Ali Mac.... Has to go

[TonyGilroy]

The disconnect for me is the listing of all that's gone wrong and pointing the gun exclusively at AM's head when we simply don't know who decided what and, even more significantly, how logical those decisions seemed to be at the time they were made.

The insulting thing is assuming that Khan (who has created a massive fortune for himself) is an innocent abroad unable to make decisions for himself.

[Forever Fulham]

An innocent abroad?  No,that's unwarranted.  Don't think anyone intimated that.  Rather, he's a businessman who inherited in-place management and didn't rush in with unilateral changes to make his stamp on the situation.  It appears he gave them time to carry on, to listen and abide by their advice and counsel.  To not presume to know more than the presumed authorities with time in grade.  And they let him down.

[TonyGilroy]

If Khan thinks that he'll no doubt sack the guilty parties.

[Forever Fulham]

I realize I'm presuming certain facts re: Khan's lack of hands-on involvement in decision-making.  I could be dead wrong.  I think AM has been a good servant of the club under MAF, and I wouldn't want him given the boot if he didn't deserve it for actions or inaction so far this season.  I think reporting to MAF was probably no walk in the park.  But things went way wrong this year, and there has to be a proper reckoning.

[MasterHaynes]

I do not understand all this belly - aching about Costas and the blame game. So what ................ the club forked out £12M  for a player in  2014 who has not shown form ( ..well hasn't shown !) 16 weeks later and the majority want to sack the best CEO in the Premiership

Thirteen years ago  we paid £11.5  for a right dronga and I do not remember anyone blaming   Adam Crozier  (I think it was him )

Anyway

I think you should book your tickets for Chelsea next Monday and admire something we know for definate Alistair Mackintosh  IS responsible for 

difference is this time were going down and the 12 mil could have either been spent on gifts for the fans for all the shizz we had to watch this season, or another striker that probably could have mustered a game and who knows mustered some more points for us!

We could have bought Shane Long for a quarter of that and he wouldn't have been there to pop up and grab that equaliser or help Hull with goals and assists to gain points since his signing in january.

[TonyGilroy]

  But things went way wrong this year, and there has to be a proper reckoning.

Even if lessons have been learned?

[Logicalman]

  But things went way wrong this year, and there has to be a proper reckoning.

Even if lessons have been learned?

I think that depends on both how long it took to learn them and was the error repeated prior to the learning process having some success.  Football is still a fast process especially when it comes to the windows and any hesitation can spell disaster on most occasions.

[Arthur]

Um not really. If somebody admits to purposely ignoring what is written and then has to put the words 'mockery' in their post to prove it, my ignoring them and telling them so seems polite. Our debate on another thread on another day and you bring it up here just sounds petty. Petty and precious.

Bluntly-put: stop pretending.

Reading the exchange between AttM and you, it can be seen that yours is the point of view which is being steadily eroded. All the fuss about the use of the word 'mockery' is simply an attempt to throw up a smokescreen to hide this. AttM is not intending to be funny; his piece fails so obviously that it is clearly a parody of what a joke should be. Herein lies the message.

In excusing yourself from further participation in the debate on the grounds of derision, there is - as we both know - an inherent irony. (That it pertains to another thread, a couple of days earlier, matters not in the least.) To quote you for a second time: I think you'll find that (in bringing it to your attention) I am doing nothing other than giving as good as I get.

[the nutflush]

What gets me most upset is the lack of communication to supporters from the top.  Both Khan and AM have done some great Marcel Marceau impersonations this season.

