England After Capello: 10 Reasons for Roy Hodgson If Harry Redknapp Says No

Where Harry Redknapp is a media darling, Roy Hodgson hardly features. However, if you were to take a private poll of managers in and outside the UK, Roy would be one of the most universally respected coaches.

And this is an important difference. The England manager's job is nothing like a club manager's job. The FA is a machine. It sometimes doesn't run very well and has been poorly led for years, but when it comes to internationals, an army takes over.

So, in an nutshell, the England manager is first and foremost a coach.

Harry has a team of coaches. He would need a team of coaches as England manager. He is first and foremost a motivator. Yes, he believes in a style of football and God knows England need more of that.

Right now, he's managing a team playing a style of football that people love and has given Tottenham a realistic chance of winning the Premier League. Anyone who saw the demolition of Newcastle, led by a striker that many have written off and was signed on a whim, couldn't fail to agree.

Even if they don't win the league, they are nailed on to get automatic qualification for the Champions League and how could Harry walk away from that? What's more, he knows that if he leaves, Gareth Bale will leave as well.

He owes no allegiance to Daniel Levy, but he feels an allegiance to the Spurs fans who feel reborn, having eclipsed Arsenal after all these years.

So although he always knew his big chance would come after this summer, somehow it's not the right time, for all the reasons that ironically make him even more of a favourite with supporters of all teams for the England job.

He surely can't leave before the end of the season? But can he leave even then? If he's interviewed, the FA will want an assurance now. Harry can't do the England job part time and remain Spurs manager. That would mean Stuart Pearce standing in until May. Not impossible. Not ideal.

But then one has to consider the alternatives. Most other leading candidates would also have to break a club contract. Jose Mourinho and Arsene Wenger certainly wouldn't be available before the end of the season, if at all. Right now, each still cherishes the dream of their team in the Champions League final in late May.

Guus Hiddink would have to break his contract with the Turkish FA but anyhow the FA is not going to appoint someone with a suspended jail sentence for tax fraud. We've had enough with all the suspense over Harry.

But you can bet your life that Roy Hodgson has a release clause in his contract—but only if the FA comes calling...

So why should Roy Hodgson be England manager?

An Internationally Respected Coach

Seeing the warmth of greeting from Michel Platini at the Europa League final two years ago may have surprised some people. But in the top international coaching circles—especially in Europe—Roy Hodgson is very highly regarded.

This is not entirely surprising when you think about it. Roy has managed 16 different clubs across Europe and three international teams, of which two were European.

In addition, he has several times been a member of UEFA's technical study group at the European Championships and has also served on FIFA's technical study group at the 2006 World Cup.

If he has had one persistent problem it is that his coaching theories and methods have often been ahead of the game.

As Sir Alf Ramsey found in similar circumstances before 1966, when he changed world football forever by playing 4-4-2, you cannot be universally popular when you are leading a revolution.

Brian Clough was never going to persuade the Leeds United players to change anyhow, partly because of his brusque manner but mainly because they were in thrall to the later discredited Don Revie and his methods.

Similarly, Liverpool was always going to be a poison chalice for Roy Hodgson.

Although Rafa Benitez had become less popular before he left, he had brought the ultimate success to Liverpool with the Champions League trophy. A substantially Spanish squad, containing strong figures like Gerrard and Carragher, wasn't going to change overnight; and all the while, King Kenny was hovering like the ghost at Banquo's feast.

So there is no denying Hodgson's coaching capabilities, nor his knowledge of European football, its teams and their style of football. He also knows how to neutralise these, as he has proved twice before with unfancied national sides.

The questions are, therefore, can he do the same for an arguably more talented English team, and does his international coaching experience put him in better stead than his vast cub experience?

At the end of the day, England players will respond to and play for any manager they respect. Nobody has ever argued that Roy Hodgson cannot establish rapport with his players. The bigger argument is whether he can get them to adapt to a different way of playing that will bring success.

