Not as a player but as the new head of the intermediate academy.
http://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2018/0...-well-academy/
Printable View
Not as a player but as the new head of the intermediate academy.
http://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2018/0...-well-academy/
No comment ... apart from, why the heck are we still allowing mediocre ex-players a pay check when there must, I say MUST, be better candidates available? No responses allowed that include his relationship to POD.
Time will tell if this is a good appointment, as is the case with Hammy. There may be better candidates out there but both these guys have come through the youth system at Motherwell and both have a great affiliation with the club, something others will not have. Both appear to have been involved in our youth system for some time and it looks to be in pretty good shape judging by the number of young Well players in Scottish youth teams at different age groups. It could be seen as "jobs for the boys" but they have got their appropriate badges and will bring years of experience at a good level with them. I think it is a move well worth giving a good go and the "Boot Room" approach worked well for Liverpool so why not at Motherwell?
What does being a mediocre player have to do with being a good coach? I have no idea whether Clarkson is a good coach or not but I'd be amazed if you do either, much less if anyone better would be willing to take the job for the peanuts we're likely paying.
I suspect the appointment is a bit of mandatory form ticking for the Project Brave debacle and we've ticked the box with someone who has already been working with a similar age group in the academy, knows the club and can guide youngsters with his own experience of coming through from a Fir Park youth to scoring for his country. Could we do better? Possibly. But on the face of it we could also do worse.
Of course there is a chance it could all go wrong and then questions will definitely be asked if the jobs for the boys approach was the right one...but plenty of other clubs see value in keeping 'their' people within the set-up, so long as we don't let things become stale (promotions when earned and arranging a dignified exit when necessary) I'm happy to look on the optimistic side in the absence of any evidence to the contrary.
Who needs an ex-player reunion ... they’re all in the pheckin dressing room !
Forget the sentiment and MOVE ON. A pointless appointment
If people are ok with this appointment then who am I to question that? My point (as seen on the video), is ... 'Leitchy' got 'Clarky' involved, then 'Hammy' thought 'Clarky' was the right man. That's hardly business-like patter. I'd like to know what candidates were rejected because they weren't the right man? It's called transparency.
Sieb - that's not going to happen. It doesn't happen in other job appointments (confidentiality). I can see that there is a question of "were there any other candidates interviewed" and it might be the answer is "none". That could be seen as "jobs for the boys" but there is the fact that he has been seen in action as a youth coach for at least a couple of years and they will know if he is capable of doing the job. I think it is worth giving him the chance and then making a judgement based on his performance.
According to the Evening Express: "Dundee recently advertised for four full-time academy coaches as well as a full-time medical professional and scout for their youth system in a bid to meet the SFA demands (for Project Brave."
So with the decision made to be in the 'elite' youth set-up, I suspect you can score out "pointless" and replace it with "obligatory".
If the position wasn't advertised, and we chose to recruit from within then fair enough. However, to me, it smacks of us doing that old 'jobs for the boys' routine that I thought we'd evolved out of. I wish Clarkson well and shall watch with interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gowboy