Why dont we just go for Hughton as well while we are at it.

[colinwhite]

The most worrying thing about the whole head coach recruitment issue is actually the un fulhamlike way we seem to be going about doing things.
Ive been seriously feeling irritated for the last week or so ,and I am always very supportive of the club. I ve actually just worked why I am extremely grumpy about the whole thing . I supported Kit against my better judgement to the last, but was of the firm belief that we had our next option worked out and all would be fine ( that was surely what the 5man team got payed for right  ?).
Going for Clarke smacked of arrogance and failing to land him regardless of what is the true reason why, is farcical. To then be linked  with Rowett (who is probably a very good option )is baffling . Will we go for Hughton too? Given our poaching policy we should have started with him as his record at Brighton this season is unbelievable, and leaves Clarke looking poor and second best.
I dont have any answers or even decent suggestions as to who should be our next coach apart from the ones that we are clearly not going to get. But I just cant help feeling that what goes around comes around and if we nick Birminghams coach we will create alot of animosity which may well come back and bite us in the bum.

[hovewhite]

the club seems to have run into a brick wall!

[WhiteJC]

my problem with the way its been handled is why Kit's replacement wasn't "ready and waiting" before Kit was sacked? Smacks of knee-jerk reaction to me, while Kit was seen to be struggling then options should have been "put in place", now everyone who we approach will hold the club to ransom as they know how desperate we are!

[RaySmith]

Maybe giving Kit a points total which he had to meet -33 points after 20 games was it?- meant the club's management pushed themselves into a corner.

They had to sack Kit when it became apparent that he couldn't make that total, though he might have almost made it, and they chose just before the break to do it, but it's not the best time to appoint a new, experienced Championship manager.

Though from their point of view this was the points total they'd set themselves to target promotion this year.

[Lighthouse]

What irritates me is that we seem to be going obvious names. In the old days we were mostly surprised   when a manager turned up. Now our wonderful professional club seems to be going for names that have done well against us and are in a job already. Much like our player policy. If they played well against us we try and buy them.

Fulham have become a no imagination club. They also seem to find a situation that is only slightly broken and smash it beyond repair. Still we may yet be shocked by the brilliant name we will all be shown by this time tomorrow. Or then again we may not.   

[EJL]

my problem with the way its been handled is why Kit's replacement wasn't "ready and waiting" before Kit was sacked? Smacks of knee-jerk reaction to me, while Kit was seen to be struggling then options should have been "put in place", now everyone who we approach will hold the club to ransom as they know how desperate we are!

It's a tricky one. You can look for potential replacements before sacking a manager and risk being accused of undermining him, or you can be upstanding only to leave yourself with a difficult search due to the amount of time lost. Many managers say they don't feel comfortable negotiating with clubs when someone is still in place, so that could be a factor.

[Arthur]

Going for Clarke smacked of arrogance...

I may be wrong, bur did we not ask Reading Football Club if we could speak to Clarke? And then ask Clarke if he would like to speak to us? Either could have said 'No'. The Club acted in a proper fashion. I fail to see how to abide by the the rules is to behave arrogantly.

my problem with the way its been handled is why Kit's replacement wasn't "ready and waiting" before Kit was sacked?

Yes, indeed. How frustrating that our Chairman wasn't prepared to go behind Kit's back and try to negotiate with our next manager.

A lesson learned from the Magath fiasco, perhaps?

[Logicalman]

Without making digs at any one in particular or people in general, if I was a staff at Fulham and I read this forum, I would cringe at what I read.

We have had thread after thread on this forum shouting, not just calling, but screaming for the club to sack Kit, immediately, 6 months ago, etc. The club finally sack him, and because they don't have somebody lined up, perhaps because they felt it would both undermine Kit himself including his position, and signal to anyone they approached that this is the underhand way in which the club deals with it's staff, they are then blamed for being open and having an appearance of being above board. They just can't win.

All those that called for Kits immediate sacking, I hope your accepting that it now will take time to find a suitable candidate. Don't think for one moment I felt that Kit would be our manager/coach for much longer, given the overall results, though I did feel he should have been given a little longer.

