Roy Hodgson is like the embarrassing uncle who will not stop making daft remarks at family gatherings
England coach's comments regarding Raheem Sterling’s ‘tiredness’ and Brendan Rodgers’ training methods feel rather too much like a trip down memory lane, writes Chris Bascombe
Roy Hodgson is like the embarrassing uncle who will not stop making daft remarks at family gatherings
Think before you speak: Roy Hodgson's honesty has come in for criticism Photo: GETTY IMAGES
By Chris Bascombe
12:16PM BST 14 Oct 2014
It was Roy Hodgson’s introductory press conference as Liverpool manager.
He sat in the Anfield trophy room, flanked by the European Cups and memorabilia of the club’s greatest achievements, utterly convinced of his right to be there but well aware his immediate challenge was to reassure a sceptical fanbase.
Many did not want his predecessor, Rafa Benitez, to leave. Others thought his eventual successor, Kenny Dalglish, should have been sitting in his seat.
Hodgson had to get to work, to ensure he said the right things as much as did them, and this was a chance to make a positive first impression.
He must have gazed around the room that day and felt that weight of history. The reminders were everywhere, not least a montage of the club’s iconic managers staring statesmanlike at the spoils of victory.
A question was put to Hodgson, the equivalent to teeing up an easy volley into the top corner.
“Who would you say are your greatest influences as a coach, Roy?”
A matter of inches away was a portrait of Bill Shankly, alongside another of Bob Paisley and Joe Fagan. The ears of those Liverpool Gods must have been pricked as they awaited the response.
Hodgson paused.
“Don Howe,” he said.
Taking up the brace position is not customary during an interview, but never has so much resistance been required to do so.
This is the Hodgson many remember on Merseyside - a manager whose foot needed a restraining order from his mouth. Hodgson’s comments regarding Raheem Sterling’s ‘tiredness’ and Brendan Rodgers’ training methods feel rather too much like a trip down memory lane.
The defence then, as it is with his comments regarding Sterling’s ‘tiredness’ this week, is he is honest.
That’s true enough. Go back to that day in July, 2010. Evidently Liverpool’s legends had no impact on Hodgson’s footballing philosophy – or certainly were not foremost in his thoughts - so there was no reason to say they were. Equally, he may not have been aware that coaches such as Howe were perceived as the antithesis of the continental style pass and move game that enabled Paisley to win three European Cups.
Missing from Hodgson’s answer was not dishonesty, but tact, foresight, diplomacy and a huge dose of common sense. What might have prompted a chuckle if he’d proved a good Liverpool manager became more serious for him because this trend for misjudging his audience would pollute his brief reign at Anfield. The list of inappropriate, alienating remarks can be easily traced with the use of a well-known search engine.
Some would demonise Hodgson for this, but he seemed more like the embarrassing uncle who could not stop making daft remarks at family gatherings.
For such an experienced manager, there seemed to be a bumbling, naïve innocence to Hodgson as he rambled on for five more minutes than required and turned what would have been a reasonable answer into an incendiary one. It became tempting to turn up to his weekly briefings with a spade rather than a dictaphone. His answers were so accident-prone you needed the St John’s Ambulance crew on standby. Some wanted to rip his heart out every time he spoke and others thought it was nothing the removal of his vocal chords could not solve.
Given the circumstances in which he took the job, no Liverpool manager has required more PR advice, and yet he seemed totally incapable of absorbing it. Many in football may actually like this about Hodgson – he’s strikes you as far more old school than his namedropping of obscure philosophers and their nobel prize winning books would have you believe.
The flip side of this was the perception of a bloke whose response upon seeing an inferno raging all around him was to order a few more gallons of petrol.
“A genuinely nice bloke completely out of his depth,” was how one senior Anfield man put it on the day Hodgson left.
When Gerard Houllier, Benitez and Brendan Rodgers took over at Anfield they embraced the role of humbled custodian, sounding as if they’d spent weeks in the Anfield museum. They enthused and galvanised their audience by doffing their cap to the grandees and vowing to evolve a winning philosophy.
While cynics mocked the soundbites they had genuinely thrown themselves into every facet of Liverpool life. Supporters bought into the message and all three recovered from troubling starts to their rebuilding process because gave the impression they knew what they were doing and things would get better.
There are those who maintain Hodgson was dismissed after six months at Anfield solely on footballing grounds, but there was far more to it. Rodgers’ results at Anfield six months into his reign, for example, were little different to Hodgson’s and yet the mood was entirely different.
It was not ONLY Hodgson’s dire football that was his undoing – although clearly that sealed his fate - but a broader lack of wisdom and incapacity to understand that in the modern game looking and sounding the part becomes even more important when your competency as a coach is under scrutiny.
Anyone who has seen how Hodgson operates knows when the cameras are on his remarks can never be taken entirely at face value because he has a history of asking those who heard them to reassess what he said, reconsider them in a different context and then accept his genuine remorse if they’ve had an unintentionally negative impact.
“I apologise if I have offended anyone. It was not my intention,” is a recurring Hodgson follow-up. There never seems to be a sinister intent, but the effect still causes some to spit out his name on Merseyside rather than speak it.
You can imagine him flicking through the newspapers today fretting as to whether he really meant to deliver such a critical message, pondering whether another phone call is required to reassure Rodgers.
There should be no anger at Anfield regarding Hodgson’s comments today. There will be a touch of bewilderment that – without a trace of irony - he questioned the training methods at a club where some senior professionals were fatigued with the sheer tedium of his sessions.
Privately, it may also be asked if the FA are planning to pay 50 per cent of Sterling’s next contract since they evidently believe they are entitled to interfere in how the club that pays his wages manages their employee – a player whose rapid elevation as England’s most exciting player is in large part due to his current manager’s man-management.
Most of all, however, there should be a shrug of the shoulder and hope (probably forlorn) that Hodgson’s comments are seen for what they are - the latest in a multitude of examples of the current England manager’s struggles to keep his brain and vocal chords working in harmony.
