England

[Groundhog63]

1 hour ago, The Butcher said:

 

 

Read that last night. He makes valid points, tbf. 

Then read this just now. Also seems to reaffirm the point that we've not enough coached coaches. 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cz6wzl93223o

 

 

As an aside, and fwiw, I don't give a flying fuck if the England manager's German. More to the point, unless your beef with this appointment is about the serious lack of English talent and not just about the fact he's NOT English then there's something wrong with you. Especially if that beef is heightened simply because he's a Jorman. 

[Mahoneys Tache]

Exponential increase of ‘I served my country’ posts on social media. 

[Groundhog63]

10 minutes ago, Mahoneys Tache said:

Exponential increase of ‘I served my country’ posts on social media. 

No idea what's going on with them, probs distracted by the myriad baiting to hate brown people, but the Poppy Police are running late this year as well. 

 

Maybees this appointment will sharpen the patriots minds.

[UncleBingo]

7 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

Would you draw it at Kai Havertz starting up front for England? Or does it only become risible and xenophobic at the exact point that it's not a player we're talking about?

There are clearly defined criteria on who can and can't represent a country on the pitch, I don't really give a shite where people were born......take Owen Hargreaves, I was much more offended by his haircut than his accent or birthplace.

 

No such rules exist for non-playing staff, so I don't really care where they were born or whether they'll sing the national anthem or not......I certainly wouldn't FWIW.

 

It is a sad indictment of our coaching set up in England that there are very few people you would even consider, but this is a country where journeymen like Allardyce, Bruce, Rednapp etc are lauded simply for being friends with the right people in the press. The likes of Potter would never be given a chance by these same people clamouring for someone English.

 

 

[mondonewc]

No English manager has ever won the Premier League... Good luck to Tuchel!!!

[AyeDubbleYoo]

16 minutes ago, mondonewc said:

No English manager has ever won the Premier League... Good luck to Tuchel!!!

Don’t think he’ll win the premier league. 

[McCormick]

Often plays with a lot of 10’s so should suit the players we have. 

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, UncleBingo said:

There are clearly defined criteria on who can and can't represent a country on the pitch, I don't really give a shite where people were born......take Owen Hargreaves, I was much more offended by his haircut than his accent or birthplace.

 

No such rules exist for non-playing staff, so I don't really care where they were born or whether they'll sing the national anthem or not......I certainly wouldn't FWIW.

 

It is a sad indictment of our coaching set up in England that there are very few people you would even consider, but this is a country where journeymen like Allardyce, Bruce, Rednapp etc are lauded simply for being friends with the right people in the press. The likes of Potter would never be given a chance by these same people clamouring for someone English.

 

 

 

So to summarise (and putting your hypotheticals to one side for a moment), because there are rules about players you care, but because there are no rules about the coaching staff you don't?

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17 by Kid Icarus

[Wullie]

1 hour ago, UncleBingo said:

The likes of Potter would never be given a chance by these same people clamouring for someone English.

 

As far as I'm concerned that's demonstrably false. You're arguing against a fictional England-for-the-English baddie that you've dreamt up. 

 

On 16/07/2024 at 15:41, Wullie said:

More than anything, I don't see the FA paying up an expensive PL contract, especially after they've had previous recent success with promoting from within (and so have Spain). Even if they didn't do that Potter just looks an obvious choice to me - free, available and good at playing possession football.

 

[UncleBingo]

11 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

So to summarise, because there are rules about players you care, but because there are no rules about the coaching staff you don't?

 

 

 

 

 

I clearly stated that "I don't really give a shite where people were born", do keep up. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17 by UncleBingo

[UncleBingo]

11 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

As far as I'm concerned that's demonstrably false. You're arguing against a fictional England-for-the-English baddie that you've dreamt up. 

 

 

I haven't dreamt anything up, the English media have a history of going after people that aren't pally with them, or who don't sing the national anthem with enough gusto.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17 by UncleBingo

[Kid Icarus]

8 minutes ago, UncleBingo said:

I clearly stated that "I don't really give a shite where players were born", do keep up.

 

 

 

Where players are born is irrelevant to the point. As you know, players don't choose to play for countries solely based on where they were born.

 

I get that you want to make it clear that you're not a bigot, but if we could both take that as a given about each other and talk like adults we'll probably get to a mutual understanding much quicker.

 

Do you agree with the existing clearly defined criteria on who can and can't represent their country on the pitch? Is it not reasonable to think that same criteria should also apply to arguably the most important role, ie the manager?

 

 

Edited October 17 by Kid Icarus

[Pata]

4 hours ago, The Butcher said:

 

First reply says it’s actually €6000 which is still a lot less tbf.

 

I think the biggest problem is the English obsession of big name players getting big managerial gigs almost instantly and obviously failing. That then taints the reputation of English coaches who have actually done their licenses but fail to get any big jobs.

[The College Dropout]

The only viable English manager was Howe. Maybe Potter. 
 

Potter vs Tuchel is almost a philosophical choice.  1 is better qualified . The other is likely to be a better cultural fit (including personality here). 
 

Eddie would be the standout. Managed at every level of the English game. Prefers British based players and has a modern style that is also very British at the same time. As much pedigree as 90% of international managers in modern club football.  If not him there’s big sacrifice to make. And they sacrificed nationality and depth of knowledge of the English game. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

They couldn't have got Howe anyway IMO, so he wasn't a factor in the decision. 

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

They couldn't have got Howe anyway IMO, so he wasn't a factor in the decision. 

