According to Peter Rutzler of The Athletic, we are looking to recruit a Director of Scouting, no further information than that, but it's certainly a step in the right direction.
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Dont we still have Alistair mackintosh who does some of that stuff?
The role was previously occupied by Javier Perriera (sp)
Quote from: Willham on May 05, 2021, 10:34:33 PM
Dont we still have Alistair mackintosh who does some of that stuff?
I thought his job was just contracts.
I've got a contact at the club, this role will oversee all transfers, TK will be staying out of the recruitment side of things, however, he won't step down as he wants to have final sign off on all signings. This is a big step for us, TK will not stand down as it will deflate his massive ego. But my source at the club is 95% right with his info.
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Shahid Khan is the ultimate boss. Even if FFC sacks Tony Khan and makes Rafa Benitez the DOF. The DOF would end up requesting to buy a new centre back to replace "the USA Captain (i.e. Tim Ream) in order to gain promotion, so he would have to get Shahid Khan's approval.
Shahid Khan would be left with a decision to approve, the DOF request that we need money to get a better backup center back than "the USA captain". What if SK says veto's the transfer? Don't assume Shahid Khan will say yes to spending money, SK has been tight with his money in his other businesses.
If Shahid Khan says "No, I don't think the new DOFs request to upgrade the USA Captain is responsible because the USA captain that has been promoted twice is good enough, and the new DOF can make do with what he has?". If next season Tony Khan is not our DOF and Ream is our best centre back in the squad, then we haven't improved.
For those that want "Tony Khan Out" because he vetoed Slavisa targets, you have to realise that you are really just replacing Tony Khan with Shahid Khan, as Shahid Khan can still veto any DOF targets. Shahid Khan and Mike Ashley are both tight in their other businesses not spending any more than they need to.
If Tony Khan is removed from DOF, then I expect Shahid Khan will require the new DOF to justify every pound spent to him, the DOF will be tightly financially controlled and the Chairman to veto all transfers he considers unnecessary. I have absolutely no doubt, that the Chairman will mistaken veto some necessary transfers too like Mike Ashley.
As for the original topic, bringing in more scouting staff to assist Tony Khan of course that a great idea. Also, we need to bring in an attacking/finishing coach and a corners/penalties/set pieces coach to assist Scott Parker.
Can't help but think this is a positive thing. While it may not be adding an experienced DOF permanently in place it does help to add another voice at the club for how to go forward.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on May 06, 2021, 02:00:33 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Shahid Khan is the ultimate boss. Even if FFC sacks Tony Khan and makes Rafa Benitez the DOF. The DOF would end up requesting to buy a new centre back to replace "the USA Captain (i.e. Tim Ream) in order to gain promotion, so he would have to get Shahid Khan's approval.
Shahid Khan would be left with a decision to approve, the DOF request that we need money to get a better backup center back than "the USA captain". What if SK says veto's the transfer? Don't assume Shahid Khan will say yes to spending money, SK has been tight with his money in his other businesses.
If Shahid Khan says "No, I don't think the new DOFs request to upgrade the USA Captain is responsible because the USA captain that has been promoted twice is good enough, and the new DOF can make do with what he has?". If next season Tony Khan is not our DOF and Ream is our best centre back in the squad, then we haven't improved.
For those that want "Tony Khan Out" because he vetoed Slavisa targets, you have to realise that you are really just replacing Tony Khan with Shahid Khan, as Shahid Khan can still veto any DOF targets. Shahid Khan and Mike Ashley are both tight in their other businesses not spending any more than they need to.
If Tony Khan is removed from DOF, then I expect Shahid Khan will require the new DOF to justify every pound spent to him, the DOF will be tightly financially controlled and the Chairman to veto all transfers he considers unnecessary. I have absolutely no doubt, that the Chairman will mistaken veto some necessary transfers too like Mike Ashley.
As for the original topic, bringing in more scouting staff to assist Tony Khan of course that a great idea. Also, we need to bring in an attacking/finishing coach and a corners/penalties/set pieces coach to assist Scott Parker.