[NogoodBoyo]

Here are a few questions you might wish to consider:
1.   In any operation what does the CEO do?  He/she hires and fires the senior operational managers who are responsible for the company's revenues, cost centres, financial jurisprudence and position in its chosen field
2.   He/she is responsible for the success or failure of his appointees
3.   He/she is the person who reports into the Board acting as a conduit to the operational managers in passing the Board's  financial and strategic plans down through the ranks so that everybody from the top to the bottom buys into the company's culture and objectives
4.   He/she is responsible for creating and/or maintaining the Company's brand.  What does the company stand for?  How does it want to be perceived in its marketplace (=brand equity)?  How does it take its brand equity and profit from it?
As far as Fulham FC is concerned, reading through all the press releases, club statements and resulting press articles, all senior managers over the last couple of years including Hughes, Jol, Meulensteen, Curbishley , Wilkins and Magath were hired or approved by Macintosh.
After the embarrassment of having Hughes stand up to the club's BS about transfer funds, who was the CEO who took that bad decision and pursued another – Martin Jol? 
Who was the CEO who failed to see the irreparable damage caused by Jol's terrible man management skills (with his toxic mixture of un-droppable duds and cast-asides all praised or damned in unequal measure in the press) and inexplicable tactical disasters? 
Who was the CEO responsible and accountable for running the club through five different managers (or quasi-managers) in just three years as it was being laid to waste through an over-reliance on ageing legs, free transfers, low wages and a naïve belief in the strength of untried, untested youth?
Who was the CEO who hired Meuelensteen to be Fulham's Head Coach in name but manager in nature? 
Who was the CEO who failed to recognize the negative impact that would have on the team's morale and on the club staff who could see that Meulensteen did not have the full confidence of the man who had hired him?
Who was the CEO who allowed two failed coaches/managers (the aforementioned Wilkishley)to be hired in what was viewed (correctly in my book) as a charade of an inoperable management system that only served to confuse, bewilder and demoralise the club's team and staff even further?
Who was the CEO who panicked just a couple of months later in hiring Felix Magath, a manager who appeared to be unemployable in Germany without first having had the good grace to sort his hired man Melensteen's position within the organisation, let alone the ridiculously unemployable Curbkins?   
Who has been the CEO throughout this epistle of disasters that has beset the club in the last three years since Hughes stood up to weak management and/or lack of owner interest in the long-term future of the club? 
Who was the CEO who introduced Huw Jennings and the Academy set-up?  Well, that man deserves some praise, but that is not good enough.  That is just one part of a very flawed operation for which the CEO has responsibility.  If he is responsible, he must be held accountable. 
By all measures except for the success of the Academy he has failed the club and failed it badly.  He needs to be fired - sooner rather than later.
And for all those who ask for reasons, just look at the bloody league table!  The buck stops at the top and we're at or near rock bottom.
Nogood "CEO is responsible and accountable, isit" Boyo 

[the nutflush]

Here are a few questions you might wish to consider:
1.   In any operation what does the CEO do?  He/she hires and fires the senior operational managers who are responsible for the company’s revenues, cost centres, financial jurisprudence and position in its chosen field
2.   He/she is responsible for the success or failure of his appointees
3.   He/she is the person who reports into the Board acting as a conduit to the operational managers in passing the Board’s  financial and strategic plans down through the ranks so that everybody from the top to the bottom buys into the company’s culture and objectives
4.   He/she is responsible for creating and/or maintaining the Company’s brand.  What does the company stand for?  How does it want to be perceived in its marketplace (=brand equity)?  How does it take its brand equity and profit from it?
As far as Fulham FC is concerned, reading through all the press releases, club statements and resulting press articles, all senior managers over the last couple of years including Hughes, Jol, Meulensteen, Curbishley , Wilkins and Magath were hired or approved by Macintosh.
After the embarrassment of having Hughes stand up to the club’s BS about transfer funds, who was the CEO who took that bad decision and pursued another – Martin Jol? 
Who was the CEO who failed to see the irreparable damage caused by Jol’s terrible man management skills (with his toxic mixture of un-droppable duds and cast-asides all praised or damned in unequal measure in the press) and inexplicable tactical disasters? 
Who was the CEO responsible and accountable for running the club through five different managers (or quasi-managers) in just three years as it was being laid to waste through an over-reliance on ageing legs, free transfers, low wages and a naïve belief in the strength of untried, untested youth?
Who was the CEO who hired Meuelensteen to be Fulham’s Head Coach in name but manager in nature? 
Who was the CEO who failed to recognize the negative impact that would have on the team’s morale and on the club staff who could see that Meulensteen did not have the full confidence of the man who had hired him?
Who was the CEO who allowed two failed coaches/managers (the aforementioned Wilkishley)to be hired in what was viewed (correctly in my book) as a charade of an inoperable management system that only served to confuse, bewilder and demoralise the club’s team and staff even further?
Who was the CEO who panicked just a couple of months later in hiring Felix Magath, a manager who appeared to be unemployable in Germany without first having had the good grace to sort his hired man Melensteen’s position within the organisation, let alone the ridiculously unemployable Curbkins?   
Who has been the CEO throughout this epistle of disasters that has beset the club in the last three years since Hughes stood up to weak management and/or lack of owner interest in the long-term future of the club? 
Who was the CEO who introduced Huw Jennings and the Academy set-up?  Well, that man deserves some praise, but that is not good enough.  That is just one part of a very flawed operation for which the CEO has responsibility.  If he is responsible, he must be held accountable. 
By all measures except for the success of the Academy he has failed the club and failed it badly.  He needs to be fired - sooner rather than later.
And for all those who ask for reasons, just look at the bloody league table!  The buck stops at the top and we’re at or near rock bottom.
Nogood “CEO is responsible and accountable, isit” Boyo 

