TheGame - Times Online - WBLGBritain's best football supplement comes alive on Times Online You can subscribe to a feed of posts at: http://timesonline.typepad.com/thegame« Celtic must act cautiously over Strachan spat | All Posts | Bill Edgar's Tuesday trivia question » December 16, 2008Poll: were Blackburn Rovers right to sack Paul Ince?
in Blackburn Rovers, Polls | Permalink
TrackBackTrackBack URL for this entry: Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Poll: were Blackburn Rovers right to sack Paul Ince?: Comments
|
Perhaps the League Managers Association get themselves a deal like the players ie no movements in and out apart from the January transfer window. If only the premier were scrapped and all the clubs reinstated in the Football League,then some of this 'fear'(of relegation) might end!
Posted by: Brian Wildey | 16 Dec 2008 12:18:30
Never liked him as a person or a player, but he was wholehearted and determined - they'd do better sacking the lazy underachievers who let Ince down
Posted by: Homer | 16 Dec 2008 12:19:35
He made too big a jump. He was doing a good job at MK Dons and a promotion to the Championship was/is clearly not beyond them. He should have stayed and gained some more experience before jumping into the Prem where relegation is an unmitigated disaster for any club (in comparision to Div 1 to Div 2 for example).
Posted by: Laurie | 16 Dec 2008 12:56:17
Blackburn would've been in this position whoever was at the helm. Sad to see Ince go but I think he ran out of ideas, a situation that may've got better with time.
Posted by: Moshie | 16 Dec 2008 13:03:13
I think they were right to sack him. Defensively, we've been poor all year and his substitions on Saturday were just odd. As for midfield, Andrews doesn't cut it...He's had the same group outfield of players bar Bentley and we've shipped more goals that under Kidd. Big Sam is your man, even if he's got Peter Kay connections.
Posted by: Ronnie Hildersley | 16 Dec 2008 13:10:58
They were right to sack him, he has led a solid, difficult to beat Premiership side into major relegation issues, unable to pick up a point anywhere. He is not cut out to be a Premiership manager, nor would less than 2 seasons managing in League 2 indicate that he was. I have no idea why they hired him in the first place. They may pay the ultimate price for this mistake and loss their Premiership status.
Posted by: Mark | 16 Dec 2008 13:48:54
No,I don't think they were right.He proved himself in the lower leagues and surely would have come through.Spurs sacked Ramos and now he's in charge at Real Madrid !! It's a mad house isn't it -the Premier League - and the lunatics are running the asylum !!!
Posted by: Ivan | 16 Dec 2008 14:05:59
Robbie Fowler? Keith Anderews? Matt Jansen? Maybe he's got no money but as the chairman said, minus Friedel and Bentley (the latter, I can tell you, is usually invisible at Spurs), the squad was 7th last year. Not good.
Posted by: 9lives | 16 Dec 2008 14:17:11
A real tough decision that only time will tell if correct. I'd have given him until the Stoke match on Saturday. Just imagine if that proved to be the turning point- the club and manager would have had a mutual respect,forging a bond of real trust. I'm not convinced by any of the names being mentioned,but I'm more than happy to eat my words if results improve!
Posted by: BUSHY IOM | 16 Dec 2008 18:38:12
My annoyance is... that they were wrong to sack him, but also wrong to hire him...
stupid signing from the word go. But they should stick with their decision. Sacking a manager every 5 months doesn't help anyone. Look at Fergie!!! Doesn't help the players or the youth team or the club's structure. If a manager has 5 months what is his incentive to sow the seeds of youth!?!? I hate when prem managers hire a bad / untested manager and then wonder what went wrong. Keano should have been supported more. He was and is class.
Posted by: Jd | 16 Dec 2008 18:46:22
Ince may regret taking the job, with the loss of Bentley and Friedal while the defensive players ageing, combined with lack of money, it was never going to be easy. Going forward, Blackburn are good, they create chances, they get goals but it is always undermined by a defence that has not helped Robinson, perhaps in January Ince could have fixed that.
Yet I feel they were probably right to sack Ince, they were in a rut and perhaps someone else can give them confidence. Hopefully Ince can prove himself in lower divisions or abroad and get another chance when he is ready.
Posted by: Timothy Tanner | 16 Dec 2008 20:13:58
Definitely not.
He should have been given time to complete the job.
Anyway, what happened to the bottomless pit of Jack Walker funds?
