I had a disparaging text about Vanables read out on Off The Ball this evening, seems that there are a lot of people out there impressed with his record in Euro 96, do they actually remember that tournament?
Printable View
I had a disparaging text about Vanables read out on Off The Ball this evening, seems that there are a lot of people out there impressed with his record in Euro 96, do they actually remember that tournament?
WE SHOULD HAVE A POLL FOR EVERY FAVOURITE PLEASEQuote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Saw this on the football365 message board, in the thread "which england manager do you dislike the most?"
http://forum.football365.com/index.p...445083&start=0&
Venables had a worse win percentage than McClaren, Sir Bobby and Eriksson, and only marginally better than Graham "no, no, Platty" TaylorCode:Manager Win %
Alf Ramsey 61.1
Glenn Hoddle 60.7
Ron Greenwood 60
Sven-Göran Eriksson 59.7
Walter Winterbottom 56.1
Steve McClaren 50.0
Bobby Robson 49.5
Don Revie 48.3
Terry Venables 47.8
Graham Taylor 47.4
Joe Mercer 42.9
Kevin Keegan 38.9
Some of the comments on El Tel are fairly damning as well
It's extraordinary isn't it? That's the problem though, nobody places England's Euro 96 record under any scrutiny. My recollection is that the friendly campaign before Euro 96 was unimpressive too, not to mention the shambles of a team he put out at lansdowne in February 1995.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlooooomp
A few of us mentioned it here a few times and McDonnell wrote it in this morning's Indo, but a good win against a feuding Dutch team aside (yes, I'll concede the same team that tore us apart at Anfield 7 months earlier) England were very average. And let's face it, a team playing all its games at its home stadium hardly needs a genius to gee them up. Home games are easier for a manager. England played 5 home games at Euro 96. After 90 minutes (or even 120), 3 were drawn, and 2 were won. If McAllister had scored his penalty it'd probably have been played 5, drawn 4, won 1. Great record indeed. Not to mention the astonishing decision not to award a penalty against Gascoigne against Spain (during the Golden Goal ET period?).
People talk about today's international game being weak - not the case in my opinion - but in 1992 and 1996 the standard of European Championships was relatively poor. The Dutch were in turmoil, France had yet to properly emerge and Germany couldn't believe they won it.
Delaney could be talking to anyone in London. He might even go through the motions of speaking with Venables. But thats about it. Delaney himself has huge doubts about Venables. Mind you Cascarino lumped on Kerr getting the job at 8/1 after bumping into Kerr in the Airport hotel prior to Kerr getting the job. I have a "feeling" it is Liam Brady that Delaney is going to interview. And this is an interview for the job not for the committee. It is only an interview not an offer of the job. I would'nt be surprised if Cascarino lumped on Brady today thinking that Brady was a cert for the job.
True, in fact you could contend that Delaney would be negligent NOT to speak to Venables as part of a broad selection process.
It's obvious I have a total and utter dislike of the man but I also feel that I'm being completely objective in assessing his track record since the 80s and also in mistrusting what I feel is a carefully placed set of Venables advocates in all sections of the media. A well known Irish journaliost emailed me today, copying a link from the (London) Evening Standard's website distancing Venables from a "paranoid" McLaren. Fine if true, but Venables has his tentacles in many segments of the media and I for one place no credibility on what I read in Venables' favour in the UK.
It has been suggested to me that certain commercial pressures are being put on the FAI re-Venables. I posted a couple of months ago that I was deeply suspicious of Umbro's (and John Courtenay's) relationship with the FAI. We have used Umbro kits for years, no questions asked, yet the competition for shirt contracts has never been greater. Put it this way, my suspicion runs deeper now.
Are you sating that Venables' appointment would sell more merchadise?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Philip Quinn writing in the Irish Mail suggests something similar
I honestly wouldn't touch Venables with a barge pole.
He is exactly the type of manager we don't want.
I wouldn't be a fan of Dunphy, but his article today was spot on.
can the title of this thread be changed to "7 pages of disparaging remarks about venables"
My source was spot on about Delaney meeting Brady in London.
