They have made a statement to Kent Online to this effect by backing the least-cost option of sticking with a manager they are clearly less than enamoured with and who has lost the dressing room. To make their commitment to this decision look more serious they are talking about "releasing funds" for "loan or swop" players. Expect no significant change in playing personnel and no material improvement in performances or results; this is all window dressing. Sorry, but continued failure by the Board to act decisively will see the downward spiral continue. The net worth of the club will drop and who would want to buy a club heading for the third division?
Plymouth are a home banker on my coupon this week as will Birmingham be the following week. The Board are stoking trouble for themselves and a fiery reception from those that bother to turn up for the Sheffield United match. You could take the view that the pressure from the fans will get to Pardew before the Board do. However, the Board have been naive with this latest statement; not only are they ignoring the will of the fans but they are clearly minimising any further personal exposure and are now openly saying that they want out. We all know that they have loaned the club large sums over the years but that's the risk you take when you invest in a football club.
Guys
ReplyDeleteAs an employer myself , I think it might be a calculated gamble by the Board that after 2 more bad results, Pards will resign rather than have to sack him so that the pay off is mitigated a bit.
In my view, and I accept it's easy to say in hindsight, the Board have been stoking trouble for themelves since the final years of the Curbs era. On the field, over time, he delivered, whilst off it he seemingly had a good relationship with the Board. I think a consequence was that the Board perhaps became a touch complacent.
ReplyDeleteThe turning point in all this in my view was the Scott Parker sale. One thing it suggested to me at the time was that the Board might be approaching the limit of the resources they could put into the club.
And I think it probably marked the beginning of the end of Curb's committment to the club.
Whether the Board saw this at the time is for them to know, but subsequent events suggest that they failed to have in place a suitable plan for his eventual replacement.
The upshot of the decisions that Curbs should leave with a year to go on his contract, and that a new "continental" management structure would be introduced, were the failure to appoint Davis, and the rushed appointment of Dowie.
Dowie's subsequent, still unexplained, dismissal and the mistaken appointment of Reed then left the club in a parlous situation.
So at a time when relegation was at least a distinct possibility, one then has to question how the Board could appoint Pardew, allegedly just sacked for losing the dressing room across the river, on such a long contract and on such high remuneration. What were the business plans (a) for if we were relegated, and (b) for if we failed to get back up?
The Pardew appointment was simply the last of a series of misjudgements. No wonder the Board want out.
Mal, a midlands addick.