QuoteWE SHOULD HAVE A POLL FOR EVERY FAVOURITE PLEASEOriginally Posted by paul_oshea
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?
This is not the best signature in the world, this is just a tribute
WE SHOULD HAVE A POLL FOR EVERY FAVOURITE PLEASE
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.
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.
Last edited by Stuttgart88; 23/11/2007 at 9:14 PM.
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.
Last edited by Noelys Guitar; 23/11/2007 at 9:42 PM.
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.
Last edited by Stuttgart88; 23/11/2007 at 9:49 PM.
Are you sating that Venables' appointment would sell more merchadise?
Philip Quinn writing in the Irish Mail suggests something similar
http://pix.ie/widgets/generate/accou...000-F5F5FF.jpg
"It's time for the FAI to grow up." John O'Donoghue, Minister for Sport, RTE , Sunday 7 Nov 2004
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.
Yeah, really spot-on!
Honest! I am not a secret Tim nor a closet Sham - I really am a Seagull.
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.
Last edited by Noelys Guitar; 24/11/2007 at 10:44 AM.
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.
Last edited by Noelys Guitar; 24/11/2007 at 10:57 AM.
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.
Last edited by Noelys Guitar; 24/11/2007 at 11:00 AM.
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?
Honest! I am not a secret Tim nor a closet Sham - I really am a Seagull.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks