OMG Are you for real ? have a look at all the petty and juvenile insults you threw at eagleman13 on the Franca’s Opportunity thread who is a long time and much respected member on the HOL site . Pot calling the kettle, you nasty little man you should be ashamed of yourself.

I absolutely disagree with this.

Having been at the Al-Narrs vs Al-Hilal, Old Firm type derby in November, with a full stadium, the place was rocking and the fans mental.

Then again for the Riyadh Seasonn Cup between Al-Nassr, Al-Halal and Inter Miami.
The 2 Riyadh sides utterly humiliated Inter Miami, in front of packed crowds, even without Ronaldo or Neymar entering the pitch at all. Inter Miami losing 4-3 (a very flattering result for them) then 6-0. Just show's how rubbish the American sides are.

I'm afraid, agree with their business model or not, they're here to stay. However their league is a little like the WSL, with a few decent sides and a huge gap between them and the rest.

Neither do you. You have as much coaching experience as I have. Less from reading your comments.

You seem such a genius that has thought of tactics that no one else has. I wonder why that is?
I'm guessing it is because there is not a chance in hell that your long ball theory would work in the modern game. But we'll never know because there is not a manager on the planet stupid enough to try it these days.
Plus you and people like you talk about Roy Hodgson's style of play being boring, negative and uninspiring. That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. In fact in many ways I dont disagree with you but how much of the ball do you honestly think we would see if we played the Crazy Gang way? The answer is the same as Wimbledon used to. Very little.

If Southgate ends up here I will not be renewing my ST

No their isn't, Frank is a disciple of Charles Hughes as was Dave Bassett, one of Hughes many statistics was 87% of goals are scored in 5 passes or less, if you had read it, you would see the similar tactic's, not thuggery, but a systematic style, which would work in todays football without a doubt, todays football is mostly boring anyway

The way we set up under Hodgson we remain compact and play within around 70 yards of the pitch between our penalty area and a few yards over the halfway line.
The idea is not to leave gaps and spaces for the opposition to exploit.
The opposition can have the ball in their own half where they don’t pose a threat is I suppose is the logic.

This can work if you have outstanding forwards and blistering pace to play on the counterattack.
To my mind we don’t have these.
We rarely attack the opposition’s penalty area in numbers and frequently when in crossing positions pass the ball back to a full back or midfielder.
This is the very antithesis of the Charles Hughes’ approach where we make 10 or more passes with no purpose sometimes with the ball ending up back at the goalkeeper.
Possession without purpose .

Liverpool have been an outstanding example in recent years of scoring goals in 5 passes or less.
We’ve been on the receiving end a few times.
To compare them to Dave Basset’s Wimbledon would be nonsensical.
Direct play can take different forms.

For me it’s about utilising tactics to suit the players.
Put simply , Roy’s tactics haven’t worked this season for the players at his disposal.
We’ve been neither efficient nor effective.
We have looked clueless in the absence of Eze and Olise, just as we did in the past in the absence of Zaha.

When Hodgson came back last season the first game was at home to Leicester and he set us up to win the game.
All week before he worked in training on taking off Vieira’s handbrake and we bombed forward at every opportunity and had about 20 efforts on goal.
This season he seems to have reverted to type and we don’t even have the benefit of being tight defensively.