I can fully understand the first reason. Managers of yesteryear had full control over the comings and goings of players and no better example of that era was Kevin Keegan.
He returned for his second stint in charge of the Toon and found out that things had changed from his first managerial reign over a decade before. He found it was those in the corridors of power, the boardroom, who now decided who the manager managed.
Keegan left and the reigns were taken over permanently by a manager who fully accepted the constraints imposed upon him. He went and now it is the turn of Alan Pardew, who is perfectly suited to Ashley’s style of management.
His reign will live or die mainly by the players brought in by other people at the club. How much Pardew plays in identifying players nobody really knows but it’s fair to say, it’s not like Keegan’s era in the 90’s.
The second main reason why managers get the sack is down to tactics. One recent poster scoffed at us all giving our opinions as to where Alan Pardew was going wrong with his tactics. The poster expressed that because Pardew was a Premier League manager he knew better than all of us.
This to me is absolutely wrong. Football is an easy game and tactics easy to understand. It’s understanding the skills and abilities of your players and how best to play them in that system that matters.
Managers get appointed because they show the correct skills and abilities and personality to their prospective employers. So apart from the club buying the wrong players why do the managers get such simple tactics wrong?
There’s not a manager ever who wouldn’t admit they made the wrong decision or played the wrong tactics at sometime in their reign. Well, maybe bar Brian Clough!
Only last month, Pardew stated he got his tactics wrong when we got drubbed 5-0 by Spurs.
I hazard a guess that the average fan who has a basic understanding of the game could see he was calling the wrong shots. So why do the fans see it but the Premier League manager misses it.
I strongly suspect that Pardew is starting to fall into the same trap that many managers do and our last permanent manager paid the price for. Chris Hughton allowed the players to dictate to a certain degree the selection and tactics of the team.
Managers naturally get close to certain players and their personalities influence them to a certain degree. It’s human nature and it takes a certain personality that can deal with it effectively. Sir Alex Ferguson being the ultimate at not letting feelings and sentiment get in the way of his tactics long term. I’m sure he’s slipped up occasionally and let his guard down and played Giggsy when he shouldn’t have but in general he distances sentiment and good judgement.
I hope, but I am not ruling it out, that Pardew’s liking for Cabaye as a person is not damaging the future hopes for the team to qualify for Europe and in the long term his job. I can see no other reason why he plays two defensive midfielders in a 4-4-2 formation.
Is he trying to please his player because he promised him that he would play in his natural position when he persuaded him to join us?
Cabaye may have shown his dislike of playing as a more advanced midfielder earlier in the season when we looked more like an attacking unit and Pardew out of loyalty is forced into this scenario? We know Cabaye was bought as a direct replacement for Barton, so why not play him in the same role?
Many have argued that he does so because the defence is too vulnerable. I would argue that Pardew never showed much inclination to rectify the problem during January.
Yet, I also hear (read on here) the same people express their dismay about certain players being selected over others and players not playing in their natural positions.
I would like to hear your views whether Pardew is now favouring certain players because of their influence over him and whether loyalty is getting in the way of good judgement.
You may state my assumptions are absolute rubbish and I have no problem with that, but it’s a consideration that I believe is closer to the truth than not. Many managers succumb to it and they ultimately pay the price.