Originally Posted by
ragingpup
I'm saying that a good manager sets the expectations, guides players on what they need to do in and out of club time monitors their fitness levels and conditioning and importantly intervenes if they are not at the levels you have clearly communicated you are looking for. This includes calling them out if they are repeatedly not responding and this is what Warnock et al have done.
The difference I am trying to get over here is that Clarke is clearly identifying a cultural issue (ie. its systematic, affecting many players) and whilst players have to take their share of responsibility if they are letting standards drop, it is the same in any walk of life that if 1) standards aren't clearly communicated 2) standards are clearly monitored 3) actions are quickly taken if standards are not upheld, it is the nature of people (whether we like it or not) that they will fall below the standards required for a role.
I'm not saying that supporters or anyone is wrong, I'm actually agreeing with them/you. But we are identifying the outcome, systematic poor performance in job roles. What we?re disagreeing in is the root cause for that. And I would argue that until we get an excellent manager (not easy to find, were talking about very highly levels of performance at this level of pro sport with lots of complexities) who realises that it is their responsibility for the culture and for player's performance in their roles, we are likely to see the same outcomes over and over. We can blame this group of players all you like and get in another bunch, but without the above standards being monitored and reinforced by good man management, the next bunch will likely repeat the same outcomes.
Hall Of Fame
Reply With Quote