He's taken up the role offered to him by Scally http://www.gillinghamfootballclub.com/page/PressReleases/0,,10416~2774277,00.html I think this is a good thing and can be a real benefit to the new manager coming in. No doubt there will be issues as there always is. He's in place before the new manager has been appointed so the manager will know what the deal is. UTG
This can only have an adverse effect on the quality of the new manager coming in. Cannot imagine a high profile manager like Adams or Ince being happy with this arrangement. It appears the new appointment is looking more like a Mark Robson / Steve Constantine type now.
I am happy with Andy Hessenthaler in the new role. My take on it is whatever management role you take in any job, there is always a chain of command above you. Why not a man that knows more about Gillingham then most other people (accept the fans of course!!!), this surely can only benefit future decisions that the Chairman makes.
only see this as excellent business for gillingham fc and hope it works out for all concerned, whilst saying GOOD LUCK HESS !!! i don't think it's as bad as many feel regards the fact...he may tread on the new managers toes in the position he will hold above them. in fact i think hess is aware of this and will stay clear until called upon regards advise. i'm looking forward to actually having someone focusing on players coming in and development on a much bigger scale and other matters...it's needed and think hess can handle it ! just hope the new manager is a welcome appointment alround to take gillingham fc forward !!!
brb - whilst I fully accept your comments regarding chains of command any high profile manager would not expect, at this level, to be sub-ordinate to anyone with regard to footballing matters.
I have to say I think this is a good decision but it will almost defiantly effect who we have as a manager due to cost for one reason as we are now paying for someone extra and the second reason is many good managers may not want a director at the club.
The more I think about it the more that this is a bad idea for numerous reasons. Firstly I am surprised Hess took the role, it seems an odd thing to do especially if a clause is written into his contract that he can leave for nothing if a managerial job comes along (as touted). It seems that he is happy to take the clubs money until something better comes along. But on to my main concerns... as Hoadie pointed out, I don't think Hess will be working for free, so he will be draining the clubs limited resources. Also what the hell is the role? If he is developing youth, make him the youth team manager, if he is scouting players make him a scout, the ambiguity makes the managerial position a little more suspect, but I am sure that any propsective employee will be informed about how things work. Most importantly, as pointed out early, I feel it will have an adverse affect on the type of manager we can attract. In Europe the idea of a manager is essentially a coach with the board / director of football taking many decision who the clubs signs, in Britain things are different and the buck stops with manager in nearly all the first team decision, the two aren't seen as compatatible. This many put more traditional english managers off, but Constantine may fit the bill in that regard. Even as brb suggests that the hierachy is clearly established Hess must has some input or the role is completely pointless, and even if Hess sets out not to get involved all it would take is one comment in the press after a bad result to undermine the manager, and the all hell will break loose. I feel that the job would be pretty hard to follow Hess, seeing as he was/is so popular and a "club legend", but to have him hanging about will make it ten times more difficult, like trying to seduce a new girlfriend with her ex hanging about, and other people telling you how great her ex was! Rant over... and breathe
why does everyone assume that hess is gonna cause a problem by being in charge of bring players to the club, for all we know he is just gonna be the broker in the deal rather than scally over the phone, which will only be a good thing as a it speeds the process up and who better to sell the club to the player and agent. no where has it been mentioned that hess will control all signings from identifying to completing the transaction. im sure if he finds a player then the role will include showing the manager the guy and seeing if he likes him or not.
jokeykid(606) If we assume that you are correct - then why call Hess a director, rather than a scout ? In an ideal world a person like Hess, who has been ' special ' to a club, would not merely be thrown out, and I would like to think that his position as director will work - but it looks as if a job has been created for him ( at what unnecessary cost ) - until another suitable managers position is available. Scally must be going soft in his dotage - he has never seemed to be one for sentiment in the past.
As I pointed out before, and Always has also reiterated, if his job is just tplayer recruitment make him a scout then there is no issue / debate over the chain of command. However, according to Scally the role is "over seeing football matters from grass roots to senior level" WFT does that mean... seems pretty much a managers role to me. The cyncial side of me thinks the Hess was only given this job as Scally doesn't want to be seen as "the man who shot Bambi's mum" in footballing term and of course any bad news can be tempered by sending out Hess to break it to the fans rather than doing it himself. I was thinking of calling Hess Scally's rotweiller but I think lapdog maybe a better phrase
I've got some thoughts on this from a slightly different perspective, surely some of the cost will be offset against any annual tax bill? Not making a statement there just a general question. More importantly though, one thing I have experienced is you do not need to run a business and say for sake of example, if you are a chairman, why would you want to make decisions on situations you may not be fully qualified or experienced to do so, you might as well save costs by having someone on the payroll with more knowledge of certain situations. Maybe even just to relieve some of the pressure off yourself. People might state that is not the way the English or for want of being correct a manager in the UK might do but what is wrong as in any business of having a right hand man. Maybe that is the way of private sector business but not the particular way of football. Well I see it as maybe it is time we did. The manager concentrates on his job on the pitch, tactics, team selection. While the director oversees the finer detail of the business while offering support to those above and below him. Also with the proposals of ground development on the agenda as a chairman maybe you need to start sharing some of your workload (player matters), while getting on with the business development model side of things. Obviously I do not know but just suggestions. ps. to clarify what I am trying to say, I am looking at this more from a business prospective than solely a football one.
