Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

England manager continuum

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    England manager continuum

    I was struck by the fuss about the Capello Index and how this was exactly the sort of trouble that Sven-Goran Eriksson would have got himself into, with his various ludicrous commercial escapades.

    And that got me thinking. Capello's performance at the World Cup was eerily Sven-esque:

    - rigid adherence to 4-4-2
    - crap substitutions
    - distracted by commercial issues
    - bizarre fascination with Emily Heskey

    What is it about becoming England manager that turns everyone into a crap manager? The only England manager I can think of who emerged with his reputation enhanced was Terry Venables and he was also the only one who got England out of their 4-4-2 straightjacket...

    #2
    England manager continuum

    I think it's more that 4-2-3-1 (or variations on that theme, with two defensive midfielders doing the hard work allowing one attacking midfielder relative freedom) has become so de rigueur internationally and domestically (at the clubs where most of the English squad players play), that the realisation that most of the defensive midfielders at the clubs concerned are foreign, leaving Capello with a choice of playing Gareth Barry and Michael Carrick/James Milner behind Frank Lampard and get annihilated (even more than they did against Germany) because the defensive midfielders aren't good enough, or play the only other system the players are comfortable with (4-4-2), knowing that it's the system that exposes the English limitations the least.

    Comment


      #3
      England manager continuum

      Torcida wrote:
      What is it about becoming England manager that turns everyone into a crap manager?
      Is this question being asked with an ironic smile?

      Torcida wrote:
      The only England manager I can think of who emerged with his reputation enhanced was Terry Venables and he was also the only one who got England out of their 4-4-2 straightjacket...
      Venables was lucky in that he had a relatively good crop of players and a decent mix of youth and experience. This was around the time that positive, skilful attacking football had come back into fashion (the younger players had matured in this environment) but shortly before top English players fell victim to the rampant egomania encouraged by the Premier League once it was in full swing, and thus became near-unmanageable. The hardest player to manage out of the Euro 96 squad was obviously Gascoigne, but Venables got on well with him and his time in charge coincided with a relatively good/confident spell for Gazza (playing in a league where he felt comfortable, winning stuff, not being too badly injured all the time). If you look at the rest of that squad, you find old-fashioned model professionals (Pearce, Platt), calmly efficient ball-players (Redknapp, Anderton), genuinely clever footballers (Sheringham, McManaman) and a pretty good goalkeeper. A much better balance than any England squad this millennium, really.

      He also had a couple of players who'd played abroad, notably Paul Ince, whose transfer to Inter had improved his game - a year or two before he'd been this unreliable, ego-driven Gerrard-type player, but by summer 96 he'd matured as far as Paul Ince was ever going to mature. He had a very good tournament, at least as I recall.

      Venables' changing formations were pretty smart in terms of making use of what was there, but England didn't do that well, did they? There were only two really convincing performances, one of which was against a Dutch side falling apart at the seams, the other of which was against Germany, in a game they lost. How's that different from England's performance in the 1990 World Cup?

      Comment


        #4
        England manager continuum

        Capello might have been able to manage the same if he'd had hargreaves and dean ashton. Hargreaves would have been a huge addition in midfield, and massively improved their passing from front to back. Ashton was a very skilful line leading forward, and was able to give the team great shape, while other players around him did a lot of the fast running.

        unfortunately both are cripples. Instead he's stuck with no real line leading forward, and his midfielders seem to be made entirely of egotism.

        To be honest, I don't know if the players were going to listen to capello before, because even though they hadn't qualified for euro 2008, he couldn't drop people for not following his plans.

        Perhaps they'll now do it his way. Because they showed no signs of following any tactical plan, and he definitely had one.

        Comment


          #5
          England manager continuum

          I'm mystified as to how Capello got himself into such bother with the whole Capello Index thing.

          The guys behind it (as anyone can tell immediately from the website) are Italian, so it isn't a language issue. And Capello is a shareholder and director of the company that holds the trademark, so it isn't as if he just lent them his name for a one-time fee.

          Comment


            #6
            England manager continuum

            But it wasn't as though there are no good England defensive midfielders.

            Scott Parker was playing well and yet he didn't take him - why on earth not? Particularly given Barry was coming off an injury.

            Another gripe - England have a wonderful crop of wingers currently. Capello took Lennon, Milner, Joe Cole and Wright-Phillips but he could also have taken Adam Johnson, Theo Walcott and Ashley Young. Why not be adventurous and build a team around real speed down the wings? If you want Rooney to play like he does for his domestic club someone needs to be Valencia, pinging in loads of crosses for him.