I wouldn't disagree with what you say even though you used to many words to make a simple point.
But...........It's most likely a different DOF will be approaching any potential signings in a better way or even looking at different players altogether!
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
A step, but in the right direction? Too soon to start getting our hopes up. Just look at the Club's form under the Khans and don't hold your breath ...
This is exactly what many of us have been asking for, WSW says he is confident his info is correct. Rustler is normally on the money.
Call it director of scouting, director of recruiting or whatever you like, it doesn't matter. If this new person is going to oversee all of recruiting and is the right person, happy days. It allows TONY to maintain face he can't do the job but can still call himself DOF as he will have the final sign off as any owner would, as I have stated so many times recently he can't possibly be directing the football anyway.
What is missing still however is who is in overall charge of football strategy, planning for the future etc. If they are saying Parker and Jennings working together, I am ok with that for now anyway. I don't think Jennings came from a football background (think he was in teaching) but was in charge of Southampton's academy and now a long time at Fulham so will have become an expert and has of course done a good job. I suspect a hell of a lot of trust is being put in Parker so let's hope he is up to it. This is a huge job for Parker and the new man needs to get the right scouting in place, Talbot is the invisible man and May need replacing just as much as anyone.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on May 06, 2021, 02:00:33 AM
For those that want "Tony Khan Out" because he vetoed Slavisa targets, you have to realise that you are really just replacing Tony Khan with Shahid Khan, as Shahid Khan can still veto any DOF targets. Shahid Khan and Mike Ashley are both tight in their other businesses not spending any more than they need to.
Where is your evidence that Jokanovic ever suggested 'targets' (I assume you mean actual player names) and doesn't the person in charge of recruitment (DoS as s/he'll be known) also have knowledge of spending restrictions etc via Mackintosh? The rubber stamp provided by TK or SK or God is a declaration of faith in the person TK, SK, or God appointed in the first place. Either they trust their appointees or they don't bother with staff and do the whole lot themselves including playing the cornerflags and goalposts on CC matchdays. Trust is a huge element in success and if it isn't respected and supported by all concerned then you shouldn't be surprised when things go badly wrong.
Hope the scouting man at Brentford applies!
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
This bloke used to be good:-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baden-Powell,_1st_Baron_Baden-Powell
Quote from: Steven Ageroad on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Hope the scouting man at Brentford applies!
That's a computer.... similar at Southampton
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
The way business works is that those delegated to do the jobs are given the responsibilities and are held accountable from above. The senior level sign offs are generally within the senior management team, so in Fulhams case, it could be to sign a player for £1-2M it can be signed off by the CEO, if £3-10M it needs the CEO and junior owner, but if it's more than that and potentially breaking the budget it needs the CEO, junior owner and Owner. At the end of the day, senior management approvals are often just a check and balance exercise and should not represent a problem. If our new Director scouting wanted to sign a player for £25M and I was the owner, I would want his and the Head Coach to justify and sell it me before I signed it off. This ensures they really think it through and keeps the money under control. The job of the CEO is to manage FFP and set the budget.
But who is going to be in charge of selecting the Director of Scouting? Tony might just bring in someone as useless as himself or a yes man.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on May 06, 2021, 02:00:33 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Shahid Khan is the ultimate boss. Even if FFC sacks Tony Khan and makes Rafa Benitez the DOF. The DOF would end up requesting to buy a new centre back to replace "the USA Captain (i.e. Tim Ream) in order to gain promotion, so he would have to get Shahid Khan's approval.
Shahid Khan would be left with a decision to approve, the DOF request that we need money to get a better backup center back than "the USA captain". What if SK says veto's the transfer? Don't assume Shahid Khan will say yes to spending money, SK has been tight with his money in his other businesses.
If Shahid Khan says "No, I don't think the new DOFs request to upgrade the USA Captain is responsible because the USA captain that has been promoted twice is good enough, and the new DOF can make do with what he has?". If next season Tony Khan is not our DOF and Ream is our best centre back in the squad, then we haven't improved.
