Arbeloa

[Andrew]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

[sarnian]

Andrew, whoever we take on is a risk and you, I and everyone else will have to wait and see how it pans out.

Agree he is not very experienced but look what happened last season with experienced managers. Everyone said Franks was a good manager and look what happened to him at Spurs. Slot won the Premier League two years ago but last season saw him sacked. Maresca was sacked by Chelsea but is likely to take the Man City job.

Personally whoever we appoint I will support and give a fair chance without prejudice.

[roberto w6]

I know nothing about him but if Real Madrid put him in charge, I doubt he will be a total fool.

Also, I'd hope that he has created a good network and will be able to attract some exciting names (including hopefully some fringe Real players on loan etc). With all due respect, I doubt that would have happened with McKenna, Rosenior and some of the other names mentioned

It sounds like his signing is going to happen but who knows. Has anyone seen where he reportedly is at the moment? If watching the World Cup and if he is coming to us, I hope some tapping up of potential recruits is going on. At least he will be a "face" out there having managed Real, albeit for a short time

[demeant0r]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

[Andrew]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

I asked myself the same question and cannot come up with a balanced answer because I have such affection for him from his playing days. I think he is also a risk but he does know the place however I am not sure that he did that well as a stand alone manager (from memory) and think he maybe a better number two but I do not think that option is on the table.

[Lovely park walk]

For the experts saying he has not managed at a top level before, neither had Guardiola when he got the Barca job. Arbeloa has also played 7 years in this league so understands the nature of it well.

[Andrew]

Andrew, whoever we take on is a risk and you, I and everyone else will have to wait and see how it pans out.

Agree he is not very experienced but look what happened last season with experienced managers. Everyone said Franks was a good manager and look what happened to him at Spurs. Slot won the Premier League two years ago but last season saw him sacked. Maresca was sacked by Chelsea but is likely to take the Man City job.

Personally whoever we appoint I will support and give a fair chance without prejudice.

I will absolutely support whoever we get and hope their time with us is a brilliant success. I agree experience doesn't guarantee success. 

Just for the record when Frank went to spurs I thought it an error for both parties based on no more than my instinct. Slot, I have no opinion because the two seasons were so different and had special circumstances. Maresca IMO could go on to be brilliant in a more stable environment where he is allowed to get on and do his job.

But I will give the new manager a proper chance and be very supportive. All I really hope is we can play at a higher tempo and try to get forward quicker than we have in the last season or so.

[blingo]

If we sign him i can see us qualifying for Europe next season.

[hovewhite]

Just hope the club is taking him on not building hopes up to bring in another coach completely.

[perry geyton]

If we sign him i can see us qualifying for Europe next season.

Knowing you think that makes me feel so much better about it now Bongo, now I will sleep tonight

[v]

Chelsea appointed Rosenior (a flop) and Brentford appointed their set-piece coach (just missing out on Europe)
Horses for Courses.

From what I've heard Arbeloa has a higher profile than either.

[Cambridge Away]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

I asked myself the same question and cannot come up with a balanced answer because I have such affection for him from his playing days. I think he is also a risk but he does know the place however I am not sure that he did that well as a stand alone manager (from memory) and think he maybe a better number two but I do not think that option is on the table.

Boa Morte will never be appointed because he is not management material at the level we are talking. He's a legend as an ex player and did well as an assistant and that's it. I am not sure why people have such opinions with little research

[Fulham Tup North]

Why haven't we gone for Neil Warnock, he only lives in Cornwall  and it will save a lot of fannying around.
We could have done it weeks ago, and he would have been charming a pile of new players through the gates at Motspur Park by now.

Caretaker manager of Torquay is about the summit of his managerial capabilities.

What did you expect? Wildebeests crossing the Serengeti?

"Sydney opera House - Hanging gardens of Babylon perhaps"?? Tremendous 🤣🤣👍

[demeant0r]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

I asked myself the same question and cannot come up with a balanced answer because I have such affection for him from his playing days. I think he is also a risk but he does know the place however I am not sure that he did that well as a stand alone manager (from memory) and think he maybe a better number two but I do not think that option is on the table.

Boa Morte will never be appointed because he is not management material at the level we are talking. He's a legend as an ex player and did well as an assistant and that's it. I am not sure why people have such opinions with little research

I'm not sure you can have such an opinion when he's only ever had one management role and not had one in a league club. Perhaps he should start at a lower league club but to have such a definitive opinion without one data point is a bit ignorant.

[bill dando]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

I asked myself the same question and cannot come up with a balanced answer because I have such affection for him from his playing days. I think he is also a risk but he does know the place however I am not sure that he did that well as a stand alone manager (from memory) and think he maybe a better number two but I do not think that option is on the table.

Boa Morte will never be appointed because he is not management material at the level we are talking. He's a legend as an ex player and did well as an assistant and that's it. I am not sure why people have such opinions with little research

I'm not sure you can have such an opinion when he's only ever had one management role and not had one in a league club. Perhaps he should start at a lower league club but to have such a definitive opinion without one data point is a bit ignorant.

Boa Morte is a good omen that cannot be ignored !

[General]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Hi Andrews, sorry to be controversial (I appreciate some may see that as my default - though my aim is to stifle debate in a healthy way at most), but you lost me when citing Adams and Macdonald. If it were that straightforward then tonnes of managers would succeed in the PL as many have succeeded in lower leagues.


The general point of Arbeloa being a high risk option I agree with, but there are some unknowns

He played in England under Benitez and so has some idea of what makes a player succeed in the PL, and what tactics are required. What he learns from those experiences don't necessarily mean he's learning the right things though, so a lot will depend on how he learns and also tests what he learns from managers who have learned, of which he's had a few very good managers.

