nottsblue wrote:Good article. Very valid point regarding actually coaching the game and coaching the man. Players are picked for the national side because they are already good enough. What they need more often than not is the ability to fit into a different way of playing to their club side and to have the belief they are good enough to win things as it's been so long as a nation that we have been successfull.
I agree totally - the England job is not rocket science, and as much as I'm not a fan of his, I would have had Allardyce in years ago. His 'style' of football isn't as bad as it's made out, and he gets players up for the games. And basically, when you get your players together for a tournament once every 2 years, its getting the players up for the games and havinig the tactical nous to win 1 off games that counts, how good a coach you are doesn't even come into it.
I don't give a fuck how the England manager 'coaches' players, his job isn't to make them better, it's to manage them and inspire them make to fit in an unfamiliar system and motivate them to win games. Nothing more, nothing less.
Edit to say, that would rule out the likes of Mancini and Pellegrini, as they have a certain rigid philosophy on how they play, and will shoehorn inappropriate players into those roles, just like Hodgson and Pellers did with Sterling, and every England manager did for years with Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes