New manager

[heart_fan10]

Would prefer JVS by a mile.

[carlings]

I would prefer experience in a coach with some kinda of proven record. JA still all so haunting.

[mulhollanddrive]

The old board wouldn't do it, but the new board, to make a statement could.  Especially if Raul comes along, though I thought he's retired.

[Shahanga]

The old board wouldn't do it, but the new board, to make a statement could.  Especially if Raul comes along, though I thought he's retired.

Actually this is pretty much exactly what the old board DID.  They appointed a high profile ex-player, renown for his playing ability with virtually no coaching experience as coach.  I think we can remember how it ended.

 

if we want Raul sign the bloke.  Don't do it via a novice coach.

[Embee]

We could likely find a better marquee than Raul anyway.

 

As good as the guy was he's got one foot in an old folks home now, with the money we can offer we could likely get someone just outside of their prime (at a minimum).

[Heart_fan]

The old board wouldn't do it, but the new board, to make a statement could.  Especially if Raul comes along, though I thought he's retired.

 

I thought they said they didn't want players that were looking for a last pay day? Thats exactly what Raul would be.

[jw1739]

 

The old board wouldn't do it, but the new board, to make a statement could.  Especially if Raul comes along, though I thought he's retired.

 

I thought they said they didn't want players that were looking for a last pay day? Thats exactly what Raul would be.

 

They did. Everyone should read again http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/man-city-executives-promise-to-sign-marquee-players-at-melbourne-heart-for-football-reasons/story-e6frf4gl-1226809029402

[wombegongal]

Fuck some funny shit in here. Raul is every part as good as Del Piero. Would be just as big and he is younger. Comparing Hierro and JA is pretty laughable too. I'd be wary of a first time coach but you are talking about a guy who on face value looks to have been involved with football behind the scenes longer than JA's 6 months. Has the licenses before he applies for jobs and had a playing pedigree much better than John's (questionable if that is a major factor in coaching).

 

I'm not saying sign the guy but at least listen to his pitch.

 

Also bigger than Man City buying us. Fuck me at the shit agents roll out.

[Baresi]

JvS > Hierro.
People also forget how much of a footballing legend JvS is, lol.

[Red or Dead]

If we sign Raul I will lose my shit...in a good way!! I've farken loved this guy all my from when I was a young boy!!

 

Even if he's 36, Raul will still rip it up and definitely get bums on seats!! Only issue is with Man City owning us, I doubt they'd get a 36yo marquee when we can afford to get a 26yo marquee!

[n i k o]

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

[Dylan]

We will probably get a broich type marquee. An unknown but great player

[Embee]

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

 

It'll definitely be harder to find someone in their 20's but don't forget we practically have unlimited money at our disposal. We can afford to pay wages that are competitive with what's on offer with Europe, not to mention that City owns our club and that means that scouts from other clubs will likely have an eye on our talent too. 

 

That being said, I still think our marquee will be closer to 30 than 25 but I don't think we'll be chasing someone who's in their mid to late thirties.

[n i k o]

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

 

It'll definitely be harder to find someone in their 20's but don't forget we practically have unlimited money at our disposal. We can afford to pay wages that are competitive with what's on offer with Europe, not to mention that City owns our club and that means that scouts from other clubs will likely have an eye on our talent too. 

 

That being said, I still think our marquee will be closer to 30 than 25 but I don't think we'll be chasing someone who's in their mid to late thirties.

I know what your saying regarding the money, but being marquee status and in your 20s would question your motivation to play in Australia. The new owners have clearly stated that they want the right player that will embrace the position they're in, and not just to collect a paycheck. In saying that though it would be something special if we got the best of both worlds, a marquee player in their late 20s that's very motivated to play in Australia. Needle in a haystack to try and find someone like that though.

[NewConvert]

 

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

 

It'll definitely be harder to find someone in their 20's but don't forget we practically have unlimited money at our disposal. We can afford to pay wages that are competitive with what's on offer with Europe, not to mention that City owns our club and that means that scouts from other clubs will likely have an eye on our talent too. 

 

That being said, I still think our marquee will be closer to 30 than 25 but I don't think we'll be chasing someone who's in their mid to late thirties.

 

 

The "unlimited money at our disposal" seems to be a constant meme in the forum. I would be weary of having too high an expectation on the amount of money that MCFC will provide. First there will be capital investment on infrastructure then there will be capital investment on staff (principally coaches) and there will be capital investment on players. The owners are not likely to over invest - they will invest enough to ensure that the club gets to the top of the A-League and be competitive in the ACL. Given that the most effective marquee on the pitch has been Broich followed by Ono. ADP has not been as successful on the pitch because he has the dead weight of Farina but he has also been able to pull in crowds at functions and matches. So if MCFC are going to bring a name marquee that can raise the profile and businessmen in Melbourne and Sydney will be willing to pay $1000 for a chat like ADP, then we are likely to get an Italian or Brazilian someone people will instantly recognise - but this will cost money. The alternative is to bring someone who is relatively unknown but better than the local players a la Broich and is unlikely to cost huge amounts of money (depending on the rest of the season Engelaar may fit the bill).

In any case to re-iterate the point - MCFC will spend only what is required to make the club successful and not a cent more. So be weary with having too high expectations on the amount of cash available to the club.

[Embee]

 

 

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

 

It'll definitely be harder to find someone in their 20's but don't forget we practically have unlimited money at our disposal. We can afford to pay wages that are competitive with what's on offer with Europe, not to mention that City owns our club and that means that scouts from other clubs will likely have an eye on our talent too. 

 

That being said, I still think our marquee will be closer to 30 than 25 but I don't think we'll be chasing someone who's in their mid to late thirties.

 

 

The "unlimited money at our disposal" seems to be a constant meme in the forum. I would be weary of having too high an expectation on the amount of money that MCFC will provide. First there will be capital investment on infrastructure then there will be capital investment on staff (principally coaches) and there will be capital investment on players. The owners are not likely to over invest - they will invest enough to ensure that the club gets to the top of the A-League and be competitive in the ACL. Given that the most effective marquee on the pitch has been Broich followed by Ono. ADP has not been as successful on the pitch because he has the dead weight of Farina but he has also been able to pull in crowds at functions and matches. So if MCFC are going to bring a name marquee that can raise the profile and businessmen in Melbourne and Sydney will be willing to pay $1000 for a chat like ADP, then we are likely to get an Italian or Brazilian someone people will instantly recognise - but this will cost money. The alternative is to bring someone who is relatively unknown but better than the local players a la Broich and is unlikely to cost huge amounts of money (depending on the rest of the season Engelaar may fit the bill).

In any case to re-iterate the point - MCFC will spend only what is required to make the club successful and not a cent more. So be weary with having too high expectations on the amount of cash available to the club.

 

 

Fair enough. I don't assume that we will have an endless pool of cash (calling it unlimited was a slight overstatement on my account) but I do assume that we'll have enough money to offer competitive salaries for players that we want.

 

I don't think the club will throw around money for the sake of it but I feel that if they identify someone who they feel will genuinely improve the team more than anyone else can then they will offer a wage that it adequate to get that player here, even if it's considerably higher than that of most players in the league.

 

Given the wide range of scouts available to them they could likely find a solution like Broich on a lower salary but I don't think the wage of the player coming in will be a higher priority to them than the ability of said player, which would be a complete contrast to the previous regime.

Edited February 13, 2014 by King Malta

[Embee]

 

 

I feel they'll still be getting a 30 something year old as marquee though. I know what your saying, with the money thing, but anyone at marquee level in their 20s won't be coming to aus to play. I for one would vote yes for Raul.

 

It'll definitely be harder to find someone in their 20's but don't forget we practically have unlimited money at our disposal. We can afford to pay wages that are competitive with what's on offer with Europe, not to mention that City owns our club and that means that scouts from other clubs will likely have an eye on our talent too. 

 

That being said, I still think our marquee will be closer to 30 than 25 but I don't think we'll be chasing someone who's in their mid to late thirties.

I know what your saying regarding the money, but being marquee status and in your 20s would question your motivation to play in Australia. The new owners have clearly stated that they want the right player that will embrace the position they're in, and not just to collect a paycheck. In saying that though it would be something special if we got the best of both worlds, a marquee player in their late 20s that's very motivated to play in Australia. Needle in a haystack to try and find someone like that though.

 

Agree completely, with the scouting infrastructure we now have access to though players like that can potentially be identified more easily. 

 

Like I said, I still think our marquee players will be a little older but I wouldn't expect us to be chasing blokes that are past the age of 35 if younger, comparatively talented options are available.

[Kiro Kompiro]

I would expect us to be roundly underwhelmed by our marquees name when announced, and then wearing his number by about round 15.

[Luke]

Definitely don't want a 32+ y.o as a marquee

[jw1739]

I would expect us to be roundly underwhelmed by our marquees name when announced, and then wearing his number by about round 15.

Agreed.

 

To quote Begiristain: 'It's not about the names, it's about the player. We don't need a big name, we need a big player, and a big player will develop into a big name. He has to add something more than a name. Commitment with the group and the football in Australia, experience to teach the players and help the coach.'

 

I think we're in for some surprises.

 

Can't wait.

[Shahanga]

I would expect us to be roundly underwhelmed by our marquees name when announced, and then wearing his number by about round 15.

As a tattoo

[Murfy1]

It's probably an exaggeration to say that we're more likely to get a player aged 26 than a player aged 36, but not by much. Also, it's an exaggeration to say that we'll 'unlimited money at our disposal', but compared to other A-League clubs (indeed, compared to most football clubs) it isn't much of an exaggeration.

I agree though the question is how much they are willing to spend, and I don't expect them to throw money around for the sake of it, but I do reckon they'll invest a fair bit and they won't skimp in any important area (unlike Sidwell and co. who always skimped in a major area. In our 1st and 2nd seasons they paid a lot for a coach but not near enough for the football squad, whilst by our 4th season they paid a fair bit for the squad but not enough on the coach! [with many wrong decisions along the way, of course]).

 

BTW It's not inconceivable that we could get a real quality marquee (although not a 'big name') around the age of 26. Lucas Barrios was 27 when he moved to Guangzhou Evergrande in China (for the remarkable amount of $10 million Australian per year, though. But I reckon players will be more open and less expensive to come to Australia).

 

Also, whilst it's clear that Man City want a marquee at Heart that truly believes in what they are trying to build at Melbourne Heart, they have also made comments that they are open to signing a 'name' player:

 

Asked if the new owners intended to maximise the marquee concept, City academy head Brian Marwood said: "We've taken that on with the MLS [with New York City] where it's a similar model with the designated player. We've not been shy of bringing 'marquee' players into Manchester City either.

 

And the example he cites is Del Piero, seemingly because ADP genuinely does believe in promoting football in Sydney and Australia, but nonetheless he is 'name player' who's cost Sydney $4 million a season (Marwood article: http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/man-city-to-bring-marquees-players-to-melbourne-heart-but-it-wont-be-a-final-payday-for-a-player/story-e6frf4gl-1226808983171).

 

I'm sure that Man City will get an international marquee for Heart who's keen about playing for the club and being apart of the project, but that doesn't mean they won't bring in a name player. Given our pretty dire 4 seasons of football, they'd know our football and our squad could use a real boost next season, so I reckon they'd be pretty open to bringing in a well known footballer who's keen and is able to give Heart at least 3 good seasons of football (assuming there's such good candidates out there).

[jw1739]

Back to the Manager...

 

...how exactly do clubs go about recruiting a new head coach/manager? Do they advertise? Do these people have agents as players do who are looking around all the time for possible job vacancies? Is it all about who you know?

[HEARTinator]

Back to the Manager...

 

...how exactly do clubs go about recruiting a new head coach/manager? Do they advertise? Do these people have agents as players do who are looking around all the time for possible job vacancies? Is it all about who you know?

Hmmmmm, what we should do is work out what SFC do ISFA recruting a manager is concerned and do exactly the opposite

[M13]

Back to the Manager...

 

...how exactly do clubs go about recruiting a new head coach/manager? Do they advertise? Do these people have agents as players do who are looking around all the time for possible job vacancies? Is it all about who you know?

They got agents just like the players so that´s rather straightforward.. in general the agent makes sure that clubs know that his client is available

[japiedog]

We will probably get a broich type marquee. An unknown but great player

if we could get a player that offers as much as Broich, I'd be happy

[belaguttman]

An interesting article from New Statesman on why great players don't always make great coaches. Applies to someone we all know...

 

 

 

Despite his successes, Andy Flower became too dogmatic

Former cricket coach Andy Flower speaks to the media during a press conference on 30 December 2013 Australia. Photo by Gareth Copley/Getty Images.

Lucky the leader who first experienced failure in the ranks. He has a huge advantage: the inclination to consider that other people have different solutions, perhaps even better ones. Top-flight coaches were usually second-division players. Failure was formative, sharpening their observations and developing their empathy. In contrast, great players who become coaches often suffer from over-reliance on the very instinct that once served them so well: it worked for me before, so it must work for everyone.

