BBC BLOGS - Phil McNulty
« Previous | Main | Next »

Roy Hodgson: He's not Harry Redknapp but...

Post categories:

Phil McNulty | 11:15 UK time, Monday, 30 April 2012

Roy Hodgson – among other things – suffered for not being Kenny Dalglish during his failed tenure at Liverpool. The Football Association must hope their choice as England manager does not suffer similarly for the crime of not being Harry Redknapp.

In the eyes of Liverpool fans, Hodgson paled miserably in comparison to Dalglish after Anfield’s icon, a serial collector of silverware as player and manager, was overlooked in favour of the man who had just taken Fulham to the Europa League Final in 2010.

As soon as the FA’s official move for Hodgson was announced on Sunday evening the comparisons with Redknapp, previously the prime contender and the so-called “People’s Choice”, began. And not many were flattering.

Roy Hodgson and Harry Redknapp

Roy Hodgson and Harry Redknapp. Photo: Empics

When Redknapp’s name was first placed in the frame as Fabio Capello’s successor after he quit in February, influential England figures such as Manchester United pair Wayne Rooney and Rio Ferdinand hurriedly took to their Twitter accounts to declare support.

The Twitterati have hardly been alive with backing for Hodgson now it is clear he is the preferred choice of the FA’s four-man selection panel comprising chairman David Bernstein, FA general secretary Alex Horne, director of football development Sir Trevor Brooking and managing director of Club England Adrian Bevington.

The FA itself has been accused of having its modern-day “Brian Clough moment" with the decision to choose Hodgson ahead of Redknapp being likened to Ron Greenwood's selection ahead of the great Derby County and Nottingham Forest manager as successor to Don Revie in 1977.

The argument for Redknapp drives towards his recent successes, winning the FA Cup with Portsmouth in 2008, guiding Tottenham to the Carling Cup Final in 2009 before taking them into the Champions League for the first time, reaching the last eight in 2011 and beating Inter Milan and AC Milan along the way.

Hodgson, after losing that Europa League Final to Atletico Madrid, had a nightmare spell at Anfield that ended with the sack in 191 days before restoring at least some of his reputation with very solid work at West Bromich Albion.

Redknapp is the highest-placed English manager in the Premier League with a Spurs team that played arguably the most exciting football in the division this season until, with tragi-comic timing, they went into a sharp decline at almost the very moment their manager was linked with the national job.

He is regarded as an advocate of flair-laden attacking football, although to suggest Redknapp does not have a grasp on the tactical side of the game is an insult, while Hodgson is portrayed as a fan of functionality, organisation, repetition and discipline instilled on the training ground.

Hodgson likes 4-4-2 and zonal marking, whereas Redknapp prefers one man up front and more fluidity around the midfield. That is not to say either is wrong in their approach and England’s new coach will surely be wise enough to tailor his approach to the players at his disposal.

At Liverpool, Hodgson’s methods reportedly led to tedium on the training ground – although it is clear this approach was bought into and resulted in success at Fulham and stability at The Hawthorns. Steven Gerrard’s thoughts on the appointment will be keenly sought.

Redknapp is regarded as more media friendly, quicker with the quip than Hodgson, but the latter’s desire to study the game and his wide range of interests outside of the game also wins him plenty of admirers.

Again Hodgson’s time at Liverpool is used as an exhibit against him. He certainly became increasingly testy under constant scrutiny at Anfield as he struggled to cope with the pressure and his failure to fire the imagination of the fans with either his personality or style of football.

Redknapp can have his moments also, however, reacting famously with fury when being described as “a wheeler dealer” by an interviewer. He has also had his failures, such as his relegation with Southampton in 2005.

When their careers are measured in trophies, Hodgson is the runaway winner. The problem he has is where and when they were won.

Hodgson finished top of the Swedish league seven times with Halmstad and Malmo. He also won the Swedish Cup twice with Malmo before collecting the Danish championship with FC Copenhagen in 2001.

He was runner-up in the Uefa Cup with Inter Milan in 1997 and enjoyed a successful first season with Blackburn Rovers, finishing sixth and taking them into Europe, before he was sacked by owner Jack Walker after a slump the following season.

It is creditable record and one that demonstrates a background of experience in working around Europe at club and international level that Redknapp cannot boast – but winning titles in Scandinavia is never held up as confirmation that you are the man to manage England.

Many of England’s players relished the potential appointment of Redknapp because they felt it might bring some of the joy back to playing for their country again which they felt had been taken away during Capello’s austere tenure.

Hodgson will not evoke the same emotions and there may be disappointment among some, but surely an upcoming major tournament will be enough to get the juices flowing irrespective of who is wearing the tracksuit on the training ground.

And Hodgson will be out there with them, preparing meticulously and hoping England's players join him in wanting to improve themselves and the country's fortunes.

So the comparisons will continue while the FA, understandably, outlines Hodgson’s wide experiences, renowned tactical expertise and commitment to shaping every aspect of England’s football development at Burton.

He is not, however, Harry Redknapp. Which, in some quarters at least, has put him at an instant disadvantage.


Page 1 of 8

  • Comment number 1.

    ... and, in other quarters, at an instant advantage.

  • Comment number 2.

    I think you could put a cucumber in charge, it wouldn't make the slightest difference as none of the English football 'stars' seem to give two hoots about putting on the England shirt.

  • Comment number 3.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • Comment number 4.

    He didn't suffer for not being Kenny, he suffered because never in his career has he managed a win ratio much above winning a third of his games. It wasn't good enough at Liverpool, it won't be good enough for England.

  • Comment number 5.

    I don't think "not being Harry Redknapp" should necessarily count against him, the fact that he is decidedly average at best should though.

