Harry Redknapp was the right choice

This will sound especially bizarre after Portsmouth's humbling at the hands of Liverpool today, but Harry Redknapp was the right man for the England job. That's not to say that Fabio Capello won't do well, but Harry had everything that was needed. He's great at getting the best out of what he has, he's worked with several of the players before, and he likes his teams to attack.

Sven Goran Eriksson was by far the most successful manager that England have had in recent years. Critics complained that he had failed to win England a major tournament, but then who had? They're a side that haven't done fuckall since 1966, and the unfortunate Sky and Premiership hyperbole seems to have players and fans alike believe that the England squad is far better than it actually is.

What ultimately really got the fans on Sven's back, was that England didn't play exciting football. They played result-oriented football, to the best of their abilities, and when faced with the world's best, like Brazil, Portugal and France, they couldn't survive. They always managed to compete though, and were never massacred, but the players weren't upto the level of technique where Sven could trust them at.

This year, after City's rousing start to the season, the press asked Sven why England never played like that, and his simple and honest answer was that he never had a player like Elano as England manager. That's the basic truth to all this - the present England players are lacking heavily in technique and skill, and so they have to be organised in a way that compensates for this, and that requires a tremendous amount of humility, which the players simply don't have.

Capello is an angry man with a big personality, and he will make sure the players do what he says, and he won't mince his words. But if people thought that Sven's brand of football was uninspiring, they will be in for even worse with Capello. His only focus is winning, and he doesn't care about style or substance or anything as long as he gets 3 points.

He's also a stereotypical Italian tactician, and his lack of English is going to hamper his communication to his players. Additionally, he's never managed an international team, so it will be interesting to see how he does with England, since he only has the players together for a few days every month. My guess is that he'll strip the play down to the bare essentials, and the fans won't like it. Neither will the media, and that battle is one of the biggest for an England manager. If the media starts to get on your back, the wheels might just start falling off the wagon.

Now Capello is a strong enough character to deal with all of this, but he's going to have to conduct quite a reality check once he starts. In his first spell at AC Milan, he had Van Basten, Rijkaard, Maldini, Gullit and co. Then at Real, he had Raul, Morientes, Suker and Mijatovic. Back at Roma, he had Totti, Batistuta, Cassano, Tomassi and Emerson. At Juventus, he had Buffon Ibrahimovic, Vieira, Del Piero, Emerson, Camoranesi and Nedved. And then back at Real, he had Raul, Ronaldo, Beckham, Cassano, Robinho, Van Nistelrooy, Gago, Guti, and Casillas. That is an awesome array of talent to always have been supported by.

Who does he have with England? Well... Wayne Rooney, Steven Gerrard, and Joe Cole. Gerrard as well is probably just a little bit overrated, but that's essentially the issue. Rio Ferdinand can play a bit when he's not busy with orgies and booze, and Peter Crouch can be a jack-in-the-box, but essentially the England squad is full of very, very limited players, and has no goalkeeper (surely, only the most deluded of fans still believe that Paul Robinson is "world class?).

At his previous clubs he's always been able to request the players that he wanted, but international management doesn't have transfer feers unfortunately. Granted, that's more than OK if you're the manager of Brazil, or Italy or France, but not quite with England. The core group of England players might be as talented as some top sides, but in terms of depth, there's not much. So the key is getting the best out of the players that you have, and that is where Harry Redknapp is excellent.

OK, he is a bit of a wheeler-dealer on the transfer market, but those who've followed him for many years know that it's not what he relies on. Constant injury problems, lack of funds, and switching of clubs mid-season have shown that he organises the team according to the players he has, and can innovate very well. He's never won anything major, but he's shown he can beat the best, and play attacking football.

Also, across the various clubs he's been at, he's had Michael Carrick, Joe Cole, Jermain Defoe, Glen Johnson, David James, Peter Crouch, Theo Walcott, Rio Ferdinand, Anton Ferdinand, Frank Lampard and Sol Campbell playing for him. That's the core of the England squad right now, and he knows them in-and-out. Plus, he's been a Premiership manager for years, and knows the rest of the players quite well. This is as opposed to Capello, who admittedly says he doesn't know too much about the Premiership, and intends to do homework with watching loads of videos.

Having said all of this, Capello and Redknapp are in two completely different classes of manager. One could take the Italian comparison, and compare Capello to Lippi (two highly succesful, legendary club managers), and Redknapp to Donadoni (canny managers, who have managed small clubs, and not won anything, but know how to organise teams).

I'm in favour of Redknapp in this case, because he would have cost a fraction of what Capello did, and would not have put the pressure on England in such a big way. Now, they've gone for one of the biggest names available, on one of the biggest salaries available, and if they still fail, they one of football's proudest nations will end up as a laughing stock. It's a miracle they aren't already, because anyone who hired Steve McLaren should be.