But also, how much of a pragmatist is Hodgson to create the basis of success in a few short months?

Transforming the Swiss

By the time Roy Hodgson took over as manager of the Swiss national side, he already had an impressive pedigree in European football. Given his undoubted international standing as a coach, it seems somewhat ironic that he had to manage the Swiss to come to the attention of the FA.

In 1992, he inherited an uninspired, unfashionable Swiss team from Uli Stielike, who had won only 13 of the previous 25 matches.

Only three years later, Switzerland were No. 3 in the FIFA rankings.

His first international tournament was the 1994 World Cup. The Swiss lost only one match in qualifying, including taking four points off Italy and finishing above Portugal. Indeed, they were leading 2-0 in the drawn match against Italy, which went on to win the World Cup.

Reaching the round of 16, they lost to Spain. Two years later, they again qualified easily for the European Championships, but by that time, Hodgson had already been recruited by Inter Milan and, after his departure, the Swiss fell apart.

Inter Milan

Very few managers have a CV like Roy Hodgson's. Sir Alex Ferguson has won more than almost anyone as a two-club manager and has had a brief but unsatisfactory foray into international management, which seems to have put him off for life!

Roy Hodgson was already working for Inter before he left the Swiss. They were lacking in flair and money compared to the present-day team, but he managed to transform their prospects in as little as 18 months. By the time he left to join Blackburn Rovers, they had finished third in Serie A and reached the final of the European Cup.

Throughout his time, the fans were calling for him to be sacked, so it is hardly surprising that, when Jack Walker came calling, Roy moved back to England.

If Roy has had a problem it is to be ahead of the game, technically. He was one of the pioneers of zonal marking, for example.

It is a measure of how highly he was regarded at Internazionale that they asked him to be caretaker manager for a few months, on his way to Grasshopper of Zurich.

The Flying Finns

The significance of his time at Switzerland and Finland is that these were both international sides that had underachieved. It is fair to say that under Roy Hodgson they overachieved, viz what has happened since.

At Inter, he began a transformation that began to make them the club they are today.

He is a quiet revolutionary whose teams and tactics are usually ahead of the game. For some clubs and players this can be difficult to accept. There is an important distinction between Liverpool and Fulham or West Brom.

Liverpool have a history of success as one of the greatest club sides in history. Any manager going in there is faced with an urgency to return to the old days. Kenny Dalglish is being given more time than Roy Hodgson because he is one of the greatest darlings of all time at Anfield. That glitter will fade fast if Liverpool don't make Champions League qualification again this season. The signs are not good.

Fulham and West Brom had no such expectations, however, and he was given the time and support—especially by the players—to keep them up and take them where he wanted.

With Finland, who had never qualified for a major tournament, Hodgson guided them to six wins in qualifying and were very unlucky to miss out on Euro 2008.

Turning Lead into Gold

While his time at Udinese didn't work out, Roy Hodgson has several times turned "water into wine," as he described his achievement at Halmstad.

This was his first proper job after two positions in non-league English football.

Three times, he has turned unfancied teams into championship winners:

At Halmstad, they were regularly and universally tipped for relegation from the top division in Sweden. He took them from that position to win the league twice in five years.

At Malmo, he performed a similar feat, leading them to five consecutive championships, including winning the top tier twice and knocking Inter out of the Champions League. 

He then moved to Neuchatel Xamax in Switzerland because he could no longer afford Swedish taxes and managed to beat both Celtic and Real Madrid.

In 2000 he joined FC Copenhagen and took them from eighth the previous season to win the Danish league before moving to Udinese, where he was never happy.

During his time in Sweden, he is credited with bringing zonal marking into the Swedish game.

Blackburn and Liverpool

It is fair to say that Roy Hodgson's time at Liverpool and Blackburn was not successful. He would never make excuses himself.