For those that want "Tony Khan Out" because he vetoed Slavisa targets, you have to realise that you are really just replacing Tony Khan with Shahid Khan, as Shahid Khan can still veto any DOF targets. Shahid Khan and Mike Ashley are both tight in their other businesses not spending any more than they need to.
If Tony Khan is removed from DOF, then I expect Shahid Khan will require the new DOF to justify every pound spent to him, the DOF will be tightly financially controlled and the Chairman to veto all transfers he considers unnecessary. I have absolutely no doubt, that the Chairman will mistaken veto some necessary transfers too like Mike Ashley.
As for the original topic, bringing in more scouting staff to assist Tony Khan of course that a great idea. Also, we need to bring in an attacking/finishing coach and a corners/penalties/set pieces coach to assist Scott Parker.
You seem to be muddying the waters unnecessarily.
Football has worked like this for a long time. What significant change do you see ocurring if Tony Kahn's responsibilities were removed and/or changed?
"If Tony Khan is removed from DOF, then I expect Shahid Khan will require the new DOF to justify every pound spent to him"If I'm putting words you mouth than I apologise, but you seem to suggest that currently the DoF (TK) does not have to do this. Why would that be the case?
--
I'm sure it would work how it usually does for 99% of clubs across England and Europe and SK would give a a budget to a DoF and AM and allow them to spend as they see fit. Most chairmen have the good sense to employ people with better knowledge of football and football ops in key roles to help ensure that the money that is invested into the club is spent as effectively as it can be.
There is absolutely zero evidence that Shaid would change his strategy and become involved in approving and vetoing every single signing.
Quote from: FulhamStu on May 06, 2021, 11:29:44 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
The way business works is that those delegated to do the jobs are given the responsibilities and are held accountable from above. The senior level sign offs are generally within the senior management team, so in Fulhams case, it could be to sign a player for £1-2M it can be signed off by the CEO, if £3-10M it needs the CEO and junior owner, but if it's more than that and potentially breaking the budget it needs the CEO, junior owner and Owner. At the end of the day, senior management approvals are often just a check and balance exercise and should not represent a problem. If our new Director scouting wanted to sign a player for £25M and I was the owner, I would want his and the Head Coach to justify and sell it me before I signed it off. This ensures they really think it through and keeps the money under control. The job of the CEO is to manage FFP and set the budget.
Thank you and of course I understand how the business works (except for our CEO who seems to be responsible and accountable for nothing because he should be the boss of the DoF but clearly is not). However what you describe is not the model we have. The DoF is the man that makes the decisions on recruitment. He is only answerable to his dad. so if his dad says you can have £100m then he can spend it on who he wants, everyone else has to report to the DoF in that respect. A new chief scout, if I have understood correctly, will not change that. Tk remains an owner (or has a major interest) of an analytics company as is evidenced in an article posted on here today. I do not have a proiblem with analytics as such, it is a useful tool to assist a seasoned proffesional. But in the hands of an amateur it is a menance as we have observed.
The unfortunate thing about the Fulham business model is that the owner has seen fit to delgate a specialist job to an amateur with no ability in the role and that does not look li changing soon. It is not what he promised when he purchased the club. If Tony was not his father's son, he would not be here, he would surely have been shown the door years ago. A new head of scounting is almost certainly PR stunt to paper of the cracks!
Let's face it neither Shahid Khan or his son know much about association football to be able to rely on their judgement. Even though Tony Khan in his deluded dream whilst polishing his inflated email, might think he does.
So if they wish to sincerely sustain and offer more possible success to Fulham FC, and plan both short term and long term then they have to employ professional qualified football people to carry out the position of D of F and Head of Scouting and Recruitment, and not the current pantomime and circus we have to tolerate with the current incumbent. That needs to take place in some shape or form for at least the sake of the Manager Head Coach. Otherwise I fear we shall continue to tread water and go round in circles.
