New Manager

[Old Man Andrews]

This kind of shit really winds me up. Nigel Howe is an absolute titan of of a businessman and I won't hear a word against him.

I mean, it's not like we were on the brink of administration during his last tenure as CEO....

Because that was his fault

It was, of course, a little tongue in cheek.

However, if you think the CEO won't have been heavily involved in decisions such as taking on the Vibrac loan then I think there's a little bit of ostrich behaviour going on.

Of course we've all enjoyed using Samuelson and Zingarevich as the scapegoats for that period in our history, but this idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that mess is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

If Howe hadn't have toed the line then he would have been fired. Of course he wasn't going to say anything. It also should be noted that nobody thought Zingarevich was as dodgy as he turned out to be.

[genome]

This kind of shit really winds me up. Nigel Howe is an absolute titan of of a businessman and I won't hear a word against him.

I mean, it's not like we were on the brink of administration during his last tenure as CEO....

Because that was his fault

It was, of course, a little tongue in cheek.

However, if you think the CEO won't have been heavily involved in decisions such as taking on the Vibrac loan then I think there's a little bit of ostrich behaviour going on.

Of course we've all enjoyed using Samuelson and Zingarevich as the scapegoats for that period in our history, but this idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that mess is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

Sure. But he was also CEO during the most successful period in our club's history. You can't just cherry-pick reasons to demonstrate incompetence

[winchester_royal]

Sure. But he was also CEO during the most successful period in our club's history. You can't just cherry-pick reasons to demonstrate incompetence

It was a tongue in cheek, throwaway comment (the type HNA specialises in) that I didn't realise would generate quite so much fury, it certainly wasn't meant to be a serious post analysing the pros and cons of Nigel Howe's abilities as a CEO.

However, I would say that Howe is a businessman, and certainly during the Coppell/McDermott years his involvement in the football side will have been very limited.

[winchester_royal]

If Howe hadn't have toed the line then he would have been fired. Of course he wasn't going to say anything. It also should be noted that nobody thought Zingarevich was as dodgy as he turned out to be.

So Howe let us go the brink of administration because he was too scared of losing his job to stand up for what he thought was right?

Some leadership qualities right there.

And while many of us on the outside would have no way of knowing what was going on, I'd hope the CEO would be able that his business was hurtling towards financial ruin.

[genome]

Sure. But he was also CEO during the most successful period in our club's history. You can't just cherry-pick reasons to demonstrate incompetence

It was a tongue in cheek, throwaway comment (the type HNA specialises in) that I didn't realise would generate quite so much fury, it certainly wasn't meant to be a serious post analysing the pros and cons of Nigel Howe's abilities as a CEO.

However, I would say that Howe is a businessman, and certainly during the Coppell/McDermott years his involvement in the football side will have been very limited.

He would've been involved in hiring/firing McDermott and Coppell. The idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that success is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

[winchester_royal]

Sure. But he was also CEO during the most successful period in our club's history. You can't just cherry-pick reasons to demonstrate incompetence

It was a tongue in cheek, throwaway comment (the type HNA specialises in) that I didn't realise would generate quite so much fury, it certainly wasn't meant to be a serious post analysing the pros and cons of Nigel Howe's abilities as a CEO.

However, I would say that Howe is a businessman, and certainly during the Coppell/McDermott years his involvement in the football side will have been very limited.

He would've been involved in hiring/firing McDermott and Coppell. The idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that success is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

Ha, a fair point, although I would certainly argue that previously Nicky Hammond would have been a lot more influential from the football side back in the day, and Madejski was certainly playing a more active role. 10 years ago Howe will have just been a man in a suit to most fans, but now - in this post-Gourlay era we live in - I think his influence is probably exaggerated. Although admittedly, without a DoF in place, he will have more say from a footballing POV.

Which actually brings me to a wider point. Should Howe be making these decisions, or should we have someone with more football savvy leading the charge (like Hammond used to do)? Could certainly draw parallels with Ed Woodward at Man Utd here.

Now Nani has disappeared, I think we're in urgent need of a good Sporting Director who can form that long term view and then seek to hire a manager who fits into that.

[Coppells Lost Coat]

Which actually brings me to a wider point. Should Howe be making these decisions, or should we have someone with more football savvy leading the charge (like Hammond used to do)? Could certainly draw parallels with Ed Woodward at Man Utd here.

Now Nani has disappeared, I think we're in urgent need of a good Sporting Director who can form that long term view and then seek to hire a manager who fits into that.

Was thinking the same, who is searching for potential managers or are we expecting agents to put names forward?
Does Howe have any links to reach out to to help and guide him to potential candidates? Football has changed quite a bit since he was last in his position.
Would potential candidates be put off that we dont have a DoF or would they demand their guys to come in too, which could mean more compensation. Howe has suddenly put us in a right old mess.
Hopefully he has a clear vision and plan in place and a real direction for the club.

[Vision]

Sure. But he was also CEO during the most successful period in our club's history. You can't just cherry-pick reasons to demonstrate incompetence

It was a tongue in cheek, throwaway comment (the type HNA specialises in) that I didn't realise would generate quite so much fury, it certainly wasn't meant to be a serious post analysing the pros and cons of Nigel Howe's abilities as a CEO.

However, I would say that Howe is a businessman, and certainly during the Coppell/McDermott years his involvement in the football side will have been very limited.

He would've been involved in hiring/firing McDermott and Coppell. The idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that success is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

Didn't we create the position of Director Of Football as a result of Howe signing off on a bunch of expensive jokers in the Burns' era?.

My concern is this was the last time he was given the equivalent power over the footballing side that he apparently has now.

Of course History shows that the whole Madejski-Howe-Hammond structure worked really well and Howe certainly played an integral part in that success. I'm not convinced he's as well suited to what he's being asked to oversee now.

[Forbury Lion]

The Chronicle has Parky as favourite now that the Portugese chappy has turned us down, apparently the club have been in contact with him and as he's on a 12 mth rolling contract with Bolton he won't cost too much to get.

[Simon's Church]

Because that was his fault

It was, of course, a little tongue in cheek.

However, if you think the CEO won't have been heavily involved in decisions such as taking on the Vibrac loan then I think there's a little bit of ostrich behaviour going on.

Of course we've all enjoyed using Samuelson and Zingarevich as the scapegoats for that period in our history, but this idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that mess is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

If Howe hadn't have toed the line then he would have been fired. Of course he wasn't going to say anything. It also should be noted that nobody thought Zingarevich was as dodgy as he turned out to be.

So he's a yes man who won't kick up a fuss regardless of what state the club is in?

Think it's becoming clear why he has the job back.

[Old Man Andrews]

It was, of course, a little tongue in cheek.

However, if you think the CEO won't have been heavily involved in decisions such as taking on the Vibrac loan then I think there's a little bit of ostrich behaviour going on.

Of course we've all enjoyed using Samuelson and Zingarevich as the scapegoats for that period in our history, but this idea of Howe being an innocent bystander during all of that mess is, in my humble opinion, a little naive.

If Howe hadn't have toed the line then he would have been fired. Of course he wasn't going to say anything. It also should be noted that nobody thought Zingarevich was as dodgy as he turned out to be.

So he's a yes man who won't kick up a fuss regardless of what state the club is in?

Think it's becoming clear why he has the job back.

Completely different circumstances now.

[Hound]

The Chronicle has Parky as favourite now that the Portugese chappy has turned us down, apparently the club have been in contact with him and as he's on a 12 mth rolling contract with Bolton he won't cost too much to get.

the bit about the rolling contract is correct- wouldn't be expensive to get him.

Bookies have him as big favourite. Saw Tim Sherwood's odds have come in **shudder**

[Nomad_Royal]

I detest clubs who go behind a manager's back and negotiate a replacement before they're gone.

Not only is it immoral, I reckon a good lawyer could get a decent law suit out of it.

I agree but why sack Clement two days before the game? Surely he should have been given the Sheffield game rather than someone with absolutely no experience of managing senior team football. I'd have thought given the timing, they had someone to bring in almost instantly to take the Sheffield game or the very least, this week's training. An atrocious decision and if someone isn't appointed in the next couple of days and we lose at Rotherham, big questions needs to be asked

Howe couldn't have sacked him sooner, he did it almost immediately upon taking over. And I guess he thought the sooner he did it, the sooner he could have a replacement.

It's not like the club won't have had contingency plans for who they might want. Howe will have been in negotiations about his role for some days at least, and will have been thinking about what he wanted to do, Who he might be interested in.

We've almost never appointed anyone within a week of a sacking mid-season, even internal appointments usually have a couple of games interim first.

About the only speedy one was Clarke. And he proved he was never remotely committed to us.

