Monday, December 21, 2009

How the sacking occurred

More emerging this morning as to how the downfall of Hughes was planned, and executed, and one which left Hughes a lame duck manager:

It emerged a verbal agreement on Mancini’s three-and-a-half-year contract was reached on December 2, as City beat Arsenal in the Carling Cup, but the board wanted to delay the appointment until after tough games against Chelsea, Bolton and Tottenham.

Mancini, set to earn £10million during his time at City, will begin his reign with fixtures against Stoke, Wolves and then Middlesbrough in the FA Cup.
And perhaps equally as bad, are reports that Hughes was not given a straight answer when he challenged Garry Cook over the growing speculation that swept around the club on Saturday:
“Am I being sacked?” Hughes asked the sheepish-looking chief executive. Cook was non-committal. The man who had told anyone who cared to listen that Hughes was the best young manager around did not have the decency to tell him the truth. Hughes had to wait until after the game to be told to pack his bags during a ten-minute conversation with al-Mubarak, the man who had driven through Mancini’s appointment.
Perhaps it is a little naivety on our part to think underhand shenanigans are not part and parcel when concerned with the machinations of a football club, but ADUG have always portrayed themselves as different from the average owners.

They have always stressed the importance of the values they possess, but as more and more emerges about how the sacking of Hughes (and his staff) was conducted (and exactly when it was decided upon), the more badly it reflects on all concerned.

vote it up!


Quinn said...

I have to agree. While there is a lot of knee-jerk opposition to foreign millionaires getting involved in the game I was delighted that ADUG seemed to be honest, long-term owners, in contrast to the doubts I had over Thaksin. Now, I’m not so sure, and a huge amount of goodwill has been squandered by gambling on Mancini.

One quick word about Hughes, though. While I wouldn’t have sacked him, he knew what he was getting himself into when he took the job, stepping into Sven’s shoes when he had been sacked in what I think was a similarly unjust manner. I thought then – as I think now – that such actions almost guarantee a short-termist approach from the new manager, who will take the job in the knowledge that the worst that can happen is to be sacked and given a massive pay-off if things go wrong. I’m sure Hughes is gutted that his best shot at sustained managerial success has just gone up in smoke, but he knew all this when he took the job and I’m sure he’ll be alright.

Anonymous said...

Cook is become a cancer to the club. Get rid of him.

pjdemers said...

I fully agee with Anonymous. Any chance of a "Cook Out" campaign?

TSVDP said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
TSVDP said...

The press conference was called in part to dispel conspiracy stories such as those listed in the article. I've got to say, those stories are very truly bothersome, upsetting and bitter especially on top of everything else.

It's certainly interesting how Shay Given has been involved in two of the bitterest stories of this late 2009, Henry's hand ball in the Ireland/France playoff and now this.

It's been said that Mancini and the owners were already previous friends. Is this true? I think the sacking is not justified. Still, if Mancini had been already a personal friend of the owners, again, it might change the perception some on this news.

Quinn, just to note, if you should mention Sven, I agree the sacking was not justified but if I have my facts correct, at least that waited until after the season and from what I know, it is the classic ownership/coaching clash, like Sven not actually getting the selected Thai players into the teams and things like that. Not right but a lot easier to understand.

Lastly, 2 Saturdays ago, 9 matches, 6 draws. Some people are saying the league in general is a weaker field. I think there is a lot of parity and making for an exciting year all the way up and down the table. After last year, Aston Villa and Tottenham made impressions as forces to be dealt with. Everyone talks about the fall of Liverpool, but it was clear these two teams could definitely be troublesome. Tottenham's match-loss against Wolverhampton looks to me due in part to locker room strife, 16 of the team flying to Dublin to party and 2 players left off the squad against the Wolves, Pavlyuchenko and Bentley due to some sort of misunderstandings between players and coach.