How far will Mandy go?

[Thracian]

Never trust these message boards.

That's why I didn't quote the other two names.

[davieG]

Seems to me MM has made two statements that have boxed him into a corner, the one about getting an experienced manager and the one about going through 20 odd if he has to.

The problem with the first statement is that no matter how difficult he finds it getting this experienced manager he will now need to do so.

There are two types employed and unemployed, of the unemployed ones very few, now that Jewell has declared himself out of the running seem to tick all the boxes that Allen supposedly ticked - the choice is very limited to say the least.

Ideally he should be after a currently employed successful manager if he wants one better than Allen unfortunately his second statement re 20 managers is likely to put off the honest, intelligent, principled ones that's one of the reasons Dowie's a good prospect for him. He's already proved he'll lie to get a better deal.

It's all somewhat depressing football wise.

[Guest]

Our new victorious youth team no longer allowed to use the main pitch at belvoir drive or use the changing rooms until they have "earned the right".

What's the problem with that? You only have to look at, for example, Richard Stearman to see that there's some grounds to support such a move.

[Bryn]

Where's this Kisnorbo transfer request rumour come from?

[skinnydipper]

Not as far as Debbie cos Debbie does Dallas

[Geo V]

Seems to me MM has made two statements that have boxed him into a corner, the one about getting an experienced manager and the one about going through 20 odd if he has to.

The problem with the first statement is that no matter how difficult he finds it getting this experienced manager he will now need to do so.

There are two types employed and unemployed, of the unemployed ones very few, now that Jewell has declared himself out of the running seem to tick all the boxes that Allen supposedly ticked - the choice is very limited to say the least.

Ideally he should be after a currently employed successful manager if he wants one better than Allen unfortunately his second statement re 20 managers is likely to put off the honest, intelligent, principled ones that's one of the reasons Dowie's a good prospect for him. He's already proved he'll lie to get a better deal.

It's all somewhat depressing football wise.

We went through the 20 managers line that MM spouted on another thread already. I doubt that it would put off managers who had two things. Firstly a valid contract which has no clauses that would allow his contract to be bought up for pennies and secondly, someone who has faith in his ability to the extent that he isn't worried about getting booted out. Milan may have a short fuss but he acts for the good of the club and anyone who comes in will know that they have to succeed or else which is the way it should be. Any manager who comes in wanting an easy ride is not one that we want anyway is it?

[davieG]

We went through the 20 managers line that MM spouted on another thread already. I doubt that it would put off managers who had two things. Firstly a valid contract which has no clauses that would allow his contract to be bought up for pennies and secondly, someone who has faith in his ability to the extent that he isn't worried about getting booted out. Milan may have a short fuss but he acts for the good of the club and anyone who comes in will know that they have to succeed or else which is the way it should be. Any manager who comes in wanting an easy ride is not one that we want anyway is it?

Redknapp wasn't a failure and he sacked him!

With MM it's not all to do with failure, had MA failed - I don't think so!

It's as much to do with personlity as it is to do with what happens on the football pitch, having faith in your ability and being successful is no gurantee if you can't get on with MM and it seems that sycophants have the best chance. Unfortunately I don't associate successful people with being sychophantic, quite the opposite.

[Thracian]

Redknapp wasn't a failure and he sacked him!

With MM it's not all to do with failure, had MA failed - I don't think so!

It's as much to do with personlity as it is to do with what happens on the football pitch, having faith in your ability and being successful is no gurantee if you can't get on with MM and it seems that sycophants have the best chance. Unfortunately I don't associate successful people with being sychophantic, quite the opposite.

He reminds me of Pinocchio in that picture.

[Webbo]

He reminds me of Pinocchio in that picture.

I think that's the idea.

[Geo V]

Redknapp wasn't a failure and he sacked him!

With MM it's not all to do with failure, had MA failed - I don't think so!

It's as much to do with personlity as it is to do with what happens on the football pitch, having faith in your ability and being successful is no gurantee if you can't get on with MM and it seems that sycophants have the best chance. Unfortunately I don't associate successful people with being sychophantic, quite the opposite.

As much as the media paint a picture of Milan being some wild madman, I am trusting him to be just someone who will do all he can to succeed but someone who also has his personal guidelines on what is and is not acceptable behaviour from him. I know sometimes a madman and a man blinkered to be successful at all costs can be one and the same but I think that when a person like MM who hasn't got that much money (in relative terms), throws so much of his profits into this "project", he will have limits to what he will do.

