As someone said, if you laid the favourites since the start you'd make a nice profit. O'Leary (2.80), Jewell (2.00), Houllier (2.28), Venables (1.82)...
Printable View
As someone said, if you laid the favourites since the start you'd make a nice profit. O'Leary (2.80), Jewell (2.00), Houllier (2.28), Venables (1.82)...
Speaking of Giles being old school, I used to work in Irish Ferries and he drives a Rover that's as tatty as hell and about 10 years old.Quote:
Originally Posted by Billsthoughts
Back to the manager I think short list for me at this stage would read:
Hodgson
Houllier
Jol
O'Leary
Venebals
Interview them all, it covers all the bases and preferably give it to Hodgson at this stage.
was that a typo, or a mis-spell, or just plain brilliance?Quote:
Venebals
Lads, lets be honest though in terms of football management what the hell does an interview do/find out about a person?
Do you like Spuds? What are the endearouing characteristics of a good football coach? At the end of the day a good manager might not be able to answer these, but yet they are still a good manager due to their record. I really cant see what the point of an interview is for a football manager. They are either good or not, nothing they say in an interview ( either way good or bad ) can change that....its not like a normal profession.
Whilst I mostly agree, it is important to have an interview with prospective candidates to see what direction they want to take the team in, such as what backroom staff he will bring in, his ideas in regards to coaching, tactics, what he will do to improve the underage setup and maybe the home league. However, it should only be used to give an idea of the what the candidate is about and should not be used to decide between the candidates, unless they were extremely similar candidates in regards to their managerial records and the FAI/selection committee was finding it difficult to choose between them.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I'd like to claim brilliance, but more a typo/mis-spell.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I think you have a fair point about formal interview too. The only reason to have them is to ensure some sort of understanding between the FAI and the manager. As with all interviews the persona in the interview room often won't translate into the real world.
At Hodgson's current odds of 18/1, Paddy Power only allow a maximum bet of €60, so I have thrown that on, for footballing and monetary reasons I want Hodgson to get the job.
Not really a gambler but am seriously considering putting a tenner on him at those prices. Then I'll have two reasons for wanting him to get the job.
Supposedly Stan wooed the interviewing committee before he was appointed.:D Rumour has it he brought out our old favouritesQuote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
''Im the Boss, the gaffer, the buck stops with me'':D
In fairness, how could they not give him the job!! He has such a way with words.:D
Actually the interview went like this.
John D "Stan what do you think you can bring to the job"
Stan: "You tell me"
Quality!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD
Again, back to my point, do you really care who is backroom staff is, his tactics ( you should know this already, coaching ( again should know this etc) and lets be honest what manager ( from outside Ireland ) is going to try and improve the league? All I as a fan, as I assume the FAI are ( because the income side affects their choice, or so it should ) too, I want the best man for the job based on his ability not on what he says or doesnt say in an interview. I mean the whole idea of an interview in normal circumstance is to get the person who answers the questions the best ( and has a personality ), if this were the case then how did staunton get it and how would other such managers do that have done well in the premier league or Europe?! They wouldn't probably!!! Only the more intelligent ones etc....Quote:
However, it should only be used to give an idea of the what the candidate is about and should not be used to decide between the candidates, unless they were extremely similar candidates in regards to their managerial records and the FAI/selection committee was finding it difficult to choose between them.
Quote:
Actually the interview went like this.
John D "Stan what do you think you can bring to the job"
Stan: "You tell me"
:D that is class. One of the best posts I have ever read. Not just cos of this, but it reminds me of trainspotting when spud puts the question back on the interviewers, and how I have often tried to bluff it when I dont know something. Brilliant neil. He probably did say it too. :)
I actually mostly agree with you. All I'm saying is that an informal interview should always take place. It doesn't necessarily have to mean anything in regards to getting the job. For example, the FAI might invite someone to an interview and say "look, we've chosen you, there's just a few things that need ironing out". That's not an interview per se, but it is an interview nonetheless.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
In regards to the backroom staff the FAI may need to know so they can sort the budget for the new manager out (although it's highly unlikely that someone who wants an assisatant role for a country is going to be expensive). You can also never really know what a manager's coaching and tactical philosophy is until you meet him and have a chat with him about it. You can have an idea, but you won't know for certain.
If you want to get the rest on you can ring up and ask 1800 721 821Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlooooomp
For liability reasons they have limits on internet betting but if you call them they will generally give you a bigger stake.
I've backed him at 60/1 - though I may have already mentioned that in this thread! :)
Cheers for that piece of info.Quote:
Originally Posted by JC_GUFC
60/1, thats very sweet if it comes through. Can't really count on the FAI to do the sensible thing though.
he's come in to 14/1 on paddypower now
that'll be because of this thread
At the moment he is 20/1 at Ladbrokes if anybody fancies a punt.Quote:
Originally Posted by eekers
Hodgson was just on R5 live being asked what credentials the next England manager should have. He basically touted his own credentials, most notably experience, but I can't see England looking his way.
I doubt his name will even be mentioned if the FA create a shortlist of candidates. Haven't heard a mention of him in conjenction with the England job on any program or paper that I have looked at so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
He is 66/1 last time I looked.