What I would be looking for is quite simple - a) International experience (and success) and b) Knowledge of English players and game - definitely not Rocket Science. Now for me Redknapp only ticks one of these reasonably simple boxes like previous appointments. Miraculously, when the FA have ticked box a they have failed to tick box b but generally they merely tick box b. Venables ticked boxes a and b as did Bobby Robson (both winning titles abroad). Like I said, not Rocket science, or maybe it is judging from the papers, some comments on here and from the FA!!!!!
Good point. So who ticks both boxes now? Roy Hodgson.
What I would be looking for is quite simple - a) International experience (and success) and b) Knowledge of English players and game - definitely not Rocket Science. Now for me Redknapp only ticks one of these reasonably simple boxes like previous appointments. Miraculously, when the FA have ticked box a they have failed to tick box b but generally they merely tick box b. Venables ticked boxes a and b as did Bobby Robson (both winning titles abroad). Like I said, not Rocket science, or maybe it is judging from the papers, some comments on here and from the FA!!!!!
Good point. So who ticks both boxes now? Roy Hodgson.
Steve McClaren!
Don't see why international experience is necessary. Very few managers in world football are successful at international level due to the nature of the competition - every nation only plays in a major tournament at most every 2 years. We need someone to shake things up and mould the development of English football from the ground up. I'm not sure who that is, but the approach Brendan Rodgers and Paul Lambert have taken at their respective clubs is something to be admired, and something we should aspire to.
Well it is quite possible Steve McLaren would make a much better stab at it this time, but there is no way he will be given the chance given the mess he made last time. The FA aren't very brave and they know if they appointed him and he failed again, they would get both barrels from the press and public.
The experience Steve McLaren gained in the job and subsequently abroad could mean he is now a better international manager though. Pardew was hopless with us and was sacked by Southampton but is doing OK with Newcastle. It was right for us to sack him -he had lost the plot but in the right circumstances he has shown he can do a good job. Not saying he should be England manager though but pointing out it is wrong to write people off- he doesn't tick box a for me for the England job. What is in his favour is that he hasn't had much of a chance internationally where as Redkanpp has and not set the world alight. But the point is there are so many differences from managing different clubs and both are so different from managing a country, why do we always use the wrong criteria?
Anyway, it is clear the FA are going to offer it to Redknapp -everybody seems to want it. Passion for football is very high in this country but knowledge and insight isn't I'm afraid. You only have to see the coaching standards at youth level, full of ex pub players focussing on fitness, tackling and winning at all costs rather than giving youngsters the core skills they need, You get what you deserve I suppose.
listined to bernstien the chairman and it seems like they want a younger man, he said they want someone who will be envolved from schoolboys upwards, taking u17 and u18 training sessions go to all the tournaments like cappello didnt, real fulltime instensive job as i said be envolved from school boys upwards and be around when they make it to the first team dont think Harry fits that mould so i think there could be a real suprise and wouldnt be shocked if gareth southgate is the new england manager.
Can't understand Arry knockers. Has Spurs playing some of the best football in England.
I don't think anyone doubts that he's a decent manager. But the reasons for appointing him show exactly why we're lagging behind in international football.
He's passionate - only in England would we appoint a manager on the basis of passion. No one can put a serious argument forward for the real problem we have at international level being a lack of passion and pride. There's a lack of technique and not enough coaches. We need a manager who is prepared not only to pick the squad for the Euros, but have a blueprint for the development of English football.
He plays good football - if England try and play attacking football we will get hammered by the better teams. We simply don't have the players to play an expansive brand of football. I know some would say "well we can't beat Spain/Holland/Germany however we play", but that's simply not true. In a one off game, we could beat them, but we would need some tactical creativity and a bit of luck. Anyone can have luck, but by Harry's own admission he doesn't really do tactics. I know he plays up to that stereotype, but the point stands.
He's English. That's not even a reason. The FA are saying they'd prefer an "Englishmen or someone British". Well if we're prepared to have a Welsh or Scottish manager, it clearly doesn't matter what nationality they are.