I just like to think of the last couple of weeks episodes of a chairman who was not impressed with what MA was doing with the club and acted before things got too bad. I also would like to think that he isn't quite as ruthless or blinkered as some say because he gave RK a chance to succeed (I say too long) and gave Wortho a short time to impress sufficiently to be a candidate. Wortho couldn't do too much in his defence but didn't quite excite us all enough to warrant a deal. MA came in and from what we see was doing plenty right but we have all read the things that many think he was doing wrong and the alleged fallouts. Milan has also backed the judgment of MA on Robbie Fowler, openly saying that MA wanted DJ instead and has also didnt follow through the JFH transfer despite being in a position to just sign him anyway if he wanted him that badly. I dont think he is as bad as many are making out to be fair and I don't think we can judge him too negatively after 3 or 4 months where he has come in, funded some big transfers and have put us in a position as a footballing team that can compete at the top end of the table, something that we haven't seen for 4 years!

Time to board the optimistic bus

[Thracian]

As much as the media paint a picture of Milan being some wild madman, I am trusting him to be just someone who will do all he can to succeed but someone who also has his personal guidelines on what is and is not acceptable behaviour from him. I know sometimes a madman and a man blinkered to be successful at all costs can be one and the same but I think that when a person like MM who hasn't got that much money (in relative terms), throws so much of his profits into this "project", he will have limits to what he will do.

I just like to think of the last couple of weeks episodes of a chairman who was not impressed with what MA was doing with the club and acted before things got too bad. I also would like to think that he isn't quite as ruthless or blinkered as some say because he gave RK a chance to succeed (I say too long) and gave Wortho a short time to impress sufficiently to be a candidate. Wortho couldn't do too much in his defence but didn't quite excite us all enough to warrant a deal. MA came in and from what we see was doing plenty right but we have all read the things that many think he was doing wrong and the alleged fallouts. Milan has also backed the judgment of MA on Robbie Fowler, openly saying that MA wanted DJ instead and has also didnt follow through the JFH transfer despite being in a position to just sign him anyway if he wanted him that badly. I dont think he is as bad as many are making out to be fair and I don't think we can judge him too negatively after 3 or 4 months where he has come in, funded some big transfers and have put us in a position as a footballing team that can compete at the top end of the table, something that we haven't seen for 4 years!

Time to board the optimistic bus

Even if you're right about MM re MA - and I have serious reservations about MM's conduct over that issue as well as MA's - what about the other managers?. How many times can a guy get it wrong and still believe in his recruitment ability?

If you say he gave RK too long are you also saying that was another misjudgement?

Things like moving his goalposts concerning the three-year plan, spouting all that praise about Allen then almost immediately undermining him, saying he's not interested in Redknapp then prising him from his club are all the hallmarks of a guy you cannot be sure of. A guy so ruthless he will do anything if it it suits him at the time.

You don't buy a club like Leicester and in the way he bought it without being ruthless. But it's his perceived arrogance that bothers me. Confidence and self-belief can be easily mistaken for arrogance but Mandaric's seeming willingness, even apparent delight in having the power to ride roughshod over anyone - "I'll have 20 managers if needs be" - conveys an awful message.

It might be the American way but modesty and humility might be a better way forwards as a chairman. And understanding. Cos it seems obvious to me that MM has much to learn about people whatever his other qualities.

[Chrysalis]

There were many eccentric aspects to MA's management which probably led to Kisnorbo's reported transfer request and, it is rumoured, other TR's though I've not heard of these first hand, but which, if they happened would have put considerable pressure on Mandaric.

The point is though that MA's bizarre style was nothing new or unexpected and MM was still seen to allow the tail to wag the dog by supporting the players at the cost of the manager's authority. In my view an extremely risky precedent to set.

Now it seems no coincidence to me that various people mentioned as among our favourites for the managership seem either to have distanced themselves from the job or be less than thrilled at the prospect.

It really would strike a blow for managers and their contracts if word has gone around to take a stand and MM has serious difficulty getting anyone to do the job because of his flippant hire 'em and fire 'em style and comments. I don't believe that will be the case, people are notoriously fickle where money and opportunity are concerned, but it would serve him right.