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...g-1229670.html
Further intrigue has been added to the situation when strong speculation last night suggested that Delaney had met another potential managerial candidate in London before continuing his journey onto Durban.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
Yeah, really spot-on!
I think it's becoming clearer and clearer that Delaney and others in the FAI are not in cohesion / harmony. It's worrying as anything could happen if a an orderly search isn't conducted.
Separately I bought the Indo today due to the back page story on Delaney. Not one other mention in the whole sports section was given to the manager situation, yet instead I lost track of the number of opinions and articles on the next England manager. I'd have bought an English paper for that (which is what I did).
HaHa. McDonell changed this paragraph which originally named Brady. The reporter still mentions Brady but in a round about way in the next paragraph.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
So McDonnell is your source, or Indo editorial?
No chance! I hate O'Reilly. I was told that Delaney would be London and would be meeting Brady. What I don't know is the reason for the meeting. I posted that last night 5 hours before the Indo came out so maybe McDonell is coming on here reading the forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Isn't Brady touted as one of the selection advisors? If JD met him it's more likely to be to run the rule over a few of the names in the frame, no?
Brady wants the job. And I'm speculating here but if Delaney spoke with Wenger then I'm sure Wenger could be very persuasive in pushing Brady's case. Don Howe has been mentioned in some papers as a possible for the elusive 3 man committee. I'm sure if Delaney spoke with him Howe would give glowing reports for both Brady and O'Leary. Are any of these ex-managers/players mentioning Hodgson? I bet there not. Out of sight out of mind kind of thing as much as jobs for the boys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Some relief in that Venables is starting the slow drifting out of the betting market.
For a while there I was almost ready to phone Uri Geller.
The betting market seems a good mirror of the FAI intentions.
I was surprised to see Brady in at 6/1 early on and staying there, whereas Hodgson was always a rank outsider.
Now Liam is starting to come in a bit to 7/2.
Why would Wenger want to push Brady's case?. Wenger's priority is Arsenal. Brady is Director of the Arsenal Academy, an important role in the Arsenal set up, a job Brady has been successful at. Wenger has high regard for Brady and the job he does at Arsenal, so why would he be trying to puh Brady's case with Delaney?Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
Brady spoke with Wenger the day after he publicly declared his interest in the job on RTE. Wenger stated that he would not stand in Brady's way if Brady got the job. So if Delaney spoke with Wenger about Brady I'm sure Wenger would push Brady's case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
That is quite different to Wenger pushing Brady's case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
If Brady decided to go for whatever reason, not sure Wenger or anyone else could stand in his way. There may be contractual implications but as we all know that can be easily sorted.
The strange thing is that Brady has been the lone voice on the RTE about Delaney having too much power "its one man" etc.
Brady would not get this team to the WC. So I hope its not him. He admitted himself that he is not the ideal candidate and that the FAI should be looking for someone who has had success as a manager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
That's the problem and the reason why none of the 'big names' are queuing up for the job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noelys Guitar
I don't think the best manager in the world, whoever that may be, would be confident of getting this team to the WCF (they might actually get them to the WC! :D). Tomorrow's WC group qualifying draw will be a big factor in finalising who is in and who is out.
Noely I have to ask. Is your "insider/source" a former UCL man? If so I really think I can hazard a guess as to who it is, as I reckon soccerc could too.
This talk of Brady, which if true, is ridiculous. If Oscar Wilde appoints Brady after appointing Staunton, then there will be no saving him after the next disasterous campaign.
Brady successful at the academy? How many youngsters has he produced for the first team? Wenger clearly doesn't give a stuff about the Academy, since not only does he buy established players from overseas, but youngsters, as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Brady was a crap manager at Brighton and a crap manager at Celtic. I see no evidence whatever he would be a good manager of the ROI.
