Failure being rewarded

ForssAwakens

ForssAwakens

Well-known member
The likes of lampard and smith getting jobs, what sort of message does send.

They both have been deemed to fail at lesser jobs than their new ones.

I don’t like it
 
As interim appointments they make sense, Smith has a decent enough CV and Lampard should at least have the dressing room more together than Potter who the ego's obviously didn't respect. Better permanent options in the summer.
 
OK.
giphy.gif

Perhaps some nice camomile tea?
 
Football management is a peculiar profession where abject failure, and a sacking, can lead to another job/opportunity very quickly.

Think they only other field similar is being a Tory MP........but very difficult to be sacked in that gig.....
 
Club owners don't like to take risks on rookie managers, so they tend to go for already established names even if those names have a history of failure.

We're lucky to have Gibbo. He's given six managers their first jobs and on the whole its paid off; Robson, McClaren, Southgate, Karanka, Woodgate, and now Carrick. Four out of those six have been good appointments for the club with promotions, a trophy, European football, and play-off challenges. The few times he's brought in experienced managers to steady the ship or rebuild, we've failed (Strachan, Monk, and Wilder being the worst of the bunch imo).

I'd rather our club take a risk on a Carrick, than appoint a Steve Bruce.
 
Last edited:
h_m_boro said:
Football management is a peculiar profession where abject failure, and a sacking, can lead to another job/opportunity very quickly.

Think they only other field similar is being a Tory MP........but very difficult to be sacked in that gig.....
Click to expand...

Happens all the time in local authorities too. Directors etc who are sacked after poor Ofsted inspections popping up in other local authorities a month or two later in similar very senior roles.
 
sherlock1969 said:
Happens all the time in local authorities too. Directors etc who are sacked after poor Ofsted inspections popping up in other local authorities a month or two later in similar very senior roles.
Click to expand...

I think the difference is football is competitive.

If the 20 best managers in the world are all in the PL, and they all get every decision right, 3 of them will still be relegated, right? Or more likely sacked before they get close to relegation. It wouldn't mean that there was a better manager out there.

In local authorities, one doing well does not mean someone else has to fail. Failure in that context is failure, rather than strong competition.
 
Last edited:
Cardiffdaffs said:
Do you advocate that if a manager fails in a job he never gets a job again?
Click to expand...
I don’t, but I don’t think failure requires you to get a better job

Lampard failed at Chelsea, stepped down and failed and everton. He’s now back at Chelsea

Smith, deemed to fail at villa, drops down with Norwich in the championship and is deemed to fail. Now he’s back in the premier league at Leicester.
 
GazBoro said:
Club owners don't like to take risks on rookie managers, so they tend to go for already established names even if those names have a history of failure.

We're lucky to have Gibbo. He's given six managers their first jobs and on the whole its paid off; Robson, McClaren, Southgate, Karanka, Woodgate, and now Carrick. Four out of those six have been good appointments for the club with promotions, a trophy, European football, and play-off challenges. The few times he's brought in experienced managers to steady the ship or rebuild, we've failed (Strachan, Monk, and Wilder being the worst of the bunch imo).

I'd rather our club take a risk on a Carrick, than appoint a Steve Bruce.
Click to expand...

A common problem with experienced managers with a bit of prior success is for some of them there's a tendency for them to rely on the approach they've taken before and end up expecting the club/players to bend to their way of doing things rather than adapt to what they've got to work with.

There's also maybe an element of arrogance/impatience/stubbornness at times. A common attitude seems to be: "I know what I'm doing, this has worked before. Therefore you lot must be the problem".

Which can work if you have the right players, but as we've seen (and other clubs have seen) can eventually cause more issues than it solves.

Less of an issue at bigger clubs who have the resources to completely revamp the playing staff to suit a particular manager.
 
ForssAwakens said:
I don’t, but I don’t think failure requires you to get a better job

Lampard failed at Chelsea, stepped down and failed and everton. He’s now back at Chelsea

Smith, deemed to fail at villa, drops down with Norwich in the championship and is deemed to fail. Now he’s back in the premier league at Leicester.
Click to expand...
Did Smith really fail at Villa? He got them promoted and kept them up. Gerrard came in and took them backwards despite a massive spend on players. Emery has come in and shown Gerrard to be a failure but in doing so, he has also shown that Smith was doing a good job prior to Gerrard.
 
Lampard is a stop gap to appease the fans nothing more. A side show distraction till they can get their real target in.
 
GazBoro said:
I'd rather our club take a risk on a Carrick, than appoint a Steve Bruce.
Click to expand...

I agree, as does everyone, unless it goes wrong.

As a very rough and ready rule, I think clubs tend to make young, fresh exciting appointments during the Summer and the early part of the season, and then reach for the grizzled veterans after Christmas, be it Allerdyce, Hodgson, or Warnock to dig them out of trouble when things go wrong.
 
WilliamMunny said:
Did Smith really fail at Villa? He got them promoted and kept them up. Gerrard came in and took them backwards despite a massive spend on players. Emery has come in and shown Gerrard to be a failure but in doing so, he has also shown that Smith was doing a good job prior to Gerrard.
Click to expand...
I know it semantics but, I said he was deemed a failure, compared to lampard who failed.

That said I believe smith had got 40 points from his last 36. Good enough for safety but maybe villa had bigger aspirations, and ultimately the immediate form wasn’t great

I still think that the fact he went to norwich after, that his stock is lower after being sacked by both villa and Norwich in that order
 
Frozen Horse said:
I think the difference is football is competitive.

If the 20 best managers in the world are all in the PL, and they all get every decision right, 3 of them will still be relegated, right? Or more likely sacked before they get close to relegation. It wouldn't mean that there was a better manager out there.

In local authorities, one doing well does not mean someone else has to fail. Failure in that context is failure, rather than strong competition.
Click to expand...
Which just makes it worse that they get appointed to similar senior roles.
 
Lampard is an awful manager.

He's left every club in a worse position in which he found them.

How he keeps getting gigs is remarkable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top