    England wanted a break from the oppressive rule under Capello and so turn to a man famous for tactical inflexibility, lack of flair and a cleansheet before goals mentality.

    What England really needed was a manger that the majority of fans would instantly get behind. A manager that would, in the short term, deliver attacking football and something for us to cheer at the Euros. Instead what they have delivered is the cheapest option available.

    Bernstein and co should hang their collective heads in shame. This appointment is England basically giving up on the next decade of international football. Disgraceful.

  • Comment number 6.

    Irrespective of the appointment, this has been handled with the usual efficient of the laugh stock more commonly known as the FA. Damaging themselves again in the public eye.

    Whilst I’m 50/50 over the HR leaving or not (Spurs fan) I wish Woy all the best, he’ll need it. The media vultures are already circling.

  • Comment number 7.


  • Comment number 8.

    Finally an intelligent manger who might drop lampard and build the team around our only two world class players: Scholes and Rooney.

    PS I am a Fulham fan so no biased opinions.

    He is a manager we can finally be proud of

  • Comment number 9.

    Woops !

    Harry or Roy.

    In cricket terms it's Botham or Boycott.

  • Comment number 10.

    Everyone knows that Roy is not the best choice but I suppose majority will be happy as long as England manager is english

  • Comment number 11.

    He starts with the media against him, for sure. All he needs is a win against France and Redknapp will be forgotten.

  • Comment number 12.

    Hodgson or Redknapp makes no difference, another spell of mediocrity awaits England

  • Comment number 13.

    I really dont understand the media obsession that it has to be Redknapp. It didn't exactly work out well the last time the FA appointed the supposed fans/media favourite - Kevin Keegan anyone?

    This job is the pinnacle for an English coach, Hodgson looks like getting the job and all I've read this morning is critique that hes the wrong choice. Give him a break, he might actually achieve something!

    Redknapp isn't the messiah, he didn't get the best out of Darren Bent who scored under every other manager hes played for - even McCleish!

    Get over the Londoncentric bias, Hodgson is the perfect candidate - hes the right age, has international experience, has managed big players, is available (no compensation) and will have no problem working in Burton!

  • Comment number 14.

    They are two very good managers, and they are very 'chalk & cheese' in their approach to the game. As a Spurs fan, I'm hoping that we can now get on with our football without the constant "Harry will be England manager" headlines which have no doubt affected our performances. I will get behind Hodgson, he may not have the charisma of Harry, but he has a fantastic tactical brain (as he showed with Fulham during their fantastic Europa League run a couple of seasons back) and really he was never given a chance at Liverpool, and in a way this possibly helped him as he went back under the radar and could do his business in a calm manner. Now he is going to be England manager, it will be interesting is he can control the prima donnas in the team, and get them playing well as a unit.

    TL;DR Both good managers, very different approaches to the game, but I will support Roy and hopefully he can get the team playing as a team!

  • Comment number 15.

    Oh Dear............Danny Murphy brought in to control the game for 15 minutes and Liam Ridgewell as our last line of defence! Weally Weally Wubbish!

  • Comment number 16.

    Is there any chance we could have another blog about Roy Hodgson? There just don't seem to be enough at the moment. :strokeschin:

  • Comment number 17.

    I think Hodgson is a poor choice but I did not like the idea of Harry Redknapp either. I would like a proven winner chosen to take the team forward. Both Roy and Harry have not won enough for me. The FA like the safer options and if they continue to employ this type of manager, I fear we will not get the results or direction we need. I would leave Pearce in charge for the Euros as expectations are low at the moment. The FA ill then have time to select the person charged with taking our team forward after Euro 2012. My vote would be for Jose Mourinho as he cares less about the press and will do it 'his' way.

  • Comment number 18.

    Redknapp - Hodgson? Whoever, Germany is quaking in its boots. Like the rest of the footballing world.

  • Comment number 19.

    Another manager same story from press and armchair pundits. Can we just let Hodgson get on with it, support him and stop moaning about this and that. We are nearly good enough to win the Euros, but not quite there just yet. Let the man do his job and lets see where we get to.

  • Comment number 20.

    I've nothing against Hodgson at all. The Liverpool experience said more about the club that it did him. He has a lot of experience, and clearly knows what he's doing.

    But it's not an inspiring choice. It doesn't get me excited or offer hope for the future. I don't see this making a radical change. Redknapp would have given me that. Harry was clearly the right man for the job. He's not as straight-laced as Hodgson, and that may be what the FA desire more than anything else. But as an England fan this is real let down. I was hoping for a bolder appointment, and for a man to get in there who plays good attacking football.

    Disapointing, I don't see Hodgson making any hogr changes. Not a disaster, but not as good as it could/should have been.

  • Comment number 21.

    Its kind of beauty and the beast. Redknapp - the nations favourite. Cheeky and chirpy against Hodgson - the other guy.

    I'm pretty happy the FA got in contact with hodgson, his cv and experience clearly exceeds harry's. Just because harry has a "top team" to manage it shouldnt influence anything. I noticed how quick individuals i.e ferdinand was to publicly back redknapp.... what about roy?

    People need to realise the best manager is not always the most outspoken one or one that is seen as one of the lads.

    Come on Roy!!!! Lead us to some glory!!!

  • Comment number 22.

    Roy H would be entirely fine by me: a manager with a good enough record, tactical nous, dignity and common sense, and a familiarity with his native tongue. He would have handled the Suarez episode in a manner which didn't make Liverpool an international embarrassment.

  • Comment number 23.

    While generally being pretty poor, I think the FA are getting a tough wrap for this one. They never said they wanted Harry. The media did. It's not their job to police peoples speculations. Nor is the appointment of the England manager a democratic process involving the majority of English football, so let's labour under that impression. They choose who they want.

  • Comment number 24.

    I wonder if Harry knows taking the England job is a hiding to nothing, especially as he has no time to work with the players. Cappellos "sacking" (for it was as good as,) was very badly timed and handled by the FA.
    Good for Hodgson if he takes the job, I really hope he does well, as an England fan and becasue he seems a very decent bloke.
    I actually think with this short time before the Euro's only Harry could help, as there is no time for tactical work, it has to be done in the minds of the players and he seems to be the man for that. Roy would need more time to instill his style on the squad.

  • Comment number 25.

    At 11:48 30th Apr 2012, The_soul_patch_of_David_Villa wrote:

    Is there any chance we could have another blog about Roy Hodgson? There just don't seem to be enough at the moment. :strokeschin:

    For once in my life I agree with you!!

  • Comment number 26.

    Oh dear Phil, do let go of this HR nonsense that you and others in the media have been traipsing with since Pierce took temporary charge. You picked your man and were wrong, so let it go and find something positive to write about.

  • Comment number 27.


    I cannot believe that there has not been some sort of clandestine approaches before all this. Did Harry decline ? I can believe that. How many others ?

    Perhaps we will never know !


  • Comment number 28.

    Apologies re:23

    "let's *not* labour under that impression"


  • Comment number 29.

    Are we seriously having this same debate again???!!! Redknapp's overall managerial record is worse than Hodgson's......FACT. King Kenny only has a marginally better record in his second tenure as Liverpool boss, this has got to be down to nothing more than being given longer than 6 months in charge!! For you, Phil, a so called respected journalist to use the words "Steven Gerrard’s thoughts on the appointment will be keenly sought" make me cringe. Who really cares if Gerrard does or does not fully endorse the appointment.....he has hardly been the same player for England that he is for Liverpool. The twitter comment however does not even warrant any comment.........utter dross

  • Comment number 30.

    I've only read two paragraphs and I need to pull you up already Phil. The view that LFC fans hounded Roy out because he wasn't Dalgish is totally wrong. There were of course some calls for the "return of the King" after Benitez departed, but this was a vocal minority. This became a very vocal majority after a few months of Hodgson's awful management. Fans of other clubs have been quick to say how shoddily Roy was treated by LFC fans - but they didn't have to put up with it. Well congratulations, with this appointment you'll now get the opportunity. Don't say you weren't warned.

  • Comment number 31.

    2.At 11:36 30th Apr 2012, zapalniczka wrote:
    I think you could put a cucumber in charge, it wouldn't make the slightest difference as none of the English football 'stars' seem to give two hoots about putting on the England shirt.

    Could not have put it better myself. If we had Sir Alex, Jose and Pep, they could not turn a sows ear into a silk purse no matter how good a manager is.

    What this probably does show is that international football is being marginalised anyway, the clubs are not bothered, internationals during the season are a hindrance to planning, tournaments are a hindrance to the beach. In any case, Arry was on a hiding to nothing with our English trait of feeling superior to our continental brothers, after all WE had the British Empire you know. How long is it before these traits appear and we demand that we start winning ? Not long because thats another English trait............... impatience.

    The press will be happy though......................... They can probably slag off Hodgson more quickly than if Arry was in charge though having said that Arry would eventually get it in the neck when he fails given our stupid expectations vis a vis our "world class" talent.

    PS If Terry gets sent off in the semi at Euro 2012, I hope Uefa will allow him to lift the trophy as we are sure to win it.

  • Comment number 32.

    It doesn't matter which manager the FA chooses, if he hasn't got the quality players to work with (which he won't), he won't win a flower pot.

  • Comment number 33.


    "Finally an intelligent manger who might drop lampard and build the team around our only two world class players: Scholes and Rooney."

    Sorry, i must be confused, is that 37 year old Paul Scholes who as i recall not only retired from international football, but only came out of club retirement to help his pal SAF, that you would like to build the team around? At 37 years of age, in the modern game i really dont think the future of English football is anything to do will Scholes, unless he is part of a coaching set up, although i would be surprised if he didnt end up on Man utd's coaching staff.

    As for Roy Hodgson for England, it is a good call in my opinion, the only question i would like answered is; do you think Spurs could/would have maintained their (admittedly already faltering) title push if the FA hadnt gone "all out" for HR in the immediate Capello fallout? Who ever is the next man for England i hope that we can perform well and that the media give them a fair run (you never know....)

  • Comment number 34.

    I cannot remember the last time I sat to watch an England match knowing we were that good we were gonna win. Maybe when we beat Germany 5-1. I believe we've played on a reputation that hasn't been right for over a decade. I think our players - compared to the rest of the world - just aren't as good. It will take more than a manager to turn the English football team around. I want to have that winning feeling again, as I'm sure all England fans do.

  • Comment number 35.

    The management teams of Germany, France, Italy & Spain will fully endorse the FA's choice.

  • Comment number 36.

    Mr Hodgson is once again the easy way out a yes man and somebody who wont rock the boat.Winning coach ?in sweden what level is that?He is a good manager at a certain level but surely not for England national side He might not lose a lot of games but how many will he win cmon please pick a winner and not the safe and easy choice YOURS JOHN BOYD

  • Comment number 37.

    Good appointment but will it give LFC fans another chance to try and hound him out of another job at the first signs of adversity? Someone better tell them that KK was not overlooked for the England job :)

    Poor spurs: being left with the chronic failure of 'chequebook' Harry

  • Comment number 38.

    I think the media need to get a grip here

    The so called "peoples choice" no he's the media's choice. People will be for or against Roy as opinions differ from person to person (which is expected and normal)...

    However to paint our Arry as being some overlooked nations favourite is bonkers. Lets not forget Cloughie won 2 European cups and the title with Forest and a title at Derby. Redknapp has noweher near that sort of CV. Is is not comparable to Clough.