Quote from: Riversider on May 05, 2021, 10:53:23 PM
The role was previously occupied by Javier Perriera (sp)
Perreira was Assistant Director of Football Operations - slightly different job title.
TK still will have ownership, he just wants someone to go through the data instead it seems.
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 12:52:30 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on May 06, 2021, 11:29:44 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
The way business works is that those delegated to do the jobs are given the responsibilities and are held accountable from above. The senior level sign offs are generally within the senior management team, so in Fulhams case, it could be to sign a player for £1-2M it can be signed off by the CEO, if £3-10M it needs the CEO and junior owner, but if it's more than that and potentially breaking the budget it needs the CEO, junior owner and Owner. At the end of the day, senior management approvals are often just a check and balance exercise and should not represent a problem. If our new Director scouting wanted to sign a player for £25M and I was the owner, I would want his and the Head Coach to justify and sell it me before I signed it off. This ensures they really think it through and keeps the money under control. The job of the CEO is to manage FFP and set the budget.
Thank you and of course I understand how the business works (except for our CEO who seems to be responsible and accountable for nothing because he should be the boss of the DoF but clearly is not). However what you describe is not the model we have. The DoF is the man that makes the decisions on recruitment. He is only answerable to his dad. so if his dad says you can have £100m then he can spend it on who he wants, everyone else has to report to the DoF in that respect. A new chief scout, if I have understood correctly, will not change that. Tk remains an owner (or has a major interest) of an analytics company as is evidenced in an article posted on here today. I do not have a proiblem with analytics as such, it is a useful tool to assist a seasoned proffesional. But in the hands of an amateur it is a menance as we have observed.
The unfortunate thing about the Fulham business model is that the owner has seen fit to delgate a specialist job to an amateur with no ability in the role and that does not look li changing soon. It is not what he promised when he purchased the club. If Tony was not his father's son, he would not be here, he would surely have been shown the door years ago. A new head of scounting is almost certainly PR stunt to paper of the cracks!
What has been posted by Rustler of the Athletic who is pretty reliable is that we are looking for a director of scouting. What has also been posted by someone with a source inside the organisation who is normally 95% on the money is that Tony Khan is to step aside and let the new man take over recruitment. I don't know how true it is, I have only these tweets and posts to go on. I was just pointing out how an owner be it, Shahid or Tony and the finance guy, ( our CEO ) would normally be involved. You can view this however you like, yes it could be a smokescreen or it could be a genuine attempt to do all the things many folks have been crying out for. Time will tell I guess.
Quote from: FulhamStu on May 06, 2021, 02:28:47 PM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 12:52:30 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on May 06, 2021, 11:29:44 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
The way business works is that those delegated to do the jobs are given the responsibilities and are held accountable from above. The senior level sign offs are generally within the senior management team, so in Fulhams case, it could be to sign a player for £1-2M it can be signed off by the CEO, if £3-10M it needs the CEO and junior owner, but if it's more than that and potentially breaking the budget it needs the CEO, junior owner and Owner. At the end of the day, senior management approvals are often just a check and balance exercise and should not represent a problem. If our new Director scouting wanted to sign a player for £25M and I was the owner, I would want his and the Head Coach to justify and sell it me before I signed it off. This ensures they really think it through and keeps the money under control. The job of the CEO is to manage FFP and set the budget.
Thank you and of course I understand how the business works (except for our CEO who seems to be responsible and accountable for nothing because he should be the boss of the DoF but clearly is not). However what you describe is not the model we have. The DoF is the man that makes the decisions on recruitment. He is only answerable to his dad. so if his dad says you can have £100m then he can spend it on who he wants, everyone else has to report to the DoF in that respect. A new chief scout, if I have understood correctly, will not change that. Tk remains an owner (or has a major interest) of an analytics company as is evidenced in an article posted on here today. I do not have a proiblem with analytics as such, it is a useful tool to assist a seasoned proffesional. But in the hands of an amateur it is a menance as we have observed.
