We would probably be a non league club by now. Or gone into administration.
Amazing what he did To the club, surely he was on a mission to destroy us.
Heres the glorious day when he got the sack, with one point after seven games...
https://youtu.be/bUqgOQQqeWs
Anyone miss him ?
Like a hole in the head.
I also missed him when I threw my season ticket at him, but only by a couple of inches.
I miss him like clueless Clegg from politics.
092.gif
It makes my stomach churn to think of that wolly as still being in charge of our team.He destroyed us beyond belief with his crazy signings ( McCormack apart ) and mad cap training regimes.Wow , what a mess the club was in back then.We would probably have done what Sunderland have but on a more epic scale and possibly never returned.An absolute nightmare.But we have risen again so we can all breathe easy.COYW
Old school manager from a different culture. A recipe for disaster.
It would have taken a miracle to save us from relegation but I suspect he seriously underestimated the level of the Championship. That first game against Ipswich... Boys vs men. He more or less ruined the career of one of our promising youngsters in that single game.
I disagree.
I think Magath came in at a time when we were relegated... and there were multiple calls on here and throughout the club for us to play our youth team players and start a fresh.
He came in, did exactly that, and unsurprisingly they struggled.
The training regimes.. up Scottish mountains etc. So what? So it's not some tropical paradise? It's Britain.. it's a beautiful part of the country.. and it's Magaths style. The style that won him multiple Bundesligas (ie equivalent of winning the Prem multiple times!!). Jokanovic has a style that hasn't always worked but he's stuck to.. Magath had a style that didn't work to start (what.. 7 games?) but he didn't have the chance to see if it worked like Hodgson etc had before him.
He rightly said at the time that "why do you ask Risse and Hangeland about my methods when you should ask Raul etc who are Champions League top scorers?". These old players who wanted to retire in their early thirties playing in second gear and not be forced to become fit by jogging up mountains. Unsurprisingly they kicked up a fuss and we all patted them on the head and let them force him out. What we should've done is realise Magaths plans were to use his previous methods in a league with 46 games where fitness was key. This season shows how vital it is to have that extra fitness at the end of the year.
I think without the situation we were in with the strong fan pressure to play all youth... with more time to make it work.. and less out-spoken over the hill players causing trouble.. it would have all turned out considerably better. But he never had the chance and he eventually lost the dressing room. A big opportunity lost for the club in my opinion. 092.gif
He was a control freak who underestimated English football, and had no experience of the football culture in this country.
He was brought in to save the club from relegation, and failed miserably, and at the same time, reduced morale lower than a snakes belly.
Playing Dan Burn at right back at Stoke said it all. No wonder we got stuffed 4 1. Another 3 points down the drain.
When we were 2 0 up at home to Hull, he took off a midfielder and brought on Darren Bent who contributed to us drawing 2 2 and another 2 precious points lost.
Did not want his methods questioned so he decimated the team by offloading the experienced players, and only brought in youth because he knew they were more likely to toe the line.
Just when we needed the players to come together as a unit, one for all and all for one. He did the complete opposite, his policy was to divide and rule.
That is why he lost the dressing room almost immediately.
Then if that was not enough to tell the club, we have employed a right one here.
They allowed him to continue to decimate the club on and off the pitch the following season.
He had a completely fresh start he did not deserve, and due to his methods and poor man management, he lost I believe 7 out of first 8 League Matches.
He was the worst possible nightmare, who should have been sacked at the end of the season he relegated us. Instead of waiting until a damp Autumn Tuesday evening when we lost at Forest.
Fulham should have sued him for impersonating a Football Manager.
Milo and Statto sound serious 😂, Magath was just wrong for us, and his methods were just wrong for this era, brilliant or good managers adapt to changing football, Magath...he just couldn't get around tgat things had changed, not even in China where he unsuccessfully went to after us.
Shandong Luneng are still in shock. 🆘
Oh dear, if I listen to what Milo and Stato are saying then when Jocanovic leaves it could just be possible to employ another manager like Magath with the blessing of some fans. We must hang on to Jocanovic for a good while until we are all convinced of the right type of manager for Fulham.
Quote from: Statto on June 03, 2018, 07:43:22 PM
Quote from: Johnh on June 03, 2018, 05:09:47 PM
his methods were just wrong for this era
his methods were working very well until about 2010 if not even later, so i'd be interested to know when "this era" began
A decade ago around about 2008, beyond which he was a dinosaur seeing out his time. Since leaving Fulham he has achieved the square root of not a lot.
That's because no decent club will touch him with a barge pole. In fact come to think of it, no club will touch him with a barge pole. Not even a wooden club.
Even his wife boos him every time she sees him.
Felix had no idea about the Championship and thought it was a second rate league as they have throughout Europe. The owners were ignorant as well. The fact that Felix never learned from his mistake and continued to treat his players poorly as if they too were as stupid of the facts as he was just made things worse. When the list of the worst managers to manage Fulham ever comes up. Then the answer is always Felix. Which is a shame because before that there were a few in with a chance.
Thank you Lighthouse. The voice of reason!
Quote from: Statto on June 03, 2018, 04:41:53 PM
Agree with you Milo
People have probably selectively forgotten this but he did actually have the kids passing the ball around very well. ok there was little end product, but nor was there during wobbly spells under Jokanovic when everyone just wanted Matt Smith brought on
His only real mistake IMO was massively underestimating the standard of the English Championship but I could forgive any foreign manager for that, based on the general standard of second tier leagues throughout Europe
Even excluding his achievements as a player he had, as far as I'm aware, the best CV of any manager we've appointed in our history or that we're likely to appoint in the future
Wtf??Please get real. He came in , signed mostly a load of nobody's , and played dull football with , as you have said no end product and which is the aim if you want to win.The sheer fact that he put those kids in the team who" passed the ball around with no end product " shows how poor he was at managing as they were clearly not ready and could have ruined their careers.And then he tells our captain to strap cheese to his thigh to aid his recovery from injury.Sorry but that is NOT someone I deem capable of running a kids little league team let alone Fulham FC. Oh yeah and ONE point from 7 league games with the leagues most prolific striker tells its own story.
I cannot believe anyone could have anything positive to say about Magath. End of!
The Hangeland Cheese story is a classic though.
I can laugh about it now.
Friendly reminder to all that this forum is based on opinions and not all opinions will be popular ones or, one that you agree with. Still, please be respectful of other members regardless of their opinions.
Why on earth are we bringing up past managers now? It was 4 years ago!
Let's enjoy the present, for goodness sake.
I realise that perhaps I shouldn't have commented on this thread as I really don't see the point of discussing Magath as he is firmly in our past and will never return. I don't understand how some posters can get so animated on the subject either but as has been pointed out this is a forum and people have differing opinions. It was still a shock to see him defended by some though!
I would invite anyone who has even the remotest bit sympathy for Magath, to go back and watch the highlights of those first games in the Championship with Magath in charge, compared even to the first few games with Symons (they're all on Youtube on the club's page). Particularly the goals we conceded given his choice to release Hangeland.
From all that I remember of the early days of Khan's stewardship of FFC they were days of a trigger happy, 'quick fire' regime, that saw panic ruling over carefully nuanced appointments with appropriate monitoring of progress. Jol was perhaps the one 'shot' that was, in one sense or another, appropriate, but Meulensteen and Magath both seemed to be ill judged at both ends of the recruitment process.
I have always believed that you can see 'a difference' whenever a new coach takes over and it is as true of the assistant coaches as it is of the head. The 'difference' can, initially, be misleading, and then I am guided by the owner's intended recruitment objective – avoid relegation; improve position in table; obtain promotion, etc – which tends to change with longevity. The problem with short tenures is the objectives often seem to get lost among the many other problems failure (as the direct opposite of success) brings with it.
Meulensteen's sacking and Magath's appointment were heavily criticised in the media and by people much closer to Fulham FC. Should either have been given longer? I think that may have been true of Meulensteen but I cannot see any justification for believing Magath should have been given the length of time he was since his original task was to avoid relegation. He should have been fired when relegation was not avoided since he did not achieve his objective. That may have prompted a profound look at how the Khans were recruiting their head coach and their players – the 'Symons effect' well before it actually happened.
So we are all agreed then, we won't be inviting Mr Magath back to Craven Cottage.
Also there was a rumour that he was doubling up as Sir Craven of Cottage in his spare time.
Apparently because he was a control freak, he could not bear the thought of someone else wearing the costume.
All that makes sense because I defy anyone to say they ever saw Magath and Sir Craven together at the same time.
You either saw one or the other, but never both together.