It could be said that Kenny Dalglish is something of a bogeyman for Hodgson. Kenny had presided over a period of unparalleled success at Blackburn before moving upstairs to be director of football. He was succeeded by Ray Harford, who nearly got them relegated; Roy had to pick up the pieces as soon as he came in.

They finished sixth in his first season having been among the front-runners, but the following season was not good and Hodgson was replaced by Brian Kidd, who took them down.

At Liverpool, he inherited something of a poison chalice. The club had already been on the slide under Rafa Benitez, who had taken them to the Champions League final twice (winning one) and as many as 86 points in a Premier League season, pipped by Manchester United in 2008/9.

Unfortunately, the Hicks and Gillett regime was overseeing an alarming decline, and when Liverpool finished seventh the following season, Rafa left by mutual consent.

If he's honest, Roy should never have taken the job, although anyone would find it hard to turn down managing one of the greatest clubs in history. 

Kenny Dalglish had been the fans' favourite, and the club was sliding toward bankruptcy. While Roy didn't have much to spend, his signings were unwise and he lasted only one year before, inevitably, Dalglish took over.

These relative failures at what were then the leading clubs in the Premier League are the main reason why Roy Hodgson isn't on everybody's lips to be the next England manager. 

The question is, what experience is relevant to the England job? Given their signal failure to do anything much since 1966—and certainly since 1990 under Sir Bobby Robson—have we set our sights too high?

Roy Hodgson hasn't—he believes that 2010 was England's best chance in 44 years to win a major trophy. So, Capello blew that chance.

Now there is a new generation coming through. Should we regard England as an underperforming supernation or an overachieving mid-rank team.

If the latter, Roy's experience at Fulham and West Brom is relevant.

Fulham and West Brom

On Sunday, West Brom thrashed Wolves 5-1 at the Molineux in a sparkling performance that got MIck McCarthy the sack. Hodgson knows all about that.

It was a surprise to most people when he turned up at Fulham in 2007, but Roy tends to keep his contract flexible when the England job is in the offing.

Both at Fulham and West Brom, he saved them from relegation. Better than that, having taken them to seventh, their highest-ever placing, in 2008/9 and barely missing the Manager of the Year, he trumped that in 2009/10.

Fulham surprised everybody by reaching the Europa League final, barely losing 2-1 to Atletico Madrid. Not surprisingly, he won Manager of the Year by an avalanche.

Liverpool were clearly impressed, paying £2 million in compensation to sign him as manager.

A Serious English Candidate

So why should Roy Hodgson be taken seriously as a candidate for the England job?

First, he's English. There's only one other credible English candidate.

Next, he has been on the FA's short list several times before, first after Glenn Hoddle's departure in 1999, when Kevin Keegan, the popular choice, got the job.

He is a man of honour and was actually first choice in 2000, but had agreed to manage FC Copenhagen and so Sven-Goran Eriksson got the job.

Unfortunately he was managing Finland when Eriksson left the England job and can surely have been no worse than Steve McClaren. He was indeed a candidate to replace the latter in 2007.

Given the uproar over the appointment of foreign managers in the past, Hodgson must surely be a serious candidate this time around. He does not yet have a long-term contract with West Brom and would almost certainly consider this his last chance to fulfil the one remaining ambition in his 41 years in management.

At 64, a similar age to Harry Redknapp, he must fancy his chances. The FA does not always do the obvious.

The best thing going for him is his utter integrity, allied to his international coaching experience for club and country. No other English candidate since Sir Bobby Robson could boast a similar pedigree.

Oscar Tabarez, 64, had an undistinguished club management career and had never managed a national side before he took over the Uruguayan squad in 2006. He is now their most successful manager ever.

Harry Redknapp's History

In the fans' eyes, Harry Redknapp is the only serious candidate for the England job. But the bookies haven't closed the book...why might that be?

First, the FA is notoriously unpredictable. If Harry was the right man for the job, why wasn't he appointed instead of Fabio Capello?