Andy Flower resigned as coach of the England cricket team on 31 January and he left office with some notable achievements. With personal directness and analytical clarity, Flower oversaw three Ashes series victories and England enjoyed brief spells as the top-ranked team in the game’s three formats. In Australia this winter, however, the England team seemed increasingly cowed by their manager rather than inspired by him. His response was fatal: more work, more toughness, and a narrowly defined emphasis on “character” – the cornerstones of Flower’s highly successful career as a player. He started out trying to modernise English cricket and ended up trying to recast it in his own image. This is a classic process that should become a business school staple.

Playing and managing exact almost opposite psychological demands. All of the top four English football clubs are coached by men who had unremarkable careers as players: Arsène Wenger, José Mourinho, Manuel Pellegrini and Brendan Rodgers. Naturally, there are exceptions. Pep Guardiola, arguably the best manager of all, was previously a superb midfielder. But the wider point stands: playing at the level below greatness hones the most underrated quality in a leader – scepticism. Great managers, despite their ultra-confident press conference personas, constantly reassess their managerial bag of tricks. When they stop evolving philosophically and become predictable, their effectiveness tapers off.

For once-great players, however, it is harder to learn scepticism. All athletes depend on a trained conviction: this is what works for me. Your particular methodology becomes hard-wired into your DNA. It might be to attack when you are under pressure, or to defend; it may be to nurture anger, or to assume calmness. It doesn’t really matter. What matters is the degree of faith that sustains your default position: you need to trust what has worked for you before. The best players have a higher degree of confidence in their routines and patterns of thought.

A manager searches for the opposite position; he must become detached. In his handling of people, he cannot trust one default position as innately superior. Instead of believing he can change everyone’s character, he must see how every player is seeking a personal solution to a unique set of problems.

Behavioural economists would describe this as overcoming a cognitive bias. Great players, who benefit from a narrow and intense focus, are inclined to observe and remember their own methods while ignoring or forgetting the approaches of others. In contrast, managers have to see the whole picture.

The best coach I encountered – once a distinguished player but not a great one – constantly drew on his playing experience in his new role. He advised people how to avoid making the errors he had made. He recast his stock of playing experience as something to be judged and interpreted with total detachment. Having performed at a high level was not a licence to lecture people about “In my day” or “When I was a player”. Instead, it fired his imagination. His management evolved so far from his own playing days that it approached a state of negative capability.

Some great managers pursue the transition too far. They end up with only one blind spot: for their mirror image. George Graham, the successful Arsenal manager in the 1980s and 1990s, had once been a languid, laid-back player. His nickname was “Stroller”. As a manager, far from indulging players cut from his own cloth, Graham revered discipline and control. Too much so: unpredictable playmakers, such as the mercurial Paul Davis, never quite fitted his manager’s template.

It is ironic that Andy Flower once sought to bring the scientific method to cricket by drawing on principles of Moneyball. Michael Lewis’s book portrayed Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland A’s major-league baseball team, using statistical modelling to buy and select players who were undervalued by the transfer market. Flower hoped to bring a similar analytical rigour to cricket.

In the final, disastrous months of his regime, it became fashionable to ridicule England’s vast back-room staff of analysts and experts. Surely it was time to go back to instinct and self-expression, perhaps even a smile or two? This theory, though true enough, misses the central difference between Flower and Beane. Flower was a great player, Beane a highly talented failure. Beane’s pursuit of scientific detachment led him to avoid acting on managerial instincts. He became like a trader who sells a stock when it reaches a predetermined price. Indeed, he stopped watching Oakland’s matches because he didn’t trust himself to manage his emotions. Flower, by contrast, loomed large in the dressing room.

Strategy does not exist in a vacuum. It interacts with the person who imparts it. Flower’s theories advocated detached reason, yet in person he became imposingly dogmatic. Between those two forces, there was little space for anything else.

Ed Smith’s latest book is “Luck: a Fresh Look at Fortune” (Bloomsbury, £8.99)

[Shahanga]

Nice post Bela.  A few random thoughts:

How good a player was Andy Flower really?  He stood out because he was Zimbabwean, but if he'd played for a decent test nation what then? (ie I like where the author is going but am not sure that Andy Flower is the best example)

 

In football terms i would like to see an analysis based on players positions as well as their success.  Personal bias, but i suspect defenders might have more chance of being top managers than strikers.  I guess this goes back to an interview I saw once with Alan Shearer at the end of his career.  The journo asked "how did you know the right spot to be all the time?", to which Shearer said "I don't know".  I also heard "The Duk" say pretty much the same thing - "why do you have these goal scoring blitzs, then periods of nothing".  Duk "I don't know, I wish i did".  Both these guys were fabulous players but they played by instinct, you can't teach others if you don't know what you did yourself!

