Is Sven the worst manager in English history, ?

Question

The first 2 games was a disgrace, admitidley we got through, Sven had nothing to lose by trying Theo, as opposed to Peter Crouch the clown, he could have tried some of the others to give them experience and confidence, but in my eyes the big mistake was he stuck with Crouch, Sven in my eyes is the worst manager ever seen, he doesnt know his players, do you feel it will be better for England once he go's,?

Shame we couldn't have kept Terry Venables....

Answer 1

Just look at his record - World Cup 2002 and 2006, and Euro 2004. Each time England have qualified and progressed from the group stage. In the last WC they were narrowly beaten by the winners Brazil in the QF, and Euro 04 they were only knocked out by the home side after penalties in a match that England should have won, but for a dodgy ref decision.

That being said, I do find many of his decisions bizzarre such as:
1. Continuing to play Hargreaves out of position when he has failed to perform there.
2. Taking only four recognised forwards, especially when one was injured and the other was still not fully match sharp.
3. Picking Walcott dispite never having played for the Arsenal first team, especially when there were others such as Defoe, Bent, Johnson, Ashton, Beatie etc
4. Not using Steve McManaman - the obvious solution to England's left wing problem.
5. Not dropping his favourite players, for the sake of the best formation.

Answer 2

Statistically speaking, no definitely not. As it stands Sven has a win percentage of just under 60%, which puts him in the top five of all time along with Alf Ramsay, Glen Hoddle, Ron Greenwood and Bobby Robson. In pure statistical terms Terry Venables doesn't even come close, with a win rate of 47%.

Anyone with a long enough memory will remember England performances so shambolic that they put these first two games of England's World Cup campaign into sharp perspective - such as the 1973 draw with Poland (under Alf Ramsay!) which stopped us from qualifying for the 1974 World Cup, the dismal defeats against Ireland, Holland and the USSR under Bobby Robson in 1988, not to mention a litany of footballing atrocities under Graham Taylor.

The fact remains that England topped their group pretty comfortably while playing appallingly, while other teams (France spring to mind) are playing badly and struggling. How they would love to be in our shoes. And for all Crouch's faults he has been one of England's better performers thus far, and has scored a crucial goal that pretty much justifies his selection in my eyes. Who is to say that Theo Walcott is good enough to play - how much of him have you seen? Perhaps Sven has realised that he's not up to the grade and will struggle, whereas Crouch is that little bit older and wiser and can take of himself against quality defenders.

So no, Sven isn't the worst, but he isn't the best. His era will be remembered for providing the most schizophrenic England performances of all time - from 5-1 in Munich to losing 1-0 to Northern Ireland - and even the same kind of form in the same game! Unless a miracle happens and England triumph in a hard won battle on July 9, in which case the randy bugger will probably get knighted!!!

Answer 3

No he's not the worst but he makes some very dodgy decisions and tactical moves. I've got nothing against Walcott and think he can become a good player but he didn't deserve to be taken to the world cup. Defoe would have been a better choice in my eyes

Answer 4

As far as results, he is one of our best. However, as a "master tactician" his team reflect his personality : Dull boring and soulless.
The defence is like his comments to reporters : Unaware of who is around.
Some of his squad selections have been more than a bit ridiculous and Im afraid that now with the job going to his number 2 (Steve Yes McLaren) rather than the tell it straight personality of Big Sam, looks like more heartache for us for the forseeable future sadly.
The FA didnt give it Sam simply because he would refuse their bullsh*t principles and ideas. The fact he would pick the best performing players and motivate them all to gel together as a unit didnt really seem to matter to all the pr**ks at Soho Square.
However, the only good thing Mclaren may bring is after Boro's UEFA cup rounds, he wasnt afraid to go all out attack to recover a game,unlike "for sure" Sven.
Time will tell i guess. Love England but cant see us making it past the QF's.

Answer 5

Statistically he is not the worst but his half time team talk to motivate the players must be the worst of all time but i don't think Mclarren will be any better another fa yes man..

Answer 6

the guy is god. It says all of it that he has been with the club for see you later & it additionally says alot approximately Manchester United because of the fact look in any respect the different giants sacking their managers each season in the event that they dont win something.

Answer 7

No.Not even close.In recent times that honour goes to Graham Taylor.They didn't call him the turnip for nothing.

Answer 8

Actually on a win/loose ratio he has one of the best records - he just seems to bottle it or stuff up his tatics during major competitions.

Answer 9

his tactics makes him one of the worst i can remember , when was the last time he made a substitution, not a forced one, that benefitted the team at all

Answer 10

technically he is one of the best, results wise. We have had a number of proper gimps in the past as well!