brb I understand your point of view and I am not opposed to the concept but my concerns are on the choice of applicant. I can't see Hessy's presence having anything from a detrimental affect on the managerial role. Look at the instability experienced by Crewe when Gradi went upstairs... they went trough two managers in very quick succession, no doubt influenced by the pressure of having Gradi sitting just above them, as I see it if you have got a ready made manager within in the club who would be willing to take up the reigns again at the drop of the hat the amount of pressure would be unbearable and the tolorence of the fans of a bad run of form would be reduced, the footballing equivilent of the sword of Damaclees (spelling?).
The more I think about this, the more I find it an interesting concept. I have done the positives, so a couple of negatives I throw in to the pot, firstly is Hessy to much of a Mr. Nice Guy for the role? My first thoughts on such a role brought Bobby Charlton to mind. So no I see no issue there. Actually it probably makes it more of a perfect fit if judged on personality. Lastly handling any budget, we know how Hessy can become rather emotional, paying back travelling fans for poor performances - ouch! As long as those emotions do not cross over in to decisions within the player market. Maybe a look through wiki might be able to explain what the role is about and to where we think Hessy might fit in to that role...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_football interesting to note they used Bobby Charlton as an example.
The wikipedia article is written by someone who does not understand company law. Titles do not mean much in this context what matters is whether or not the person is a member of the Board and what are the reponsibilities of the Board (in other words is there a more senior Board which makes the real decisions). So some "Directors of Football" have a nice title but they are not on the Board and therefore their powers are limited, others are on a Board but it is a subsidiary Board which does not make the key decisions. This all sounds a bit technical but it makes all the difference in terms of who wields the power. At Gillingham it seems quite straightforward (if you ignore property matters) and there is only one Board of significance and it seems Hessy will be on it. The Board makes its decisions collectively but inevitably on football matters the Football Director would be the most influential voice. In other words Hessy would be top dog on all football matters and the only issue then is how much the Football Director chooses to delegate to the no 2/coach/manager/call him what you will. This delegation is the key to the relationship between no 1 and no 2 but you have to remember that the no 1 can change the terms of delegation whenever he likes and this tends to be the cause of tension. So Hessy will be the no 1, the Board will choose the no 2 and Hessy will be hugely influential in the choice and then Hessy will decide on the extent of delegation and will probably change it as and when he thinks fit. Well I am an unapologetic Hessy fan but I see lots of problems in what is being proposed. A good main board football director needs to be a deep thinker rather than an excitable character and needs to be a calming influence instead of an explosive reactor. I think the arrangement being proposed will last a very short time. A more positive analysis would be to interpret all this as simply the replacement of Southall by Constantine/Robson with a redistribution of titles to satisfy egos and no real change. Now that would make sense.
There are many highly successful clubs that have a director of football that deal with all matters apart from the match 1st team squad. The manager/coach will concentrate only on picking and working with the team preparing them for match days, he will not have any other distractions to get in the way of winning games. Some top managers have even stated they don't want to get involved in anything other than the football, Redknapp is one who will give the board some names and wants nothing else to do with it.
Hessenthaler said: "I have taken on this job but I still want to be a manager at some stage. I just might need a rest (from managing) at the moment. "If, in a few months, there is an opportunity and something comes up then who knows? Management is still something I would like to do." Then why on earth has he taken the job? If this role is really needed then we need someone who is commited to the task and to the club. I never thought that I would ever questions Hess' commitment to Gillingham but here we are, he is essentially saying that he will take the club' money for a couple of months before clearing off as soon as something better come alongs. He has lost a lot of respect in my eyes and should simply pack his bags and clear off now and save the club some money which could be better spent elsewhere!!
BSG - on this one I agree. I have given Hessy my backing in his new role, which is evident reading back through the posts. However, I really do not want to be reading that sort of stuff. Has he learned nothing from the last two seasons as manager and talking to the media? Come on Hessy your a director of football now that really is a very, very poor advert for the club or if mis-reported you need to take that reporter to task..."If, in a few months, there is an opportunity and something comes up then who knows? Management is still something I would like to do." I thought this was about the future of Gillingham Football Club not an individual's own ambition if the chance came up elsewhere in a few months. Really disappointed especially after all my support.
