Then it means you don't know how to do your job right and someone needs to replace you
Match Day Thread General Match Thread
- Thread starter PleaseNotPoll
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Then it means you don't know how to do your job right and someone needs to replace you
Man Utd and Chelsea have all had many goes at appointing a successful manager. As did Liverpool before Klopp. The only stable clubs in the PL are Man City and Arsenal.
So every Director in the PL needs to be sacked?
Choosing a coach is closer to choosing lottery numbers than a rational decision process. You can't hold people accountable for decisions which are not driven by data.
They don't understand the game
They don't understand what the team needs to progress, what type of man is required to improve us. Do you genuinely think they know what they are doing when it comes to us giving it our all as a football club to move onto the next level on the pitch?
Possibly.
I think the club needs a whole fresh approach just because of how long they’ve been owned by ENIC anyway. It’s stale and not working.
Paratici also pushed for Nuno, though
Also seemed to be on the basis of his pre-Wolves history of playing 3ATB, which seems to be a fixation of the board and/or Paratici
Also likely an attempt to keep Jorge Mendes sweet after sacking one of his most notable clients the previous season, which would also count as a form of continuity between coaches
No PL owners have any football experience. Half of them don't even have Directors of Football with football experience. We have had Paratici and Lange so have more football experience than most.
Moving on to the next level can only happen when we have one of the top 3 or 4 most expensive squads. There are literally no serial winners in world football who are outside that.
| thought it would be a good idea to bring Kinsky on and then that disaster happens. You can argue either way whether it was a good idea or not, to take him off and not give him the chance to redeeem himself in a game in Spurs current season that is almost irrelevant. I just hope the young man recovers his game and his confidence.
I used to chair the Investment Committee of a £2.5b pension scheme. It waa manifestly stupid for the Committee to choose the investments itself so we appointed investment managers. We did have to decide which sort of investment managers we needed and how much went into different investment categories so we appointed consultants to help us with those issues. But we then had to choose the consultants. We did our best in doing that but we had no real data on the performance of those consultants so we generally went for the safe approach of hiring big companies who advised many pension schemes. However it turned out that the only way to get sensible advice out of consultants is to ask them difficult questions. I had the qualifications to do that so we ended up with a very different investment strategy from the one they originally recommended. But when you analyse the performance of investment managers their net return after fees is almost zero so in practice you would get a similar result through choosing investments by sticking pins in the Financial Times markets pages.
I see a similar problem in football. The owners have no better understanding of how to organise football matters than the average fan so they need someone to advise them on that and help them select the coach. However there is no easy way of getting such advice or judging the best people to appoint. So you have to fall back on general principles and ask difficult questions of your staff. But again there is overwhelming data that shows that the wealth of the club is much more important than who the coach is, and that almost no coaches make a real difference statistically. So I really can't get excited about discussions on whether the owners have a clue about football because even people who do don't perform better in decisions on football matters.
We have a short term problem which at the moment overrides long term considerations. Yes in the long term sadly it's all about wealth but in our current situation, surely the only thing you can hang your hat on is experience. Pick a man who knows the PL and preferably has a connection to the club because the players need to believe what he is saying to them. Redknapp has done this job successfully at Portsmouth, West Ham and Spurs, it is the most obvious way to go.
Of course wealth is the most important thing. Look at how City and Chelsea have bought and bribed their way to success over the years. And by the same token, wealth isn't a guarantee of success either. Look at United. Look at how much Liverpool spent only to have a relatively terrible season.
But in the absence of wealth, or rather: in the presence of a wealth gap, it is crucial to get everything else under control as best as possible. You can't control the purchase of better players if you're in the same market as bigger clubs. You also can't control being able to keep your own players from wanting to join bigger clubs. So what can you control?
I don't agree with your comparison of what sounds like a huge hedge fund aiming to streamline success to probably hundreds of investors, to what is ultimately a game that was described by the great Bill Shankly as "terribly simple".
Because football is a very simple game that sadly in modern times has become over-thought and over-tweaked and over-complicated to the point where it is barely recognisable anymore.
Which is why I think the underdogs always seem to thrive when they appoint managers who understand this principle and players who have the drive to deliver it.
I look at our best managers of the PL era and all of them have a few things in common:
They weren't tactical geniuses.