            Comment


              #7
              England manager continuum

              Torcida wrote:
              The only England manager I can think of who emerged with his reputation enhanced was Terry Venables and he was also the only one who got England out of their 4-4-2 straightjacket...
              Can't believe I missed this bit earlier. Venables came out with his reputation enhanced because of his friends with the press (and how good he was at giving them stories), and by not getting his contract extended (prior to Euro 96) because he was due in court on charges that led to him being disqualified as a director. That it wasn't "footballing reasons" meant that it was a "travesty". When you consider how poor his record post-Euro 96 is, there were still sections of the tabloid press suggesting him as Eriksson's replacement. All based on two wins out of five on home soil.

              The one thing that Venables was derided for was getting England out of their "4-4-2 straightjacket" and into the Christmas Tree formation (4-3-2-1). He was rightly derided for that, because at the time, all his players were playing 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 at club level, and some of them couldn't get to grips with it. That's fine though as he only tried it in friendlies, as come Euro 96, he went back to 4-4-2:

              Seaman
              Neville-Adams-Southgate-Pearce
              Anderton-Ince-Gascoigne-McManaman
              Sheringham-Shearer

              Platt replacing Ince for the quarter final. Sheringham wasn't as far advanced as Shearer, but he wasn't deep lying in the sense that we would call it today. Venables was forced into going 3-5-2 for the semi-final with Germany (Pearce as one of three centre backs, with Platt joining Ince and Gascoigne in midfield) because Gary Neville was suspended and Venables hadn't named a backup right back in his 22 man squad, although he did try it in the second half against Scotland (Pearce withdrawn, Neville at centre half, Rednapp in midfield) until Jamie Redknapp was taken off injured.

              The Mighty Kubelgog!!! wrote:
              Capello might have been able to manage the same if he'd had hargreaves and dean ashton. Hargreaves would have been a huge addition in midfield, and massively improved their passing from front to back. Ashton was a very skilful line leading forward, and was able to give the team great shape, while other players around him did a lot of the fast running.
              Hargreaves, certainly was a huge loss, but we'll never know about Ashton, consdiering he was never capped. We'll never know if he was capable of making that step up, some players just can't make that next step mentally (and don't forget Ashton hadn't even played European club football).

              Torcida wrote:
              But it wasn't as though there are no good England defensive midfielders.
              Good isn't good enough. England only have one defensive midfielder who is good enough, and that is Owen Hargreaves.

              Scott Parker was playing well and yet he didn't take him - why on earth not? Particularly given Barry was coming off an injury.
              Gareth Barry isn't good enough, but a three quarters-fit Gareth Barry is better than Scott Parker. James Milner is a better defensive midfielder that Scott Parker.

              Scott Parker is 30 years old. In an decade where more players have been capped than any other, where more caps have been awarded than any other, Scott Parker has managed to pick up just three. His last cap (and only competitive match) was the disastrous European Championship qualifier in Zagreb in 2005 where even with five defenders and two defensive midfielders, England put up one of their most appalling defensive performances in history (losing 2-0 to a side who weren't a patch on the one that turned up at Wembley a year later), and at the heart of this was Parker, who despite Paul Robinson's fuck up for the second goal, was the worst of the bunch.

              If Parker was good enough for the top level of international football, he would have needed to have proven himself at a top club by now. At Chelsea he was kept out of the team by Tiago. At West Ham, he's charged with protecting the defence, which finished fourth from bottom, and shipped 66 goals. If Parker is so good, why is he at West Ham at the age of 30? I've give you a clue, it'd because he isn't so good.

              Another gripe - England have a wonderful crop of wingers currently.
              No. England have a crop of fast wingers. A surfeit of speed.

              Capello took Lennon, Milner, Joe Cole and Wright-Phillips but he could also have taken Adam Johnson, Theo Walcott and Ashley Young. Why not be adventurous and build a team around real speed down the wings? If you want Rooney to play like he does for his domestic club someone needs to be Valencia, pinging in loads of crosses for him.
              Manchester United reputedly spent £16m on Valencia. Which would be enough to buy most of the wingers you mentioned. Why did Ferguson spend that money on Valencia, and not on Lennon, Milner, Cole, Wright-Phillips, Johnson, Walcott or Young? Because Valencia is the one who consistently puts great crosses in. Speed is nothing without delivery.