Yet I cannot but feel that all this could have been avoided with a little diplomacy and common sense or - in other words the involvement of a Director of Football with excellent communication skills and some serious clout.

I don't usually see much point in the role but with MM seemingly wanting so much input on the managerial side, and no manager worth his salt being prepared to be dictated to on signings and team selection, there really needs to be a communications expert at the City.

One who knows Leicester City, knows the players, knows football, can act as mediator and diplomat, can assess players in a scouting sense, can motivate people who are underperforming or struggling to make further progress and and who will make himself useful in a hundred ways.

The DoF would be the perfect buffer between manager and chairman so that no player would ever have direct access to the chairman and therefore be in a position to undermine the manager.

While he would be close enough to MM to advise him. he would also ensure the club moves in the direction the chairman advocates in terms of style throughout the different levels, youth and development policy, commitment to entertainment etc. And any manager would need to be a disciple of those ideals - but as laid out, not with the goalposts being moved every month or two.

It would be the DoF who would have responsibility for ensuring that players weren't treated like children, not Mandaric. Because MM cannot afford to be compromised. He needs to stand aloof and let his wishes be known through the DoF who woud, in turn, protect him from advocating anything which would backfire or be potentially disastrous.

Football is a team game but it doesn't always appear that Leicester's football administration works that way.

If managers fail they should be sacked, in many other professions you lose your job if you fail at your task, managers also tend to get paid off so I dont have sympathy for them.

[Chrysalis]

I don't see them as being anywhere near a reason for a dismissal, early meetings and late arrivals by Directors are common industry. As for them not being able to use the main pitch mmmm a real sackable offence.

You going have to do better than that.

Sounds like a combination of things which were leading to falling outs and not a healthy environment for a promotion winning team.

What it boils down to people on here like MAs personality they think he is a god although his record isnt that great. He wasnt sacked for results so the excuse he wasnt given a chance isnt valid.

[Chrysalis]

Not in itself, for example if it was Kisnorbo he may have been tapped up for a Premier move. If the reasons were genuine then MM should have investigated the reasons, maybe tried some mediation. Of course he could have done this and found that MA was committing some serious offences but the ones mentioned above are just laughable.

If someone somewhere knows of some justifiable reasons let them speak up untill now I've heard of nothing that was either serious or not resolvable, assuming we're dealing with sensible intelligent adults - but I guess, in the case of LCFC that's where my theory flounders.

3 key players asking for transfer requests is a sign of losing the dressing room, causing unrest amongst club staff, disrespecting the youth setup, not turning up for important meetings plus other stuff not known here to me is good enough reasons to part company.

If you worked for me and didnt take it serious for not turning up for meetings you would soon be fired sounds like you have an easy going boss.

[davieG]

3 key players asking for transfer requests is a sign of losing the dressing room, causing unrest amongst club staff, disrespecting the youth setup, not turning up for important meetings plus other stuff not known here to me is good enough reasons to part company.

If you worked for me and didn't take it serious for not turning up for meetings you would soon be fired sounds like you have an easy going boss.

Well the 3 players is no more fact then that we are going to sign Peter Read on Monday nor are any of the other stories. On the no smoke without fire theory some could be true but there could also be a lot of bandwagon jumping and exaggeration by the story tellers

I'm not sure I understand your last comment as I'm not one to miss or turn up late for meetings, quite the opposite. what I said in my previous posts was I've worked for many Directors who did miss or turn up late, it can be the arrogance of people like that which makes them successful.

[Thracian]

If managers fail they should be sacked, in many other professions you lose your job if you fail at your task, managers also tend to get paid off so I dont have sympathy for them.

a) MA had not "failed" in any way. He did things in his own eccentric manner which was whollly predictable and we were ninth in the table, our highest League place for ages.

b) Mandaric chose the manager having had access to a myriad of information about the bloke. It might be said he should sack himself for his poor judgement.

c) Whatever the rights and wrongs of MA's eccentricities, and many seemed wrong, MM compromised the authority of the manager by backing the players, an extremely risky precedent to set and not one likely to endear him to other prospective managers.

d) Coming out with statements that he would sack 20 managers if necessary is an awful image for the chairman to foster on behalf of our club. People should want to work for Leicester City. They should expect backing and should not be scared to death of being stabbed in the back. It was an irresponsible remark and there's no defending it. Again, if MM had the wisdom to recruit well then he wouldn't need to think about sacking people.

e) What has the pay off got to do with anything? Managers have big bills too. Do you seriously believe they are not stigmatised by a sacking and their careers are not compromised? Look at Peter Reid. How long has it taken him to get back into football? Or Megson? Sacking people is a serious issue and you are as insensitive as MM if you don't realise that. Chairman, champions of industry if you like, should show themselves big enough to bear the responsibilities of their position and should take responsibility for the welfare of their appointed staff. That starts with the appointments they make.