Rovers for the Premiership (Blue Square!)
up the Clarets
Posted by: Terence Park | 17 Dec 2008 10:21:25
Absolutely right to get rid... Williams is spot on. If Ince spent the money unwisely in January he'd never forgive himself for not sacking him sooner. The club must come first.
Why we didn't by a replacement for Bentley, is beyond me. (Pennant or Lennon?).
Posted by: JAMIE | 17 Dec 2008 11:02:40
To be a Pro Football Player like any occupaton demands the very best of you, So does being a manager When millions of pounds rests on sucess or failure it was a very brave decision in appointing Paul Ince.There are occupations in all walks of life that demand a trial period.My son had to work for 5 weeks with out pay to see if he was good enought to cut the mustard in his occupation. So how come its a surprise when Paul's contract is terminated.From the outside looking in he was not good enough. Lets blame the players or not enough cash to spend.Apart from the loss of 2 players,the squad he gained finished 7th last season.You don't have to be brain of Britain to see that Blackburn had no option but to finish him.Perhaps the next manager will be wise enougth not to joke about flirting with relagation on National TV
Posted by: Andrew Visser | 17 Dec 2008 12:13:28
Ince was far more proven from his time at MK Dons, than many of his compartriots; Southgate, Zola etc. Indeed having had two cracking seasons in the lower leagues what do people deem to be the preequisite time to 'step-up'? Coupled with the sale of his two best players and then being no money too spend what did people expect. I really feel for him. Allardyce is truly a negative, backward step. Such a shame, Blackburn used to be quite good to watch
Posted by: Will | 17 Dec 2008 15:06:56
JD,
Role on the cliches:
"But they should stick with their decision."
Why? Just because the Board made a bad decision doesn't mean that they shouldn't do anything to correct that. Ince is getting paid lots of money to do a job, if he is doing badly and is putting the clubs future in jepeordy, why should the club stick by him? If Ince did well and another club came in for him, would he stick by Rovers?
"Sacking a manager every 5 months doesn't help anyone."
Rovers haven't sacked a manager every 5 months. In fact, their last two managers didn't get sacked, they moved to other clubs.
"Look at Fergie!!!"
Are you suggesting that we should use the example of one manager who took over a club 2 decades ago, as reason to give any poor performing manager more time? Paul Ince is not Alex Ferguson, and Blackburn Rovers cannot afford to have 20 year hindsight when making decisions. Football has changed a lot since Ferguson was appointed, and if you looked past your own club for examples, you might realise that it was the correct decision.
"Doesn't help the players or the youth team or the club's structure.
If a manager has 5 months what is his incentive to sow the seeds of youth!?!?"
Ince has been there 5 months, I'm pretty sure that he hasn't completely revamped the youth setup in that time. The youth team players haven't exactly been thriving with first team action since Ince took over, so somehow I think they will get over it.
"I hate when prem managers hire a bad / untested manager and then wonder what went wrong. Keano should have been supported more. He was and is class."
It was the Chairman and the board that appointed Ince, not other Premiership managers. It was a bad decision by the board, and now they have to make up for it by appointing someone qualified for the job.
Posted by: Joseph Brown | 17 Dec 2008 15:07:14
Rovers were wrong to appoint Ince. He's a good guy, but did not have the experience for the pressure cooker known as the Premier League. I hope this is not the end of his managerial career
Posted by: Tony G | 17 Dec 2008 15:28:31
Mr Brown,
Thank you for so very carefully deconstructing my comments :)
Cliched or not, we have cliches for a reason (is that another one?). I think you missed my point on the youth team format and managers turnaround. Like in business, poor job security offers no long-term performance incentive. Only short term goals. Hence the neglecting building a structured youth team because they won’t be there long enough. They end up buying in old journeymen to fill a gap (ala Capello with every team he has been with, albeit with more success) before they can get their hands on a million dollar pay off. This is part reason why the English youth system is failing!!!
Many clubs with stable managers go through periods of stability (Fergie is the obvious, but not only example) the antonym being my beloved Southampton who keep chopping and changing and this does nothing for club morale, club finances, or league position… new players in and out all the time, plus stupid compensation settlements (if I am sacked for being incompetent at my job where is my compensation?!?!)
The 5-month comment was not a literal Blackburn specific statement but an indictment of the way our game is going!!! Look at Madrid, West Ham, or Newcastle.
Part of my point is that is unfair on Blackburn fans that Ince will get millions for failing. They pay for it!!! Managers should be given at least a season before they can be sacked. If they go down then they do. The board should make better thought out choices at the time.
