|The Effects of the Owner in the Modern Game|
Written by Edmunds5 on Friday, 11th Jan 2013 13:40
The idea of this article, is to discuss the influence of the owner with regards to managers. I will also talk about the impact of the media and fans with regards to football clubs.
Where should I start? Steve Kean at Blackburn, Sean O’Driscoll at Nottingham Forest, Ståle Solbakken from Wolves, Keith Hill at Barnsley, Simon Grayson at Leeds, Lee Clark at Huddersfield following a 43-match unbeaten run. These are just some of the names of Football League managers who have lost thier jobs in the recent past.
I could also dip into the Premier League, and most notably Roberto Di Matteo and his sacking despite Champions League glory against the odds. I could add Neil Warnock’s sacking at QPR when they still had a decent chance of staying up.
Even our very own Mick McCarthy, who with a bit of patience from the board may have led Wolves to safety with the club in touching distance of climbing out the bottom three and with three months of the season still to play.
Perhaps McCarthy had had his time, but the Molineux club's rather rapid decline suggests that they could have done worse than sticking with the man who took them to the Premier League in the first place.
Some may argue that these radical decisions can often pay off, but just why in the modern era, do managers get such a short time to stamp their authority on a club before getting the boot, many unjustifiably?
The first point I would make would be the increasing amount of owners involved in English football, many who are successful businessmen but seem to with the greatest of respect have a limited knowledge of English football.
Many owners have there own personal backgrounds and are used to completely different environments and culture compared with England and may not be full aware of the adoring, obsessive attitude towards football in this country which means different concepts and an immediate difference in understanding.
Owners are undoubtedly powerful, perhaps deservedly so, but the feeling of constant success doesn’t always transcend to a football club.
I feel some clubs need a structure, just look at Liverpool for example, and the vast amounts of money they spent under Kenny Dalglish. Many people would argue that it is a manager’s job to invest the money more sensibly and that Dalgish’s acquisitions were poor.
At the same time is spending £100 million on players logical? Is there a structure here? Is there a criteria for which players are genuinely needed? Are the wages really necessary for players who have yet to play a single game for his new club?
The objective of this blog isn’t to put football club owners in a poor light, I appreciate the fact that many owners have came in and saved clubs from the possible threat of administration and potential liquidation. I would only have to look as far as our club and the state we were in before Marcus Evans's investments.
Chelsea were also in dire straits before a certain Roman Abramovich bought the club, starting a revolution that has since brought many trophies to the club and continued success.
Further more, the new Malaysian owners, led by Vincent Tan have backed Malky Mackay and have given him the funds to bring in players and afford the wages of players such as Craig Bellamy who could prove crucial in their promotion bid.
Some people would also argue that owners should be free to do what they like, it is their money that is being invested and that should be respected, and appreciate that their money has been the trigger for great success.
Would Man City have achieved a Premier League title triumph without their riches? Certainly not, would Chelsea be challenging for the Champions League places let alone win the competition has it not been for Abramovich? Who knows, that’s not even mentioning the trophies that have been won over the past eight seasons.
Football is largely about entertainment, and these riches have allowed our country to witness some fantastic talents.
This ultimately makes the sport more attractive and gives us the nail-biting finishes and pulsating games such as last season when Man City pipped bitter rivals United to the Premier League title following their victory over QPR.
It is also worth noting the influence of external factors though, perhaps us as fans inadvertently play a role in the decline of a club? Fans have every right to show an opinion but perhaps some take it too far when the club's hierarchy get verbally abused and when there are mass protests sparking a widened division between the fans and those that run the club, which only adds to the negativity.
Are fans asking for too much and expect constant success? Is it only natural that clubs will yo-yo up and down divisions despite past highs and maybe you have to accept that things are not always rosy.
But it's tough for fans, because they are powerless in the sense that they are not in charge of the club despite being the core of it, many spend hard earned money watching a broken team and sometimes feel the only way to get their message across is through the ways I’ve mentioned.
There is also the influence of the media, whether that be from tabloid headlines or rumours as well as people venting their frustrations through sources of media such as the internet or local radio. Football phone-ins such as 606 and Talksport which again may not necessarily be healthy for the club in question as they only add to the tension.
But again it is one of the few ways in which fans can let out emotion, there seems to be a lack of insight into the way some clubs are run which cuts off fans and makes them struggle to understand certain aspects.
For example who takes training? Who picks which players to buy? Who picks the team? For me, it is no surprise that the football clubs that are run more sensibly are the ones who seem more stable.
For example, Bill Kenwright at Everton has stuck by David Moyes for a decade and he has achieved continued success on relatively low budgets.
The same could be said about Peter Coates’s relationship with Tony Pulis and Dave Whelan's with regards to Roberto Martinez. The rapid rise of Swansea has also been largely due to the competence of owner Huw Jenkins, each have allowed their managers to implement their own style of football and build their own team.
My views may come across slightly sinister on the way some things have evolved. I would say with regard to our club, that despite the questionable decisions owner Marcus Evans and CEO Simon Clegg have made in the past, at least we can say that both Paul Jewell and Roy Keane were given a fair chance to succeed.
Not only by the board but I felt the majority of fans were respectful, patient and supportive of them both. This meant that even through the more turbulent times we at least kept our dignity as a club and remained an attractive proposition for a manager of Mick McCarthy’s calibre.
The appointment of the for mentioned McCarthy looks to be a very shrewd move so far and you have to credit both Clegg and Evans for their latest appointment, at least we’re starting to look like a football club in safe hands, something that cannot be set at every club and something we should not take lightly.
Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.
Blogs by Edmunds5
Blogs 219 bloggers
12 Days of Christmas by SpiritOfJohn
To celebrate the festive season, here is a version of a familiar Christmas song with lyrics that could be sung by Marcus Evans.
Standing – A Matter of Choice? by Official_ITSC
In a first blog for TWTD, the Official Supporters Club outlines its position on the reintroduction of standing.
Mick McCarthy: Shrewd Pragmatist or Tactical Dinosaur? by DanLyles
“There's so much grey to every story – nothing is so black and white”.
Non Sequitur by warkthelint
Ipswich Town has commonly been associated with English football in all its major defining moments from providing two of the nation's most successful managers, to being one of the few provincial clubs to have landed the whole haul of League Championship, FA Cup and UEFA Cup.