Alistair Mackintosh

[Jack Fulham]

Wouldn't blame Mackintosh for Mitroglou. Only the chairman would sanction a move with a fee that big and considering the managerial changes we were having at the time, it was probably a chairman signing.

A Chairman  has the money but he clearly knows nothing about football and would have given over responsibility to Mackintosh. Kahn made a statement to that effect when Rene was sacked.

Agreed, Khan's not scouting and signing, he only said "yes" to the logic in the move and to release the funds for the move. I highly doubt he initiated the signing of Mitro

Word is that Khan's son has become heavily involved and Mitroglou was his idea.

Word from whom? What's Khan's son's name anyhow?

From someone I know who is close to the club. His name is Tony Khan.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

Why would an owner who has paid £200m for a club or a manager/head coach would allow an accountant to make footballing decisions about buying and selling players?

We didn't hear fanciful speculation like this when Al-Fayed was the owner and see no reason why the CEO's job description would have changed.

[HatterDon]

Why would an owner who has paid £200m for a club or a manager/head coach would allow an accountant to make footballing decisions about buying and selling players?

We didn't hear fanciful speculation like this when Al-Fayed was the owner and see no reason why the CEO's job description would have changed.

Well, during the first two seasons of Martin Jol, we heard that Jol recruited the players who succeeded and the board recruited the ones who didn't. Prior to that, we heard that the board deserved credit for Dembele's signing and NOT Hughes [even though Hughes had been after him for a while], and earlier than that, we heard that the board had forced Eddie Johnson's signing on Roy.

So, yeah, since all of those thing happened while MAF was the owner, I think we've heard "fanciful speculation" like this on this very forum under his leadership -- and for quite a while. It doesn't mean that any of it is true, of course, but we certainly did hear it.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

Why would an owner who has paid £200m for a club or a manager/head coach would allow an accountant to make footballing decisions about buying and selling players?

We didn't hear fanciful speculation like this when Al-Fayed was the owner and see no reason why the CEO's job description would have changed.

Well, during the first two seasons of Martin Jol, we heard that Jol recruited the players who succeeded and the board recruited the ones who didn't. Prior to that, we heard that the board deserved credit for Dembele's signing and NOT Hughes [even though Hughes had been after him for a while], and earlier than that, we heard that the board had forced Eddie Johnson's signing on Roy.

So, yeah, since all of those thing happened while MAF was the owner, I think we've heard "fanciful speculation" like this on this very forum under his leadership -- and for quite a while. It doesn't mean that any of it is true, of course, but we certainly did hear it.

I mean `fanciful speculation about Alistair Mackintosh' as that is the theme of the thread.

Message boards are full of fanciful speculation about who did what and who is to blame behind the scenes almost none of which has any basis in reality.

[TonyGilroy]

I really doubt that Mackintosh is making football decisions.

Under MAF I assume that he was the implementer of policy made by MAF who had trusted advisers - some on the board others not. A massive amount of knowhow was lost when MAF left.

Here's how I think things panned out this season based largely on choosing to believe what we're being told.

1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business.

2. Muelensteen came in because Jol wanted his help.

3. By the West Ham game Jol's position was untenable - he had to go. No supporter wanted him to stay. Easy decision.

4. There was  sign of improvement. No decision was made to make Rene manager but it seemed like he might make a go of it. He asked for Wilkins and Curbishly and got them.

5. The transfer window. We'll never know who our primary targets were and who chose them but as is usual you get who you can in the last few days and due diligence goes out the window.

6. After Sunderland, Swansea and Sheffield United desperation and anger sets in. There's a demand for an experienced man who's been there and done it. That feels to me like an angry demand from the owner.

This season has been an absolute disaster and had MAF been in charge I doubt it would have happened because as soon as he lost confidence in Jol a top quality replacement would have been sourced using MAF's network of contacts.

As it is I doubt that Mackintosh has been the source of our problems or had the authority to salvage the situation.

