Should Morgan take responsibility?

[Orangputeh]

Neil Moxley wrote a very good article in the Mail Online a few days ago. In it, he concluded: -

Whether McCarthy would have kept Wolves in the division is hypothetical. The fact is, what happened in the aftermath worsened an already troubled situation. The timing was diabolical. The failure to have an appropriate replacement was simply asking for trouble.
By that stage, Morgan had created a perfect storm which Wolves were ill-equipped to weather. On Sunday, they finally fell through those cracks.

Do you agree that Morgan blew it?




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...king-led-Wolves-relegation.html#ixzz1t4JlFfar

 

[Neilynotquite]

As the ultimate decision maker, Morgan clearly has to take responsibility, as does Moxey, but I don't agree with the reasoning. Morgan clearly felt that without a change Wolves were doomed, and I think most of the supporters agreed with him. He thought he had a replacement lined up, but assuming it was Curbishley, when he turned the job down, Morgan was reminded that just when you think things can't get any worse, something usually happens to prove you wrong. He then promoted Connor, which nobody I've spoken to thought had any chance of working, but from Morgan's perspective was less damaging than giving someone you are not convinced about (e.g. Steve Bruce) a long contract.
I'm pretty certain we would have gone down if Mick had not been sacked, and Morgan's big mistake was not replacing him in June or December.
We shouldn't forget though, that the last few years have been better than a lot that went before, and I for one think the infrastructure projects should be applauded rather than blamed for our current problems (the "invest in the team and forget about the stadium" philosophy comes straight from the Portsmouth FC book on how to run a football club).
I know the jury is out, and appointing a good manager in the summer is crucial (please God the rumours about Megson aren't true), but can we have a bit of balance in the discussion?

 

[Orangputeh]

As the ultimate decision maker, Morgan clearly has to take responsibility, as does Moxey, but I don't agree with the reasoning. Morgan clearly felt that without a change Wolves were doomed, and I think most of the supporters agreed with him. He thought he had a replacement lined up, but assuming it was Curbishley, when he turned the job down, Morgan was reminded that just when you think things can't get any worse, something usually happens to prove you wrong. ......

Moxley makes the valid point that Morgan should have had a firm agreement with a successor to McCarthy before sacking him. Not to do so is rather like a salesman spending his bonus before the client has signed.
From that point, the ship was rudderless and the crew seasick.

A new manager needs to be appointed soon, to give him time to lick the team into shape for next season.
Good luck to him, whoever it may be, and good luck to Wolves in the Championship.

 

[hedgeworth]

Neil Moxley was suggesting that teams should speak to other managers and appoint them while the current manager is still in place and yet you know that the same press would slate any team for doing so.

If we appointed a manager the next day the same joker, sorry i meant journalist would have written an article about backstabbing chairmen plotting behind managers backs.

Journalist = 80% bullcrap or pointless article.
Working for the Mail = another 19.9%.