    Roy is a solid appointment... not everyones cup of tea but who is. Gordon Bennet there are even a small minority of Utd fans grumbling about Fergie!!

  • Comment number 39.

    Weren't Switzerland a pretty decent outfit with Hodgson in charge? I'd have thought that was one of the major arguments in his favour.

  • Comment number 40.

    "Roy Hodgson: He's not Harry Redknapp"

    Brilliant, I applaud you Phil on the first truthful, non-hyped thing you have said in years.

    Well done Mr Hodgson (if you get the job), well done the FA for not listening to the media and their 'Peoples choice' rubbish and I think he is the right person for the job and the best person for the job (given that we are limiting ourselves to English people.

    People can harp on about Martin O'Neill and David Moyes (among others) but why would either of them want to take the England job! people need to think before opening their mouths.

  • Comment number 41.

    "Hodgson failed at Liverpool because he wasn't Kenny Dalglish". Fundamentally incorrect: Hodgson failed at Liverpool because he was completely incompetent.

  • Comment number 42.

    Perhaps the FA should have used this opportunity to re-think what an England manager means or needs to be. I understand the FA want the new man to be involved at all levels of football (i.e. each of the age groups and excluding women's soccer!) and be heavily involved with activity at the much delayed Burton on Trent FA centre.

    Stuart Pearce has enormous understanding of the different age groups of the game, is still young enough to be highly regarded as a top rated former England player (79 caps and captain). He has a good track track at all levels (he lasted 2 years at Manchester City as manager!).

    Why not consider Stuart Pearce (or someone like him in the future) being a well paid (probably 6 figures not 7) full time ENGLAND Manager then appointing (maybe selected several months prior to the tournament starting) a short term Tournament Manager to bring that extra dimension and motivation for a tournament.

    If this had been the case over the last few years the FA would not have incurred such huge costs (that may mean it is not so easy to justify the wages of the 'men in suits') and 'being stuck with a manager for 2 ,4 or 6 years.

    In this instance Stuart would managing the qualification games & friendlies, maintaining a short list of squad players, keeping in touch with managers etc. But now - at the end of the season prior to a major tournament (Euros or World Cup) - Harry or Roy (or a non English manager if thought appropriate - Sir Alex, Jose Mourinho) could be brought in to jointly MANAGE the team for the duration of the tournament.

    Clearly this would require an ability to establish a good working relationship with Stuart Pearce (or successor) but maybe a positive way forward - combining youth and energy with experience and winning tactics.

  • Comment number 43.

    I really don't care who manages England. They dropped off my radar some time ago. I've been following Argentina and am much happier as a result. Smiles instead of a constant frown. Laughter intead of a deluge of tears. Calmness intead of anger and madness. Theraouetic football without the need for heavy medication and sedation. Roll on the World Cup.

  • Comment number 44.



    Personally I'm a bit disappointed Mark Lawrenson didn't get the job......his predictions about Liverpool winning every game are so astute.

  • Comment number 45.

    Phil, I'm amazed how much you and the rest of the media have mid-read the run up this appointment.

    The only sources of speculation for Redknapp came from pundits, players, supporters, even David Cameron! However, none of those involved in the decision have ever given any support to Redknapp.

    Weeks back, Redknapp denied having been contacted by the FA over the job. You in the media just tapped the side of your noses and said he was playing his cards close to his chest.

    You fell for it, hook, line and sinker. Even now, you are hinting that Hodgon was second choice. Wrong again !!!

    Now, you are already undermining him with Redknapp comparisons, which are completely irrelevant.

    Capello and Erikkson had fine records before the England job, but neither could bring any success to England.

    Give Hodgson a chance and stop setting him up for a fall.

    And have some humility, Phil, and admit you got this badly wrong.

  • Comment number 46.

    The problem with getting Hodgson in is not necassarily that he's a worse manager than Redknapp but that he's not the medias choice (or if youre looking at twitter the players choice either). If we'd have got Redknapp in it would have recieved a very positive reaction from everyone leading to a potential placaebo (spelling?) effect for at least the next tournament.

    This from a Spurs fan.

    (P.S. I'd have gone for Benitez over both of them)

  • Comment number 47.

    Whether it is Roy or Harry tearing his hair out on the touchline makes little difference.

    England success will be down to the players raising their game when under pressure, but the truth is that we are a quarter-final side when it comes to major tournaments and that is probably how it will stay, whoever is in charge.

  • Comment number 48.

    When did England become so moronic? It saddens me to see the way the media (espcially Sky) have reacted to this decision. People on here too - Hodgson is 'decidedly average' or he's only managed obscure teams etc...

    Karlsruher, Tirol Innsbruck, Adnaspor, Austria Vienna... anyone know the significance of those teams? They're the sides Joachim Löw gained his managerial experience before taking Germany to the Euro final and WC semis. Aime Jacquet was manager of Nancy then a technical advisor to the French FA for the 2 years before taking the France job and winning the world cup. France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Holland might have bad tournaments and fire a manager, but they still maintain a plan, a long-term technical strategy, and aren't afraid to promote 'obscure' figures if they fit the bill. That's why they play in finals more than once every 50 years.

    But no, in England we need a 'people's choice' like Keegan or Redknapp, and after that fails we need a 'sergeant major' figure to sort the players out. We decide managers based on what David Beckham or the Daily Mail wants. Maybe get some input from Cheryl Cole and Princess Diana's gravestone whilst we're at it.

    And incidentally, please, please, please let no-one else liken Redknapp to Clough's rejection by the FA. When Harry has two European Cups then he can be mentioned in the same breath as Brian Clough.

  • Comment number 49.