              Like Parker, Wright-Phillips didn't make the grade at Chelsea, Lennon consistently flatters to deceive, Milner's on a tour of mid-table teams, Cole looked fucked before he kicked a ball, Walcott's distribution is abysmal, and Young's now a winger because it dawned on Martin O'Neill that he bought a fast striker who couldn't score goals (much like in Milner he bought a winger who wasn't very good at crossing).

              And then we have Adam Johnson. I've seen at least one journalist compare him to Thomas Müller and wonder what could have been, and use hindsight to suggest that Johnson should have gone. However, this is based on the fact that a) they're both wingers, and b) they had the same number of caps before June. However - Müuller had just won the double in Germany, as first choice in his position, and played in a Champions League final at the age of 20 (and had been one of Germany's better players as they trounced an England U21 side containing Johnson 4-0 in the European U21 Championship final). At the same age, Johnson was coming off the bench for lower midtable Middlesbrough. A year later, he just about getting in their relegation team. He's played a dozen games as first choice for Man City, it would have been lunacy throwing him into a World Cup based on that.

              Comment


                #8
                England manager continuum

                Interesting stuff from Taylor about the mid-90s England team. I'd actually say the France 98 squad had a better balance about it (Pearce was a creaking and paceless liability at Euro96), and that squad might conceivably have actually done something but for the one poor performance of that campaign - the Romania defeat - that condemned England to a second-round match against Argentina, although given that Croatia (the alternative second-round opponents) cruised to the semis that was hardly a given. That was probably the most impressive England qualifying campaign of the past two decades too.

                Comment


                  #9
                  England manager continuum

                  it's worth pointing out that venables only emerged from that european championships with his credibility intact because he had spent so much time shovelling stolen booze into his scummy hack friends in his 'nightclub'.

                  England should have gone out in the second round to spain. Only a refereeing performance as bad as either leg of the barcelona-inter milan semi final was able to keep england in that one.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    England manager continuum

                    The Mighty Kubelgog!!! wrote:
                    it's worth pointing out that venables only emerged from that european championships with his credibility intact because he had spent so much time shovelling stolen booze into his scummy hack friends in his 'nightclub'.

                    England should have gone out in the second round to spain. Only a refereeing performance as bad as either leg of the barcelona-inter milan semi final was able to keep england in that one.
                    One bad linesman decision (ruling out a legitimate goal for offside) does not make a bad refereeing performance.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      England manager continuum

                      Parker is a pretty good player, I think. But he's not a defensive midfielder. He's a traditional box to box player, who's actually better attacking than defending - basically a not quite as good Gerrard. Ledley King was probably the best holding/defensive midfield option available to Capello, had he been fit.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        England manager continuum

                        I also think Milner is a decent crosser of the ball, he's just not quick or skilfil enough to get into position often enough to play on the wing at the top level.

                        Otherwise I agree with TV.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          England manager continuum

                          hmm, i remember two actual goals ruled out for offside and at least two incidents where spanish players were through on goal and hauled back incorrectly. There were also a couple of very good penalty shouts for spain in that game as well.

                          i still laugh to think of the miss by shearer, which has to be perhaps the worst I've ever seen in an international tournament. He can't have been more than 4 feet out when he missed that great chance.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            England manager continuum

                            E10 Rifle wrote:
                            I'd actually say the France 98 squad had a better balance about it (Pearce was a creaking and paceless liability at Euro96), and that squad might conceivably have actually done something but for the one poor performance of that campaign - the Romania defeat - that condemned England to a second-round match against Argentina, although given that Croatia (the alternative second-round opponents) cruised to the semis that was hardly a given. That was probably the most impressive England qualifying campaign of the past two decades too.
                            Yeah, I'd agree with all that. It's weird to remember what a good coach Glenn Hoddle looked like becoming. In retrospect his weirdness, his immaturity and most of all his horrible man-management were always going to undo him in the end, but it's a shame, because he seemed to have a pretty good idea of how to get a team playing decent football, even if he was a disaster one-on-one. I haven't watched a full 90 minutes of any of those games since 1998, but I seem to remember England looking amazingly fluent and sophisticated (by their standards), despite the brainless moments from various individuals.

                            The brainless moments in that tournament, of course, were in almost every case costly. It's hard to tell how many of them Hoddle could have averted with better instructions (Graeme, don't lose your concentration; Alan, don't elbow the goalie in the throat; David, don't be a snotty dick - you may as well tell fish not to swim). Perhaps this was the moment when the technical improvement in English football that happened in the 1990s reached a premature and slightly underwhelming climax - and also the moment when the new century's superstar twattishness first started to kick in.

