Mike's Blog

Earlier today Southern Tim posted a blog entry about the whole Eriksson situation. I started writing a comment on his blog, but it was getting too long, so here's an entry all about it instead.

The next time I hear anyone make arguments referring to the Sheikh incident as Eriksson "publically" criticising his players, I will go completely mad. He did not publically criticise his players. As far as anyone is concerned, it was a private conversation.

I too would be appalled if anyone chastised Eriksson for "publically" saying things in this instance. I'd prefer it if they said "publicly", personally. They would still be wrong in this instance, though, and I agree that the criticism in this manner is somewhat unfair. I would argue though that it's poor form for him to offer his opinion in such a manner to someone he's known for not very long at all. That in itself is a breach of confidence on the part of the players. The revelations weren't exactly ground-breaking, but that he started talking about the players at all (and especially Owen, for whom the comments were particularly damaging) isn't too clever. That it came out into the public arena isn't his fault, but if he'd kept schtumm about this in the first place, the situation wouldn't have occurred.

People saying he was a crap England manager… conveniently forget the wins against Germany (5-1 in their back yard in a vital crunch match), Argentina (1-0 in the World Cup and 3-2 in an anything-but-meaningless friendly) or Poland home+away (which no-one seems to notice is actually a bloody impressive pair of qualifying results).

Eriksson's main failing as England manager has been a lack of adaptability and strange tactical choices. A goal down against ten man Brazil, Eriksson might have considered making some substitutions to go for broke, bring someone like Vassell on for someone like Mills and throw everything at them. If he had, and it had failed, it would have disappointed, but would have had a bit of logic to it. Much more than, say, not doing very much at all.

Similar things would be said about the team that sat back on a 1-0 lead against Portugal and (to a lesser extent) France in Euro 2004. While I still think England deserved to win the France game, it took only two mistakes in 85 minutes to ruin the match for England, and against even a limited team like that French one, it was ultimately a bit too risky, especially with the potency of Rooney, Owen, Lampard, Gerrard, Scholes, etc. And given that England only actually attacked for about 15 of the 120 minutes against Portugal, getting a 2-2 result really wasn't that bad.

And 4-5-1 against Northern Ireland doesn't need discussion. That, for me, has far more value than a friendly win over Argentina (especially one where many of their top players had been brought off after an hour). So too does needing a last minute wonder free-kick to scrape a draw against a Greece team that had played England off the park, come to think of it… That Eriksson's England got such a tremendous result in Germany the previous month is to his credit. That they then scraped a draw with Greece and relied on Germany not winning their final match summed much up about his reign to date - so promising, but ultimately a little hollow.

And whoever first suggested Hitzfeld is a loon. Great manager, but there's one glaring issue. You've seen what the English have done to a "neutral" Swede; what on earth would happen to a German?

The point about Hitzfeld's Germanness being an issue is somewhat moot. Eriksson was lauded for his work in the first year, got in trouble for the Ulrika thing, and after the WC it went somewhat downhill. But has this uniquely happened because he's Swedish? No. For references on the media's handling of England managers, a quick look into the files labelled "Taylor, Graham" and "Robson, Robert" might refresh the mind on the fact that, well, the press generally give England managers a hard time anyway. It sadly is part of the job. Hitzfeld's Germanness won't help, for sure (see what I just did?), but he'll be criticised for everything else anyway, so it's hardly too great an extra hindrance. Englishmen (including the tabloids' favourite manager Terry Venables) have been criticised in the past, a Swede has been this time around, and any other nationality will be too.

None of the "potential candidates" articles springing up seem to mention Big Phil Scolari. The man has 1. expressed an interest in the job, 2. won the last world cup, 3. reached the last european championship final, and in the process 4. dumped England out of both those competitions.

Scolari would be an interesting appointment, but on Five Live last night Tim Vickery opined that Scolari would be too controversial because of the things he says. Such as, for example, saying that his teams need to commit more petty fouls to break up opponents' play. That wouldn't go down well with Quite A Lot Of Fans. (If anyone can fill me in as to whether he speaks English too I'd be grateful, as this is something of a requirement for the English national coach.)

For what it's worth, here's the people in order who I'd like to see get the job. Some might be untenable (as Tim mentions, O'Neill being an Irish Catholic might be an issue, however this is England, not Britain, and he never objected to working in England before…) and some might declare themselves unavailable, but let's have a go anyway.

• Ottmar Hitzfeld - one of the top few club managers in terms of success and experience over the last decade.
• Guus Hiddink - international experience with South Korea and Australia, knows the pressure of the big time after working at Real Madrid.
• Martin O'Neill - brilliant manager and motivator.
• Sam Allardyce - wouldn't be so harshly criticised if he was a more refined continental manager as opposed to a big bloke from Dudley. A credible candidate.
• Martin Jol - knows the English game, is honest, doesn't criticise referees.
• Luis Felipe Scolari - good manager, excellent record, but as I don't think he speaks English I can't place him any higher for now.
• Graeme Souness

And here's a googly to make a few people think - the ideal situation would be an Englishman with experience of the continental game. Why not bring Roy Hodgson into the fold in some way, if not only as a Bobby Robson-like wall for someone like Stuart Pearce?