There are many jobs that no one in the sport of football envies. The janitor at a large ground. The sports analyst the day after a missed prediction. The guy responsible for Alexi Lalas’ hair. Sepp Blatter’s best friend. The guy relaying the Manchester City score to the Manchester United squad on the last day of the EPL. Although I’m sure some of these jobs bring a fair salary and compensation, the line of people offering to take these people’s place is rather short. So, with the somewhat recent appointment of Roy Hodgson (really? Roy?) to the position of England’s national squad manager, we have to ask the question: Is the English managerial job the hardest job in football?
Sure, several other countries have very high standards. Spain has to perform yearly just because the success that their mostly Barcelona/Real squad has experienced in their domestic leagues. The Netherlands have zero World Cup victories, but the talent wearing that bright orange during international tournaments is regularly off the charts. Brazil would never accept a coach informing the federation that they are in a “rebuilding period,” and anything less than victory in every tournament played in tends to spell the end for most managers. All of these teams have very high standards, but there still seems to be that little bit extra causing the England job to look more like a burden than a privilege.
What makes the job so ridiculously difficult? Wow…let me count the ways…
England has long been regarded (whether historically accurate or not) as the birthplace of modern football. Typically, in most sports, the originator of the game tends to find themselves always vying for the top spot. The United States typically has no basketball equal. Russia and Canada could practically battle it out for every major hockey tournament (originated in Canada). Most English created sports are either dominated by the English themselves, or by a culture that was heavily influenced by English rule in their histories (cricket- India/ Rugby- New Zealand & Australia). So, how is it that victory in football seems to constantly be beyond the Englishman’s grasp? The pressure grows…
The fan-base is the most fervent in all of football. They may not sing the loudest. They may not have the most travelling fans. That doesn’t matter. England bends around their football team. World Cup triumphs in mere group stage matches can lift the entirety of the country for days. It also seems that the lone World Cup victory in 1966 has done more harm than possible good (in terms of the necessity to win). Every tournament without lifting the trophy heaps more and more pressure onto the team and only brings more outrage from the fans. For Americans, think about the despair surrounding Chicaco Cubs fans. For everyone else, simply think about how most English fans are. The need for victory nearly breeds madness…the pressure grows greater still…
The talent level on the squad should be able to succeed. England can’t be seen as great underdogs in any given situation. The U.S. teams, the smaller South American teams, teams like Belgium or Ireland: all these teams can constantly point to only having a few star players and having mostly weak teams to surround them with as being their biggest problem. England can be seen as strong in most (if not all) positions on the pitch. There are even some positions where England may be seen to have 2-3 players fully capable of playing on the international level. Although I personally feel that the current Euro squad is one of the weaker that England have put together, they still find themselves ranked 6th in the world (with 2 out of the 5 teams above them not able to participate in the Euro’s)…mount the pressure high…watch it grow…
England also have the curse of history working against them. As stated earlier, the victory in ’66 may actually work against them. If you’ve never experienced ultimate victory, then you can’t hope to return to that feeling…a thought that may allow teams like the Netherlands far less pressure on their shoulders during the World Cup. I understand that England have never won the European Championships, but the stock placed on the World Cup is so much greater than any other tournament that a Euro victory would only satiate England for a small time. Factor in that England have never (never-ever) been ranked below 13th in the World, and the pressure never fades (especially since they’ve never finished better than 4th outside of the victory in 1966 in the WC and no higher than 3rd in the Euro’s). Not that the previous stat needs any help, but England’s lowest ever ranking (13th) is incomparable to any other team’s- Brazil’s stat is closest (18th), but still makes England’s all the more impressive. Feel the pressure yet?
Although Hodgson still has plenty of time to prove himself, the everyday football fan has some serious doubts. If the previous managers couldn’t bring victory to the Three Lions, then you surely must doubt a manager that was fired because he couldn’t handle the Liverpool managerial position. Roy has always been able to prevent a team from getting relegated, but there are serious doubts as to whether he can succeed with a top-tier squad whose goal is more than just constant mediocrity. For what it’s worth, Roy is undefeated at the helm of the Three Lions (true as of the writing of this piece).
I’m sure that we would all be more than happy to have a national team manager’s salary. I’m sure the perks are also pretty nice. However, I’m sure that being in charge of the English national team is akin to getting a high-risk, high-interest loan. You feel great for a bit, but then it is time to pay up.
Is the England job the hardest in football? If not, what is? Also, let us know if you think Hodgson can lead England to where the fans believe they belong?
About drewplaysbass
basketball started in Canada
Actually, Basketball was created in Springfield, Massachusetts. The man who created it was Canadian-American. Thanks for reading!
hell yes, I keep telling this to people and they never believe me.
You’re putting too much faith in FIFA rankings, they’re meaningless.
A lot of their players are way overrated as well to be honest.
The media make it an impossible job. Hodgson hasn’t made the best start though
Hey Andrew,
I wouldn’t say it’s an ‘impossible’ job at all. But making decisions such as including Martin Kelly instead of Rio Ferdinand or Micah Richards certainly doesn’t help. How about placing such a reliance on Liverpool players who flopped big time this season? It just strikes me as strange. He’s putting himself under pressure with these decisions, and if Ferdinand has been left out because his brother was racially abused by John Terry, then Hodgson certainly won’t come out in a positive light.
I’d also like to point out the comparison between Germany and England. Ten years ago, England beat Germany 5-1, in Munich I believe? Now, in the present day.. Germany are lightyears ahead of England. The reason? Because the German FA invested heavily in setting up youth programmes to help players develop. They now have individuals such as Ozil, Muller, Goetze coming through in the first team. For England to become a force within football, the same needs to happen within the Premier League. Until the FA realise this, then England will remain in the dumps.
It’s the poisoned chalice of football and no manager who has ever held the position has come out the same. They become casualties. In a nutshell the problem manifests itself thusly: the FA is antiquated, obtuse and self-destructive; they consistently undermine their nation’s opportunities at succeeding in major global tournaments, have failed to invest in the development of the youth and have by and large interfered with the national set-up detrimentally.
The media has hounded the managers and players no end (and the players I hasten to add have not helped themselves either with their idiocy, immaturity and those incredibly vapid and annoying WAGs) and hyped them up to the point of being nauseating-effectively they’re making out donkeys to be a pack of stallions and hilarity abounds when England fails miserably at the QF stage. Simply they overestimate their capabilities and the glaring obvious they either are oblivious to or revel in deluding themselves in terms of just how good they are-take your pick but the fact of the matter is that you have a bunch of prima-donnas who cannot cut it and refuse to accept reality. That and the public will hold unrealistic expectations building up to a fever-pitch that is ultimately not satiated and will only serve to further compound that frustration and relentless hounding of all and sundry associated with the national team set-up; drivers, butlers, canteen ladies and boot cleaners/ball boys/valets included.
Further, the Premier League is simply not good enough-say what you will about the standard of play, the calibre of foreign talent, the incredibly dazzling technical footballing spectacle that is Bolton Wanderers v Blackburn Rovers (as the spin would have you believe) but ultimately the English players are absolute millennia behind their peers at club level on a technical and tactical level-their reading of the play and their nous is absolutely laughable/comical and it appears they only know how to play basketball-gain possession and attack the opponents’ goal and should they miss/fail to score/are thwarted, attempt to regain the ball for the proverbial “fast break” or more aptly, counter-attack. I believe Chris Waddle pointed out their tactical deficiencies rather nicely noting how they know nothing of reading the tempo of the game and knowing when to play fast, go slow, stop the game dead, and so forth-suffice to say he was part of a generation of players plying their trade on the continent and it goes without saying that the team of 1990 would murder this lot on that basis-for my money they were the best English team in living memory given they had the physicality and robustness but also some acumen tactically given their exposure to other footballing cultures where technique and tactics were as important if not more important than speed and physicality. While the FA, the Premier League, the clubs etc. have made bucket loads of money in making the Premier League cosmopolitan as they have, they’ve failed miserably in harnessing that wealth to develop the next batch of English players and the clubs viewing the sport purely as a balance-sheet exercise find it more cost effective to bring a 15 year old African/South America/continental European kid etc. who is a raw talent and adding some final touches to their game than looking after their own talents; great for television perhaps but dooms England to mediocrity; consider Germany as Jon so rightly pointed out-they’ve invested where they should and have always had a consistently excellent national team (barring of course the occasional blip like in 1998, 2000, and 2004.
In sum-the problem with England is that they expect too much of a very mediocre team and have no discernible system in place to develop players who are able to compete with other nations-the future does not bode well for them if they persist like this (it is said insanity is defined by doing the same thing time and again and expecting a different outcome and I believe Spain, Germany, France and Holland will pull further away from them. That being said, keep an eye out for the Ukraine, Belgium, Russia and even Greece-all still very much developing footballing nations in some respects (I hasten to add Russia as in post USSR) and these will get progressively stronger. Portugal is very much a spent commodity and will take time to regain any semblance of strength like their Golden Generation and the Nordic nations will solid, are unspectacular; Italy is deceptive and can either be good or absolutely hopeless (as the most recent results suggest but are not to be written off).
That is my take, copious as it is, the fickle will watch the EPL and clap like trained seals while the connoisseurs will enjoy continental football such as the Bundesliga, Eredvisie etc. and appreciate the nuances, or even cast their eye further afield. England has a very myopic view of football andI think my “exegesis” addresses some of the reasons why England is ultimately an also-ran and rank outsider.
Very well said Hondo. Although I fear most who attempt to read your comment will need to break out the OED, I thoroughly enjoyed it. (I haven’t seen “exegesis” since my Senior year of college)
Thank you sir. Just a few observations from my part using the admittedly limited intellect I have.
If this is interesting to you, read Simon Kuper’s “the Ball is Round”. Or as it was released in the UK, “Why England Lose”