I must be the only one that is seriously worried about this football board set up by the current Chairman. For me it not only tells the footballing community, and us supporters that the chairman, as well as the owner know very little about football, but wont it ring alarm bells for the new manager that he's not going to be able to go direct to the chairman or owner and will have to deal with another group of people first?
And don't get me wrong, I see why Hollis has done it, but doesn't that raise a question on his suitability as the chairman of Aston Villa Football Club?
But lets look at Moyes for a moment - the manager that most now accept is the best man for the job. Do you think, while he managed at Everton that he had a footballing board or a committee or a panel, name it what you want it's all the same, that he had to go through to get a player? Or do you think at Manchester United he couldn't just walk in and see Ed Woodward? I'm fairly confident the answer to both is no.
But both were different. At Everton he probably spent a lot of time with Bill Kenwright talking about players. At Manchester United he was probably offered players or even given them and he probably had confidence that he'd get the best out of them because they were who they were.
If only the supporters had listened to that speech that Sir Alex gave at Old Trafford when he was saying good bye. I still believe that had Moyes been given the time, he'd have made it work at Manchester United, but that's just me.
We must bounce back straight away
Now, this isn't to say we're after Moyes, but I do think it could be why we don't get Moyes. This is England and as such, results and performances are demanded far more quickly than they are on the continent. In Spain, France or Italy and most of Europe for that matter, I can understand why a committee is something that the coach has to work with, but this isn't the continent and we don't call them coaches.
But you know what, what ever the position is called is irrelevant, it's the part they play. It's the role this committee plays. Whatever happened to having a manager and a chairman that worked together? And next season, it's going to be vitally important that this committee or football board don't meddle because if we don't come back at first time of asking it's statistically likely that we will be down for three or four seasons.
We have one chance of coming straight back up (stupid statement of the day) and to do that, the last thing we need is a board or committee sticking their oar in. If we are to come straight back up we need a manager with experience at getting clubs promoted. We need a manager with experience in the Premier League and we need a manager with a black book with lots of contacts in the game and someone that will instantly command respect.
We simply can not have a manager that is seen as having to report to a footballing board or committee and even if it only seems that way. If it seems that way, it's a waste of money and time and if it doesn't seem that way and it's something the manager has to do - it undermines his position and his authority.
Maybe it's just me
I'm probably blowing this out of all proportion, but with a chairman that knows as much about football as our owner, sorry, it's actually possible that our owner knows more about running a football club than the chairman by now, then surely I have a right to be worried by all these changes that are happening when there is every possibility I know more about both of them about football?
I'm sorry, but this to me sets off alarm bells. I know the intentions are good, but hasn't someone somewhere actually sat down and look at the bigger picture and thought about what is needed and what will happen. We had an opportunity this week and we blew it. When people at the club can't see these opportunities, it worries me about the future success of this Football Club.
It worries me that when we've got people that can't recognise what an opportunity is, they're not going to understand what they are doing is going to mean in the long run. But like I said in the title and somewhere above, this is probably just me.
- David Bernstein is talking about implementing plans around players - without consulting the new manager. Remember this is a four man board that will be given budget and financial constraints by the proper board that will be given budget by whatever the owner signs off on.
- It's a four man board, two of which are joint chairman. It's not necessary to have a board (committee or panel - call it what you want) when there are so few employees. We're creating the same problems, just calling them something else.
- The new manager will report directly to David Bernstein. Remember, his football board is given budget by the real board that is given money by what the owner sanctions. How many people is that the new manager has to seek approval from and is anything going to get lost in translation? Do you think if you passionately put your point across to one person, that that same person will be able to convey that passion to the next person, in such a way that that next person will be able to convey it to the real decision maker? More importantly, is that even necessary. If it isn't, why have it in place in the first place?