‘Primacy of the management team’, was you saying that last season when things were going badly?Maybe. But equally if they weren’t any good until Lampard and co arrived how much is down to them? For me just reinforces the primacy of the management team over anyone else in terms of results on the pitch.
Though that also means for the coaches if Lampard is happy I’m happy.
‘Primacy of the management team’, was you saying that last season when things were going badly?
If not you, then enough people made the case it was the exact opposite. Even indulging quite silly conspiracy theories Robins was being deliberately undermined.
I don’t agree with recruitment heads abd performance coaches sitting on a level with managers full stop. I don’t really agree with DoFs either. The buck stops with the manager at a club and IMO anything that’s not purely business should be their purview.
I actually think Doug has rowed back a bit from where we were under Robins. That’s certainly the impression from outside in terms of who is getting publicity. The whys and wherefore of that I don’t know. Maybe it was Robins idea and it went badly maybe Doug trusts Lampard more.
There was a popular opinion on here that Dr Roberts as ‘Head of Performance’ was responsible for ‘performance’ on the pitch i.e. results. If memory serves me, didn’t you and others have a lot to say about Dr Roberts and Austin last season?
It’s clear that Robins messed up the post-Viveash coaching reshuffle. He’d still be our manager if he hadn’t, in all likelihood. He’s going well with Stoke and Viveash is doing well with Edwards at Boro.
It’s all psychological, King hasn’t changed anything in terms of his public persona, imo. He obviously came out to defend sacking Robins because it was fundamentally an unpopular decision. The difference this year is that he’s got the perception of having ‘Midas Touch’. Hiring Lampard has been vindicated and we’ve bought the stadium so he’s in the good books with the fans.
Last season, it’s far to say that our fan base couldn’t come to terms that Robins could a) have bad judgement and b) had run his race with us. He’ll always be a Coventry City legend but was rightfully sacked last season.
That just isn’t true and never has been.The point about Dr Roberts was that she and Austin were elevated to a position equal to if not above Robins. And if that’s the case and their areas aren’t performing then they’ve got to carry the can just like a manager would. You can’t sack the owner but everyone else should be accountable or be under the umbrella of someone who is.
In reality Roberts and Austin just like the players and coaches fall under the managers umbrella and as such should be subordinate to him.
He still doesn't understand what her role actually is and what she does.That just isn’t true and never has been.
Dr Roberts was senior to Robins? What?
The manager can’t fire the head scout either, what’s your point?She was/is on a level with Austin and the manager. Once again the point is what is her accountability if that’s the case? If the GK coach is poor because the keepers aren’t getting better it’s on the manager to sack him. What’s the lines of accountability and in what sphere for transfers and “performance” if not a direct subset of the managers responsibilities? Poor performance would be blamed on the manager (and was), poor transfers seemingly are also blamed on the manager. But the manager can’t fire the performance or transfer head? Nice work if you can get it I suppose.
The manager can’t fire the head scout either, what’s your point?
Some time ago King gave an open invite to ask him about her role. Maybe you should take him up on it?Id have thought it was quite clear now that my point was he should be able to.
Some time ago King gave an open invite to ask him about her role. Maybe you should take him up on it?
I find it very difficult to believe that Robins then/Lampard now wouldn’t be able to get rid of any member of staff if they demanded it.She was/is on a level with Austin and the manager. Once again the point is what is her accountability if that’s the case? If the GK coach is poor because the keepers aren’t getting better it’s on the manager to sack him. What’s the lines of accountability and in what sphere for transfers and “performance” if not a direct subset of the managers responsibilities? Poor performance would be blamed on the manager (and was), poor transfers seemingly are also blamed on the manager. But the manager can’t fire the performance or transfer head? Nice work if you can get it I suppose.
Wouldn’t you then get your questions answered by the bloke who actually makes the decisions?Why?
Wouldn’t you then get your questions answered by the bloke who actually makes the decisions?
You think Frank should be able to sack the performance director and don’t get why he can’t. King says his door is open for anyone to ask about her role, so you could tell him.What questions? What are you on about? Why don’t you go and ask Frank why we are bringing players back for corners?
You think Frank should be able to sack the performance director and don’t get why he can’t. King says his door is open for anyone to ask about her role, so you could tell him.
If I get to a Lampard event and could ask him I would tbf
Very sassy today aren't we.You want me to call up Doug King and say what? “Hi Doug, I disagree with your theories on a flatter management structure in football. What do you say to that?”
Very sassy today aren't we.
The club's owner offered people on the internet the opportunity to talk to him about it in person.Im not the guy responding to people on the internet by telling them to take it up personally with the clubs owner. Just very weird.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?