See thats my problem.
I think shouldnt stop with just one man.
One man can only do so much and the players need to take responsibility aswel.
There's a difference between taking responsibility and the 'buck stops here' PG.
Ultimately the buck can only stop with one person. That person (Hodgson in this case) is charged with giving each player a role/responsibility, making sure they carry it out and sanctioning them if they don't.
How he goes about it is down to him but if he can't get individual players to preform or fulfill their responsibility the buck must stop with him. Similarly, if the team is under-performing as a whole; he must be held accountable.
Many on here, if we're all being honest, feared the worst prior to the game. We feared the worst because recent history has conditioned us to do just that.
It could be successfully argued that our away form, last season cost us a Champions League place and our then manager his job. To put it another way; the buck stopped with him. One would assume that if our away form cost us so dear last season then a simple solution would be to employ someone who's role, quite simply, was to improve on that form.
With the minimum of research those charged with finding a manager to do just that should have seen that Roy's pedigree dictated that he was wrong for the job at hand. The buck for that decision would have stopped with them but as H & G and Purslow have moved on, no-one is accountable; therefore the buck stops nowhere.
Like it or not, agree with it or not; if Hodgson can't get the players to live up to their responsibilities, it's him that is failing and it's him that should go. It's now only a question of when.
Logged
