I'm not sure if any of you listen to the weekly Naked Football Show podcasts (worth a listen https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-naked-football-show/id397094002 ) but they suggested the idea of Harry Redknapp taking over BUT only for the short term until we can get a new manager lined up. I know a lot of people really dislike the idea of Harry taking over as manager - but what about in this situation? And do you think he even has the tactical and man-management skills to get us safely out of the relegation zone without bringing in his own players? Would you prefer to get a new man in ASAP so he can get more time with the squad, or would you prefer to get steered to safety by Redknapp so the new guy can start with relatively low pressure? Personally I would much prefer Harry to Hutchings as caretaker manager. He would definitely give the players the kick up the backside that they need!
No to Harry, Logistically this idea is flawed in many ways. There is no guarantee any manager can achieve success and honestly I don't think P1ss arsing about with temporary managers is of any use to anybody. Hutchings to stay in charge until we can bring in a good permanent replacement - if that means we wait a week or two then so be it but why bring in someone else to then go through this again... Just makes no sense in any way what so ever
How is it flawed logistically? Harry as caretaker manager for the next few games until we find a suitable replacement - seems simple enough to me?
Why would he do it? Why would we do it? What difference would he make to the players? Will it benefit him? (Probably not) Will it benefit us? (maybe but having 4 managers in one season can only be seen as a bad thing regardless of who they were) It gives us no stability to chop and change so much particularly in our situation, the players won't appreciate the idea of a bloke being there for a few weeks. We also already have a caretaker manager who is in essence doing everything that Harry would do who a) knows the players, the situation and b) doing it for a fraction of the price.. and in reality Harry will be wanting a Permanent job (which answers my 1st & 4th question) it would make no sense as while he our caretaker manager he won't be getting considered for any other roles - which he would clearly prefer to take than be with us....
i think you're correct to question why hutchings is in caretaker charge, as he was partly responsible for your current predicament, but seriously, harry? it will not happen. as kopr says above, there would be literally no reason, none whatsoever, for him to do it.
Redknapp is a better manager than Hutchings, I don't think anyone can argue with that? Surely it has been Hutchings job to motivate the players just as much as it was Jewells, so I don't think he's good enough and I don't think the players will respond to him in the same way they would respond to someone like Redknapp. As Superman says, Hutchings has got to take partial responsibility for the mess we are in. Harry took an unpaid advisory role at Bournemouth - he clearly loves the game and wants to be involved and obviously he is close to ME. If he fails no one blames him because he only took charge for a few weeks, if he succeeds he gets all the praise. If we could convince him to take charge for a few weeks and install that "failure isn't acceptable" attitude then why would we say no? I'm very confused why you would rather keep Hutchings if Redknapp was offered to us for a few weeks.
wright, i don't think you seem familiar with redknapp's personal life. he lives down in dorset in one of the most exclusive areas of the country. he WILL NOT commute to ipswich simply to fill in for three or four games, that is illogical. the reason he is at bournemouth is because of that very reason, as its on his doorstep. redknapp would not even be mentioned were it not for his tenuous connection to your owner. i totally understand why you wouldn't want hutchings in charge - the guy is as much a failure as jewell was and a clean cut of the coaching staff would have made sense - but you'd be far more suited to letting klug or someone like that take over for a short space of time. harry redknapp is not going to be ipswich town manager, it isn't even viable. what you need is a quick but detailed search for the right guy to manage you for the next five years, not 1 month. surely that's been the issue with your team for the past two years - short termism
I'm with Wright on this one.. We could get him in until we find a suitable canditate (ie wait for Adkins to get the boot, or draw up a compensation package for Mogga). Or if things are working for all parties, keep him there for as long as possible.
