Apparently his next sentence was "put it on the mantelpiece with the small bird".
Euro 2016 - Round of 16 - Monday 27th June
- Thread starter 6TimesaRed
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Apparently his next sentence was "put it on the mantelpiece with the small bird".
Roy's quotes sort of mirror what i was thinking when he was appointed
Why so much angst, Sean?
Roy's always been a bit thin skinned and peevish. Reminds me of one of those academics who get huffy if you ask an awkward question.
What a fucking arrogant bastard that man is.
Compare that to the way Stuart Lancaster took it on himself to answer any questions & took the blame for his errors.
Roy is basically saying he doesn't feel he should answer questions about how badly they played because he resigned. What a deluded arrogant cunt. At least the rest of the country has finally, belatedly, seen him for what he is.
Compare that to the way Stuart Lancaster took it on himself to answer any questions & took the blame for his errors.
Roy is basically saying he doesn't feel he should answer questions about how badly they played because he resigned. What a deluded arrogant cunt. At least the rest of the country has finally, belatedly, seen him for what he is.
Last edited:
Hey, if he's not on the clock ...
I heard on the radio that he refused this press conference 2 or 3 times before he caved in and did it.
Then he says I suppose I'm here because of the disappointment and the need for someone to stand up to the slings and arrows.
Fuck off Roy you had to be coaxed in to it and your letting on like you're the strong man out there accepting your fate nation's punching bag.
Then he says I suppose I'm here because of the disappointment and the need for someone to stand up to the slings and arrows.
Fuck off Roy you had to be coaxed in to it and your letting on like you're the strong man out there accepting your fate nation's punching bag.
Yes, for a 'ferociously intelligent' person his lack of understanding of basic PR these days is astonishing.
It was what struck me early on when he was at Liverpool - I'd never expected him to change his views and values, but I'd expected him to attempt to buy himself a bit of time with a few fan friendly gestures and remarks, but he did the opposite. I'd love to know why the hacks maintained this image of him as the super-bright gentleman, because empirically he seems the opposite.
Remember when he attacked some poor Norwegian (?) reporter simply for asking him an innocuous question before a European game? Just rude and graceless, not remotely 'gentlemanly'. Then he moaned about the 'famous support' not being there for him in spite of his horrendous football and awful results. And there were his innumerable stupid decisions and comments.
And yet the likes of Paddy Barclay and Martin Samuels and others shook their heads and bemoaned how ungrateful and unintelligent we were not to appreciate this wonderful man who reads the odd novel and speaks more than one language, how DARE we not genuflect in his presence. Well, I guess, belatedly, they know better now.
You forgot to mention when Fergie attacked Torres and Roy agreed with him instead of defending Torres.
That for me says it all what a c u n t he is.
I still remember when we got totally outplayed at home against the worst pro team in the leagues, Northampton. They could easily won 4,5-0. We parked the bus at home against a shit team.
Not even the 6-1 loss against Stoke come close to how shit we played that day.
That for me says it all what a c u n t he is.
I still remember when we got totally outplayed at home against the worst pro team in the leagues, Northampton. They could easily won 4,5-0. We parked the bus at home against a shit team.
Not even the 6-1 loss against Stoke come close to how shit we played that day.
Oh yes, the list of offences is a long one. Maybe in social occasions he is indeed an urbane and charming and interesting man, but if he shows nothing of that in his working environment then he can't expect to be treated with greater respect. I mean, how on earth does an intelligent, experienced manager, who has just overseen probably the worst performance in England's history, and one of the most dismal tournament campaigns, really think to himself, 'Yeah, I'll just say that these things happen and leave it at that. No point in turning up to answer any impertinent questions'. Utterly amazing.
I wouldn't bet on it, I'm afraid. Neither of them would be any more likely than Hodgson to admit they'd been wrong, not even to themselves.
Ha! Good question. They don't make me froth at the mouth like say Nigel Farage, but my preference is that they fail.
[article]
We get the England football team we deserve
David Conn
Decades of mismanagement and greed have caused huge damage to the game. No wonder the Euro 2016 national squad was so poor
Can further calamity befall the English? There we were on Monday night, willing the multicultural football team to provide some cheer amid political collapse, unleashed xenophobia and a tanking economy. Instead they lost 2-1 to tiny Iceland, in another ignominious exit from Europe.
But the surprise is that people are surprised. Football is our national game, and has always reflected the country’s broader social and economic themes. Never has it done it quite so unerringly as against Iceland: the team’s departure and manager Roy Hodgson’s prepared resignation speech came just hours before the council of Europe meeting from which David Cameron will have to withdraw, so 27 countries can shake their heads at how inept we are and wonder what to do about us.
Back in the 1980s, rundown football grounds, fenced-in “pens” for supporters and brutal policing were just another feature of the Thatcher project’s general deindustrialisation and hollowing-out of our provincial towns and cities. Three decades since those cruel practices culminated in 96 deaths at Hillsborough, football still holds up a mirror to the country we have become, and reflects its dominant faultline: inequality.
