*Official* English Football Season 2011-12

[GIMH]

Less than 12 hours to go!

Yeah, so excited. Watching it deep in Man U territory. Got a text off my dad telling me to 'keep quiet when [City] **** those *****'.

Liam Gallagher & Beady Eye Reveal Manchester City Home 2011 - YouTube

 

[The Sean]

Yeah, so excited. Watching it deep in Man U territory. Got a text off my dad telling me to 'keep quiet when [City] **** those *****'.

What are you doing in Surrey?

 

[sledger]

I think he actually is referring to London tbf, haha.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I don't agree with everything Ikki says on the Hodgson thing, but I don't see why people aren't holding his record at Liverpool against him a little more. To have Liverpool in the position he did is indefensible. I'm not sure whether he just didn't get the backing he felt he needed, certainly he made some questionable signings, but it is a worry that perhaps he couldn't handle some of the bigger egos that grace that squad. Good luck with England if that is indeed the case.

I don't want Redknapp or Hodgson but I actually do think Redknapp is probably the better manager of the two, although as Uppercut said, his main strength is in the transfer market.

Again, get a foreigner.

Hodgson at Liverpool had no chance. The fans (we're dealing with people like Ikki here) hated him from the start. He was too much of a gent to fit in with their crackpot culture, as you can see from Ikki's comments. Roy didn't say how great the performance was after every match and slaughter the opposition and referee for costing them the win. He didn't buy into the persecution complex and siege mentality, so the nutjobs didn't like it. And Liverpool fans still had this idea that they were a team that should be challenging for the title, instead of a midtable side that coughed up a good performance occasionally when 'the lads' were up for it.

He was in no sort of position to deal with the big egos because the fans weren't behind him. If he doesn't play the past-it hollywood ball merchant then you get the scousers crawling out of woodwork calling for the death penalty because their hero hasn't been selected. He was in a no-win situation.

My concern is that it doesn't repeat itself with England. **** the media. Pick the best team/squad for the medium term.

 

[Eds]

Hodgson at Liverpool had no chance. The fans (we're dealing with people like Ikki here) hated him from the start. He was too much of a gent to fit in with their crackpot culture, as you can see from Ikki's comments. Roy didn't say how great the performance was after every match and slaughter the opposition and referee for costing them the win. He didn't buy into the persecution complex and siege mentality, so the nutjobs didn't like it. And Liverpool fans still had this idea that they were a team that should be challenging for the title, instead of a midtable side that coughed up a good performance occasionally when 'the lads' were up for it.

He was in no sort of position to deal with the big egos because the fans weren't behind him. If he doesn't play the past-it hollywood ball merchant then you get the scousers crawling out of woodwork calling for the death penalty because their hero hasn't been selected.

Did a Liverpudlian rape your sister or something?

 

[sledger]

Nah, reckon Beevs has got that spot on tbh.

I don't think Hodgson is a world-class manager, but the above is undeniably true.

 

[GIMH]

Hodgson at Liverpool had no chance. The fans (we're dealing with people like Ikki here) hated him from the start. He was too much of a gent to fit in with their crackpot culture, as you can see from Ikki's comments. Roy didn't say how great the performance was after every match and slaughter the opposition and referee for costing them the win. He didn't buy into the persecution complex and siege mentality, so the nutjobs didn't like it. And Liverpool fans still had this idea that they were a team that should be challenging for the title, instead of a midtable side that coughed up a good performance occasionally when 'the lads' were up for it.

He was in no sort of position to deal with the big egos because the fans weren't behind him. If he doesn't play the past-it hollywood ball merchant then you get the scousers crawling out of woodwork calling for the death penalty because their hero hasn't been selected. He was in a no-win situation.

My concern is that it doesn't repeat itself with England. **** the media. Pick the best team/squad for the medium term.

Extreme language and hatred aside, I agree with some of your points. He was on a hiding to nothing for sure. But the idea that Liverpool were a midtable side that coughed up a good performance now and again is laughable, you are dealing with a side who had probably missed out on the Top 4 maybe 3 times in the decade prior to his appointment and he had them languishing near the trap door with about half the season gone. The form they showed in the second half of last season shows you he had them underperforming whichever way you try and spin it.

 

[GIMH]

Anyway, point stands that the things be was up against at Liverpool will all exist at England in some form.