    Let's hope the ManU Twitterati convey their unequivocal support for Hodgson as they did for Redknapp. Will the absence of their opinion be viewed as a rejection of the FA's decision? I am sure the FA will provide a statement as to why they raised the hopes of so many so high about Redknapp and then made such a u-turn. Or is there something we don't know. And hopefully, if appointed, we won't have a fan's revolution similar to what Hodgson faced at Liverpool. And the press, pundits and commentators, what will they say now; they had literally sworn allegiance to no other except Redknapp!!!!! Give peace a chance!!

  • Comment number 50.

    "Hodgson likes 4-4-2 and zonal marking"?? Where has this come from?. As an Albion fan I can safely say that we mark man to man and have on many occasions played 4-5-1. What I will say is that he will get the best out of average players which in my opinion is exactly what England has. Too much arrogance and hype and not enough focus on what is required of them. They need discipline, structure and focus and Roy will definitely give them that. The only worry I have is that he will need time and there has been times watching Albion that I have worried about his tactics, but time has shown him to have worked miracles.

  • Comment number 51.

    Well, let's see shall we? At least he doesn't have to try to organise some spineless mediterranean types, recruited by someone one step away from a straightjacket. Who knows, if all he is supposedly good for is motivating mediocre players and organising them, then maybe we'll get an effective team, instead of the teams made up of our premiership stars. We should look at the german example of how disciplined team work get results.

  • Comment number 52.

    It takes a very special manager to motivate the over-paid, over-pampered multi-millionaire moron that is your typical Premiership footballer today. Ferguson's still got it, Wenger's arguably lost it, Villas-Boas never had it. It's not about man-management skills, it's about sheer force of character. That's why Hodgson fell short at Liverpool and that's why he's going to fall short for England, too. Not since the 1998 World Cup, when 10-man England were eventually beaten by Argentina, have I seen England rise above the sum of its limited parts. Yet Germany consistently does so. The inflated prices and hype of Premiership club football has killed the desire to perform for England.

  • Comment number 53.

    As a Fulham Fan we used to have saying ( in Roy we trust) I think on a lot of occasions we didn't understand some of his tactical decisions but we started learn that he knows more than us about football. England will be in safe hands even though the media and fans wont think so till he wins them round.

  • Comment number 54.

    Have to say (partial) credit to the FA. It did show some guts to not bow to pressure and go for Harry.

    The reason the Redknapp train got so many onboard was the media wanted their mate who'd give them plenty of good quotes and the thin gruel of the Capello years. Managerial ability is of secondary importance to the press' desire to sell papers etc.

    Unfortunately this will also be a negative for Hodgson who will now be hounded relentlessly by those same media hacks who've been made to look silly (maybe even into doing a Scolari).

    Out of the candidates Hodgson is a decent choice however my reason for only giving the FA partial credit is they restricted their choice (no matter what they say) to English managers to placate the certain elements of the nation (again a lot them in HM Press Corps).

  • Comment number 55.

    Our sports editor has written an interesting article about the implications of Roy Hodgson's impending appointment. Hope you enjoy it! Thanks

  • Comment number 56.

    His Switzerland team were quite good. I remember then getting dismantled by the sizzlingly sensational Spanish side in USA '94.

    Only for the thuggery of Mauro Tassotti to rob Spain of glory. :shakesfistswithrage:

  • Comment number 57.

    Phil, please stop insisting that Redknapp was the people's choice. This whole 'Arry for England' charade was started and ran by the media and the media alone. It is well known that Redknapp has plenty of allies in the press and they have driven this joke of a campaign to get him appointed. Luckily the FA did not bow to the pressure and they went with right man in Roy (given the insistence on having an English manager).
    When you compare their records, Hodgson is the clearly the better candidate. He has that crucial european and international management experience, while Redknapp only has experience of sending teams into financial oblivion.
    I also think there is more chance of Roy picking players to fit a defined system and strategy, rather than picking players that are overhyped by the press or choosing players simply because they play for the top 4/5 sides.

  • Comment number 58.

    The FA probably got cold feet at the thought of any more of Harry's alleged extra-curricular activities coming to light. As several posters have pointed out, the real problem with England is the fact that (in recent years) players have identified more with their clubs than the national side and in all reality are encouraged to do so by their club managers.

  • Comment number 59.

    Speaking as a non-England fan, Hodgson is probably the best long term choice, players like Terry, Lampard and Gerrard will almost certainly quit internationals after the summer so there'll be fewer big egos in that dressing room and maybe the younger players will be more receptive to Hodgson's methods.

  • Comment number 60.

    Please stop with this "he wasn't Kenny" nonsense. Statistically speaking (excluding the Houllier-Evans debacle), in the last 30 years only Souness has had a worse win ratio (41.40) than "Woy" (41.94). **That's** why he was never wanted at Liverpool. He was given a chance and failed badly. His entire career is one of mediocrity. Is that really what any club aspires to? Mediocrity?

    All these other supporters blathering on about Liverpool fans "hounding" Woy out need to get a grip. How many of you would put your hands up and say you'd want him at your club? You really think he'd have been hounded out if he'd be successful? Liverpool FC are not Chelsea.

    The statistics do not lie. His career average win ratio is 41.40. This is not up for debate. I wonder how many will jump to his defence after the inevitable shambles that will be Euro 12...

  • Comment number 61.

    I think it would be a disaster if Hodgson gets it, you need a man manager like Redknapp for all the big personalities in the England squad. Plus be good with the media pressure, which Redknapp has already shown.
    Hodgson has go nether of these two qualities and when England flops out of another tournament we'll be on the hunt again.

  • Comment number 62.

    This is yet another example of the dysfunctional FA. They find it impossible to make a clear decision and when they do its the wrong one.
    This is a disaster waiting to happen-a McClaren like exit in 18mths or less is eminently predictable.

