Posts: 1,488
Threads: 194
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
0
26-09-2018, 19:48
(This post was last modified: 26-09-2018, 19:52 by bluepooch.)
It won't happen but I would like us to adopt a management structure of which the team manager is a part of ,rather than keep setting a new man on and giving him carte blanch to make all the footballing decisions which, as we have seen all too often when it goes wrong ,results in paying off numerous people and players and having to re-recruit again at great cost to the club.Its a modern approach and therefore wont be adopted at CFC but which I think Watford use among others and which makes sacking a failing manager less of an upheaval as there would only be one or two perhaps to pay off.
Posts: 5,112
Threads: 633
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
6
27-09-2018, 11:36
(This post was last modified: 27-09-2018, 11:37 by Devongone.)
Fine by me Pooch.
In the past I've thought we should negotiate a contract which actually specifies what doing the job properly entails. As so much of football is results-based, would it be unreasonable to include a clause that defines failing to do the job satisfactorily as the team appearing in the relegation zone for three successive weeks? If that were an acceptable reason to dispense with a manager's services then this lunatic business of sacking people without good reason and of clubs carrying a string of paid-off defunct managers might become a thing of the past.
At the moment, turning up everyday and putting a shit team on the field every week seems to constitute a manager doing his football job. But if you were a turner and daily you produced product unusable by the factory you'd soon be down the road. Some managers should be sacked and because they have not fulfilled their side of a contract they should not even have a case worth arguing in court.