I'm no great follower of football other than us, but Hodgson wasn't exactly deemed top

class before Fulham was he?

I mean, I don't remember his appointment being greated with scenes of glee, or the type of coverage and declarations of 'ambition' that the scums appointment of Keane got.

In short, (and feel free to correct me) wasn't he considered a distinctly average (at best) and dour manager before he got the Fulham job.
Also, isn't it his marvellous sucess at Fulham that has upped his stock as manager?

Do you really think if we had appointed him he would have been largely accepted, or would it have been greeted with howls of disbelief and cries of "cheap""crap" etc etc?

He could well have done well here, but i don't really remember him being suggested (at least not often) as an option.
So therefore had we appointed him instead (and considering how long he was out of work before Fulham if he's applied for our job twice, there has not been clubs queing up to appoint him) wouldn't there have been an element of gamble involved, and therefore luck?

Posted By: megson on May 26th 2009 at 12:31:51

Message Thread

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.

Log in