SamL Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Roberto Di Matteo is expected to be named as Paul Ince's successor at MK Dons, reports BBC Three Counties Radio.The former Chelsea midfielder, 38, has emerged as favourite after discussions with chairman Pete Winkelman and could be unveiled in the next 48 hours. Di Matteo won 34 caps for Italy during spells with Lazio and Chelsea and retired from playing in 2002. Ince left to replace Mark Hughes at Blackburn last month after guiding the Dons to League Two title last season. Winkleman was keen to appoint a new manager as quickly as possible with the Dons players reporting back for pre-season training on Monday and said he had received 40 applications for the vacant post.
Ric Flair Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Interesting. Could be a coup for them, but at best, if Di Matteo does well, he'll be off after a season and they'll be back to square one.
MC Prussian Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Would be a sweet move for DiMatteo. Grew up in my region and played for the local team for quite a while before moving on to bigger clubs.
Tilley Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Interesting. Could be a coup for them, but at best, if Di Matteo does well, he'll be off after a season and they'll be back to square one. I think he'll do well for them, But have to agree, he'll be off after one year, I'm sure they are getting sick of losing managers!
Benji Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 20th July 2009LEICESTER look set to confirm Di Matteo as their new boss after Milan Mandaric last night agreed a deal with a pissed off MK Dons
Darkzzz_ Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 The next Leicester Manager then in approx..... 1 season time!!
SamL Posted 2 July 2008 Author Posted 2 July 2008 could be a big risk. no experience. Paul Ince was relatively inexperienced when he went to Macclesfield and he miraculously saved them from relegation. He then moved to MK Dons and got them promoted in his first season. Everybody has to start somewhere.
MikeyT Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Good luck to him apart from the first game of the season an then when we go there!
Jack Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 Can't see success here I'm afraid. Me neither. Even if he is a success he will just move on the bigger and better things.
The People's Hero Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 This'll be our next boss then. Hopefully MK Dons will eventually see the light and go for Lee Philpott and Mike Whitlow. Score.
Daggers Posted 2 July 2008 Posted 2 July 2008 The next Leicester Manager then in approx..... 1 season time!! I hope they've sorted out the manager training program so he's better than the last bastard.
SamL Posted 3 July 2008 Author Posted 3 July 2008 Confirmed. http://www.mkdons.premiumtv.co.uk/page/New...1337757,00.html
Thracian Posted 4 July 2008 Posted 4 July 2008 Some clubs don't have this obsession with experience. I wonder how many genuinely talented people have been turned down for all sorts of jobs because they "didn't have experience". Qualifications don't necessarily equate to ability. I saw so many hopeless cases given coaching badges it devalued the whole process. Di Matteo had far more ability than most footballers who would ever turn up at Milton Keynes and it wouldn't take a genius to get a feeling for his ideas on the game, to find out if he could organise and conduct some stimulating training/coaching sessions and to deduce whether he was articulate enough and inspiring enough to get his wishes across to the players. I'd doubt there'd be much questioning the breadth of his contacts. When I see some of the wankers who are constantly given manager's jobs despite largely unimpressive records, I really don't see why De Matteo should be any more of a risk than other likely candidates. It does help though when a chairman can sift out the shit and recognise ability when he sees it.
Webbo Posted 4 July 2008 Posted 4 July 2008 Some clubs don't have this obsession with experience.I wonder how many genuinely talented people have been turned down for all sorts of jobs because they "didn't have experience". Qualifications don't necessarily equate to ability. I saw so many hopeless cases given coaching badges it devalued the whole process. Di Matteo had far more ability than most footballers who would ever turn up at Milton Keynes and it wouldn't take a genius to get a feeling for his ideas on the game, to find out if he could organise and conduct some stimulating training/coaching sessions and to deduce whether he was articulate enough and inspiring enough to get his wishes across to the players. I'd doubt there'd be much questioning the breadth of his contacts. When I see some of the wankers who are constantly given manager's jobs despite largely unimpressive records, I really don't see why De Matteo should be any more of a risk than other likely candidates. It does help though when a chairman can sift out the shit and recognise ability when he sees it. Surely it's not asking too much for someone to have had some sort of apprenticeship.You wouldn't let an unqualified surgeon operate on you just because you liked his enthusiasm and ideas. Just because he was a good player and likes a good style of play doesn't mean he knows how to get other players to produce that on the pitch.
Tevez Posted 4 July 2008 Posted 4 July 2008 Got to start somewhere haven't you? Don't look like a Motivator though.
lildave3 Posted 5 July 2008 Posted 5 July 2008 :w00t: How can I not like MK Dons now?! God I love that man. My favourite player as a kid, along with Ronaldo. I kid you not.
Thracian Posted 5 July 2008 Posted 5 July 2008 Surely it's not asking too much for someone to have had some sort of apprenticeship.You wouldn't let an unqualified surgeon operate on you just because you liked his enthusiasm and ideas.Just because he was a good player and likes a good style of play doesn't mean he knows how to get other players to produce that on the pitch. I'm a big believer in apprenticeships because they can really can hone some skills and the people teaching and advising have presumably been apprentices themselves. And it would be a better system that worked like that. A prolonged and protected initial apprenticeship would be much more worthwhile than some shortish crash course of instruction that ends in token coaching badge "qualifications" whether the beneficiary is any good or not. I don't think your surgeon reference helps the argument because the specialised skills needed by a surgeon cannot easily be learned without going through a qualification process nor practised without the specialist back up and equipment provided by a hospital. For a more realistic comparison there are loads of absolutely brilliant mechanics out there who are not necessarily qualified. They've simply worked with and learned from other mechanics. Gardeners and landscapers offer other examples. They've learned over a period of time and it's that that makes them at least potentially "expert" at their job not some piece of paper presented after a short-term vocational experience. If you want an example of meaningless pieces of paper you only have to consider the driving licence. What a joke process that is. You've only got to take a drive any Saturday or Sunday to know that stacks of people on our roads haven't got a fecking clue how to drive yet they mostly have a licence. They don't know their own car's capabilities, they can't park, they've never driven in snow or on black ice, they've never learned to control a skid nor been taught how to minimise the chances of collision. They have poor awareness of what's around them, lousy concentration, they can't see cos they won't wear glasses, have no navigational idea whatsoever, don't keep their eyes on the road especially when they're talking or looking for a parking spot, never look further than the end of their bonnet in terms of assessing the road ahead and are often far too nervous to be driving safely in any case. Yet they get a piece of paper that says they're allowed to drive a 125mph lethal weapon on the roads whether they're a danger or not. And so long as they've not had a pint or two they're automatically considered safer than some guy or girl who perhaps does 1,000 miles of driving a week, in every kind of vehicle imaginable and in almost every kind of situation. What nonsense. Obtaining a driving licence should a staged process based on many things including the completion of so many hours, experience of different road/weather conditions, time on a test pad and a gradual increase in the range of vehicle power/passenger totals a driver is entitled to be responsible for. In other words time and experience should be used to build credence rather than some short-term theoretical paper qualification that probably has no genuine relevence whatsoever.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.