Now don't get me wrong, I think sacking Nick has been a huge mistake and I think it has been handled extremely badly, but a caller on Radio Rugby just came up with a very good point. I recall saying when Nick was first appointed as caretaker manager that he needed to create separation between himself and the players as he had previously been "One of them" and now he had to be "One of the Management". At the time, and a simple measure it would have been, I suggested he start by wearing a suit at games and he ditch the tracksuit. Shouldn't make any difference, I know, but just as in interviews where first impressions last, visual associations can be extremely powerful if not consciously then certainly subconsciously. Of course there are other measures that would add to this separation such as not joining in with the Team bonding, having his own space and having a more formal communication regime that make the transition from Team-member to manager more likely to succeed. The caller on Blunderside stated that his steadfast support of the players and his thinly veiled "coaxing" of the owners to do what is necessary to develop the team in terms of contracts etc was probably seen by the Allams as a failure to manage. As I say I think this is just something a young manager needs to learn and certainly not a reason for treating someone the way they have treated him and certainly not reason for sacking the guy. All this taken into account, I think with their attitude to people questioning or challenging their viewpoint, the Allams are severly limiting the types of manager they can reasonably work with in the future and therefore limiting their chances of making Hull City a successful football club.
Im not so sure Strov. Being promoted from the shop floor (sorry, hope that makes sense, I spent 23 years in the RAF) is rarely ever good. You lack the authority and respect someone new being brought in brings. For that reason, I think Nick could one day be a great manager, but sadly, if he'd stayed, I think this time next season we'd be on here wondering why we only managed an upper mid table finish, at best. If Nick had been anyone else, the KC would have been ringing to boo's and calls for him to go by the end of March. He must know that too. Its great he was given the chance to learn his craft but I firmly believe he was still too much one of the players to be taken seriously. I also honestly believe this is the best decision for the club in the long term, the Allams want a proper manager, one who WILL do us proud, well unless Dowie or Kean turn up...
I thought the bloke on blunderside who made the point that NB may have been too close and too loyal to his ex- team mates was probably spot on too. Maybe NB found the transition from player to manager harder than he made it look & he found it tough to swop his boots for a pen.
..this would all make perfect sense if it wasn't for the fact Barmby was sacked for non-footballing reasons. I love the man, but I don't think he would have got us promoted (or kept us up) so if the Allam's had said 'we don't think you're good enough, thanks for everything' I'd have been ok with it.. BUT (and this is the big but) THEY DIDN'T - they've sacked him for THAT interview, which is scandalous. In short, if they wanted him out they should have done it properly, and not in this pathetic, smoke screen manner which is wholly unfair on Barmby, his staff, the players and us.
Why is it? What if we don't know half the story? What if the Allams have kept their major evidence behind closed doors due to his appeal? To many people jump to to many conclusions. And on the original subject i can see where the caller was coming from, as i thought to myself could you really see him dropping Andy Dawson?
Nobody is jumping to conclusions, they are reacting to a revealing statement from the Allam family, what's wrong with that? If there was more to it than the Allams revealed then they could have said that, without actually telling us what it was. If people believe there is more to it than has been said then it is only because they find the reasons given were ridiculous.
Firstly i was directly replying to that quote. He was not sacked for ONE single interview. Secondly there is no smoke screen, they have none done anything underhand, they have not done anything morally wrong. They have sacked an employee.
Really so the fact that Nick has 7 days to appeal against his sacking but the Allams put out a statement saying the search for a new manager starts now is not wrong. They really are so arrogant they think they can do whatever they want and treat people however they want because they have money. Mark my words the Allams will be a laughing stock throughout the football world with people struggling to see the sense in what they have done. Nothing good will come out of this.
I agree with you, I don't think they are being underhand. That was my point, I just said that people may think they are being because the reasons they gave were so flimsy.
I got slated for asking if Nick would be a trackie or a suit. Manager. Mad hog. In your time in the services did you ever see someone promoted and stay in the same section, unit or station.
Very interesting points.. backed up by the opinion of someone I've met who knows a thing or two in the matter, one of my recent clients has been the Olympique Lyon Head of International Relations.. we talked a lot about football matters.. he told me the football club DON'T RECRUIT FANS OF THE CLUB into important positions, he believes it can cloud good business decisions and damage IMPARTIALITY. Perhaps it's true. Perhaps Lyon are right and Hull City made a mistake (as much as we love Nick)
I have to ask, where does that belief come from? That's the kind of thing you could only have any idea about if you were around him or the players on a day-to-day basis. Otherwise it's just a guess. The question not being answered by anyone supporting the Allams is this: If NB really (and I find it incredible that some people still believe this) didn't want to sign players because he loves his mates so much and it was all his decision not to strengthen, why on Earth would he say what he did about transfer funds and try to force the owners' hands ahead of this window? It's obviously the case that NB wasn't happy with the support he got from them in January, how does that fit in with the conspiracies about him being too loyal to his mates? Barmby said in his statement through the LMA that he was disappointed that the Allams have told their side of the story this early or somthing to that effect which suggests he has another side of the story he'd like to tell. I have to agree with juleskaren that the Allams seem very dodgy in all of this...
No it's not. It's called preparing for all eventualities and not leaving the club without a key position filled for longer than necessary. Would you prefer, "we've sacked him, but we're going to wait until after he's lodged an appeal in 7 days time, then we've taken another couple of weeks to arrange his appeal hearing and come to a decision, and then another 6 months whilst it goes through the courts before we start looking at who might replace him"?
I was promoted in my job & found it difficult to separate my new job from my old, which is probably why I didn't stay at that level for too long, self demotion, although my dislike of management didn't help!
We will find it hard to recruit anyone now with the Allam's track record in dealing with people. Just don't understand how people cannot see beyond the carefully constructed press releases which they employ someone to write.
ISTPLT, you accuse me of guessing stuff, when in fact I'm just expressing my view, then go on to guess stuff about Nick not wanting to buy players...seriously, if you don't like my postings just ignore them, your nitpicking is getting tedious. You believe Nick 100%. Some people believe the Allams 100%. I believe the truth lies somewhere between those 2.