 

To support the author I came to the same conclusion in a uni lecture theatre a long time ago.  Although this was an advanced class, the lecturer (a leader in his field) had lost us and was struggling to explain the issue in language we could grasp.  The reason seemed to be that it was bloody obvious to him, so he couldn't see that it might not be obvious to us as well!  That is why the best teachers are usually the ones who had to work hard to get there - they realise that not everyone works magically on instinct and that things are not "obvious" to all without explanation.  I expect coaching should in some degree, be similar.

[belaguttman]

Yeah, along the same line, one of my pet peeves is instruction manuals - they're always written by people who already know how the bloody thing works, why can't they be written by people who have to discover how it works?

[Kiro Kompiro]

Anyone watch the Adelaide match last night?

 

Gombau has them playing some terrific stuff.

 

Goes to show that the first appointment we need to decide on and get right is the coach. Everything else follows on from this.

[Shahanga]

Anyone watch the Adelaide match last night?

 

Gombau has them playing some terrific stuff.

 

Goes to show that the first appointment we need to decide on and get right is the coach. Everything else follows on from this.

Absolutely.

 

If I was on the panel what i would be looking for would be:

• experience as a senior coach, preferably with limited resources (in a salary cap comp you can't just buy a new player if the bloke you got first up isn't working out)
• a proven record of playing our (and Man City's) style of possession football
• a hunger for success
• relevant licences

I would pay scant regard to playing history.  The A League has 10 teams with very similar squads in terms of quality.  The league winners are generally the managers who can assemble a squad with a slight edge and (more importantly I think) have those players perform at their peak.  All the managers in opposing teams tend to be experienced at working in this environment and that makes them difficult opponents. 

 

Given Gombau's success I suspect we may seem more managers like him and thus the league may be even tougher come next year, so we'd better get the appointment right (this time).

[NewConvert]

Anyone watch the Adelaide match last night?

 

Gombau has them playing some terrific stuff.

 

Goes to show that the first appointment we need to decide on and get right is the coach. Everything else follows on from this.

 

When I started following football the first thing I noticed was that the manager was far more influential on game day than his AFL counterpart. The second thing that came across was that football was more like a chess game than the AFL - it also explained why AFL coaches took up watching football to borrow tactics. So I agree with you the most important appointment is the manager and all else will follow. Another example was last season with WSW appointing Popovic who then turned Beauchamp and Topor Stanley into decent players. Well they are probably still crap but he made them work as a solid unit. And this season is Gambau that took a dysfunctional club with some ordinary talent and turned them into footballers.

[NewConvert]

 

Anyone watch the Adelaide match last night?

 

Gombau has them playing some terrific stuff.

 

Goes to show that the first appointment we need to decide on and get right is the coach. Everything else follows on from this.

Absolutely.

 

If I was on the panel what i would be looking for would be:

• experience as a senior coach, preferably with limited resources (in a salary cap comp you can't just buy a new player if the bloke you got first up isn't working out)
• a proven record of playing our (and Man City's) style of possession football
• a hunger for success
• relevant licences

I would pay scant regard to playing history.  The A League has 10 teams with very similar squads in terms of quality.  The league winners are generally the managers who can assemble a squad with a slight edge and (more importantly I think) have those players perform at their peak.  All the managers in opposing teams tend to be experienced at working in this environment and that makes them difficult opponents. 

 

Given Gombau's success I suspect we may seem more managers like him and thus the league may be even tougher come next year, so we'd better get the appointment right (this time).

 

 

Food for thought:

• How do you prove "hunger for success"?
• How do you prove a proven track record of playing possession football?

 

I would also be looking at:

• the ability to analyse and explain a team's performance.
• if they have youth team coaching experience - indicates an ability to teach.
• The ability to prepare different game plans to better match an opposition
• Real time analisys of a match in progress - this should weed out the Farinas that are able to analyse a game afterwards but have nothing on the day.

[malloy]

Nice post Bela. A few random thoughts:

How good a player was Andy Flower really? He stood out because he was Zimbabwean, but if he'd played for a decent test nation what then? (ie I like where the author is going but am not sure that Andy Flower is the best example)

In football terms i would like to see an analysis based on players positions as well as their success. Personal bias, but i suspect defenders might have more chance of being top managers than strikers. I guess this goes back to an interview I saw once with Alan Shearer at the end of his career. The journo asked "how did you know the right spot to be all the time?", to which Shearer said "I don't know". I also heard "The Duk" say pretty much the same thing - "why do you have these goal scoring blitzs, then periods of nothing". Duk "I don't know, I wish i did". Both these guys were fabulous players but they played by instinct, you can't teach others if you don't know what you did yourself!