    No experience of CL football. No experience of managing at a top club or managing internationals bar his disasterous spell at Liverpool. Hodgson is a UAE manager, a Estonia manager, a WBA manager, a Fulham manager. what he isnt is an England manager.

    This is the modern era's equivalent of the "Clough moment" in the 70s. Harry is no clough but the FA have committed a howler in appointing Hodgson. Hope Konchesky hasnt got any plans for the summer. He'll be vice capt to Cattermole's capt. Anyone harbouring thoughts of England playing anything like Barca needs to think again-its back to the long ball lads and lasses!

  • Comment number 63.

    Oh deary me, a manger that the 'stars' of the England team wont respect or think is good enough for them. As previously stated, the players dont care and no matter who was in charge i dont think will change that, they would rather be in holiday in barbados than playing in the euro's thats for sure. I feel sorry for Roy as this wont go well and will damage his hard work before him. has the phrase 'poisoned chalice' been used yet? people love that one!

  • Comment number 64.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 65.

    Another appalling show by the FA, the laughing stock of the world, has ended with needless carnage at Spurs. I actually think Hodgson is a good choice, but their approach this last 3 months has been pathetic and disrespectful. After allowing months of tedious media speculation and the capitulation of an exciting (and largely English) Spurs team, they have decided to ignore Harry as a candidate. Intending to avoid disruptions in the league, they have achieved the exact opposite, and for no reason at all. Presumably they changed their mind over the appointment after Spurs' slump in form; a slump they created. What an incredibly callous way to treat English football, and to treat an English team full of national players. Another shambolic chapter in the disgraceful governance of the FA. I wrote an in-depth article on the subject actually, if anyone is interested

  • Comment number 66.

    At last we get an English Gentleman to run the England team. The F.A. Chose the right man and have no need to explain why other contenders were not chosen. It is not the right of the media to decide who should be chosen but it should be the obligation of the media to support the choice of the F.A. and get behind them in their choice.

  • Comment number 67.

    So he's being written off before he's even got the job? Brilliant.
    Lets face it, Jose, Pep and Sir Alex wouldn't be able to win the Euro's with England, with the current crop of players, being the England manager is a poisioned chalice.
    We don't have a hope in hell in the summer, and much like his tenure at Liverpool, this will only serve to put another dent in his career. Much like the Liverpool job, I can't blame him for taking it, but I can't see him being successful.

  • Comment number 68.

    "He is not, however, Harry Redknapp. Which, in some quarters at least, has put him at an instant disadvantage."

    Not least in this one-sided, snidey attack of an article. I think you get a hard time on here too much Phil, but this is drivel of the highest order, putting your opinions in other people's mouths and highlighting the pieces of history that serve your agenda.

    I think I'd have erred for Redknapp in the end, but you can be damn sure that the media would be all over him too given ten minutes of honeymoon. Hodgson has a tough job, but the first sign of his capability will be when the squad is announced. At least by getting a backlash in straight away, the media might end up giving him a break just to play a slightly different tune...

  • Comment number 69.


    yeah that was a real low point for Tassotti, he was highly regarded before then and had won numerous medals, his elbow on Enrique (one of my favourite players of all time) was horrible and to be fair he was banned for 8 games and never played again for the national team.

  • Comment number 70.

    My point is three fold:

    1: As the media has made it nigh on impossible to appoint a foreign manager this time for the England job there was always only two options, especially after Glenn Hoddle scaring everybody and puting his name in the proverbial hat. Hodgson is more conservative, and plays a tactical game, Redknapp plays a more attacking expansive game, everyone would love to see England playing expansive attacking football so the media have pushed this pro Redknapp campaign.

    2. The teams with the best players play attacking football and blow teams away, we are not the team at international football, we are the Fulham's, or WBA's of international football. We will not dominate a team like Brazil can, we haven't got the players coming through with the technical ability of Goetze, Ozil, we don't dominate the ball like Spain, what we can do (possibly successfully) is counter attack, we have wing whippets in the names of Young, Walcott, Sturridge, Lennon, Johnson, counter attacking football could suite England (hopefully we can grow to dominate the ball and change our style), Hodgson is more suited to organise a team to play against superior opposition.
    3. As for players wanting to play under Redknapp to bring the fun back, oh I'm sorry forgot you boys just wanted to go out and have fun, there was me thinking it was a paid job and an honour to play for your country!

    Sorry got carried away

  • Comment number 71.

    i just checked the calander - i thought maybe it was april 1st... it seems not though. in all honesty, this is a laughable decision

  • Comment number 72.


    Apoligies from myself, a cut and paste error. Roy's career ratio is 43.04. The point still stands however.

  • Comment number 73.

    Is this blog just a last ditch operation to get the FA to consider Redknapp? Hodgson isn't even appointed yet and the McNulty's of the world have already started on him.

    I seriously think that English manager position should be cycled among the "know better than anyone else" press. Still it is a lot easier to throw stones isn't it?

  • Comment number 74.

    I think that Hodgson will be good for English football. He has the respect of the FA, UEFA & FIFA and doesn't carry any baggage.
    My only concern is that having Arry in the background is not as damaging for him as Dalgleish was at Liverpool.

  • Comment number 75.

    Which football pundits have actually managed a football team and had any success, well apart from Glenn Hoddle? Look at the Sky Sports and BBC pundits line-up, anyone? So they should stop talking as if they know what it takes to win football games, or who should be the next England manager for that matter. This Harry for England bandwagon was started by the media and pundits alike. Harry has experience yes, but so is Roy. And he has more international experience under his belt. I think it's time to come back to the fundamentals here. The FA should not jump into the Harry euphoria; it is time to make the right, well-informed decision. All the best Woy!

  • Comment number 76.

    I find comments like "setting us back 10 years" embarrassing. How the hell can an appointment of one manager have such an impact on the national game over the next 10 years? GET A GRIP! Hodgson is not in charge of grass roots football, development, coaching, improving our managers. He is in charge of selecting a squad for Euro 2012

    Football fans are clueless, completely clueless - the sooner we all accept this as fact the quicker we can calm down and not get so angry. Hodgson knows his football, who else, WHO ELSE could do the job?

  • Comment number 77.

    This is a BRAVE decision by the FA who have decided to (again) go largely against the media, the pundits, the players themselves and the fans by not paying the £10m or so to bring in Redknapp.

    I don't necessarily think that Redknapp would be the most sensible choice for the FA (I presume they are not in the business of trying to make friends), but would have gone with him myself, just because if all else failed I could have sat there and said "I told you so" when the media decide after his honeymoon period to inevitably dig up some 'past grave news' and slaughter him and his dog for off field shenanigans!

    Not being number one choice Hodgson, i fear won't get that luxury of a 'honeymoon period' although conductivity away from the pitch is about as boring as Schteve Mclarern's was!!

  • Comment number 78.

    @soulpatch woud this be the same Spanish team that underachieved throughout the ninties?

  • Comment number 79.

    48-spacedinvader: you may well be right in yr post but the proof as they say is in the pudding. I was never as hard on Hodgson or as pro-Dalglish as many of my other Liverpool fans and i do not subscribe to the King Kenny God thing-look at Kenny's record since Dec 2011 for proof of that-worse than Hodgson!
    However Hodgson believes in 4-4-2 and long ball tactics. He has also done better at mediocre clubs where expectations were low. I can honestly see another McClaren in less than 18mths.

  • Comment number 80.

    How about we give the bloke a chance eh?

  • Comment number 81.

    doesn't matter who the boss is,the english media will build the players up as potential world beaters and then they will rip them and the manager to pieces when they fail,same old story will apply - average players-average manager- way too much pressure and hype by media!!! no wonder the players prefer playing for their clubs!!

  • Comment number 82.

    Spain won the world cup winning games 1-0 and the Spanish public loved them. Chelsea defeated Barcelona in Champions league playing outstanding disciplined defensive football, albeit with a slice of luck, and the English public loved them. Why is it with the England team that people want to see gung-ho attacking football all the time? If England won the Euros with Hodgson in charge playing disciplined counter attacking football and won three quarters of their games 1-0 with their highest win being by two goals where is the problem with that? An England team trying to play attack vs attack with Germany Holland Spain etc would get thrashed, perhaps Hodgson's approach is whats needed, Chelsea showed Barcelona got frustrated when they couldn't pick teams apart with ease and then took their few chances with aplomb. Most managers could set England up to beat poor sides by a few goals, Hodgson's counter attacking methods could set England up to beat better ones..

  • Comment number 83.

    Why nog give Hodgson a chance ? Big names like Capello and Eriksen didn't fullfill
    expectations, although a quarterfinal at the World Championships with Eriksen now doesn't look as bad as it did at the time. Stars like Lampard, Gerrard and Terry are in decline. Englands can only win the Euro's if they take an approach which took Greece to be the champions in 2004. Solid defense, and a lot of hard work and running from midfield. If you look at it like that Hodgson looks the ticket.
    Furthermore it is worth realizing that the national teams that have been most succesful recently, Spain, Holland and Germany, do not have flamboyant managers, but just get on with the job of getting the most out of the players at their
    disposal. England's players aren't as good, but Hodgson might well be able to make
    them punch above their weight. With low expectations anyway what have England
    got to lose ?

  • Comment number 84.

    I guess Harry isn't ready to end his career yet - Maybe Roy is. Let's face it - that's the consequence of being the England manager!
    Mind you, Sir Alex is coming to the end of his 'day job' at Man Utd . . . maybe he could? . . . . Oh no, He's FOREIGN isn't he?

  • Comment number 85.

    Hodgson would be the perfect appointment. He's taken a series of mediocre teams and got them to live up to their mediocrity.

  • Comment number 86.

    Open minded about this but I get the feeling that Hodgson is a small/medium club man who, once expections shift from just scrapping for survival to winning consistently and with style will struggle, it's like Mourinho and Moyes swapping roles, I reckon they'd each do worse than at their current clubs. England just need to ask themselves what type of manager they want.

    The more important long term matter I think is how the manager will contribute to the youth set up in this country. To that end, I know he's stated that he wants a complete break from football but I wouldn't mind seeing Guardiola, even only on a part-time/consultancy basis have some input.

  • Comment number 87.

    @62 "Anyone harbouring thoughts of England playing anything like Barca needs to think again"

    Presumably because Messi's Argentinian and the rest of them are Spanish? Or does Harry do a number in the passport office too? Two Englishmen _might_ get into the Barca squad (Hart and Cole, for the record) - you think Pep would have England playing like Barca? If it was that easy, do you not think someone else might have tried it by now? Also, second place out of two in the league and a semi exit to ten man Chelsea might suggest that Barca's style has been found out - a bit like Arsenal's was post-Invincibles...

  • Comment number 88.

    6 Months ago England had a manager who had won everything. Now they have replaced him with a manager who has won nothing. Only the English with their deluded out of touch warped sense of reality would think they are in a better decision now than when they had Capello.
    The main point of argument that this is a better appointment is that he's English and can therefore communicate better with his players - fair enough, however the logic stops there. Being English may ensure he can communicate with his players better, it also hinders him from the point of view that England doesn't simply doesnt produce good managers - or good players actually - or good football decision making men - well lets just accept that England's footballing produce is pretty garbage so taking the communication aspect out of the equation, why the school of thought that an English manager would solve all Englands problems?
    Why does the likes of Milner, Hart, Walcott, Terry etc have so much problems playing for a foreign coach in the England set up when they report to one every other week at club level. At least 70% of the England squad must play for a foreign coach at club level.
    The truth of the matter is that the foreign coach was just another in a long line of excuses for England, thats all the ever produce - excuses. Instead of just facing up to the fact that England isn't the football super power it likes to think it is. The quality of the Premier League does not reflect the quality of the England team.