The players who failed for England against the collective strength and spirit of Iceland’s are each paid between £5m and £10m a year to turn out for clubs in the Premier League, which is feasting for the next three years on £8bn in television rights. The playing fields on which all those players began their journeys have been underfunded for years and are now facing a renewed crisis because of cuts to local authority budgets. Ticket prices to watch professional clubs have rapidly increased, so young people have been excluded.
In Lord Justice Taylor’s post-Hillsborough report, he registered his disgust at the mismanagement of the national sport by football club owners and directors who were more interested in “wheeler-dealing in the buying and selling of shares and indeed of whole clubs”, and in “personal financial benefits or social status” than in the good of the game itself. It was an unintended consequence that Taylor’s own recommendations, for stadiums to become all-seater with venal owners given public money to aid the rebuilding, led to more “wheeler dealing” in clubs than ever before.
The huge new TV money first arrived in 1992 after Rupert Murdoch’s executives realised that only football could bring the battalions of addicted subscribers they needed to grow Sky TV. The Football Association, the game’s governing body, responsible for its nurture from the grass roots to the England team, sanctioned the top flight clubs’ breakaway to form the Premier League - an act of heroic myopia. The FA’s committee men actually believed the move would strengthen the England team; the moneymen saw their chance not to share the new satellite TV bonanza with the rest of football.
The subsequent sales of the football companies, still misleadingly referred to as “clubs”, has mirrored the flogging-off of other national assets – trains, water, gas and electricity companies – built up by generations of public service. The FA had a century-old rule restricting dividends and salaries so that football clubs would in effect be not-for-profit communal institutions, but they allowed it to be bypassed for stock market flotations. Now the top clubs, bearing the names of our towns and cities, are owned mostly by American investors eyeing TV fortunes or by billionaire oil traders building global football brands.
The English owners who sold their shares made massive personal profits: David Moores, the Littlewoods heir, £90m for his stake in Liverpool; Martin Edwards, £94m from Manchester United; Sir John Hall, £75m for flogging Newcastle United to Mike Ashley.
The Premier League is particularly popular as a global TV spectacle partly because the clubs have spent the windfalls attracting players from all over the world with booming wage packets. At the same time, the number of English players in the league has shrunk since 1992 to its current 30%, with the Premier League persistently and risibly denying that this in any way contributes to the serial failure of the England team.
And so it is that every two years, at a European championships or World Cup, the window dressing is stripped away, revealing the football nation we are: one with people at the top massively overpaid but lacking vision and expertise, a paucity of competent managers and a wider landscape of poverty, underfunding and exclusion; and accompanied this year, as we have seen, by a boorish crowd chanting, “Fuck off, Europe, we’re all voting out.” Theirs has become our country’s dominant voice, their team a reflection of the game’s deficiencies that we will not confront.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/england-football-team-we-deserve
[/article]
We get the England football team we deserve
David Conn
Decades of mismanagement and greed have caused huge damage to the game. No wonder the Euro 2016 national squad was so poor
Can further calamity befall the English? There we were on Monday night, willing the multicultural football team to provide some cheer amid political collapse, unleashed xenophobia and a tanking economy. Instead they lost 2-1 to tiny Iceland, in another ignominious exit from Europe.
But the surprise is that people are surprised. Football is our national game, and has always reflected the country’s broader social and economic themes. Never has it done it quite so unerringly as against Iceland: the team’s departure and manager Roy Hodgson’s prepared resignation speech came just hours before the council of Europe meeting from which David Cameron will have to withdraw, so 27 countries can shake their heads at how inept we are and wonder what to do about us.
Back in the 1980s, rundown football grounds, fenced-in “pens” for supporters and brutal policing were just another feature of the Thatcher project’s general deindustrialisation and hollowing-out of our provincial towns and cities. Three decades since those cruel practices culminated in 96 deaths at Hillsborough, football still holds up a mirror to the country we have become, and reflects its dominant faultline: inequality.
The players who failed for England against the collective strength and spirit of Iceland’s are each paid between £5m and £10m a year to turn out for clubs in the Premier League, which is feasting for the next three years on £8bn in television rights. The playing fields on which all those players began their journeys have been underfunded for years and are now facing a renewed crisis because of cuts to local authority budgets. Ticket prices to watch professional clubs have rapidly increased, so young people have been excluded.
In Lord Justice Taylor’s post-Hillsborough report, he registered his disgust at the mismanagement of the national sport by football club owners and directors who were more interested in “wheeler-dealing in the buying and selling of shares and indeed of whole clubs”, and in “personal financial benefits or social status” than in the good of the game itself. It was an unintended consequence that Taylor’s own recommendations, for stadiums to become all-seater with venal owners given public money to aid the rebuilding, led to more “wheeler dealing” in clubs than ever before.