[RaySmith]

I think your appraisal is  pretty accurate Tony.

AM is only an employee -  he doesn't have any money to buy players, etc.

He has had two different employers in a short space of time, and has had to carry out their instructions, while the club suddenly began to, unexpectedly, after seeming to have gained mid table stability, began to implode on the pitch, and drop like a stone towards relegation.

Obviously, Khan wasn't expecting this when he bought the club, and is now, understandably, desperate to protect  his investment - and he is the only person who can finance the buying of players, sack or employ managers.

But, somehow AM has become the scapegoat for everything, when no one knows the  full story.

[Baszab]

If people don't know the full story on AM, then why is he being defended ?
The state of FFC is pathetic and the management has been pathetic since AF left
Any company in the business world with performances like FFC would have removed the directors in power long ago - that is assuming if the owners/shareholders knew what they were doing - which is a double problem really !

[TonyGilroy]

If people don't know the full story on AM, then why is he being defended ?

Or attacked?

[MJG]

I really doubt that Mackintosh is making football decisions.

Under MAF I assume that he was the implementer of policy made by MAF who had trusted advisers - some on the board others not. A massive amount of knowhow was lost when MAF left.

Here's how I think things panned out this season based largely on choosing to believe what we're being told.

1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business.

2. Muelensteen came in because Jol wanted his help.

3. By the West Ham game Jol's position was untenable - he had to go. No supporter wanted him to stay. Easy decision.

4. There was  sign of improvement. No decision was made to make Rene manager but it seemed like he might make a go of it. He asked for Wilkins and Curbishly and got them.

5. The transfer window. We'll never know who our primary targets were and who chose them but as is usual you get who you can in the last few days and due diligence goes out the window.

6. After Sunderland, Swansea and Sheffield United desperation and anger sets in. There's a demand for an experienced man who's been there and done it. That feels to me like an angry demand from the owner.

This season has been an absolute disaster and had MAF been in charge I doubt it would have happened because as soon as he lost confidence in Jol a top quality replacement would have been sourced using MAF's network of contacts.

As it is I doubt that Mackintosh has been the source of our problems or had the authority to salvage the situation.

But you may have to concede that Magath is Ally Mac's choice. It was on his recommendation that he became manager after the CEO had dealings with him in the past. He's known him for a while.

[TonyGilroy]

He may well be.

I'm neither defending or attacking Mackintosh - just trying to understand how things are.

I have bad feelings about Magath - I suspect that he's a really bad choice and we'll be glad to see the back of him. I really hope to be wrong about that though.

[Lighthouse]

If Rene didn't decide on the players to bring in except the United players. And according to Khan our MD was to be congratulated for bringing in the players. Who are we supposed to think makes the decisions?

Clearly our MD has some power.

[TonyGilroy]

If Rene didn't decide on the players to bring in except the United players. And according to Khan our MD was to be congratulated for bringing in the players. Who are we supposed to think makes the decisions?

Clearly our MD has some power.

It can only be speculation.

To me "bringing in the players" means closing the deal - it doesn't mean picking the targets.

Only Khan, I would think, can sanction serious expenditure. I have no idea who said "let's get Misterglu" and failed to ask about his fitness.

[mikeyffc28]

To be fair to AM, he isn't stood on the pitch giving what appears 'can't be bothered' performances every week. Not alot he can do about players not performing except action during the transfer window - and he/the club have acted in the January window to bring in some fresh faces and also get rid of a few.  My only negative feeling towards him is that Jol should have been gone alot sooner.

[Forever Fulham]

Don't blame me; don't blame thee; blame the man behind the tree.  Not my fault!  Not my fault either!  It's him.  Who?  Him.  No, it isn't.  How do you know?  How do you not know?  You're an idiot.  No, you're an idiot.  I tell you it's his fault. 

[ToodlesMcToot]

I really doubt that Mackintosh is making football decisions.

