TBH Saint, I think Hodgson is a good appointment. I had the same fears when Bullockchops was appointed - not because of his lack of a high profile, but because of his 'history'. It may yet bite Spurs in the bum due to the upcoming court case. In the meantime he has done a good job.
If I'm honest, I think Hodgson will be probably the best option for Liverpool. He has established a bit of a track record of getting the best out of limited resources and resurrecting faltering careers (and we have a lot of them at Liverpool!).
I thought it was time for Rafa to go and, despite his moderate success at Liverpool, I never liked the style of play he drilled into the team (apart from, crucially, the 2008/9 season, when he seemed to let the players off the leash a bit - and look where that took us). But there are a massive number of Liverpool fans who idolise him, more for his stance against the Yanks than for anything he did with the team. Any new manager will struggle to win these over unless they win the league playing samba football - which really aint gonna happen.
As I said earlier, my biggest fear is that Torres Gerrard and Mascherano look at the appointment and decide to leave. Saying that, Mascherano's been making 'my wife can't settle' noises for months; and, if the stories are true, Gerrard is leaving for non-football reasons anyway so it wouldn't matter who we got in. Torres would be a huge blow, because he can create goals out of situations very few other players can (although you wouldn't know it, watching Spain this WC). Then again, if we could get in £100m for the three of them and if Hodgson was given that to spend and if he did that wisely on 4 or 5 players in the £20-30m bracket, we may just see a revitalised team. Trouble is, that's 3 enormous 'ifs'.
Something you can clear up for me.
My understanding was that 'King Kenny' was brought in to oversee the appointment of Rafa's successor. He the absented himself from the process when he professed interest in the job himself. Given the board/committe or whatever it's called has gone for Hodgson, what does that tell you about their faith in Dalglish?
Dalglish was already at Liverpool in some contrived, non-football-related capacity well before Benitez left. I don't think the board rate him (and perhaps question his mental strength in what is likely to be a hugely traumatic time for the club). Then again, I don't really rate him either. I know it flies in the face of accepted thinking, after he won 3 league titles (inc the double) as player manager/manager of Liverpool, but IMO he began the rot at Liverpool, as many of the players he signed in the latter stages of his tenure were well short of the standard of those they were to replace, often on inflated transfer fees (Ronny Rosenthal, Jimmy Carter, David Speedie). Obviously, Souness took transfer dealing ineptitude to another level, but he was already trying to rebuild a side that Dalglish had allowed to slide. I guess maybe the board also felt that, having been out of the game for long, he'd struggle to adjust to the changes that have taken place in recent years.
Martin
Home: St Helens (26m asl) Work: Manchester (75m asl)
A TWO addict since 14/12/01
"How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? Here lies the whole art of Conservative politics."
Aneurin Bevan