                            I'd love to see some of those games again, actually. It's too long ago to remember clearly, not least because I'd have watched all those matches drunk. Maybe that England side wouldn't look so good now, but just the pass from Beckham that set up Owen's goal v Argentina (never mind the goal itself) was better than anything anyone English has done in a World Cup since.

                            Oh alright, Joe Cole's volley. But he might just have been lucky.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              England manager continuum

                              Etienne wrote:
                              Parker is a pretty good player, I think. But he's not a defensive midfielder. He's a traditional box to box player, who's actually better attacking than defending - basically a not quite as good Gerrard.
                              Scott Parker is seen by many pundits and fans as being a defensive midfielder because he can tackle.

                              The Mighty Kubelgog!!! wrote:
                              hmm, i remember two actual goals ruled out for offside and at least two incidents where spanish players were through on goal and hauled back incorrectly. There were also a couple of very good penalty shouts for spain in that game as well.
                              I was pretty much smack bag in line with the offsides. One was a good decision (that Kiko put in the net - he wasn't just offside, probably not even an inch in it - the sort of decision Andy Gray would berate because the linesman "couldn't possibly know for certain", and should therefore give to the striker regardless), but the other one was bad. Salinas was onside for his "goal", both when the initial pass is played, and when Hierro takes a swipe at the ball, but the linesman flags as though Hierro got a touch. I don't think anyone's ever argued that should have been anything but a goal.

                              As for players being hauled back, considering your suggestion of Puyol hauling players back in South Africa included situations where he couldn't even get Arjen Robben of all people to lose his footing, then it's fair to take those with a pinch of salt (and also remember that what constitutes a foul in 2010 didn't always constitute one in 1996). Certainly I don't remember any, and a cursory view of the game doesn't bring any to mind.

                              There were three penalty shouts:

                              1) Adams on Caminero - the ball goes towards Caminero, Adams gets there first, Caminero still has a difficult reach but as the balls gone, he makes contact with air, and falls over. It's not a dive, but there's no contact.

                              2) Kiko had the ball, overruns it, Southgate comes sliding in with both feet, makes about a solid a contact as you can with the ball, Kiko carries on running, tries a shot but the ball's now gone, and he goes over Southgate. In 2010, it would probably be a penalty, because Southgate's challenge would be considered careless, in 1996, it's a fair tackle.

                              3) Alfonso has the ball, Adams comes in from the side - from the main TV angle it looks a foul, from the second angle Adams clearly takes the ball.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                England manager continuum

                                the hauled back refers to wrong offside decisions, not rugby tackles. analogue bubblebath is very vocal about this game, and almost certainly has watched it in the last couple of days.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  England manager continuum

                                  I'm not going on second hand memories. AB will just have to come and explain it himself.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    England manager continuum

                                    I was pretty much smack bag in line with the offsides.
                                    We must've been sat in the same section of the ground (royal box side, slightly to the right, away from the tunnel end, right?)

                                    Whatever the hows and whys of the offsides, Spain were massively superior to England in that match.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      England manager continuum

                                      TV is right and i am still astonished that managers like Robson, Vennerbles and now Hoddle get such a romantic write up.

                                      For a start, most people were glad on hearing on the eve of WC90 that Robson was leaving.
                                      I think most people thought "good riddance" as most thought he should have been sacked in 88 and Venerbles (or Clough) appointed. Pleat would have been a contender if not for the incident on seven sisters road in 87.

                                      In the two years leading up to Euro 96, England were no better than they were under Taylor, teams would turn up at wembley and take the piss (Nigeria, Romania and Columbia spring to mind) Shearer didn't score, Venerbles and the FA fell out with Ince over the Cantona affair and Venerbles was in the news constantly over his business dealings, the fallout of his sacking by Spurs and his role in the Bung relating to the Sherringham transfer.

                                      Again, people were pretty happy when it was announced before Euro96 that he would be leaving, England were not scoring goals, the players were struggling to adapt to his Xmas tree formation and i think people were just hoping England did not embarrass themselves.

                                      England were lucky to draw with Switzerland (I am sure Moonlight Shadow would concur) and were panned by the press.
                                      Against Scotland, they were being outplayed for most of the game apart from the cameo put in by Jamie Redknapp.

                                      The performance and result against Holland was excellent.

                                      The Spain game had decisions that led to people muttering darkly about 66.
                                      The Germany game was an excellent performance too.