And of course the board make decisions and not prem managers. It was a typo as I was tired and the crack was wearing off.
Posted by: Jd | 18 Dec 2008 09:25:22
Mr Brown,
Thank you for so very carefully deconstructing my comments :)
Cliched or not, we have cliches for a reason (is that another one?). I think you missed my point on the youth team format and managers turnaround. Like in business, poor job security offers no long-term performance incentive. Only short term goals. Hence the neglecting building a structured youth team because they won’t be there long enough. They end up buying in old journeymen to fill a gap (ala Capello with every team he has been with, albeit with more success) before they can get their hands on a million dollar pay off. This is part reason why the English youth system is failing!!!
Many clubs with stable managers go through periods of stability (Fergie is the obvious, but not only example) the antonym being my beloved Southampton who keep chopping and changing and this does nothing for club morale, club finances, or league position… new players in and out all the time, plus stupid compensation settlements (if I am sacked for being incompetent at my job where is my compensation?!?!)
The 5-month comment was not a literal Blackburn specific statement but an indictment of the way our game is going!!! Look at Madrid, West Ham, or Newcastle.
Part of my point is that is unfair on Blackburn fans that Ince will get millions for failing. They pay for it!!! Managers should be given at least a season before they can be sacked. If they go down then they do. The board should make better thought out choices at the time.
And of course the board make decisions and not prem managers. It was a typo as I was tired and the crack was wearing off.
Posted by: Jd | 18 Dec 2008 09:25:33
People think that 17 games is not enough for a Premier League manager. Could they tell me exactly how many games Ince needs? There is only 21 matches left before its too late and taking into account they are 5 points away from saftey, they are actually only 19 matches away from relegation! You could even take another 4 games from that total because they can't plan to beat the big 4 away from home or even the big 5 if you include Villa that leaves them only 14 games to get enough points to stay up. Thats not alot. If they stuck with Ince through the January transfer window which they are likley to sell Roque Santa-Cruz they would have an even less amount of games to save themselves. Then you have to take into account the expectations of the club, 7th last season they were looking for a mid table postion, Ince has simply not met his target!!! You can't blame the players he has lost, Fridel was replaced by a good goalkeeper in Paul Robinson and Bentley was sold for good money so that investment could take place in the sqaud and he brought Keith Andrews and signed Robbie Fowler!!! He still had a sqaud who strengths a soild defence and aggressive and confident mentaility under Hughes made them hard to beat. These are now their greatest weakness, they have the worst defence in the league and lack confidence so much that they outclassed by Wigan who had Micheal Brown and Lee Cattermole in their midfeild!! Ince has created alot of negativity around the team by playing the victim! accusing people of wanting him to fail! A manager should never play the victim role he should be tougher under pressure, harder, more confident!!! This is naiviety because of the extra exposure you are under in the Premiership!! His methods on the training pitch have been slated and it is not hard to see why? Nigel Winterburn as your defensive coach!!! what the hell was he thinking, his old school coaches Archie Knox and Ray Mathias made David Bentley do press-ups for having his arms folded! they dount they even do that in the army any more!!! the training suited League Two but in the Premiership I think you may have to think outside the box a little more to capture the players attention, imagination and confidence a little more. Blackburn should be praised for giving a young English manager a chance and also complemented on the assertiveness in changing things for the good of their club. I respect that, as for Ince I hope this makes him stronger and he comes back and does well for himself.
Posted by: Rob Hillery | 18 Dec 2008 09:26:42
Ince should not have been given the job 6 months ago as his apprenticeship still had 2 years to run, big sam may not play pretty football but on limited funds he did ok at Bolton and the players he brought in for them were keen to play for him..unlike some of rovers new players..
Posted by: Terry Dewhurst (Telboy) | 18 Dec 2008 09:31:12
It is a really difficult call actually. If the board did not take action and then allowed Ince to spend money in January, and it never worked they are wrong. By sacking him now, and not giving him the chance to correct the issues he must know side has they have not allowed him to prove himself. It does take time for a manager to adjust, in the same way it takes time for player to settle.
However in Ince's case I do not believe that he has shown any sign that he will progress into a top manager. Good lower level maybe but not top manager. Seems to have issues dealing with player's and with respect. Also his signings were weird!!
Maybe in time he will prove them wrong, maybe he won't but final say should go to their fans and it seems on Saturday they voiced their opinion!!
Posted by: colin | 18 Dec 2008 09:31:34