To support the author I came to the same conclusion in a uni lecture theatre a long time ago. Although this was an advanced class, the lecturer (a leader in his field) had lost us and was struggling to explain the issue in language we could grasp. The reason seemed to be that it was bloody obvious to him, so he couldn't see that it might not be obvious to us as well! That is why the best teachers are usually the ones who had to work hard to get there - they realise that not everyone works magically on instinct and that things are not "obvious" to all without explanation. I expect coaching should in some degree, be similar.

I think a large part of it comes from where they played (team) as a player or more so who they played under. JA was talked up for having played in big leagues, but it was always for shit teams who played a style of football aimed at 'stealing' wins from better teams. JA set us up in a similar manner, where we played as if we we were the inferior side out to steal some points from the big boys. The reality is that in a league like this anyone can be good.

[Shahanga]

 

 

Anyone watch the Adelaide match last night?

 

Gombau has them playing some terrific stuff.

 

Goes to show that the first appointment we need to decide on and get right is the coach. Everything else follows on from this.

Absolutely.

 

If I was on the panel what i would be looking for would be:

• experience as a senior coach, preferably with limited resources (in a salary cap comp you can't just buy a new player if the bloke you got first up isn't working out)
• a proven record of playing our (and Man City's) style of possession football
• a hunger for success
• relevant licences

I would pay scant regard to playing history.  The A League has 10 teams with very similar squads in terms of quality.  The league winners are generally the managers who can assemble a squad with a slight edge and (more importantly I think) have those players perform at their peak.  All the managers in opposing teams tend to be experienced at working in this environment and that makes them difficult opponents. 

 

Given Gombau's success I suspect we may seem more managers like him and thus the league may be even tougher come next year, so we'd better get the appointment right (this time).

 

 

Food for thought:

• How do you prove "hunger for success"?
• How do you prove a proven track record of playing possession football?

 

I would also be looking at:

• the ability to analyse and explain a team's performance.
• if they have youth team coaching experience - indicates an ability to teach.
• The ability to prepare different game plans to better match an opposition
• Real time analisys of a match in progress - this should weed out the Farinas that are able to analyse a game afterwards but have nothing on the day.

 

• Proven track record of possession football is easy.  These days everyone should have vision of their team playing (would expect the club to source the vision, highlights packages might be misleading) and with umpteen scouts surely we've had someone seen their teams play.
• Hunger for success.  Well you can ask all sorts of questions, look at their record as a player and a coach, but ultimately this comes down to the decision maker's view of the personality (so very subjective). 

Like your additional points. 

[M13]

Not many here that think JVS deserves a chance?..

[Shahanga]

Not many here that think JVS deserves a chance?..

I do! 

 

If we choose someone else instead they will have to be seriously good.

 

His strengths are his reading of the game, style of play and youth development.  Weak point could be desperation to win titles?

[M13]

Wouldn´t surprise me if he was given a serious chance to prove himself.. Reading the comments from Soriano it seems that the off-season will be hectic enough without changing the first team coach.
 

[jw1739]

 

Not many here that think JVS deserves a chance?..

I do! 

 

If we choose someone else instead they will have to be seriously good.

 

His strengths are his reading of the game, style of play and youth development.  Weak point could be desperation to win titles?

 

Always a concern about him. Also I think he plays favourites with players, and IMO both these aspects detract from his ability to coach a team to silverware. Let's not forget that the long ball to diminutive forwards, and our non-winning away streak, both started under JvS. We collapsed in the second half of season 2 and have got worse ever since.

 

We have nine matches to go, and arithmetically we can still reach the play-offs. We keep hearing that "any club can beat any club" and so IMO it's time for us to demonstrate that we can do just that. Attitudes need to change. If we were in a competition with relegation we would be sitting on the trapdoor to oblivion. If any of the current mob want to be here next season then it's time for them to stand up and deliver.

Edited February 15, 2014 by jw1739

[xXJawsaXx]

If JvS can manage to prove that he has the hunger to win and we make finals then I see no reason not to give him a chance to be honest. We are owned by highly professional people and if they see something in JvS enough to keep him then we should try to trust their judgement.