Under MAF I assume that he was the implementer of policy made by MAF who had trusted advisers - some on the board others not. A massive amount of knowhow was lost when MAF left.

Here's how I think things panned out this season based largely on choosing to believe what we're being told.

1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business.

2. Muelensteen came in because Jol wanted his help.

3. By the West Ham game Jol's position was untenable - he had to go. No supporter wanted him to stay. Easy decision.

4. There was  sign of improvement. No decision was made to make Rene manager but it seemed like he might make a go of it. He asked for Wilkins and Curbishly and got them.

5. The transfer window. We'll never know who our primary targets were and who chose them but as is usual you get who you can in the last few days and due diligence goes out the window.

6. After Sunderland, Swansea and Sheffield United desperation and anger sets in. There's a demand for an experienced man who's been there and done it. That feels to me like an angry demand from the owner.

This season has been an absolute disaster and had MAF been in charge I doubt it would have happened because as soon as he lost confidence in Jol a top quality replacement would have been sourced using MAF's network of contacts.

As it is I doubt that Mackintosh has been the source of our problems or had the authority to salvage the situation.

I think 1. is a bit off. Mr Khan said that both AM and Jol had a plan for this season and he was referring to transfer business as he was asked about making transfer funds available in the summer. That plan has failed miserably. If AM was credited for it in the beginning, it should be fine crediting him with it now.

I just don't see how some consider him above scrutiny in this disaster of a season. He's the CEO. He's as responsible as anyone for the end product which is the play on the field.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

I really doubt that Mackintosh is making football decisions.

Under MAF I assume that he was the implementer of policy made by MAF who had trusted advisers - some on the board others not. A massive amount of knowhow was lost when MAF left.

Here's how I think things panned out this season based largely on choosing to believe what we're being told.

1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business.

2. Muelensteen came in because Jol wanted his help.

3. By the West Ham game Jol's position was untenable - he had to go. No supporter wanted him to stay. Easy decision.

4. There was  sign of improvement. No decision was made to make Rene manager but it seemed like he might make a go of it. He asked for Wilkins and Curbishly and got them.

5. The transfer window. We'll never know who our primary targets were and who chose them but as is usual you get who you can in the last few days and due diligence goes out the window.

6. After Sunderland, Swansea and Sheffield United desperation and anger sets in. There's a demand for an experienced man who's been there and done it. That feels to me like an angry demand from the owner.

This season has been an absolute disaster and had MAF been in charge I doubt it would have happened because as soon as he lost confidence in Jol a top quality replacement would have been sourced using MAF's network of contacts.

As it is I doubt that Mackintosh has been the source of our problems or had the authority to salvage the situation.

I think 1. is a bit off. Mr Khan said that both AM and Jol had a plan for this season and he was referring to transfer business as he was asked about making transfer funds available in the summer. That plan has failed miserably. If AM was credited for it in the beginning, it should be fine crediting him with it now.

I just don't see how some consider him above scrutiny in this disaster of a season. He's the CEO. He's as responsible as anyone for the end product which is the play on the field.

AM and Jol would have a plan whether Khan had given them a budget of £100m or £1m.

The chain of responsibility is owner for setting the budget, the manager for setting the transfer targets and the CEO for doing the deals.

If the owner sets an insufficient budget and/or the manager selects poor targets but the CEO does the planned deals then how is it fair to blame the CEO?

"He's the CEO. He's as responsible as anyone for the end product which is the play on the field."

This is just nonsense. Football is not like a normal business. The CEO is not responsible for the main product for which he is subordinate to the manager. And even the budget will be set by the owner rather than proposed by the CEO.