If rumours are true, Mourinho wanted him to stay on as staff, so his time at real wasn't a complete bust. If that's not true then he did fundamentally fail by Real's standards as was chucked from the job after five months (compared to former player Zidane), and lots of rumours of not managing star players.


Reputation matters with star players, whether or not it should is a different matter.

Where it could be different is the expectations, realistically he may build future stars with us, but he won't have to manage as big egos with us.. his technique semi reminds me of magath in the expectations he has on players, and similarly like Parker in the sense that whilst some real supporters are fans; it doesn't come across as if he has a plan b (Parker!)

So, I err on the side of not wanting to take the risk of a fundamentally untried and tested manager. I feel Marco did so well for us and could've done a bit better but was hand tied by TK in my opinion.

Will Arbeloa be worse? Who knows.

Gut says yes, head says could go either way..

I wish we didn't have to choose.

My preference would still be pochettino.. but if Arbeloa turns out well then I'll eat my words

[Cambridge Away]

With all due respect, you are joking aren't you.
He has not managed a senior team except real where he failed, using the talent he had at his disposal as the benchmark. He is moving to new country to a team he knows nothing about.
Of course it's objective based on facts based on lack of experience and failing with the best players.
If you have a different opinion and think this is a brilliant unexpected choice that's up to you.

If it was objective, he couldn't have a different opinion...

This, to me, is an instance of an objective opinion: Andrew has used facts to form an opinion but this doesn't necessarily make his opinion a fact.

Andrew has used the fact Arbeloa has little senior managerial experience, the fact he will be coaching in the P.L. for the first time, the fact he likely knows little about our squad, and the fact he failed (was sacked) by Real Madrid to form the opinion it would be a crazy appointment. But it is just that: an opinion.

Firstly, Arbeloa may have failed to achieve the results to satisfy Real Madrid's President - hence his sacking - but this isn't the same as saying he failed per se. Arbeloa won 18 out of his 28 games in charge of Real Madrid. I think it is entirely a matter of opinion as to whether this represents 'failure' - particularly so when put in the context of the player unrest that had precipitated Xabi Alonso's departure mid-way through last season.

Secondly, I think it highly debatable how much of a drawback Arbeloa's lack of knowledge of the Club and its players will be. How many weeks and how many training sessions will he require to assess the talent at his disposal, to assess the areas of the squad he wants to improve, and to implement his ideas? And how certain is it that another manager would make better first-hand assessments and implement sounder ideas on the basis of having already seen us play a number of times? Are these not questions to which it is exceptionally difficult - impossible, even - to determine a factual answer?

To my mind, therefore, Andrew's is an opinion that carries somewhat limited merit.

Arthur,
Thank you for a sensible answer and thank you for understanding what I actually said. The fact you do not agree with my opinion is another matter and we are all entitled to our own view.

What i said was that I consider this man to be a high risk option for the reasons I stated. Nobody has actually said he is a good choice or is a low risk option.

I am interested to learn that you think having no experience of managing in the UK let alone the Premiership or indeed been a manager anywhere for any reasonable length of time, and the only job he has had, he was sacked from, is 'of little merit.'  But that is your opinion and we shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.

At some point some PL clubs have to take the plunge to hire an up-and-coming manager with no experience in the league otherwise we will get this situation where there's only 30-40 managers worldwide that have managed in the PL and are not dinosaur-aged. Obviously, Arbeloa is going to be a risk but he seemingly plays a similar formation and tactics to Marco so the risk is mitigated somewhat.

All you say is very true and I thought MacDonald and Adams were brilliant examples of giving an untried person a chance (OK not the prem but the same principle holds, in some ways the lower divisions are harder because talent and resources are more limited).  Everything is a gamble when you appoint a new person and even an experienced man is no guarantee.

Adams and MacDonald already knew the club very well, and even Brentford's manager Knew the system over there and that seems to be working well but Arbeloa's background seems to me to be so different to what he will be confronted with at Fulham, it will be quite a culture shock. I think that is part of what  makes him a higher risk option. But if he comes in, hits the ground running and we sparkle (and I have read interesting things on a Reddit forum, explaining his philosophy and why they think he will do well and I am certainly encouraged by that) brilliant for all of us.   

Do you think Boa Morte would be a higher risk than Arbeloa? Some seem to think LBM is quite high risk because he's not had much managerial experience but he's had experience as the assistant as well as experience playing in the Prem with us. I think LBM would be a lower risk, given he's worked with Marco and should know the tactics and formations as well as most of the current squad pretty well.

I asked myself the same question and cannot come up with a balanced answer because I have such affection for him from his playing days. I think he is also a risk but he does know the place however I am not sure that he did that well as a stand alone manager (from memory) and think he maybe a better number two but I do not think that option is on the table.

Boa Morte will never be appointed because he is not management material at the level we are talking. He's a legend as an ex player and did well as an assistant and that's it. I am not sure why people have such opinions with little research

I'm not sure you can have such an opinion when he's only ever had one management role and not had one in a league club. Perhaps he should start at a lower league club but to have such a definitive opinion without one data point is a bit ignorant.

You're the ignoramus who romantacises over our ex players becoming managers despite no "data points". Boa Morte isn't even a Championship Manager. It's just something some Fulham fans like to talk about once in a while. And you got caught up in it apparently. Feel free to carry on

[love4ffc]

Remember, opinions are simply opinions. You can discuss them or disregard them, but don't dismiss them disrespectfully.