The unfortunate thing about the Fulham business model is that the owner has seen fit to delgate a specialist job to an amateur with no ability in the role and that does not look li changing soon. It is not what he promised when he purchased the club. If Tony was not his father's son, he would not be here, he would surely have been shown the door years ago. A new head of scounting is almost certainly PR stunt to paper of the cracks!
What has been posted by Rustler of the Athletic who is pretty reliable is that we are looking for a director of scouting. What has also been posted by someone with a source inside the organisation who is normally 95% on the money is that Tony Khan is to step aside and let the new man take over recruitment. I don't know how true it is, I have only these tweets and posts to go on. I was just pointing out how an owner be it, Shahid or Tony and the finance guy, ( our CEO ) would normally be involved. You can view this however you like, yes it could be a smokescreen or it could be a genuine attempt to do all the things many folks have been crying out for. Time will tell I guess.
Thank you for the additional information. Often there is substance in the rumour and sometimnes not. As you say, time will tell but whatever else we do need a sea change in the way we do things.
Look any good experienced person coming into the club is handy.
Whoever advised the club to allow Kebano and AK47 and StefJo to go out on loan needs someone grown up to ask for advice, cos it has cost us.
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 12:52:30 PM
Quote from: FulhamStu on May 06, 2021, 11:29:44 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 06, 2021, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: The Old Count on May 06, 2021, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on May 05, 2021, 10:33:57 PM
it is only a step in the right direction if he does not have the DoF as his boss
Whether TK's title is DOF or tea lady is irrelevant. He's still everyone's boss and his boss is his old man.
If TK brings someone in who can do the job, even if not in title, then that can only be a positive step.
Ok I will rephrase.
The man in charge of recruitment will not be changing and his methodology will not be changing so whilst a new chief scout may be useful, it will mean nothing if the man in charge does not have a sea change in attitude or is replaced.
The way this should work is the owner sets the budget and it is up to his team to identify the players they want within that constraint, so in the end the owner remains the key player. But the objection to the current DoF is he is in charge of selecting the players. I know they say there is a two box system but in the end TK is the man with the power. A new scout may bring different players to the the DoF's attention but really there is not a change being siuggested to the basic methodology. If it works I will be happy but it is obvious to anyone that runs a business what needs to be done.
The way business works is that those delegated to do the jobs are given the responsibilities and are held accountable from above. The senior level sign offs are generally within the senior management team, so in Fulhams case, it could be to sign a player for £1-2M it can be signed off by the CEO, if £3-10M it needs the CEO and junior owner, but if it's more than that and potentially breaking the budget it needs the CEO, junior owner and Owner. At the end of the day, senior management approvals are often just a check and balance exercise and should not represent a problem. If our new Director scouting wanted to sign a player for £25M and I was the owner, I would want his and the Head Coach to justify and sell it me before I signed it off. This ensures they really think it through and keeps the money under control. The job of the CEO is to manage FFP and set the budget.
Thank you and of course I understand how the business works (except for our CEO who seems to be responsible and accountable for nothing because he should be the boss of the DoF but clearly is not). However what you describe is not the model we have. The DoF is the man that makes the decisions on recruitment. He is only answerable to his dad. so if his dad says you can have £100m then he can spend it on who he wants, everyone else has to report to the DoF in that respect. A new chief scout, if I have understood correctly, will not change that. Tk remains an owner (or has a major interest) of an analytics company as is evidenced in an article posted on here today. I do not have a proiblem with analytics as such, it is a useful tool to assist a seasoned proffesional. But in the hands of an amateur it is a menance as we have observed.
The unfortunate thing about the Fulham business model is that the owner has seen fit to delgate a specialist job to an amateur with no ability in the role and that does not look li changing soon. It is not what he promised when he purchased the club. If Tony was not his father's son, he would not be here, he would surely have been shown the door years ago. A new head of scounting is almost certainly PR stunt to paper of the cracks!
That is a very interesting point, Alistair Mackintosh has a really strange role. His employee (DoF) is also his boss (proxy for the owner of the club). But i'm sure that his 1.5m salary makes up for any bad feeling he has about that...