The key for me is that Redknapp has proved he can get the best out of what he's given and get a team playing. He is also English, knows the players and has their and everybody in the game's respect. Other than Ferguson, he is probably now 'the daddy' in the English game. He also, unlike Capello and to an extent Ericsson, has proven he can do it with middling to good players rather than absolute top draw players. That, in England, is what we have. He is the perfect choice. Hold your hands up on this one Mutley. Pearce is not the man for the job but will be a decent caretaker until Redknapp comes in (part time or not), when the season is over.
Pearce may not be the man for the job but he has surprised me with how well he has done with the U21s, which is a role that has more in common with the England manager post than managing Spurs. We can't know with any certainty who is the right man for the job but I'm not so sure it is Harry.
Pearce won't be a universaly popular choice so it will take some courage from the FA to appoint him but he was being nutured to take on the top job and I think he would have been a shoe in if he had a good Olympics but Capello has gone too early and caused a problem. I simply think Harry's European experience over what has been a long career - with lows as well as highs - is not up to the mark. Pearce has a different type of experience but it involves managing a national side and having to prepare for and deal with contental tactics and styles. Under his stewardship England U21s are more of a force than the full national side are which for me is the biggest tick on his CV.
If we are going for league managers, Hodgson had a bad time at liverpool but proved to be very shrewed with Fulham - Knocking Juventus out of the Europa league and getting to the final. He has a very good CV abroad and has proven he knows how to set up a team to be effective against better technical sides.
Hiddink has managed succesfully in this country (for a short time with Chelsea). His English is good and he knows the English game and players. His record with national sides (limited ones at that) is very good.
All three of these have to be above Redknapp on their relevant experience alone - honestly can't see how that isn't patently obvious to everybody.
Harry's star has risen massively in the last couple of years. Was he even interviewed along with Curbs and Allardyce when Schteve McClaren got the job?
The key for me is that Redknapp has proved he can get the best out of what he's given and get a team playing. He is also English, knows the players and has their and everybody in the game's respect. Other than Ferguson, he is probably now 'the daddy' in the English game.
He speaks English, proven track record at English and European club level, ability to succeed with very limited resources, tactically aware, self-belief to deal with: 'limited' players available; the media and the FA. Brought two different teams to the Valley. Best man for the job by a mile .....
The key for me is that Redknapp has proved he can get the best out of what he's given and get a team playing. He is also English, knows the players and has their and everybody in the game's respect. Other than Ferguson, he is probably now 'the daddy' in the English game.
Pearce may not be the man for the job but he has surprised me with how well he has done with the U21s, which is a role that has more in common with the England manager post than managing Spurs. We can't know with any certainty who is the right man for the job but I'm not so sure it is Harry.
Pearce won't be a universaly popular choice so it will take some courage from the FA to appoint him but he was being nutured to take on the top job and I think he would have been a shoe in if he had a good Olympics but Capello has gone too early and caused a problem. I simply think Harry's European experience over what has been a long career - with lows as well as highs - is not up to the mark. Pearce has a different type of experience but it involves managing a national side and having to prepare for and deal with contental tactics and styles. Under his stewardship England U21s are more of a force than the full national side are which for me is the biggest tick on his CV.
If we are going for league managers, Hodgson had a bad time at liverpool but proved to be very shrewed with Fulham - Knocking Juventus out of the Europa league and getting to the final. He has a very good CV abroad and has proven he knows how to set up a team to be effective against better technical sides.
Hiddink has managed succesfully in this country (for a short time with Chelsea). His English is good and he knows the English game and players. His record with national sides (limited ones at that) is very good.
All three of these have to be above Redknapp on their relevant experience alone - honestly can't see how that isn't patently obvious to everybody.
so managing an under 21 side has more in common with managing the full england side than Redknapp's 30 years of managerial experience does. It's about a game of football. It's not that complicated. Ask Peter Tayor how relevant his u21 success was.
I saw that Wayne tweeted last night his support for Harry.
Cheers for that Wayne now do one please and keep your beak out of it until your employers have made that decision. No one ever asks me who my boss should be and this sums up exactly why the England team has failed in so many cases.
I hate Twitter.
I can see why you think that Rooney and other players should have no say in the appointment. However, player power is a modern reality and needs to be taken into account. It's better that a man who has the respect of the senior players is appointed.