[Bryn]

Seriously, someone explain to me where these transfer request rumours have come from, and who they concern?

[Chrysalis]

a) MA had not "failed" in any way. He did things in his own eccentric manner which was whollly predictable and we were ninth in the table, our highest League place for ages.

b) Mandaric chose the manager having had access to a myriad of information about the bloke. It might be said he should sack himself for his poor judgement.

c) Whatever the rights and wrongs of MA's eccentricities, and many seemed wrong, MM compromised the authority of the manager by backing the players, an extremely risky precedent to set and not one likely to endear him to other prospective managers.

d) Coming out with statements that he would sack 20 managers if necessary is an awful image for the chairman to foster on behalf of our club. People should want to work for Leicester City. They should expect backing and should not be scared to death of being stabbed in the back. It was an irresponsible remark and there's no defending it. Again, if MM had the wisdom to recruit well then he wouldn't need to think about sacking people.

e) What has the pay off got to do with anything? Managers have big bills too. Do you seriously believe they are not stigmatised by a sacking and their careers are not compromised? Look at Peter Reid. How long has it taken him to get back into football? Or Megson? Sacking people is a serious issue and you are as insensitive as MM if you don't realise that. Chairman, champions of industry if you like, should show themselves big enough to bear the responsibilities of their position and should take responsibility for the welfare of their appointed staff. That starts with the appointments they make.

reference your points

(a) he was sacked for off the pitch stuff, we dont know exactly the reasons so me or you cant really pass judgement on it.

(b) he made a mistake but at least he acted upon it or would you prefer he didnt sack allen and lived with his mistake just to save face? I prefer chairmans who act on mistakes

© is questionable but 3 key players as I said in my other post is a sign he may have lost the dressing room.

(d) been sacked for failure is not been stabbed in the back, you dont stick with a failing manager just for the sake of wanting to look stable, I agree with his sentiments if it takes 20 managers then so be it, because he said that it doesnt mean he will go through 20 managers.

(e) it has a lot to do with it, I would feel sorry for a co worker who got the sack for a bad reason and then had no money to live on, MA will have come out wealthy for a relatively short period of work, I am not sure why there is so much love for MA but I expect its mostly down to his personaility as many have taken a liking to him, results wise he was nothing special.

[davieG]

reference your points

(a) he was sacked for off the pitch stuff, we dont know exactly the reasons so me or you cant really pass judgement on it.

(b) he made a mistake but at least he acted upon it or would you prefer he didnt sack allen and lived with his mistake just to save face? I prefer chairmans who act on mistakes

© is questionable but 3 key players as I said in my other post is a sign he may have lost the dressing room.

(d) been sacked for failure is not been stabbed in the back, you dont stick with a failing manager just for the sake of wanting to look stable, I agree with his sentiments if it takes 20 managers then so be it, because he said that it doesnt mean he will go through 20 managers.

(e) it has a lot to do with it, I would feel sorry for a co worker who got the sack for a bad reason and then had no money to live on, MA will have come out wealthy for a relatively short period of work, I am not sure why there is so much love for MA but I expect its mostly down to his personaility as many have taken a liking to him, results wise he was nothing special.

If it was by mutual agreement surely he wasn't sacked, bearing in mind the confidentiality clause all this off the field stuff is just unsubstantiated rumour and has no credibility. We simply do not know the reason for the split, whether it was all MAs fault all MMs fault or some of each. On that basis either of them or both could have been failures.

[Ultra]

It's a well-known fact that Martin O'Neill "lost the dressing room" during his early months in charge at City.

It happens to most managers in their career. Brian Clough and Alex Ferguson are two examples.

If it happened to Allen (and we have NO real evidence that it did), who's to say he couldn't have turned it round?

Mandaric's trigger-happy behaviour has made it that much harder for him to attract a replacement of any quality or integrity.