Do I Not Like That

After the loss to Germany in 1990, Bobby Robson resigned as England boss. Many candidates were considered though Graham Taylor was chosen.. and we all know what happened there.

Joe Royle and Howard Kendall (among others) were shortlisted by the FA as potential successors...

So my challenge is this: Who else instead of Taylor could have become England Manager and how would they have fared?

Note their personal managing styles and the players they favoured.

Bonus points if this leads to a more successful England team.
 
Last edited:
Taylor was very much the heir apparent, and Howard Kendall declined to be interviewed for the post. If Kendall does want it then he has a great chance, although I'm not sure how he'd do - he'd been excellent in the 80s, but didn't actually win anything after his return to English football in 89. He'd be less direct than Taylor, and he'd know how to get the best out of Lineker, which might lead to Lineker breaking Charlton's record rather than falling just short.

Venables was heavily linked in the press, but the FA didn't like his "dodgy" business dealings, so he didn't get shortlisted. He did get the best out of Gascoigne briefly, and that would be vital to England's success, but I can see him being under even more press scrutiny and having to resign in disgrace.

Royle I fear would be a disaster, worse than Taylor. If you look at his Everton teams, he was famous for his "dogs of war" midfielders - all bite, no flair - and a fairly direct style. I just can't see him being successful.

One wild card option is Brian Clough, but at this point his time had passed, the FA wouldn't dare appoint him (if they didn't in 82 as a double European champion, then they never would). His alcoholism would be a disaster as well.

The other surprise option might be Steve Coppell, who was doing a wonderful job at Palace at the time. He's always played attacking, flowing football but has a habit of resigning if things aren't going well for him, and doesn't adapt well to new situations. When he's comfortable, he's brilliant but I can't see him being that comfortable in the job.

The main issue facing any England manager in the early 90s is that there are heightened expectations following a good World Cup, but all sorts of problems - the likes of Robson, Butcher and Shilton are all coming to the end of their careers at the same time, and Lineker wasn't going to go on much longer, while the younger generation wasn't quite coming through in time. Robson especially will have hurt the side, as there wasn't a genuine midfield general for a few years afterwards until Ince developed into one, while Shilton's heir apparent, Woods, was not quite good enough. A poor youth development policy had led to a dearth of genuinely creative players with the exception of Barnes, Waddle and Gazza - there was no cover in wide areas when Barnes struggled, and Gazza was about to start self-destructing badly. There were also no technically proficient centre backs - great defenders like Adams but nobody who could bring the ball out from the back well. There were promising youngsters that emerged at the World Cup, but Paul Parker would have injuries to contend with as well.

However, this still doesn't excuse picking Carlton Palmer and Andy Sinton.
 
I felt sorry for Taylor because he was caught between two great England squads (90 and 96). Gazza was injured, as was Shearer and Pearce. Any team missing those players are gonna suffer. Plus... some glaring misses made in EURO 92 can't be blamed on Taylor.

Plus, during the Do I Not Like That documentary, he's seen telling off a 'fan' for making racial comments at John Barnes.

But yeah.. Sinton and Palmer... :( why why why?
 
Top