Quote from: toshes mate on June 04, 2018, 09:35:17 AM
From all that I remember of the early days of Khan's stewardship of FFC they were days of a trigger happy, 'quick fire' regime, that saw panic ruling over carefully nuanced appointments with appropriate monitoring of progress. Jol was perhaps the one 'shot' that was, in one sense or another, appropriate, but Meulensteen and Magath both seemed to be ill judged at both ends of the recruitment process.
I have always believed that you can see 'a difference' whenever a new coach takes over and it is as true of the assistant coaches as it is of the head. The 'difference' can, initially, be misleading, and then I am guided by the owner's intended recruitment objective – avoid relegation; improve position in table; obtain promotion, etc – which tends to change with longevity. The problem with short tenures is the objectives often seem to get lost among the many other problems failure (as the direct opposite of success) brings with it.
Meulensteen's sacking and Magath's appointment were heavily criticised in the media and by people much closer to Fulham FC. Should either have been given longer? I think that may have been true of Meulensteen but I cannot see any justification for believing Magath should have been given the length of time he was since his original task was to avoid relegation. He should have been fired when relegation was not avoided since he did not achieve his objective. That may have prompted a profound look at how the Khans were recruiting their head coach and their players – the 'Symons effect' well before it actually happened.
Took over in Feb didn't he?
With a retiring, aged squad bottom of the league?
What are the odds of survival realistically regardless of manager?
Then he had a complete squad overhaul in summer so realistically you have to give him another 10 games but he was only given 7.
I just think people have selective memories over what we were all calling for at the time - youth! He played youth and got them playing some decent stuff but they were taken apart. Agreed he and us as a fan unit completely underestimated the Championship. However I think the bad press he gets is so harsh given he was only following the will of the fans.
Quote from: Milo on June 04, 2018, 10:54:32 AM
Quote from: toshes mate on June 04, 2018, 09:35:17 AM
From all that I remember of the early days of Khan's stewardship of FFC they were days of a trigger happy, 'quick fire' regime, that saw panic ruling over carefully nuanced appointments with appropriate monitoring of progress. Jol was perhaps the one 'shot' that was, in one sense or another, appropriate, but Meulensteen and Magath both seemed to be ill judged at both ends of the recruitment process.
I have always believed that you can see 'a difference' whenever a new coach takes over and it is as true of the assistant coaches as it is of the head. The 'difference' can, initially, be misleading, and then I am guided by the owner's intended recruitment objective – avoid relegation; improve position in table; obtain promotion, etc – which tends to change with longevity. The problem with short tenures is the objectives often seem to get lost among the many other problems failure (as the direct opposite of success) brings with it.
Meulensteen's sacking and Magath's appointment were heavily criticised in the media and by people much closer to Fulham FC. Should either have been given longer? I think that may have been true of Meulensteen but I cannot see any justification for believing Magath should have been given the length of time he was since his original task was to avoid relegation. He should have been fired when relegation was not avoided since he did not achieve his objective. That may have prompted a profound look at how the Khans were recruiting their head coach and their players – the 'Symons effect' well before it actually happened.
Took over in Feb didn't he?
With a retiring, aged squad bottom of the league?
What are the odds of survival realistically regardless of manager?
Then he had a complete squad overhaul in summer so realistically you have to give him another 10 games but he was only given 7.
I just think people have selective memories over what we were all calling for at the time - youth! He played youth and got them playing some decent stuff but they were taken apart. Agreed he and us as a fan unit completely underestimated the Championship. However I think the bad press he gets is so harsh given he was only following the will of the fans.
If we hadn't of got rid of him when we did we were goners. We needed youth, but to play Cameron Burgessas a DM at the age he was then was ridiculoius and he got bullied. To decide to sack Hangeland, alienate some very gd players who could have stayed with us, shun Ruiz. There was so much wrong with how he managed and the bad press is justified.
Think everyone is entitled to a view,the thing he did that needed doing was moving on a heavy aged squad which had to be done.as for his record etc felt he didn't no the English game.
He was the wrong manager, in a failing setup, with poor stewardship and management. Everything was going wrong during his time at the club, and unfortunately, this didn't stop on the pitch.
You can't excuse the 6/7 defeats we suffered at the start of the season. Coupled with his odd managerial tendencies, I don't think he was ever going to last.
A worthwhile gamble, but don't think was anything more.
Quote from: Marcel_Gecov on June 04, 2018, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: Milo on June 04, 2018, 10:54:32 AM
Quote from: toshes mate on June 04, 2018, 09:35:17 AM
From all that I remember of the early days of Khan's stewardship of FFC they were days of a trigger happy, 'quick fire' regime, that saw panic ruling over carefully nuanced appointments with appropriate monitoring of progress. Jol was perhaps the one 'shot' that was, in one sense or another, appropriate, but Meulensteen and Magath both seemed to be ill judged at both ends of the recruitment process.