The UCL part is right Kingdom. I use to run a team in the UCL. In the 80's. Have kept in contact with few of the old heads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingdom
Venables has a stench off of him, we need to do whatever it takes to let the FAI know that he is not wanted here. It's not because he is english, or an east end boy, it is because his track record recently is not good enough and his relationship with money is open to question.
It seems that he has always been more interested in financial gain than success with teams that he has managed. According to John Delaney we have more money than ever before to offer to a manager and what happens, that smarmy git Venables slithers into the frame.
I for one will be disgusted if the exhorbitant price of tickets for Croke Park is used to line the pockets of Venables. I will have to seriously consider attending games while he is the manager. I realise that it is the team I will be supporting, not Venables, however the depth of my distaste of that man is a major factor.
Fabregas and Hoyte came directly through the Academy. Also the 'youngsters' that are brought over at 17/18 have all been developed through their Academy. Diaby, Flamini, Van Persie, Clichy, Bendtner, Clichy, Song and even Walcott have all spent time at the Academy when they were first signed by Arsenal before going into the reserves and first team squads.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
BTW, I agree Brady is not the man for the ROI manager's job.
The Academy exists to find and develop young players for the first team. Of those players, precisely one* was found and developed by the Arsenal Academy - Hoyte - and there's no guarantee that he will make it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Contrast that with e.g. West Ham in the same period, or Southampton, in whose Academy Walcott was first schooled, along with Gareth Bale and Andrew Surman.
* - Though I'll give you Steve Sidwell. Now at Chelsea. ;)
ashley coleQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
can all this brady stuff be moved to the brady thread - its making the el tel thread pop up on the top of the page and look like we're all interested in talking about him
Cesc was at Arsenal for around 3 months before he made his first team debut - he had nothing to do with the Arsenal Academy. Wenger prised him away from Barca reserves - Barca were not suprsingly very p!ssed off....Quote:
Originally Posted by Superhoops
Bendnter was just 17 and already a very well known player in Denmark and WEnger specificially went over and got him. He did spend time in the Academy but I'm not sure Brady does any coaching there atall! Wenger has also gone off and got the likes of Vela from Mexico, Fran Merida from Barca etc.
My point is I'm not sure how much coaching Brady does if any atall - I think his role is more administrative / fgiurehead at Arsenal.
In terms of manager there is no way Brady is the man. I think he is setting himself up for the performance director role, which he would do well i'm sure, but for that role i think i would prefer Steve Heighway. T
here are arguements about who the Arsenal academy are responsible for, but there is no doubt the Liverpool academy produced Steve McManaman, Robbie Fowler, Steven Gerrard, Jamie Carragher, Dominic Matteo, David Thompson, Steven Warnock and Michael Owen. And he is available
Yes Steve Bould is the coach of the Arsenal academy and 'manages' the u18 side.Quote:
Originally Posted by kennedmc
Brady is the Director of the academy
Lets get back to the reasons why Venables should or should not get the job. Hopefully most of you are in the should not camp.
he convinced Steve McLaren to play 3 at the back away to croatia.
those are tactics from ten years ago.
france 98 showed up wingbacks as a non-viable option in high level football
and in an away game ffs
strong anti-venables article in the sindo today
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...s-1229974.html
Yet Fanning seems certain Venables will get the job.
So what's going on here exactly? Is the FAI using external advisors or are they simply (allegedly anyway) convinced Venables is the man and no amount of advice or lobbying otherwise will change their minds? Is the FAI in any way united on this?
Both Croatia and Australia played 3 at the back in WC06. Australia didn't use wing backs so much as a 3-1-4-1-1 wuth Grella protecting the back 4, a regular midfield, Cahill playing off Viduka.Quote:
Originally Posted by eekers
A pro Venables piece in This is London (Evening standard online I think - how objective would that be? Venables has mates well placed in the media, especially London & the Standard always sticks up for their own) said that TV wanted a different role to be played by the 3 CBs than Mclaren. They went with 3 at the back but with McLaren's idea of how to use it. Like it counted anyway, Croatia were better that day too and would have been no matter who or how England lined up.