 

[Ikki]

Hodgson at Liverpool had no chance. The fans (we're dealing with people like Ikki here) hated him from the start. He was too much of a gent to fit in with their crackpot culture, as you can see from Ikki's comments. Roy didn't say how great the performance was after every match and slaughter the opposition and referee for costing them the win. He didn't buy into the persecution complex and siege mentality, so the nutjobs didn't like it. And Liverpool fans still had this idea that they were a team that should be challenging for the title, instead of a midtable side that coughed up a good performance occasionally when 'the lads' were up for it.

He was in no sort of position to deal with the big egos because the fans weren't behind him. If he doesn't play the past-it hollywood ball merchant then you get the scousers crawling out of woodwork calling for the death penalty because their hero hasn't been selected. He was in a no-win situation.

My concern is that it doesn't repeat itself with England. **** the media. Pick the best team/squad for the medium term.

Laughable. From claiming we played brilliant when losing to Everton - being thoroughly outplayed in reality - to agreeing with Ferguson and criticizing Torres in public, to blaming and lying about the previous coach, blaming the fans, the **** football and **** results...yeah Hodgson never had a chance. It's about as ******** as claiming that Tranmere are knobs and didnt give Barnes a chance.

But did he play the victim card well. Brilliantly, and got all the excuses in the world.

Weren't you criticising Hodgson for doing well more than a decade ago? Make that two decades for Dalglish, who is so out of touch with the modern game it's laughable.

Yeah, if you read my posting I'm not touting Dalglish; but if you do want to look at history, if not simply watch the way their teams play, Dalglish is on another level. Which goes to show how overrated Roy is.

That's as far as Liverpool is considered, he was an unmitigated disaster. In the Euros you never know. It's a handful of games and his defensive-styled tactics might work. But, honestly, Capello to Hodgson should be mourned not celebrated. And to think they only talked to one candidate, that's taking the piss. Even the Iranian FA do more.

 

[Nate]

He had us playing the worst football I've seen in my time as a Liverpool supporter.

...but as ***y as they are, can we stop talking about Liverpool? Man Derby!

 

[The Sean]

But did he play the victim card well. Brilliantly, and got all the excuses in the world.

Sounds like he was perfect for Liverpool.

 

[Uppercut]

Well he'll have more creative control over the England team than he had at Liverpool- England don't have anything like a settled XI at the moment. He also suits the team quite well because England are SO much better suited to being a functional team than an attacking one (as is international football generally).

I think the biggest concern is the fact that the media are on his back from day one. Handling the media well is a massive part of being a top-level manager in England, especially for the national side. The fact that the players, fans and coaching staff all know that they're just waiting to pounce on his first sign of imperfection creates a really negative vibe around the whole squad. That's something that I think has been a big problem for England over the last few years.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Extreme language and hatred aside, I agree with some of your points. He was on a hiding to nothing for sure. But the idea that Liverpool were a midtable side that coughed up a good performance now and again is laughable, you are dealing with a side who had probably missed out on the Top 4 maybe 3 times in the decade prior to his appointment and he had them languishing near the trap door with about half the season gone. The form they showed in the second half of last season shows you he had them underperforming whichever way you try and spin it.

What does the decade before have to do with anything?

If you're looking at closer to when Hodgson took over. The difference was Torres, Mascherano and Alonso had all or were about to leave. Gerrard and Carragher were past their best and injury prone, from being at their peak 2-3 years earlier.

Basically Liverpool's only real quality player left was Reina. Liverpool still have this ability now and then to play a really high tempo pressing game that makes things tight and more suited to their own players, but they can't sustain it for many matches. Their lack of quality speaks for itself with so many poor results against weak sides, and it still does under KKK.

 

[grecian]

Well he'll have more creative control over the England team than he had at Liverpool- England don't have anything like a settled XI at the moment. He also suits the team quite well because England are SO much better suited to being a functional team than an attacking one.

I think the biggest concern is the fact that the media are on his back from day one. Handling the media well is a massive part of being a top-level manager in England, especially for the national side. The fact that the players, fans and coaching staff all know that they're just waiting to pounce on his first sign of imperfection creates a really negative vibe around the whole squad. That's something that I think has been a big problem for England over the last few years.

Last few years!!. I remember Bobby Robson being hounded around both Euros he presided over, then the nonsense that any good that happened was down to the ****wit players. Even in 1990, the stick we got after a decent draw against a good Republic side was immense.