                                      Regarding Hoddle, it was not an easy qualifying route.
                                      They lost the home leg to Italy and had been playing catch-up from then onwards.

                                      Luckily for them Italy had drawn a couple of games so by the return fixture, England needed a draw that they achieved through resolute defending and poor finishing by Italy.

                                      How anyone can make anything positive from the 98 world cup astounds me.
                                      First there was his reluctance to start with Owen, his treatment of Beckham and his penchance for embarrassing his player in training and public.

                                      The group games against Tunisia and Romania were poor and it was only when he started with Beckham and Owen against Colombia did England look a decent team.

                                      After the defeat against Argentina there were alot of rumblings from the players complaining about his management style and his subsequent autobiography sealed his fate.
                                      The comments about disabled people was the excuse the FA needed to sack him without paying out all his contract.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        England manager continuum

                                        Robson only came good in 1986 and 1990 when the system was changed by events beyond his control (injuries in 86, player pressure in 90)

                                        Venables IIRC messed up the penalty shoot-out in 1996 (wrong subs in extra time; allowing Ince to opt-out?), which one would expect a top coach to get right. He also lost a European Cup final with Barca to the might Steau. His record with Spurs was debatable.

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          England manager continuum

                                          Actually is was also injuries in 1990 too.
                                          the stuff about England moving to 3-5-2 and playing better is a massive myth.
                                          For a start, England moved to 3-5-2 because Robson did not want to drop Butcher even though he was clearly past it.
                                          secondly, England only played 3-5-2 for only a small minority of the tournament and quickly moved to a 4-4-2 when they went behind against Germany and Cameroon as the midfield of Platt, Gascoigne and Waddle were constantly overrun.

                                          Again like 1986, Bryan Robson got injured which gave Platt the chance to play (and he only started his first game again Cameroon).

                                          His record for Spurs was preciding over a financial meltdown which almost bankupted the club and of course selling all our black players.

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            England manager continuum

                                            E10 Rifle wrote:
                                            I was pretty much smack bag in line with the offsides.
                                            We must've been sat in the same section of the ground (royal box side, slightly to the right, away from the tunnel end, right?)
                                            Nope, the tunnel end was the end where the offsides were. I was the opposite side to the Royal Box, roughly level with the 18 yard box. A better view of Pearce's celebration than the press managed to get.

                                            satchmo76 wrote:
                                            Robson only came good in 1986 and 1990 when the system was changed by events beyond his control (injuries in 86, player pressure in 90)

                                            Venables IIRC messed up the penalty shoot-out in 1996 (wrong subs in extra time; allowing Ince to opt-out?), which one would expect a top coach to get right.
                                            Venables didn't use any subs in extra time against Germany, and it's a little harsh to blame Ince - Darren Anderton had taken a fair amount of penalties for Portsmouth and Spurs, but stood back and allowed Southgate (who had only ever taken one penalty before for Palace, which he put on the post).

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              England manager continuum

                                              Don't feel sorry for Southgate, he is one of these John Terry types that are always putting themselves forward to do things that are beyond their station.
                                              Even as a squad player, he was alway there in England press conferences talking like he was the captain trying to give the opinion that he was some kind of big shot and important member of the squad.

                                              This was confirmd by a few ex-players at Boro who told of his behaviour at the end of Mclaren's reign at Middlesboro.

                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                England manager continuum

                                                For me, England's best performance of recent times wsa probably the defeat of Argentina in 2002, although they weren't the strongest Argentinian side of recent years, the current England side would have been easily overrun by players like Batistuta and Aimar. The 02 squad was pretty good actually, Owen and Scholes at their peak, Ferdinand and Campbell a strong and resolute partnership at the back and an emerging Ashley Cole on the left. If Beckham had been fully fit and Neville had played rather than Mills, England might have gone a bit further. Had they had a germ of an idea against the Brazilians they'd have played Turkey in the semis and a deeply average German team in the final. Who'd they just destroyed in the qualifiers.
                                                But 98 was a decent team as well. The whole of the Argentina game is up on youtube, albeit with ESPN commentary. England did play startingly well, Ince in particular having an incredible match.

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  England manager continuum

                                                  It's by no means obvious England would have beaten a fairly sharp and canny Turkey side in the 02 semis. And their limitations were summed up by the way they responded to going behind against Brazil - ie they didn't. England in 2002 were an OK quarter-final sort of side, nothing more, nothing less. They were never going to win it.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X