yes rob, some power has been taken away from the manager, but not in the sense you seem to think. he is still the one running training, he still picks the team, he's still the one organising us. his role is now solely football based. many of the powers that have been taken away from him are administrative and things like scouting our opponents (to give him more time to be coaching by the way). these were all things hughton did himself, which although very admirable, was an awful lot to cover. i have no problem with taking many of those exterior aspects away from the manager and let him concentrate on the football coaching side of things - let others write reports.
interesting you mention lambert because of course he literally did NO coaching. in fact, he wasn't even in norwich most of the week. culverhouse would drill the troops during the week, players would enjoy it, have a bit of fun but work hard. then, on the thursday or friday, lambert would march into colney and the atmosphere changed. the fun went out the door, everybody got down to work to try and impress. they knew who was in charge. it was a good balance and it meant that players were kept on their toes before a match day but weren't drilled into submission (which i suspect hughton did to a degree). we've got no sergeant major in charge and it shows i'm afraid. colney is back in 'safe mode' and everyone is on easy street. there is no fear factor from adams. there is so much more to me wanting this horrible error ended pronto than just a few bad results.
With all due respect Supers, you've skipped the actual point of my post (e.g. I brought up Lambert simply as an example that you can't judge someone's quality as a manager while they are still learning the ropes - whether Adams should have been
allowed to be learning the ropes at our club at this crucial time is a different question and one I tend to agree with you on).
And given there have been appointments to coaching positions, if you're saying Adams is doing all the coaching, just what the hell is Robson (or for that matter Holt) doing? I've already admitted I have no idea exactly how responsibility is divided (though I'm sure you're right about the administrative stuff being taken away), but your explanation about Adams doing everything bar being club secretary still doesn't explain why the board felt in the summer we needed the full house of Royle, Robson and Holt (amongst others). Incidentally, I still think Adams needs that.
My point was simply that, it's quite clear that the board have identified a short-coming in Robson's work. The board are also keen to maintain a semblance of continuity in the case of the manager, which I think is far more sensible than chopping and changing from Meulensteen to Magath, etc., and risking the whole thing truly blowing up in our faces (and with the best hyperbole in the world, you are not going to convince me that right now we really are knee-deep in it - we have a problem, but it's eminently resolvable). At this stage, if Robson is not producing the goods, given the board's stated position, this seems an entirely sensible approach. I have no doubt that the moment McNally thinks Adams has completely lost control he will be out.
Of course, as I said a moment ago, the other alternative I'm prepared to believe is that Adams was lined up as the fall guy who did just a little bit too well in the first couple of months.
You may have a very good point on Adams lacking fear factor (whether that's a necessity for a good manager is a different question altogether) but that's not really the point at hand.