I have always believed that you can see 'a difference' whenever a new coach takes over and it is as true of the assistant coaches as it is of the head. The 'difference' can, initially, be misleading, and then I am guided by the owner's intended recruitment objective – avoid relegation; improve position in table; obtain promotion, etc – which tends to change with longevity. The problem with short tenures is the objectives often seem to get lost among the many other problems failure (as the direct opposite of success) brings with it.
Meulensteen's sacking and Magath's appointment were heavily criticised in the media and by people much closer to Fulham FC. Should either have been given longer? I think that may have been true of Meulensteen but I cannot see any justification for believing Magath should have been given the length of time he was since his original task was to avoid relegation. He should have been fired when relegation was not avoided since he did not achieve his objective. That may have prompted a profound look at how the Khans were recruiting their head coach and their players – the 'Symons effect' well before it actually happened.
Took over in Feb didn't he?
With a retiring, aged squad bottom of the league?
What are the odds of survival realistically regardless of manager?
Then he had a complete squad overhaul in summer so realistically you have to give him another 10 games but he was only given 7.
I just think people have selective memories over what we were all calling for at the time - youth! He played youth and got them playing some decent stuff but they were taken apart. Agreed he and us as a fan unit completely underestimated the Championship. However I think the bad press he gets is so harsh given he was only following the will of the fans.
If we hadn't of got rid of him when we did we were goners. We needed youth, but to play Cameron Burgessas a DM at the age he was then was ridiculoius and he got bullied. To decide to sack Hangeland, alienate some very gd players who could have stayed with us, shun Ruiz. There was so much wrong with how he managed and the bad press is justified.
I would argue those alienated and sold were aging players who didn't like the idea of having to trudge up Scottish mountains and suddenly become ultra fit.
They then used the cheese reference which would have been taken completely out of context and blown out of proportion from the likely tongue in cheek intentions or indeed a mis translation to hammer their point into the heads of fans whose judgements were already clouded by lack of results on the pitch.
I understand where you are coming from but I also understand where Magath was coming from!
Playing youth players is one thing but playing them in the wrong positions is another. He gave the impression that he wasn't confident or sure that he knew about the opposition we were playing, the type of players he had in his squad or the overall standard in the Championship. He appeared reluctant to learn from the mistakes he made.
No doubt the squad was poor and ageing and he had to cut down on the wage bill. But we needed somebody who had some idea what was needed. He seemed to prefer just the burn and slash approach.
Quote from: Lighthouse on June 04, 2018, 01:56:38 PM
Playing youth players is one thing but playing them in the wrong positions is another. He gave the impression that he wasn't confident or sure that he knew about the opposition we were playing, the type of players he had in his squad or the overall standard in the Championship. He appeared reluctant to learn from the mistakes he made.
No doubt the squad was poor and ageing and he had to cut down on the wage bill. But we needed somebody who had some idea what was needed. He seemed to prefer just the burn and slash approach.
I thought there was quite a bit of squad rotation and quite a bit of uncertainty around what was his best team. So you could argue he changed it up too much and experimented too much eg Burn right back as has been quoted.
Anyway, it's all history as they say. I don't think Statto or I were intending to defend Magaths output.. more that we wanted people to see it from another perspective. That things didn't fall into place. That it was multi factorial and multi-step. Taking over in Feb when we were all but relegated, the drop from the Prem and the FFP rules and players needing to leave, aged squad members kicking up a fuss due to training regimes, and a strong fan pressure to play the kids. You can see rationale for everything he did.. and it had worked in the past.. and being dealt the odd bad hand things snowballed.
Anyway it's all history as I said.
I understand where you are coming from but I also understand where Magath was coming from!
[/quote]
I think I know where Magath was coming from, a flaming lunatic asylum, and he proceeded to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Why are we even talking about him?
Whether or not Magath was/is, potentially, a 'good' manager is not really the point of focus when looking back, is it? Being a good Fulham manager was the point of focus. He came to FFC with an objective to keep us in the PL and he obviously believed or thought he could do it or he wouldn't have come. I mentioned the feeling amongst many people on his appointment that it was not a good 'Fulham' move to appoint him and, IMO, no matter how long he had been given to manage the Club the end product would have been much the same. I also mentioned the 'panic' in the Board Room with Khan not thinking before he acted on a number of occasions and at different of levels of naivety and between all concerned I think any chance of PL survival was lost to all concerned because of this.