The club has two options when that time comes: Fire the Manager and look for a new one (as the club has done in this case) or speak with the manager and let him know his time is up, but ask him to stay on until a replacement is found, which saves him some face as well. I dunno the ins and outs, but it's the clubs decision as to how they wish to proceed.

As for who we have, and haven't, approached, there appears to be as many people on here 'in the know' as there are at the Mirror or the Sun it seems, and with so many different opinions, somebody has to be wrong, but nobody has to be right. Just sayin'

[RaySmith]

But Kit was told that  had to achieve the 33 points target after 20 games, or he would be sacked - so they presumably felt they had to do this when it became impossible to reach this.

But I suppose it's had to line up a manager for a job that isn't yet vacant, though the top clubs seem to get  away with it, though they are offering shedloads of money to top candidates.

If the club  decided to again go for an inexperienced man, then there would be little problem getting someone, but  stipulating experience of success at this level, means that there aren't that many candidates available, and everyone else also wants them.

But I'm sure there is a lot going on behind the scenes, and the club may yet surprise us.
Otherwise, maybe Grant can do a good job in the role of manager.

[Twig]

What irritates me is that we seem to be going obvious names. In the old days we were mostly surprised   when a manager turned up. Now our wonderful professional club seems to be going for names that have done well against us and are in a job already. Much like our player policy. If they played well against us we try and buy them.

Fulham have become a no imagination club. They also seem to find a situation that is only slightly broken and smash it beyond repair. Still we may yet be shocked by the brilliant name we will all be shown by this time tomorrow. Or then again we may not.   

In the past we have been delighted and surprised in equal measure by names like Keegan, Tigana and Hodgson. By those standards I have to say that most of the names linked with us are rather dull and worthy. Jokanovic would be the exception if true.

[Arthur]

But Kit was told that  had to achieve the 33 points target after 20 games, or he would be sacked - so they presumably felt they had to do this when it became impossible to reach this.

Is this 33-point target a known fact (e.g. something that Rigg has stated in a video) or is it merely rumoured? Whilst I would expect the Club to have a ballpark figure in mind, I find it hard to believe that it would be as black-and-white (excuse the pun) as to say '32 points and you're out of a job no matter what'.

Surely the decision to dismiss Kit was also influenced by factors such as our perennial defensive frailties and the lack of consistency in the team's performances (e.g. top of the league stuff against Bristol one week: a truly dire showing with five conceded against Brum the next) and did not hinge solely on an unyielding points total.

[RaySmith]

My source for the 33 points in 20 was Wayne Veysey of Football insider, who said this on Cottage Talk. Everyone seemed to think he knew what he was talking about.

[MJG]

My source for the 33 points in 20 was Wayne Veysey of Football insider, who said this on Cottage Talk. Everyone seemed to think he knew what he was talking about.

That's the kind of total needed to be 6th on average so I'd fully accept that's a good target to aim for.

If you are at that figure you are looking at 76 pts come the end of the season. Basically if we were in Birmingham's  position now, Kit would still be in a job.

[filham]

Good Post.

We wasted to weeks trying to poach the Reading manager which ends in failure. Turns out he thinks he is better off where he is.
Now it seems we are set on a similar course where all the obstacles are similar but where the manager should be even more content than the Reading manager is.

[Asotosyios]

I am not irritated, but disappointed that we haven't found anyone to replace Kit yet. Kit wouldn't have to have started approaching others while Kit was still in charge, but I was hoping that he would have done his homework and had a list with potential targets. Once the divorce with Kit became official, he should have approached them and arranged for interviews.

If this is what happened and we ended up talking to Clarke after 11 days, it shows to me that we lost precious time - perhaps I am wrong. Even after Clarke rejecting our offer (which I am totally fine with; these things happen), we should have moved quickly to our second target unless no one really impressed on their respective interviews and we had to expand our search. Again, this would mean that our list or the criteria used to make this list were not the right ones.

I like Rigg and like the vision and the plan he has for the club, but I was expecting a bit more on that.