I seem to remember last week Dellor saying, after talking to Howe, that Howe had said the decision to move immediately and sack Clement was because he felt the club should always be open in its dealings. He suggested that the club had begun to get a reputation for not always being so, he wanted to change this and he didn't want to start his new role being hypocritical. I happen to agree with that approach, I classify it as part of the "Reading way" we all talk about. Not everyone will agree.

[Simon's Church]

If Howe hadn't have toed the line then he would have been fired. Of course he wasn't going to say anything. It also should be noted that nobody thought Zingarevich was as dodgy as he turned out to be.

So he's a yes man who won't kick up a fuss regardless of what state the club is in?

Think it's becoming clear why he has the job back.

Completely different circumstances now.

If you say so

[Old Man Andrews]

So he's a yes man who won't kick up a fuss regardless of what state the club is in?

Think it's becoming clear why he has the job back.

Completely different circumstances now.

If you say so

We they are, its a fact.

[muirinho]

I agree but why sack Clement two days before the game? Surely he should have been given the Sheffield game rather than someone with absolutely no experience of managing senior team football. I'd have thought given the timing, they had someone to bring in almost instantly to take the Sheffield game or the very least, this week's training. An atrocious decision and if someone isn't appointed in the next couple of days and we lose at Rotherham, big questions needs to be asked

Howe couldn't have sacked him sooner, he did it almost immediately upon taking over. And I guess he thought the sooner he did it, the sooner he could have a replacement.

It's not like the club won't have had contingency plans for who they might want. Howe will have been in negotiations about his role for some days at least, and will have been thinking about what he wanted to do, Who he might be interested in.

We've almost never appointed anyone within a week of a sacking mid-season, even internal appointments usually have a couple of games interim first.

About the only speedy one was Clarke. And he proved he was never remotely committed to us.

I seem to remember last week Dellor saying, after talking to Howe, that Howe had said the decision to move immediately and sack Clement was because he felt the club should always be open in its dealings. He suggested that the club had begun to get a reputation for not always being so, he wanted to change this and he didn't want to start his new role being hypocritical. I happen to agree with that approach, I classify it as part of the "Reading way" we all talk about. Not everyone will agree.

^ This.

Unless you're going to go behind the current manager's back and sound out people while he is still in position, you've got to sack him first, and then find out who is interested.
If we don't want a snake manager, we can't be a snake club.
Yes it's likely they will have had a list of possible candidates, that *might* be interested back - but that's going to change as soon as the position becomes available, as others might come out of the woodwork.

As for timing - it's vital to get the new manager in before the transfer window, and hopefully with a few competitive games before that window, to suss out the squad - so they probably discussed basically sacrificing the next few games - any points accrued under the caretaker manager would be a bonus,

[RoyalinBracknell]

I agree with the approach the club has taken really.

As well as it being the moral thing to do, I think that you're in a much better position to undertake an effective and comprehensive recruitment process if everyone's aware that there's a vacancy.

Paul Clement and Steve Clarke are probably the two quickest appointments we've made in recent times (so quickly that they were perhaps spoken to before the previous manager was formally sacked) and neither worked out especially well.

If we presume that the process of interviewing candidates and negotiating with them generally takes at least a week (quite often more) then you're going to need a caretaker manager in charge for at least one game (possibly more) so you might as well get rid of the manager you want to replace sooner rather than later as there's not much advantage in waiting.

Whilst there's obviously a lot of emphasis in football on 'the next game' and there's an intense focus on that, I would hope those running the club strategically have a more longer-term view. It took us a month or so to appoint Steve Coppell back in 2003 and we lost a few games with Kevin Dillon as caretaker manager but we went on to have one of the most successful periods in the club's history so it was absolutely the right thing to go through that process to get the right candidate in.

[Hound]

Suppose a lot is to do with who we bring in

I’d happily wait a month if it meant Jokanovic coming in at the end of it

[Old Man Andrews]

Suppose a lot is to do with who we bring in

I’d happily wait a month if it meant Jokanovic coming in at the end of it

We could lose all of our games and be cut adrift by then! Too late. We should have had someone lined up and signed, poor planning.

[El Diablo]

Suppose a lot is to do with who we bring in

I’d happily wait a month if it meant Jokanovic coming in at the end of it

We could lose all of our games and be cut adrift by then! Too late. We should have had someone lined up and signed, poor planning.

If only life was that simple....

Clement was Gourlays signing..
Clement was safe until Gourlay went / Gourlay refused to sack Clement
Gourlay gets sacked
Howe comes in days after Gourlay went
Howe sacks Clement..

I cant think of any other scenario how anything couldve been done differently, - without the above sequence of events..