[Forever Fulham]

Do you think it is as 'top down' as you make it out to be, Apprentice?  By that, I mean, the owner sees the team flailing and talks to his finance guy and his managerial staff, yes?  They provide input.  "We need a Left Back, a striker, a creative attacking mid, and a quicker more powerful (and younger holding mid), sir."   "Well, um, what would that cost me?  Can you give me a guesstimate as to what it would cost to get quality players for all of those holes you've identified?"  Isn't that where the manager and the AM speak up and suggest a total cost figure?  And then the owner says yes, no, or "I'll approve XX amount of money; find a way to make it work."   So, my point is to suggest that funding must be a collaborative effort, with advice on how much it will cost to get what they perceive they need coming from AM and the manager du jour.  I don't know if it is fair to suggest the owner sets the budget by himself.  Is he working in a vacuum or with substantial advice and input from his people when authorizing how much to spend?

[Moussa Dembele the 3rd]

"1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business."

There is no way in hell Jol wanted to spend just 4 million on a 33 year old CM and two questionable loan signings.  If you think that was Jol's plan for his summer transfer business then I would disagree. He wanted McCarthy but was told 15 mill was too much, he wanted Chantome but 10-12 mill was too much, he wanted Huddlestone but 6 mill was too much.  I would like to know who was telling Jol he could only spend 4 million. Was it Macintosh or was it Khan. In retrospect it would have made a lot more sense to spend the 12-15 million on a world class CM this past summer than paying off three sets of managerial appointments and 12 million on a panic buy crocked Greek striker. Someone has royally goofed and I do not think it's fair to blame Jol for our really horrendous transfer dealings these past few months.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

Do you think it is as 'top down' as you make it out to be, Apprentice?  By that, I mean, the owner sees the team flailing and talks to his finance guy and his managerial staff, yes?  They provide input.  "We need a Left Back, a striker, a creative attacking mid, and a quicker more powerful (and younger holding mid), sir."   "Well, um, what would that cost me?  Can you give me a guesstimate as to what it would cost to get quality players for all of those holes you've identified?"  Isn't that where the manager and the AM speak up and suggest a total cost figure?  And then the owner says yes, no, or "I'll approve XX amount of money; find a way to make it work."   So, my point is to suggest that funding must be a collaborative effort, with advice on how much it will cost to get what they perceive they need coming from AM and the manager du jour.  I don't know if it is fair to suggest the owner sets the budget by himself.  Is he working in a vacuum or with substantial advice and input from his people when authorizing how much to spend?

I would certainly hope any leader/owner would take advice from those senior figures around him but ultimately it will be the owner's decision and responsibility. We have no knowledge of what the manager's or AM's advice may have been. This applies to Al-Fayed as well as Khan and to all our managers, not just to the current set up.

What is very strange is that some posters seem to think that AM has ultimate responsibility for matters like Ruiz's failure in the PL or signing Mitroglu when he had an injury or really anything to do with the footballing side of the club.

[Apprentice to the Maestro]

"1. There was an assumption that Jol could be trusted and our summer transfer business was pretty good. A few vocal exceptions on here but that's how most of us saw it I think. Khan could spend a year learning the business."

There is no way in hell Jol wanted to spend just 4 million on a 33 year old CM and two questionable loan signings.  If you think that was Jol's plan for his summer transfer business then I would disagree. He wanted McCarthy but was told 15 mill was too much, he wanted Chantome but 10-12 mill was too much, he wanted Huddlestone but 6 mill was too much.  I would like to know who was telling Jol he could only spend 4 million. Was it Macintosh or was it Khan. In retrospect it would have made a lot more sense to spend the 12-15 million on a world class CM this past summer than paying off three sets of managerial appointments and 12 million on a panic buy crocked Greek striker. Someone has royally goofed and I do not think it's fair to blame Jol for our really horrendous transfer dealings these past few months.

I think that you are right that Jol would have wanted one of these better players we were linked with especially after losing Dembele and with Diarra injured.

My point here again would be if you were the manager and felt you needed more funds to rebuild the team would you just accept the CEO saying there isn't enough money in the bank? No, you would go to the owner and ask him for the funds. Clearly, as most commented at the end of the summer transfer window, only limited funds were made available.