They were superb motivators.
They created systems whereby the players they had could best express themselves.
Take Poch for example, he isn't some sort of tactical marvel. In fact his only real innovation to the game that wasn't common in the PL until he started doing it was the FBs pushing up and the CBs splitting for the DM to drop into a 3 at the back. Before him, most teams who wanted to use WBs would just start with 3 CBs in the first place. Indeed in the first Wembley season after Wanyama's bad injury, we did this a lot too.
Otherwise, Poch focused on the simplest of simple things: Run hard, track your man, pass accurately, don't shoot wastefully.
And he was a superb motivator, a guy the players would run through a brick wall through. So they bought in fully. And the result was he simply left the team to express itself. These are elite level athletes at the end of the day.
BMJ and Redknapp had similar qualities imo. Redknapp in particular was extremely tactically limited, a bit of a throwback to the old school English game. But that didn't matter because his teams did the simple things really well and the obvious talent we had was allowed to shine.
Ange is an interesting case study. Superb motivator but tactically complex, with FBs running into pseudo-10 positions, CBs expected to cover the length of the pitch in seconds, deep CMs asked to play like prime Lampard or Dele, and strikers used as creators instead of goalscorers. There were lots of big tweaks happening all over the pitch at once, and this created a system so complicated that only a handful of our players could actually deliver it, and once injuries kicked in the whole thing collapsed.
Then we can consider Frank. Awful motivator, tactically sound but the wrong approach for a club with our philosophy, and really struggled to create a system within which the players were doing the simple stuff well, because he like many modern managers who are totally subsumed by mountains of data analysis, was always too focused on the woods to see the trees and forgot what Shankly said. It's rare you'll see a manager singularly fail to utilise his top scorer and end up selling him mid season, but such is the obvious result of a manager who over complicates everything.
This, I think, is a very very different world. Football is a simple game. Very few managers have any real edge tactically. And if they do, it will be found out and countered at this level very quickly. This only has two solutions:
1) Keep buying the best players. Pep has done this to keep his career as buoyant as it has been.
2) Start doing the basic simple stuff really, really, really well, and focus on one tactic that is difficult to stop for any opposition, because it toes the line of what is illegal according to the Rules.
If you understand football, you'll know that #2 is our dear neighbours down the road. They're a bloody boring, pain in the arse team but Arteta despite not knowing what the white line around the technical area means, is an astute man. He knows that Arsenal will never be able to sign better players than City or Liverpool, so how can he get an advantage over them?
By doing the simple things really well, which they do. In fact it pains me to say but they are the best drilled team in the league.
And by developing approaches to set pieces that piss everyone off because they're clearly unfair but right now aren't covered by the Rules. So if they take advantage of that and win the league and maybe the CL too, their stature rises exponentially and suddenly competing with City and Liverpool for the best players isn't quite so hard.
That analysis is excellent.
The more that you watch the disaster unfold, it's fair to say, that while an unfortunate slip, the first goal was almost totally attributable to the odd pitch surface. As such the keeper should be excused. The evidence for that is clear in the slips and falls of many other players.
He was certainly not to blame for the 2nd goal, which came from VDV's slip - although fewer are making anything of this.
The 3rd is 100% down to his error - but when seen in conjunction with the previous incidents, the commentary above makes sense: he was over-compensating for what happened earlier.
The bottom line is for me that, whilst I can possibly make a case for Tudor changing keepers maybe at half time after assessing the lads state of mind (after all, for a start he may have then gone on to redeem himself over the next 30 minutes), doing it when he did was wrong and his appalling lack of basic human compassion in the moment is a huge red flag for me.
I hope against hope that Kinsky bounces back and gets another chance.
I hope against hope that Tudor gets his contract cancelled and gets booted out the door ASAP.
All good stuff but I wasn't saying that football and investment were in any way similar. I was saying that finding the people to do the important jobs was equally difficult.
I agree entirely about the sort of coach we need.
Arsenal's squad is currently about as valuable as Man City's and more valuable than Liverpool's. They don't actually need to bend the rules to win.
I agree that Tudor is nowhere near the right person for the job because we need a motivator currently. But I doubt Redknapp too. Ryan Mason or Robbie Keane would be my choices