Stuart Pearce admits and has apologised for calling Paul Ince 'an arrogant black c***' in 1994. Yet has been a senior member of the England set up for a number of years and in some circles is being talked about as a serious candidate for the top job!
If he is given the top job I would love to hear his media interview when he explains how it is impossible to have John Terry as captain.
Someone on Talksport yesterday made the point that for 5 years Harry had this case hanging over his head and has now been found not guilty. What if he became manager and said I want Terry as my captain, he hasn't had his day in court yet.
The key for me is that Redknapp has proved he can get the best out of what he's given and get a team playing. He is also English, knows the players and has their and everybody in the game's respect. Other than Ferguson, he is probably now 'the daddy' in the English game. He also, unlike Capello and to an extent Ericsson, has proven he can do it with middling to good players rather than absolute top draw players. That, in England, is what we have. He is the perfect choice. Hold your hands up on this one Mutley. Pearce is not the man for the job but will be a decent caretaker until Redknapp comes in (part time or not), when the season is over.
Disagree about how well Redknapop has done, for me he has done an ok job and yes I'm ready for those that disagree to shout abuse. However, shall we gloss over the absolute mess left at Southampton and Pompey and the sum total of those years? A couple of relegations, administration for one and ver close for the other but it's ok because he won the cup.
Now on to Spurs, over the past 5 years they have spent the 4th most in the league, I will take the point Harry probably didn't spend all that money himself however the players were still there so if when you say thathe can get the best out of what's given means that he can get a team to around about where they should be in the league then yeah he probably can.
After having a long think about how he would do in the England job, I've decided he could do ok. Let's face it he isn't a master tactician (just ask Van der Vaart), he's not going to confuse the knuckle draggers in the team by telling them where to be, what to do in certain situations. The one thing he can do is motivate players, maybe that's what England needs. But I still have my doubts, for me international football is a thinking man's game. Telling the England side to go out, run around a lot, show passion etc. will work up to a point. What happens when we come up against a more technically sound side who have coaches covering every possible detail? Germany anyone? The one thing going for Harry is he will have the backing of the majority of the fans and more importantly the press. Then again so did Keegan and that didn't work out too well.
I saw that Wayne tweeted last night his support for Harry.
Cheers for that Wayne now do one please and keep your beak out of it until your employers have made that decision. No one ever asks me who my boss should be and this sums up exactly why the England team has failed in so many cases.
I hate Twitter.
I can see why you think that Rooney and other players should have no say in the appointment. However, player power is a modern reality and needs to be taken into account. It's better that a man who has the respect of the senior players is appointed.
Conversely if Redknapp isn't now appointed we know that Wayne & Rio didn't want Hodgson/Hiddink/Jose/whoever. That'll be good for the dressing room.
I know we are not alone in this but the excessive influence of certain players and their mates in the media is a large part of what has got to us being such a minor force in World football if you ask me.
This also has a major part to play. Slightly out of date figures, but the point is there
QUALIFIED COACHES IN ENGLAND FA Level Five (Uefa Pro): 167 FA Level Four (Uefa A): 996 FA Level Three (Uefa : 3,186 FA Level Two: 6,957 FA Level One: 26,273 FA Youth Award: 3,500
So, just over 4,000 Uefa's B, A and Pro badges • Spain has 23,995, Italy 29,420 and Germany 34,790
Comments
Don't see why international experience is necessary. Very few managers in world football are successful at international level due to the nature of the competition - every nation only plays in a major tournament at most every 2 years. We need someone to shake things up and mould the development of English football from the ground up. I'm not sure who that is, but the approach Brendan Rodgers and Paul Lambert have taken at their respective clubs is something to be admired, and something we should aspire to.
The experience Steve McLaren gained in the job and subsequently abroad could mean he is now a better international manager though. Pardew was hopless with us and was sacked by Southampton but is doing OK with Newcastle. It was right for us to sack him -he had lost the plot but in the right circumstances he has shown he can do a good job. Not saying he should be England manager though but pointing out it is wrong to write people off- he doesn't tick box a for me for the England job. What is in his favour is that he hasn't had much of a chance internationally where as Redkanpp has and not set the world alight. But the point is there are so many differences from managing different clubs and both are so different from managing a country, why do we always use the wrong criteria?