The ravenous tabloid press has held us back, in more things than football, for as long as I can remember.

 

[GIMH]

What does the decade before have to do with anything?

If you're looking at closer to when Hodgson took over. The difference was Torres, Mascherano and Alonso had all or were about to leave. Gerrard and Carragher were past their best and injury prone, from being at their peak 2-3 years earlier.

Basically Liverpool's only real quality player left was Reina. Liverpool still have this ability now and then to play a really high tempo pressing game that makes things tight and more suited to their own players, but they can't sustain it for many matches. Their lack of quality speaks for itself with so many poor results against weak sides, and it still does under KKK.

Under Hodgson, Liverpool were something around the bottom three

IIRC, under Dalglish, only Chelsea (or was it Man U) got more points in that period.

So whatever you think about the quality of their players, the fact is the squad were much more capable than their performances under Hodgson suggest.

I don't see how anyone could honestly try and defend his spell at Liverpool. If you don't think it should count against him as a manager then fair enough I suppose. But to actually say it's not a blot on his record? Nah.

 

[GIMH]

Last few years!!. I remember Bobby Robson being hounded around both Euros he presided over, then the nonsense that any good that happened was down to the ****wit players. Even in 1990, the stick we got after a decent draw against a good Republic side was immense.

The ravenous tabloid press has held us back, in more things than football, for as long as I can remember.

Would be interesting if we did wind up appointing their man Harry, to see how long the honeymoon lasted.

 

[grecian]

Would be interesting if we did wind up appointing their man Harry, to see how long the honeymoon lasted.

Quite a long time, I'd think. People seem to think Taylor was pilloried, well he was at the end, but as with Keegan, the Press loved him at first, simply because they played the press game well. The turnip thing only came into it after a couple of years of destroying a very good team, and making them also-rans.

This is why I would like a manager like Ramsey or Robson, who didn't give a ****. The Press would squeal that by not talking to them, the manager wasn't talking to the fans, but what do we actually learn from ****ing Press conferences It's just ways that the lazy pressman can fill copy, then of course when the managers are ****ing up a way to find contradictions to crucify them.

Won't happen though.

 

[Ikki]

Honestly, it's the perfect appointment for Hodgson. If he fails, it was the players' fault per usual. If the players pull it out of their rears, he'll be the genius.

Sounds like he was perfect for Liverpool.

Unfortunately, for us, no one buys it. Woy is just wuvable.

 

[Uppercut]

Under Hodgson, Liverpool were something around the bottom three

IIRC, under Dalglish, only Chelsea (or was it Man U) got more points in that period.

So whatever you think about the quality of their players, the fact is the squad were much more capable than their performances under Hodgson suggest.

I don't see how anyone could honestly try and defend his spell at Liverpool. If you don't think it should count against him as a manager then fair enough I suppose. But to actually say it's not a blot on his record? Nah.

Only very briefly, at the very start of the season. They were actually 12th in the table when Hodgson was sacked, which is only a few places below where they were the season before and are now. It's not a huge blot- it seemed worse at the time because most people still thought Liverpool's squad was better than it was- in hindsight he only underperformed very slightly. And he was only in charge for a handful of games- things could have been a lot different had, say, Reina not had a massive boob against Arsenal in the last minute of his first game.

The whole 'player's fault for forcing him out' angle is total bollocks AFAIC, it's the manager's job to come to the players in that respect. But it was a really, really tough gig inheriting a mid-table squad that everyone expected to finish in the top four. As AVB found out this year, the worst managerial jobs are the ones where expectations are way out of whack with the quality of the squad- that's why the England job is such a nightmare.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Under Hodgson, Liverpool were something around the bottom three

IIRC, under Dalglish, only Chelsea (or was it Man U) got more points in that period.

So whatever you think about the quality of their players, the fact is the squad were much more capable than their performances under Hodgson suggest.

I don't see how anyone could honestly try and defend his spell at Liverpool. If you don't think it should count against him as a manager then fair enough I suppose. But to actually say it's not a blot on his record? Nah.

They had a bad start, but they weren't bottom 3 when he left and easy fixtures were skewed towards the end of the season when he'd already left. I don't see how it should be such a black mark against him when he inherited a weak squad, didn't net spend and had almost no time to do anything before he was out again.