The press tend to convey Roman as a ruthless and unreasonable dictator who sacks managers on a whim.
Thereis certainly a strong case to be made for the theory that Scolari'ssacking was Roman's decision alone, based solely on poor performances.
Maybethere was a player revolt, maybe Scolari couldn't handle the workload,or maybe, after just six months, Roman decided he could stand no moretepid performances and dodgy results. Bearing in mind he staked hisreputation on Phil's appointment (having sacked Jose despite histremendous success and then Avram despite a season-long challenge) itseems a remarkable admission of defeat. Maybe rightly maybe wrongly.
I wonder, is Roman as ruthless and unreasonable as they think?
Heendured Claudio for only one season, in which we finished 2nd in theleague and were CL semi-finalists. That was ruthless to some. Orperhaps he was simply sensible, realising there was a better man out there, realising Claudio couldn't deliver (I personally believe this is the case).
Jose? The one which sticks in the craw most. It seems awfully ruthless, awfully unreasonable, awfully foolish. However, maybehe had no choice, maybe Jose had become too difficult to accomodate.Maybe Jose played a major part in his own "downfall" (I personallythink Roman was foolish but that's a different matter).
Grant?Well if he couldn't command respect behind the scenes, again Roman hadlittle choice, he simply couldn't keep Grant, it was impossible.
Andnow Phil. Maybe Roman's hands were tied, not because of performances,but because things were going on which demanded that he be sacked (I.e.stories coming out about him being late for training, "losing" theplayers, struggling with the workload and intensity etc). Maybe it wasonly going to go downhill, maybe he had information which confirmedthis, and he had no choice.
Is he ruthless and unreasonable, or has he been a victim of circumstance and had little choice but to sack four managers since May 2004,when Claudio was sacked, including Jose, who achieved unprecedentedsuccess. For someone so new to football, it seems an awful lot ofmanagers to get through so quickly, but maybe it's not his fault.
Ifhe's as ruthless as he's portrayed, I think it's to the detriment ofthe club, as there can never be any basis of trust between him and themanager, and that's not the best way to build a club, not in England.
I'dlike to think that if the right man were to come along (again), Romanwould persist with him, but is that wishful thinking, is Roman destinednever to show patience with anyone, and does that mean he's actually a hindrance to our club?
EDIT: Look at Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Villa, Everton...PATIENT! |
發表於 2009-2-11 09:52 PM
| 
