Jonathan Northcroft in the Sunday Times says that this was being planned for some time, and only the Arsenal and Chelsea wins recently kept Mark Hughes in the job:
Khaldoon, who represents Sheikh Mansour, the billionaire Abu Dhabi royal who owns City, sanctioned a change of manager last month after a run of seven consecutive league draws and first met with Mancini on December 3 but delayed appointing the Italian after Hughes masterminded wins over Arsenal and Chelsea.Wednesday’s abject defeat at Tottenham, however, sealed Hughes’ fate. Garry Cook, City’s chief executive and the club’s football administrator, Brian Marwood were thought to be influential in persuading Khaldoon that a change was necessary.So it seems as if it was the draw with Hull City that drove the board away from Mark Hughes. Which is a big overreaction to what was admittedly a depressing result. But it seems clear from these reports that from that point onwards it was a matter of when not if. To be honest I would rather it was an impulsive reaction to the spineless defeat at White Hart Lane on Wednesday night. But it wasn't. They had been thinking it through for almost three weeks and they still managed to do the wrong thing.
The other point of interest concerns the role of Brian Marwood in all of this. It is reported in the News of the World that Hughes sees Marwood as the Brutus of this play:
A similar paragraph in the Mail on Sunday report reads:The City chief [Hughes] had arrived at Eastlands yesterday meaning business - and not just on the field. He believes he has been stabbed in the back by Cook, football administrator Brian Marwood and technical development manager Brian Kidd...
He confronted Cook and Marwood before the game, accusing the pair of plotting his removal ever since their arrival at the club. Hughes has certainly been undermined in recent weeks, only discovering that the club were actively seeking a replacement when his assistant Niedzwiecki informed him.
Cook and his football adviser, Brian Marwood, finally decided that Hughes was not the man to lead the club after City's dismal 3-0 defeat by Tottenham and were authorised by chairman Khaldoon Al-Mubarak to move quickly to announce a successor in former Inter Milan manager Mancini.It would be fascinating to learn just how far this decision was guided by Cook and Marwood, rather than coming from Khaldoon himself. Ultimately, it's information that we will never get access to. And I'm not going to lay into Cook and Marwood - tempting as it might be - because I just don't know how responsible they were for it. But whoever made it, the decision stinks. (On a side note, I am keen to defend Hughes but I think it's wrong for him to think that Marwood has stabbed him in the back. Marwood's job is to provide independent (that is, from Hughes) advice to Cook and Khaldoon using his football expertise. He does not, as far as I can tell, work for the manager. If he's told Khaldoon to sack Hughes then he's wrong, but he has no duty to Hughes. His whole point is his independence from the manager.)
The final point of interest is the players' reaction. We learnt in the 'papers that a delegation of them went to Khaldoon to plead for Hughes' job - and that they included Craig Bellamy, Shay Given and Gareth Barry:
The Welshman confirmed his departure to players amid emotional scenes in the City dressing room following a 4-3 home win against Sunderland, thanking them for their efforts during his 18-month tenure. This prompted a deputation of players led by Shay Given to march to the boardroom to confront Khaldoon and try to persuade him that Hughes should keep his job. They failed.
This is no surprise. The personal bond between Craig Bellamy and Mark Hughes is famously strong, and he is the player I am most worried sbout leaving soon. I suppose this also depends on where Mark Hughes goes next. But so much of this is unknowable for now. These reports, though, do allow us some insight into recent events at Manchester City. And it's all rather upsetting.
11 comments:
Why is it so "upsetting"? If you were the billionaire owner of a multi-million pound global enterprise and you decided (as is your right) that the manager you fully and expensively supported was not deploying his assets effectively, what would you do? Wait and hope? Throw more good money after bad? Value 'stability' above all else? Or would you act to maximise your investment at a critical time?
We stopped being a football club and became a global enterprise the day ADUG came in. This is the way big business works. I lived in America for many years and the EPL is light-years behind the business and organisational savvy of the sports leagues there. Slag off Cook all you like but he was hired to bring City to that level. The 'good old days' are long gone; the Taylor Report and Murdoch's money started it, and this is the natural conclusion.
PS. Hughes is getting a huge payout and his reputation is (thanks to this 'quick' dismissal) intact. He's perfectly fine. Don't feel sorry for him.
Don,
I am from Manchester but have been living in Los Angeles for the last 3 yrs. Who cares if business wise the Premier League is behind American sports leagues? American sport is souless, there is absolutely no passion whatsoever in any American sport. They have to play music at certain times during a game to tell the crowd when to get excited. If for financial reasons they decide it`s better to move a team to another part of the country then they just do it.
Sounds like you was in America too long mate!
What ever happened to supporting your club no matter what?
I still do and though I supported Hughes until last week, I am glad he has gone but any logical and tuned in person would realise Mourinho and Hiddink are under contracts until the summer minimum.
What making me laugh is, how all the anti City brigade are coming to the aid of Hughes when the truth is, they were against him first of all, Hypocrites.
I for one am glad Hughes has gone but will credit him with doing a good job, he is not the man for City of today as we need a winner.
Watch this space, if Mancini fails too then it will be Hiddink or Mourinho to City.
To all those City fans whining, get a grip and support City or go choose another club to support.
Yas,
Although I've been to many passionate sporting events in the US, overall I agree with your point.
My point is that football in the UK is transitioning, like it or not, from locally-based sport to a global business. I, too, find it strange that it's our club that is at the forefront of this, but there you go.
@ Cityblue
No one who has been complaining is going to stop supporting this club. What we're upset about is the shameful manner in which Hughes sacking was handled. It reflects not just poorly on the owners, Garry Cook, and Brian Marwood, but the club as well.
I realize that this type of cutthroat behavior is considered acceptable in the modern business climtate but don't ask me to approve or accept it.
It also a bad piece of business. Its a roll of the dice and a needless one at that. If Hiddink or Mourinho are potential targets then why not just wait til may and allow Hughes to try and accomplish his targets. Its not like the ship was sinking.
Its also potentially dangerous. There is every chance the actions of the owners will poison the dressing room. Something we saw when Sven was sacked in a similiar shameful manner. Yes we have bags of money but how many international class players move in Janaury, let alone world class ones. The odds are not exactly in our favor and they get worse if players think Mancini is simply an interim manager.
Yes Mancini and City will have my loyality, but don't confuse loyality with blind obedience and I will now definitely question how much loyalty Cook and Marwood as well as ADUG have to this club. I only hope this roll of the dice doesn't backfire because if Mancini fails Hiddink and Mourinho won't even look in our direction.
As an American, I can tell you that Gary Cook is a total douche bag, not some brilliant PR man. By all means, put him in charge of marketing, but if he's actually making key decisions about the direction of on-field development, then it's a shame.
And I completely agree about American sports - the music blaring when crowds grow indifferent (every other play). Los Angeles Lakers games are a ghost town for the first half. If you cut to a shot of a crowd at Eastlands recently when we've blown lead after lead you would see the emotional investment each fan has in his club. If you cut to the crowd in an N.B.A. game you'd more than likely see some celebrity with sunglasses on, or a man eating a hot dog greedily without any interest in what's happening on the basketball court. And the teams are brands without history or (for a majority) a sense of place. (Although the latter point has a little to do with the unwieldy geography of America.) English football clubs are about people, or it least that's how it seems to me. Or maybe that's just how it use to be. If Cook had his way, the majority of City fans will have clubs they like more than Manchester City Football Club. That would be fucking rotten.
Good luck to Mark Hughes. I was definite loyalist, although I had my complaints. I hope he'll get more than a small handful of players who are willing to work their hearts out for him next time.
I'll give Mancini (man CHEE nee, folks) the benefit of the doubt. As long as he doesn't make wholesale changes of first team players. And I don't want to see a bunch of Corradis either.
Daniel,
Well spoken words.
I believe Cook is a tool, knows nothing about football and offered Mark Hughes` scalp to save himself.
As an american, the comparison to american sports is not understandable. The NFL is the biggest game in town, and head coaches regularly get 3-5 years after being hired.
What came to my mind is how the Wengers, Fergusons, and Moyeses of the world are the exception. As an american I've always been puzzled at how even big clubs with success regularly fire their managers, e.g.- Mancini at Inter, Capello and every other manager, successful or not at Real Madrid, Bayern Munich managers. I think the current City owners see themselves as taking City to that level, and even if Mancini is successful, I doubt he'll last more than 3 or 4 years, --see Chelsea and Mourinho.
wake up guys, the owners gave marwood and cook the nod to replace hughes, as they believe he wasn't going to fulfil their desire. im not sure what we were on track for?
But I'm glad cook and marwood found a replacement and staff in good time before the dismissed the manager. Thats good preparation and organisation, i dont see how it's back handed or otherwise. Hughes as the employee, had to do his job until the management called time on his role. Now city have not been left in manager less limbo, but have a set up to replace hughes and mates.
What other way would you like it to happen? City searching for a manager well into January? This was done to allow a new man to asses and then build in January. grow and stop whinging! Hughes had failed to rectify problems since he started 18 months ago!
@Thomas
I'm quite confident most of us are awake on this one my question is are you?
What concerns me is not the reasons Hughes was fired but the inept and unprofessional manner and in which Cook, Marwood, and ADUG handled it. All they essentially had to do was call the man in before them, state their case that they felt the goals were not being met and that it was time to part ways. In other words act with a modicum of decency and respect, something they didn't even remotely come close to. For fucks sake they didn't even have the balls to look him in the eyes. Hughes found out he was sacked the way most of us did, through the media. but hey, apparently that's good preparation & organization.
These guys have spent the last 18 months at the helm promoting themselves as business men of the highest calibre and integrity but they just handled a simple termination so incompetently that they make Mike Ashley look like a sound businessman. I don't know about you but it doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.
Mancini has time to build in January, you sure about that? Again I ask the question how many players of international class calibre move in Janaury? The answer is few to none and usually its only players who are unsettled.
Finally ask yourself this. Do you think managers of the calibre of Mourinho and Hiddink would want to work at a club where the executives behave in an underhanded and cutthroat manner? Cause if you do you might want to rethink that one.
By the way there's simple way Cook and Marwood can rectify this. Issue a public statement apologizing for the poor manner in which executed a termination of Hughes' contract. I'm told this what grown ups do.
Post a Comment