:smack: Damnit. I always do that. I meant 4-4-2, of course.
Premiership Table 2005/2006:
- Chelsea (Jose Mourinho - Portuguese) 91 points
- Man. Utd (Alex Ferguson - Scottish) 83 points
- Liverpool (Rafael Benitez) - Spanish) 82 points
- Arsenal (Arsene Wenger - French) 67 points
- Tottenham (Martin Jol - Dutch) 65 points
- Blackburn Rovers (Mark Hughes - Welsh) 63 points
These clubs decided to appoint the best man for the job rather than the best Englishman. As one does in a global sport.
Chez, you miss the point. The English national team just isn’t English without underachievement and disappointment; of course they have to hire a Brit.
Ok, well then the scope of their ambition is exteremely limited - to staying in the Premiership and maybe one day pinching a UEFA cup spot. Are either of the clubs going to risk bankrupting themselves in a quest to actually win somerthing? They don’t have them means to match the ambitions of the big three - and Pearce and Allyardice are the kinds of managers who will manage a club to the limit of their meagre ambitions, because that limit matches the limits of their talents.
Do you think for a nanosecond that, should Mourinho, Wegener or Benitez resign that their espective clubs would even consider Pearce or Allyardice as their replacements?
The “little England” mentality is all well and good, but shouting at your players from the sidelines is not going to win you a world cup. Especially when you don’t have the talent to start with.
These clubs appointed the “best” man for the job because they had the money to pay them. If they had not had the finances they have then the best Englishman willing to take the job would have been appointed and most certainly Pearce or Allardyce would have been considered.
@chowder: If {b}this text{/b} were to be bolded, I’d use brackets instead of {}braces. Don’t forget the slash in the second tag {/b} or you won’t turn bolding off.
Similarly {u}underline{/u} and {i}italics{/i}.