He has done wonders at Tottenham, supported by a strong chairman and plays football the way all fans would love to see. It is no surprise that many of his Spurs players think he should be England manager...but not yet.

In the past, the FA have fled from controversy. Glenn Hoddle was hounded out because of his beliefs and an unfortunate remark about disabled people.

Sir Bobby Robson was disgracefully driven from the job by the media on the basis of utterly false rumours.

Brian Clough never got a look because he was too controversial. He, too, was the fans' choice, with a much better CV than Harry Redknapp, but only got a token interview.

Sven-Goran Eriksson was driven out of the job on the back of a hypocritical media view of his morals.

The last time the FA went English, they took the apparently safe option with Steve McClaren, possibly the worst England manager ever. Graham Taylor was also deemed safe and became a national joke.

The media may pledge to behave this time around if their darling gets the job, but honestly, how long will it be before they're digging up Harry's skeletons and feasting on the corpse?

The FA has a diminished reputation for a number of reasons recently. While David Bernstein might think Harry Redknapp is a fine manager, he has much more cautious members of his board. They won't want to read more controversial headlines and it's clear some may baulk at the estimated £26 million bill.

In 2006, he was shown in a BBC Panorama programme which centred on taking bungs. Nothing was proven and in the Stevens inquiry that followed, the only question mark raised was over his ownership of a horse that was thought to have been given to him by an agent.

In 2007, he was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and false accounting. He was later released without charge but considered that preventing him from being considered for the England job.

In 2010 he was charged with two counts of cheating the public revenue over a substantial amount of money paid into a Monaco bank account. He was found not guilty only hours before Fabio Capello resigned. Was this just a coincidence? The bandwagon began to roll.

There is no way the media and especially the likes of the BBC are going to play "doggo" if Harry gets the job. They might lie low until the summer to see how England fare in the Euros, but you can bet the jungle drums will rumble at the first sign of failure. Can the FA afford to take that risk?

But most of all, Harry has achieved more success at Tottenham than ever before in his career. They have a serious shot at the Premier League title and are almost certain to automatically qualify for next season's Champions League. He will also feel a sense of responsibility to the Spurs fans and his players.

The FA have made clear they will not let a part-time manager take England through the Euros. If they call Harry's bluff and he declines, what is their backup plan?

So Who Are the Serious Candidates?

Surely, these two aren't serious candidates?

Despite press reports, betting has not been suspended on Harry. Yes, he's a short odds-on favourite, but he hasn't even been interviewed yet. The FA will do it the right way and see at least three candidates.

Yes, Jose wants to return to England, but to manage a Premier League club, probably United.

Apart from being French, Arsene's stock has slipped. He still has a job to do at Arsenal and if he left, surely his next stop would be Real Madrid?

Pep Guardiola is third favourite with some bookies but that surely is also a non-starter.

We've dismissed Stuart Pearce elsewhere, but he is almost certain to be interviewed, unlike Sam Allardyce.

Guus Hiddink has an outstanding pedigree, but also a suspended jail sentence for tax fraud.

Even if the FA's preferred choice is Harry Redknapp, they must have a Plan B, in case he, Daniel Levy or both say no.

Given the high risk of perceived failure, the no-brainer is to go for an English manager. Martin O'Neill might have sneaked into the reckoning, being Northern Irish and having spent most of his life playing, managing and living in England. Alan Pardew's time will surely come—perhaps after Harry.

So if Harry says no, surely the FA's insurance policy is to appoint an English manager with an excellent track record at club and international level. That would have to be Roy Hodgson, because Glenn Hoddle ain't coming back.

Then, if Hodgson failed, the FA could say "we may not have been able to get Harry Redknapp, but we listened and got the best qualified English manager...what more could we do?"

Roy is available, because this is his last chance. Nobody would have more integrity, humility or enthusiasm for the job. Managing a national side is a very different and much more lonely job than club management. Some are better suited to the latter.

Roy Hodgson for England!