Wednesday 2 May 2012

Hodgson's Zenith


Two and a half months after the resignation of Fabio Capello, Roy Hodgson has been named as the new England manger. He has been appointed to arguably the most prestigious, prominent and respected jobs in world football but in accepting the position he has agreed to shoulder the always heavy, occasionally crippling burden of expectations, hopes and dreams the England fans will undoubtedly bestow upon him. His appointment surprised many in the football world, probably none more so than Harry Redknapp who has been the media, players and fans almost unanimous choice throughout the selection process. But is Roy Hodgson really the man to end England’s 46 year wait to win a major tournament?



There is little doubting Hodgson’s coaching experience. One would be hard pressed to find a person in world football who has managed such a vast array of clubs and countries. The England job will be his 18th managerial position since he started his career in Sweden at Halmstads BK in 1976, guiding them to 2 league championships in 4 years in what he dubbed himself “a water into wine job”. Since then he has managed the likes of Inter Milan, Blackburn and Udinese as well Switzerland and Finland at international level. David Berstein was quick to point out in the press conference unveiling the new man, that Hodgson was the first England manager ever to have previous international managing experience. On paper he appears to be more than qualified to undertake a position that has been occupied in recent years by a Swedish womanizer, a “Wally with a Brolly” and a man whose grasp of the English language was comparable to that of Claudio Ranieri's.

But as a Liverpool fan I cannot ignore nor forget his time at Anfield. It was supposed to be the pinnacle of his career; the time when he would finally be able to utilise his vast experience at a club that had dreams of premiership glory. But it wasn’t long before those dreams turned into a nightmare as Liverpool became embroiled in a battle to stay out the relegation zone. Hodgson was appointed to provide stability to a club that was undergoing turmoil at the hands of Hicks and Gilette yet his stint at the club was the shortest of any Liverpool manager ever. But what went wrong? Critics have pointed to his handling of big players, his signings (do we have to look any further than Paul Konchesky), and his negative team selections. His reign at the helm was so short we will probably never know, but since then he has steered West Brom from a club facing the imminent threat of relegation to a comfortable mid table position only 3 points behind Liverpool. His management of ‘smaller’ clubs is beyond question and he will be hoping along with England fans up and down the country he can transfer this success onto the biggest stage of them all.

While the appointment of Sven Goren Erikson and Fabio Capello were met with much hyperbole and aggrandizement by the press, Hodgson’s announcement has elicited a rather more cautious response. Indeed in the months since Capello’s resignation twitter has been buzzing with tweets from the likes of Ferdinand, Wiltshire, Johnson and Rooney expressing their wish for Redknapp to get the job; however the silence emanating from twitter since the announcement of Hodgson have spoken louder than any tweets. But this tentative approach may well be the missing ingredient in what England have been lacking in previous tournaments, where the media and fans alike have built up the teams chances to astronomical levels only to see them come crashing down in a heap of penalty misses, disallowed goals and goalkeeping mistakes. Time has proven Hodgson’s greatest strength is his ability to get the best out of his players. As a nation England is littered with world class talent and Hodgson will believe he can get the best out of his stars. While success at the Euros this summer may be too much too soon for the new manager, fans will be looking for signs of improvement and progression from the abysmal England display in South Africa. Hodgson has no doubt reached the zenith of his managerial career, but with this comes the realisation that the fall from this point is a long way down. While the pressure may largely be off for the European Championships this summer, England fans will be expecting big things come Brazil 2014. Good luck Roy.

3 comments:

  1. There was an article on BBC Sport which suggested that the FA's decision to defer to Hodgson over Redknapp came down to their vision for a 'day to day management' with the position. They wanted a man capable of importing a club mentality to the new national set up at Burton, involved from top to bottom with development etc and apparently didn't see Harry doing a job. No chance of seeing him in a tracksuit, apparently. Still, if that was among the criteria for selection, I don't understand why Stuart Pearce got wholly overlooked for the permanent position.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stuart Pearce should not really have been in the running for the position. His managerial pedigree or experience is nowhere near that of Redknapp or Hodgson. I think he does a decent job with the under 21s but being a national hero of sorts from his playing days he gets cut a lot of slack from the press and fans in the same way that Dalglish does with Liverpool. Before Capello got the job and people were discussing Redknapp for England I didn't want him because I thought his best attributes were in the transfer market as a 'wheeler dealer' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJBsI7RAuvk if you've not seen it) and obviously you can't apply this at international level. If what that article says about the day to day management of Burton is true then I think it makes sense.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Money will have undoubtedly played a part as well despite what the FA might say. Levy would've wanted crazy money for Harry in compensation and his wages would've been higher than Roy's too. Roy has a similar pedigree and one arguably more suited to what they're after. I think they decided in the end that the potential gain of Harry over Roy wasn't worth the potential risk/money.

    ReplyDelete