The huge new TV money first arrived in 1992 after Rupert Murdoch’s executives realised that only football could bring the battalions of addicted subscribers they needed to grow Sky TV. The Football Association, the game’s governing body, responsible for its nurture from the grass roots to the England team, sanctioned the top flight clubs’ breakaway to form the Premier League - an act of heroic myopia. The FA’s committee men actually believed the move would strengthen the England team; the moneymen saw their chance not to share the new satellite TV bonanza with the rest of football.
The subsequent sales of the football companies, still misleadingly referred to as “clubs”, has mirrored the flogging-off of other national assets – trains, water, gas and electricity companies – built up by generations of public service. The FA had a century-old rule restricting dividends and salaries so that football clubs would in effect be not-for-profit communal institutions, but they allowed it to be bypassed for stock market flotations. Now the top clubs, bearing the names of our towns and cities, are owned mostly by American investors eyeing TV fortunes or by billionaire oil traders building global football brands.
The English owners who sold their shares made massive personal profits: David Moores, the Littlewoods heir, £90m for his stake in Liverpool; Martin Edwards, £94m from Manchester United; Sir John Hall, £75m for flogging Newcastle United to Mike Ashley.
The Premier League is particularly popular as a global TV spectacle partly because the clubs have spent the windfalls attracting players from all over the world with booming wage packets. At the same time, the number of English players in the league has shrunk since 1992 to its current 30%, with the Premier League persistently and risibly denying that this in any way contributes to the serial failure of the England team.
And so it is that every two years, at a European championships or World Cup, the window dressing is stripped away, revealing the football nation we are: one with people at the top massively overpaid but lacking vision and expertise, a paucity of competent managers and a wider landscape of poverty, underfunding and exclusion; and accompanied this year, as we have seen, by a boorish crowd chanting, “Fuck off, Europe, we’re all voting out.” Theirs has become our country’s dominant voice, their team a reflection of the game’s deficiencies that we will not confront.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/28/england-football-team-we-deserve
[/article]
Only The Guardian could write an article linking Brexit-voting to the fortunes of the England team.
These articles always follow the latest failure. They never really enlighten as they simply reflect the man in the Pub or, these days, dare I say it, the chat on online forums.
Sometimes I think 'journo's' simply C&P stuff off the interweb.
Sometimes I think 'journo's' simply C&P stuff off the interweb.
Yeah, and only the S*n could celebrate Brexit going on about Polish Shops and people speaking foreign languages being replaced by Union Jacks in the streets, then a couple of days later call for calm and no racism please. I know which I'd prefer to read.
There's very little consideration in any of these newspapers.
We are less than 48 hours on and the only message is get on with appointing a new manager.
The question is always who? never why?, expecting a new person to have a ready answer seems hopeful at best, to me anyway.
We are less than 48 hours on and the only message is get on with appointing a new manager.
The question is always who? never why?, expecting a new person to have a ready answer seems hopeful at best, to me anyway.
The Times today is also in full-on pity, scorn, doom and gloom mode, with Matthew Syed banging on about short-termism idiot coaches, who should probably buy his book and learn some big words, and another lengthy article imagining what quips Eddie Jones would hurl at Raheem Sterling , for some reason.
Oh dear.
It seems to me that England need a manager to organize what we have, not try to teach them to be more or less emotional or anxious.
Oh the Jones thing is just the usual "Why can't footballers be more like those rugby chaps? They're far nicer, better educated and not mollycoddled man-babies" that always happens when the rugby team does well.
Considering the journalist in question and the work he's done for the club I thought you might have put your standard guardian slagging to one side on this occasion
There was nothing wrong about the squad that Hodgson had at his disposal. All the players had mostly whizzo seasons in the Premier League, which everybody knows is highly competitive.
The problem was that the manager failed to get the same kind of performances in international matches. I think one major factor was that they were not being played in their proper positions. Rooney as a midfielder, and Sturridge as a right winger. Sturridge is a top-class goal poacher but a very average winger.
It's a sign of a manager who is losing the plot when he starts playing men in totally the wrong position.
Another factor is that the England players aren't enjoying their football. The players go on the field with a sense of dread, aware of the venom that is coming their way if they lose, and they play accordingly. One of the best England managers in my lifetime was Joe Mercer, who took over the team on an interim basis. He encouraged the players to go out and enjoy their football and he achieved fantastic results.
I don't care who wrote it. It's shit.
I agree, though the Joe Mercer reference is going to baffle most on here. He even came across as your favourite Uncle on telly as I recall, though I was more or less a foetus at that stage..
We really shouldn't be trying to teach old dogs new tricks, putting players in new positions and hoping it gels in a couple of games at high pressure tournaments. I'm sure these players know their system 4-3-3 etc etc that a particular manager likes, but don't double the burden by asking them to learn a new position.
And before anyone says if you're good enough you can play anywhere, well our players aren't good enough to be shuffled around.
Well thankfully we've got you to educate us on high journalistic standards Brendan.
- Status
Similar threads
