brazil, but the former will be forgotten for the same reason

That is absolutely BANG-ON!

 

[Iggle Piggle]

I want Hodgson SACKED and to bring in the best English manager around. Steve Bruce or Harry Redknapp then. On 2nd thoughts then.....

I don't mind if Roy stays but I do find our inability to defend a long ball over the top alarming. Jageilka and Cahill just does not work for me.

 

[Puppet Master]

Anyone who thinks that the problem with the England national team is the manager is deluded. Time and again we've gone out and broke the bank to get the very best managers in the world, and none of them have been able to fix it. The problems are clearly a lot deeper than who picks the team and works out the tactics!

It's just typical English- clamour for the manager to bring through some youngsters and go attacking, he does it, we go out, sack the manager. Ridiculous.

You constantly speak sense on here. Are you sure you're a Brighton fan?

 

[sparkie]

If Hodgson is the best

1) Player selector
2) Player motivator
3) Tactician

that we can afford and is available, then keep him.

I suspect he is not.

 

[keaton]

If Hodgson is the best

1) Player selector
2) Player motivator
3) Tactician

that we can afford and is available, then keep him.

I suspect he is not

So who would you have?

 

[sparkie]

So who would you have?

Ha ha! I knew that would be coming and was hoping to avoid a conversation about my personal preference.

My initial response would be to get Klinsmann in like a shot, but the list is very probably quite long if given a bit of thought.

 

[BensGrandad]

So who would you have?

Disregarding all the old excuses for sacking him, the best man tactically with the knowledge to do the job and get tge bestfrom tge pkayers woukd be to get Hoddle back.

 

[Icy Gull]

Nice to see that the good old-fashioned knee-jerk reaction is still alive and well on this thread. Truth is this was not a disastrous tournament at all. It was disappointing no doubt, but England did not disgrace themselves in my view. In 2010 we were an utter shambles, too much reliance on a discredited old guard content to rest on their ill-gotten reputations. This time we finished the group stage with a team half of which is under the age of 25 and lacking in champions league experience. They did ok, Sturridge and Rooney yet again spurned good chances to win the game, but for a yard here or there we would have had three points. Against Italy and Uruguay we were not outplayed but were just let down by momentary lapses of concentration and a lack of a clinical finish in front of goal.

This team is inexperienced and is only just starting out on it's road to recovery. The rebuilding process will take time. We have some promising talent going forward but it will need TIME to develop, and we simply do not have any depth in defence. A lot of work is required to get England back up to speed, and people are just going to have to be patient.

I'm just glad that after the last two tournaments of utter shite and obnoxious players I'm finally left with an England team I feel good about supporting, even if it isn't a particularly good one. I am glad that Hodgson has taken the bold step of blooding the new generation of players, it's something most fans have been crying out for for ages. Sadly this means initially we may not get the results we want, but hey-ho that's football. Time to enjoy the rest of the tournament, Viva Chile, Vamos Colombia, and Viva Mexico let the flair-o-nauts entertain us.

Good post. I have not been angry with this team at any point over the last three games (although I confess I saw very little of last night's game). This is unusual for me. Carry on Hodgson.

 

[del strangefish]

Megson ?

 

[Brovion]

Anybody who thinks that sacking Hodgson and replacing him with AN Other will make the slightest bit of difference to the England teams is either very very young, very very stupid or is just being wilfully ignorant. It's NOT about the people involved; we have NOT been knocked out because the manager is shit or because the player's don't care (The usual two reasons that people trot out when they lack the ability to see past the end of their noses). We have been playing competitive football since 1950 and we've never been one of the top nations. Could have been, should have been, would have been, might have been ... but never have been. We have had really dire managers in the past, and then we've tended not to even qualify for major tournaments, (I remember the 1970s when we failed to qualify for THREE tournaments in succession). I also remember the 1988 Euro's when we were shockingly bad and lost all three group games - and yet two years later we reached the World Cup semi-final with pretty much the same players ... and the same manager

One of the best things about England's performance was the reception the fans gave to the team (and the manager) at the end of the Costa Rica game. A realisation among the real England fans that we are what we are, and taking the frustrations out on our current representatives achieves nothing. We've had MUCH worse World Cups, and also we've played worse and got further - 2010 for example.

 

[Eeyore]

A few things

Firstly, if Roy wasn't English I suspect the tone of some of the debate may be different. That said, I have a lot of respect for him and, importantly, I think his players do too.

I also agree that, had we had a group which wasn't so intense, we would be looking forward to a second round tie. [MENTION=3166]keaton[/MENTION] publishes an articulate representation of many of our views.

Incidentally, if the title of World Champions was passed in a chronological way from the moment internationals started (the team defeating the previous holder gaining the title, like in Boxing), a defeat of Costa Rica would have given us back the trophy. Perhaps we should campaign for a few more changes at FIFA......

 

[Eeyore]

Anybody who thinks that sacking Hodgson and replacing him with AN Other will make the slightest bit of difference to the England teams is either very very young, very very stupid or is just being wilfully ignorant. It's NOT about the people involved; we have NOT been knocked out because the manager is shit or because the player's don't care (The usual two reasons that people trot out when they lack the ability to see past the end of their noses). We have been playing competitive football since 1950 and we've never been one of the top nations. Could have been, should have been, would have been, might have been ... but never have been. We have had really dire managers in the past, and then we've tended not to even qualify for major tournaments, (I remember the 1970s when we failed to qualify for THREE tournaments in succession). I also remember the 1988 Euro's when we were shockingly bad and lost all three group games - and yet two years later we reached the World Cup semi-final with pretty much the same players ... and the same manager

One of the best things about England's performance was the reception the fans gave to the team (and the manager) at the end of the Costa Rica game. A realisation among the real England fans that we are what we are, and taking the frustrations out on our current representatives achieves nothing. We've had MUCH worse World Cups, and also we've played worse and got further - 2010 for example.

Agreed, although the team we had post 1966-1972 was certainly among the best of the time.

1966 Winners
1968 Euro semi-finals
1970 Word Cup Quarter Finals (and that 2-0 lead)
1972 Euro quarter finals

It all went a little pear shaped after that.

 

[Ernest]

Agreed, although the team we had post 1966-1972 was certainly among the best of the time.

1966 Winners
1968 Euro semi-finals
1970 Word Cup Quarter Finals (and that 2-0 lead)
1972 Euro quarter finals

It all went a little pear shaped after that.

When Sir Alf lost the plot

 

[del strangefish]

When Sir Alf lost the plot

At Least He Had A Plot.

 

[Westdene Wonder]

The general anticipation of the average supporter was we would be unlikely to go further than the first step so not too unhappy at the result,Spain and Italy gave their supporters a shock,think how they must feel.
When you consider how little time our young Premiership players are allowed on the field its no surprise they are falling behind their continental cousins, so dont blame the manager he did well with what he had.

 

[Phat Baz 68]

I wouldn't sack Hodgson at all, I think HE has the right ideas and qualities to be England Manager.
But i agree with Th Wanderbus that the wankers at the FA should all be booted out from the top down and replaced by individuals that know about the game, and can run a business.

FA HIERARCHY = CRETINOUS WANKY SCUM !!!

 

[nicko31]

Sorry Roy you're a nice guy but England has been the WORST team at this world cup. You have failed to get the best of the players, they are not world beaters but 2 goals and 1 point is just pathetic

I've thought about it and for England getting rid of Roy is without any doubt the correct decision