Anyway, it is clear the FA are going to offer it to Redknapp -everybody seems to want it. Passion for football is very high in this country but knowledge and insight isn't I'm afraid. You only have to see the coaching standards at youth level, full of ex pub players focussing on fitness, tackling and winning at all costs rather than giving youngsters the core skills they need, You get what you deserve I suppose.
He's passionate - only in England would we appoint a manager on the basis of passion. No one can put a serious argument forward for the real problem we have at international level being a lack of passion and pride. There's a lack of technique and not enough coaches. We need a manager who is prepared not only to pick the squad for the Euros, but have a blueprint for the development of English football.
He plays good football - if England try and play attacking football we will get hammered by the better teams. We simply don't have the players to play an expansive brand of football. I know some would say "well we can't beat Spain/Holland/Germany however we play", but that's simply not true. In a one off game, we could beat them, but we would need some tactical creativity and a bit of luck. Anyone can have luck, but by Harry's own admission he doesn't really do tactics. I know he plays up to that stereotype, but the point stands.
He's English. That's not even a reason. The FA are saying they'd prefer an "Englishmen or someone British". Well if we're prepared to have a Welsh or Scottish manager, it clearly doesn't matter what nationality they are.
Pearce won't be a universaly popular choice so it will take some courage from the FA to appoint him but he was being nutured to take on the top job and I think he would have been a shoe in if he had a good Olympics but Capello has gone too early and caused a problem. I simply think Harry's European experience over what has been a long career - with lows as well as highs - is not up to the mark. Pearce has a different type of experience but it involves managing a national side and having to prepare for and deal with contental tactics and styles. Under his stewardship England U21s are more of a force than the full national side are which for me is the biggest tick on his CV.
If we are going for league managers, Hodgson had a bad time at liverpool but proved to be very shrewed with Fulham - Knocking Juventus out of the Europa league and getting to the final. He has a very good CV abroad and has proven he knows how to set up a team to be effective against better technical sides.
Hiddink has managed succesfully in this country (for a short time with Chelsea). His English is good and he knows the English game and players. His record with national sides (limited ones at that) is very good.
All three of these have to be above Redknapp on their relevant experience alone - honestly can't see how that isn't patently obvious to everybody.
tactically aware, self-belief to deal with: 'limited' players available; the media and the FA. Brought two different teams to the Valley. Best man for the job by a mile .....
If he is given the top job I would love to hear his media interview when he explains how it is impossible to have John Terry as captain.
The Governor? My arse!!
Now on to Spurs, over the past 5 years they have spent the 4th most in the league, I will take the point Harry probably didn't spend all that money himself however the players were still there so if when you say thathe can get the best out of what's given means that he can get a team to around about where they should be in the league then yeah he probably can.
After having a long think about how he would do in the England job, I've decided he could do ok. Let's face it he isn't a master tactician (just ask Van der Vaart), he's not going to confuse the knuckle draggers in the team by telling them where to be, what to do in certain situations. The one thing he can do is motivate players, maybe that's what England needs. But I still have my doubts, for me international football is a thinking man's game. Telling the England side to go out, run around a lot, show passion etc. will work up to a point. What happens when we come up against a more technically sound side who have coaches covering every possible detail? Germany anyone? The one thing going for Harry is he will have the backing of the majority of the fans and more importantly the press. Then again so did Keegan and that didn't work out too well.
I know we are not alone in this but the excessive influence of certain players and their mates in the media is a large part of what has got to us being such a minor force in World football if you ask me.
This also has a major part to play. Slightly out of date figures, but the point is there
QUALIFIED COACHES IN ENGLAND
FA Level Five (Uefa Pro): 167
FA Level Four (Uefa A): 996
FA Level Three (Uefa
FA Level Two: 6,957
FA Level One: 26,273
FA Youth Award: 3,500
So, just over 4,000 Uefa's B, A and Pro badges
• Spain has 23,995, Italy 29,420 and Germany 34,790