There was someone on this forum once, who from memory had sat on a mother's morning tea with one of Nix's AWs players wives, where the gossip was that Hudson was rated by the players!
An unconventional source of inside info granted - but not one you can tarnish with any 'fake news' sycophant media type accusations. To me there is just a consistent fed of info that planning wise esp he's doing a good job.
The OFC games to me are pretty meaningless as far as getting a gauge on AWs form/progress. They don't excite the fans or players, AWs are never at full strength and are just shark games that have to played in order to play the big games that matter, and excite the players & fans. Of the starting eleven that played the OFC Nations final I'm guessing barely half would be in a 1st choice AWs side now.
End of the day many folks on this forum, will never like Hudson even if he blended into a wonderful combination of Mother Theresa and Alex Ferguson.
Completely disagree re: OFC games because they're actually competitive games with motivated opposition. I'll cut some slack for not looking brilliant in Island conditions but IMO expecting us to win comfortably shouldn't be unreasonable when you compare all our advantages over them. And that goes for a second string AWs side too. I don't think we should be having to rely on penalty shootouts to win the OFCNC. But even accepting your position for the sake of argument, our performances in friendlies haven't been shark hot either. Or did I imagine us losing to Thailand and drawing with Myanmar? Also if we're going to talk about second string sides then it's probably worth pointing out the US and Mexico teams weren't stacked with first choice players.
I think the stuff about Hudson's personality is a red herring - the real question is has he done a good job actually selecting and setting up teams and getting the best out of the available resources. I don't think he has.