    It's the most thankless job in football. They are expected to win everything, despite half a century of miserable failure the nation still believes it can rub shoulders with the likes of France, Argentina and Brazil. So much expected with so little quality in the side.
    The players hate pulling on that jersey, most of the time they hate the manager too. The media have already started crucifying the entire set up before the tournaments even began.

  • Comment number 89.

    Altho a spurs fan, I think Roy's a good choice. Being England Manager isn't just about sending a team out on the day. We're short on homegrown talent and need some strategy around youth development etc. Not particularly sexy but vital and I think better suited to Roy. And what's all this about what Gerrard thinks? It's time to stop this player power thing. Gerrard ought to soon be yesterday's man, like some others mentioned elsewhere. The fact that he and other Lpl players will bust a gut for 'King Kenny' but not for managers not to their liking reflects badly on them. Likewise with Terry etc when ABV was in charge

  • Comment number 90.

    roy may be yet another england manager who fails to get the best out of the players available.his dour personality did him no favours when things went wrong at liverpool where he looked a haunted man uncomfortable in his own will he fare when things go wrong with england as they surely will!

  • Comment number 91.

    When I watched England win the World Cup I saw players to whom playing for their country was the reason they first kicked a ball - nothing, absolutely nothing, was more important than winning while wearing the England shirt. Not so today! Not by a long chalk! Until the mindset of the over-paid, ludicrously soft, prima donnas who call themselves footballers today changes to the same as the lads back then England will not win anything, no matter who the manager is. I feel sorry for Roy, he is about to inherit the number one poisoned chalice in sport.

  • Comment number 92.

    Both Harry and Roay are in their 60s..... what does this say for building a team for the future??? Shocking FA as usual

    I feel sorry for Roy if he gets it as the players are distinctly average. People keep blaming the managers and saying that the players have under performed but surely if they keep playing like this year after yuear then this is their ability level and not them under performing???

  • Comment number 93.

    Hodgson was barely given at chance at Liverpool and was treated harshly there but has International experience as the manager os the Swiss team.

    In my opinion if Spurs qualify for Europe its doubtful Redknapp would leave anyway.

    Give Hodgson a chance.

  • Comment number 94.

    Does it really matter who is appointed when we don't appear to have the players who are intelligent enough to adapt to playing international football. No England manager is going to be able to fix that given the lack of opportunities to get the players together because the clubs will not release them (and they'd jump at the chance to release them even less).

    From what I've read appointing Redknapp would cost a fortune to pay off Tottenham, and from the point of view of The Suits in the FA he's also potentially a bit of a loose cannon, whereas Hodgson is a lot cheaper and seen as a safe if rather uninspiring pair of hands. It says a lot about the state of English football that there are so few English candidates.

  • Comment number 95.

    I can actually see the "people" getting behind Roy because the "people" are fed up with what the media believe they have down as the "people choice"

    If by "people" they mean "media" and if by "media" they mean a few individuals who are taken by Arry's quick gaps and nauseating jokes about his wife/dog/anything down to earth, then yes he is the "people"choice

    Harry would have been a good appointment but comparing it to looking over Clough is frankly ridiculous.

    Hopefully Roy will get us well drilled and ready to do our best in the up coming tournament. It aint gonna be a classic but lets get behind them now.

  • Comment number 96.

    congrats roy! wouldve liked martinez personally...

  • Comment number 97.

    89 - I'm a Spurs fan and wanted Harry to get the job as his loyalty to certain players is ridiculous, also his constant interviews saying we are playing well when clearly we have not is undermining all Spurs fans.

  • Comment number 98.

    Got my "told you so" smirk on today with mates. Although the sheer volume of 'Arry's coronation announcements was overwhelming, it was easy to remember the whole Keegan fiasco as being very similar. The FA has long-since signalled its strategic preference for blank score sheets at the England end, regardless of entertainment value, and I couldn't see them picking Redknapp (look at Spurs' away goals difference this season).

    I wish Hodgson all the best - he may find that even moderate Euro success will go in his favour as the messianic expectations around Redknapp were patently undeliverable given the talent available.

  • Comment number 99.

    #2 - is that an African cucumber, or a European cucumber?

  • Comment number 100.

    Many of England’s players relished the potential appointment of Redknapp because they felt it might bring some of the joy back to playing for their country again which they felt had been taken away during Capello’s austere tenure.

    Why should it be fun?! It's their job to play football and frankly they should see it as an honour and privelege to represent England, something which for the vast majority of the population will only ever be a dream.

    Also i find it ridiculous that there's a story on here saying Harry wishes Roy well and there's no hard feelings. Why should there be?! Firstly Roy hasn't been offered or accepted the job and secondly it was never Harrys in the first place (he hasn't even been approached!). Sure I like most people thought Harry would at least be offered the job but really it was all down to media hype and a few players saying they thought he would be best for it, the FA have never once mentioned any names until now.

    Seems to me the Harry loving media are already trying to stir up trouble with all these comparisons, what does it matter?! He's not Harry Redknapp but so what! The FA obviously think he's suitable and at the end of the day that is all that matters, time will tell if the decision is right or not.

    Lastly though why do the FA insist on tying managers in to long term deals? It only ever back fires when they end up sacking him because results etc haven't been good enough, they should consider contracting a manager tournament to tournament on a rolling deal that way if they see fit they can change the manager without it costing millions of pounds.


Page 1 of 8

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.