Did they even try?

 

With him existing he’s still a factor. 
 

The lack of viable English coaches is a massive factor too.  
 

I would’ve been tempted to give it Carsley just because.  

 

 

Edited October 17 by The College Dropout

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

Did they even try?

 

I'm not sure, possibly a quick call and found out it was impossible. Poaching a manager from a PL club mid-season is just not going to happen, even without considering the specifics of Howe himself. 

 

 

Edited October 17 by AyeDubbleYoo

[macphisto]

It makes you think about the job Ashworth did for England. A long-term plan should have been in place with coaches embedded within Southgate's set-up and Under 21s.

[UncleBingo]

31 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Where players are born is irrelevant to the point. As you know, players don't choose to play for countries solely based on where they were born.

 

I get that you want to make it clear that you're not a bigot, but if we could both take that as a given about each other and talk like adults we'll probably get to a mutual understanding much quicker.

 

Do you agree with the existing clearly defined criteria on who can and can't represent their country on the pitch? Is it not reasonable to think that same criteria should also apply to arguably the most important role, ie the manager?

 

 

 

'Talk like adults' 🤣

 

Personally, I think representing and managing your country are two entirely different things - one is an achievement within your sport, the other is a job. However, I wouldn't be opposed to the same rules being applied to non-playing staff....as long as it was across the board for everyone. I'm not sure what the ramifications would be with employment law etc. 

 

 

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, UncleBingo said:

'Talk like adults' 🤣

 

Personally, I think representing and managing your country are two entirely different things - one is an achievement within your sport, the other is a job. However, I wouldn't be opposed to the same rules being applied to non-playing staff....as long as it was across the board for everyone. I'm not sure what the ramifications would be with employment law etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know how you thread that needle of one being one thing and the other being another. It's good that you can see the point being made and wouldn't be opposed to it though. I'm not sure it would need to be across the board for everyone either, you would expect that there will be absolutionists who want it to apply to everyone, but personally I think in addition to the players it would only need to apply to the manager. That way the really important/influential roles are covered.

[UncleBingo]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

I don't know how you thread that needle of one being one thing and the other being another. It's good that you can see the point being made and wouldn't be opposed to it though. I'm not sure it would need to be across the board for everyone either, you would expect that there will be absolutionists who want it to apply to everyone, but personally I think in addition to the players it would only need to apply to the manager. That way the really important/influential roles are covered.

I don't see it as threading the needle, one is a paid and contracted role while the other is supposedly a honour and not done for financial reasons.

 

When I say across the board, I meant that all other countries should have to follow suit.....but I could see the negative ramifications that could have on some of the smaller and developing nations. Maybe you could make certain dispensations for countries operating at lower levels?

[Abacus]

If some people and/or the FA are 'embarrassed' about appointing a non-Englishman as England manager, then good.

 

Only way it'll get fixed is by improving the supply line, and until it is in the meantime it's surely better for the current players to be working under a manager who gives them the best chance of winning something. Not their fault for developing when the managers haven't and so they shouldn't be hamstrung by having a clogger in charge. Think Tuchel is a great choice.

 

I wonder if the reaction would be any different were the manager to be a Scot or an Irishman rather than a German, but that's by the by. I wonder if being German just brings it into greater focus for some like the press - it's obviously going to be the main angle on their stories.

 

Anyway, not sure how you improve the supply line of English managers with top class trophy winning experience, with the PL being money dominated and more likely to employ proven winners wherever they're from as a result. And in return, English managers (in general) seeming less willing to go abroad to learn and adapt. Or at least if they do, they mostly don't do it very well. 

 

[The College Dropout]

It might/should be illegal to mandate a football job be given to a British person. 
 

Playing is different aye.  

[Keegans Export]

40 minutes ago, Abacus said:

If some people and/or the FA are 'embarrassed' about appointing a non-Englishman as England manager, then good.

 

Only way it'll get fixed is by improving the supply line, and until it is in the meantime it's surely better for the current players to be working under a manager who gives them the best chance of winning something. Not their fault for developing when the managers haven't and so they shouldn't be hamstrung by having a clogger in charge. Think Tuchel is a great choice.

 

I wonder if the reaction would be any different were the manager to be a Scot or an Irishman rather than a German, but that's by the by. I wonder if being German just brings it into greater focus for some like the press - it's obviously going to be the main angle on their stories.

 

Anyway, not sure how you improve the supply line of English managers with top class trophy winning experience, with the PL being money dominated and more likely to employ proven winners wherever they're from as a result. And in return, English managers (in general) seeming less willing to go abroad to learn and adapt. Or at least if they do, they mostly don't do it very well. 

 

That's exactly it - what reflects badly on the FA isn't the fact that they've hired a German head coach, it's that there isn't a single English manager with anything like his pedigree.

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, UncleBingo said:

I don't see it as threading the needle, one is a paid and contracted role while the other is supposedly a honour and not done for financial reasons.

 

When I say across the board, I meant that all other countries should have to follow suit.....but I could see the negative ramifications that could have on some of the smaller and developing nations. Maybe you could make certain dispensations for countries operating at lower levels?

 

I just don't see why there's a distinction there. I've seen people say that there is, but not why. Not only are England players paid and bonused both directly and indirectly for playing for England, but it's also very easy to argue that managing England is an honour not done for financial reasons. 

 

I get what you mean about across the board with other countries. Maybe there could be a ranking or seeding system set up whereby countries who are deemed to be establishing their infrastructure get dispensation to hire coaching staff from outside.