I don't blame Magath for anything other than not being the person to turn FFC around, not at that time, and probably not at any time. But he wasn't to know that any more than Khan was.
Quote from: Statto on June 04, 2018, 01:35:48 PM
Two posters now have referred to him "choosing" or "deciding" to get rid of Hangeland.
When you are relegated and need to get a wage bill down from £70m to £30m, you probably don't have the option of keeping an aging defender of £40k per week... as a lot of people on this forum have pointed out, as it happens, in relation to John Terry at Villa
We ended up breaching FFP so evidently he should have got rid of more, not less, of those old, expensive players
£30k a week is £1.5m a year. That's probably around what we spent on Bodurov for fee plus wages, or maybe how much we spent on, say, Bodurov and Taggart combined, although it's all speculative. We spent £11m on McCormack, half a million on Smith, and fees on players like Eisfeld and Casasola who never featured, and unnecessary wages on flops like Chihi and Voser. It's not as though his hand was twisted on Hangeland, who could have helped form the spine of a much better team for that season than the one we ended up with.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on June 03, 2018, 08:12:37 PM
That's because no decent club will touch him with a barge pole. In fact come to think of it, no club will touch him with a barge pole. Not even a wooden club.
Even his wife boos him every time she sees him.
064.gif :54:
Who gives a monkeys!
On the point of new managers, in my experience with our managers the most successful managers have a pattern of play that is clear from the their first match. Whether the players executed the managers wishes or not a clear direction of play was being implemented.
Tiganas syle was obvious from the friendlies, with players like Melville, Symons, Brevett to name a few improving a few levels in terms of playing 'football'. If im correct Roy's first game was a draw at Bolton but you could see a clear pattern being implemented.
Again with Slav it was clear he had strict pattern of play but as we saw he needed the players to do it.
Interestingly each manager made big decisions on big players or handled losing them with little fuss, Horsefield, Bullard and Mccormack respectively.
Personally i liked Rene, the home game against Liverpool springs to mind as a great performance with a bad last minute.
When we were relegated, the only thing good about the team was the youth. Jol bought a load of ex Tottenham, and older players whereas Meulensteens short reign ended up giving us 2 united trainees, more loanees and Mitroglou.
The squad was old and unfit.
What was needed was youth, and strict training to improve fitness levels. He brought exactly that but to echo previous posts, he done it all gung ho, rather than phasing it in, leading to literal men against boys in the first game against Ipswich.
Any manager worth their salt will dip into the premier league for some decent premier league experience to help a young team, whereas we went to the premier league and brought in the likes of Eisfeld and that was it.
He wasn't helped either by the reputation we had garnered following relegation, as well as the ex players like Riise and Hangeland criticising him. They both had woeful seasons and had both left at the end of relegation season.
His methods and his personality were never going to work, especially when he was drastic with the change to youth, ruining early careers like Woodrow, Burgess and Joronen, but he was however the type of manager we needed at the time, albeit a younger more dynamic diluted version.
Quote from: Newry FFC on June 04, 2018, 09:12:52 PM
When we were relegated, the only thing good about the team was the youth. Jol bought a load of ex Tottenham, and older players whereas Meulensteens short reign ended up giving us 2 united trainees, more loanees and Mitroglou.
The squad was old and unfit.
What was needed was youth, and strict training to improve fitness levels. He brought exactly that but to echo previous posts, he done it all gung ho, rather than phasing it in, leading to literal men against boys in the first game against Ipswich.
Any manager worth their salt will dip into the premier league for some decent premier league experience to help a young team, whereas we went to the premier league and brought in the likes of Eisfeld and that was it.
He wasn't helped either by the reputation we had garnered following relegation, as well as the ex players like Riise and Hangeland criticising him. They both had woeful seasons and had both left at the end of relegation season.
His methods and his personality were never going to work, especially when he was drastic with the change to youth, ruining early careers like Woodrow, Burgess and Joronen, but he was however the type of manager we needed at the time, albeit a younger more dynamic diluted version.
Did he ruin early careers of those 3 or maybe they were/are just not good enough.
Quote from: alfie on June 04, 2018, 09:27:15 PM
Quote from: Newry FFC on June 04, 2018, 09:12:52 PM
When we were relegated, the only thing good about the team was the youth. Jol bought a load of ex Tottenham, and older players whereas Meulensteens short reign ended up giving us 2 united trainees, more loanees and Mitroglou.
The squad was old and unfit.
What was needed was youth, and strict training to improve fitness levels. He brought exactly that but to echo previous posts, he done it all gung ho, rather than phasing it in, leading to literal men against boys in the first game against Ipswich.
Any manager worth their salt will dip into the premier league for some decent premier league experience to help a young team, whereas we went to the premier league and brought in the likes of Eisfeld and that was it.
He wasn't helped either by the reputation we had garnered following relegation, as well as the ex players like Riise and Hangeland criticising him. They both had woeful seasons and had both left at the end of relegation season.
His methods and his personality were never going to work, especially when he was drastic with the change to youth, ruining early careers like Woodrow, Burgess and Joronen, but he was however the type of manager we needed at the time, albeit a younger more dynamic diluted version.
Did he ruin early careers of those 3 or maybe they were/are just not good enough.
I'd say with Burgess almost certainly.
He signed Mark Fotheringham :doh:
Quote from: WOSFSC on June 05, 2018, 03:59:37 PM
He signed Mark Fotheringham :doh:
And McCormack..
Adil Chihi my personal fav. Seemed a bit fat
It feels worse because I genuinely felt we had a chance of staying up under Meulensteen - the football was dire, but we were still in the mix - the players liked him and played hard for him, despite their lack of talent, and we were grinding out a few points playing mostly in our own half and hoping for a bit of magic from Holtby at the other end. That 2-2 draw away at Man U where Bent nicked that injury time equaliser was a great moment and I felt we could have pushed on from there and then rebuilt around the youth in the summer.
Then Magath came in and it was a mess, immediately dropped Holtby for no apparent reason, started playing players out of position. The fight was just gone. Dan Burn at right back was the final straw. Watching us get torn to pieces down that flank for three goals with Heitanga just screaming at Magath on the sidelines begging to let them switch was heartbreaking. Awful manager.
Quote from: Pluto on June 05, 2018, 09:04:00 PM
It feels worse because I genuinely felt we had a chance of staying up under Meulensteen - the football was dire, but we were still in the mix - the players liked him and played hard for him, despite their lack of talent, and we were grinding out a few points playing mostly in our own half and hoping for a bit of magic from Holtby at the other end. That 2-2 draw away at Man U where Bent nicked that injury time equaliser was a great moment and I felt we could have pushed on from there and then rebuilt around the youth in the summer.
Then Magath came in and it was a mess, immediately dropped Holtby for no apparent reason, started playing players out of position. The fight was just gone. Dan Burn at right back was the final straw. Watching us get torn to pieces down that flank for three goals with Heitanga just screaming at Magath on the sidelines begging to let them switch was heartbreaking. Awful manager.
Good player, Heitinger. He dropped Holtby (in my view the best player in the team) because he knew what he was about. It was a crying shame.
Fulham would have a healthy turn over in Cottage Cheese.
Quote from: Pluto on June 05, 2018, 09:04:00 PM
It feels worse because I genuinely felt we had a chance of staying up under Meulensteen - the football was dire, but we were still in the mix - the players liked him and played hard for him, despite their lack of talent, and we were grinding out a few points playing mostly in our own half and hoping for a bit of magic from Holtby at the other end. That 2-2 draw away at Man U where Bent nicked that injury time equaliser was a great moment and I felt we could have pushed on from there and then rebuilt around the youth in the summer.
Then Magath came in and it was a mess, immediately dropped Holtby for no apparent reason, started playing players out of position. The fight was just gone. Dan Burn at right back was the final straw. Watching us get torn to pieces down that flank for three goals with Heitanga just screaming at Magath on the sidelines begging to let them switch was heartbreaking. Awful manager.
Just recalling that period makes my stomach churn. I don't deny that Magath had enjoyed a highly successful managerial career but, for whatever reason, he was truly dreadful at Fulham.
I find myself in agreement with Wooly in this thread. He was the worst. A control freak. Destroyer of Locker Rooms. A nut job. He never made a smart change on the fly during a game that I can remember. Had he stayed much longer, I would have eventually stopped supporting the club. He would have made it that untenable to me. I've always harboured this feeling that we didn't do right by Rene M. That he would have turned it all good given more time. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but it's how I felt then, and still how I feel. But what's done is done. We have a terrific manager, and the players respond to him. So very unlike Felix Magath.