You forgot to mention Mitroglou but otherwise that is the post of the season.

[Forever Fulham]

Here are a few questions you might wish to consider:
1.   In any operation what does the CEO do?  He/she hires and fires the senior operational managers who are responsible for the company's revenues, cost centres, financial jurisprudence and position in its chosen field
2.   He/she is responsible for the success or failure of his appointees
3.   He/she is the person who reports into the Board acting as a conduit to the operational managers in passing the Board's  financial and strategic plans down through the ranks so that everybody from the top to the bottom buys into the company's culture and objectives
4.   He/she is responsible for creating and/or maintaining the Company's brand.  What does the company stand for?  How does it want to be perceived in its marketplace (=brand equity)?  How does it take its brand equity and profit from it?
As far as Fulham FC is concerned, reading through all the press releases, club statements and resulting press articles, all senior managers over the last couple of years including Hughes, Jol, Meulensteen, Curbishley , Wilkins and Magath were hired or approved by Macintosh.
After the embarrassment of having Hughes stand up to the club's BS about transfer funds, who was the CEO who took that bad decision and pursued another – Martin Jol? 
Who was the CEO who failed to see the irreparable damage caused by Jol's terrible man management skills (with his toxic mixture of un-droppable duds and cast-asides all praised or damned in unequal measure in the press) and inexplicable tactical disasters? 
Who was the CEO responsible and accountable for running the club through five different managers (or quasi-managers) in just three years as it was being laid to waste through an over-reliance on ageing legs, free transfers, low wages and a naïve belief in the strength of untried, untested youth?
Who was the CEO who hired Meuelensteen to be Fulham's Head Coach in name but manager in nature? 
Who was the CEO who failed to recognize the negative impact that would have on the team's morale and on the club staff who could see that Meulensteen did not have the full confidence of the man who had hired him?
Who was the CEO who allowed two failed coaches/managers (the aforementioned Wilkishley)to be hired in what was viewed (correctly in my book) as a charade of an inoperable management system that only served to confuse, bewilder and demoralise the club's team and staff even further?
Who was the CEO who panicked just a couple of months later in hiring Felix Magath, a manager who appeared to be unemployable in Germany without first having had the good grace to sort his hired man Melensteen's position within the organisation, let alone the ridiculously unemployable Curbkins?   
Who has been the CEO throughout this epistle of disasters that has beset the club in the last three years since Hughes stood up to weak management and/or lack of owner interest in the long-term future of the club? 
Who was the CEO who introduced Huw Jennings and the Academy set-up?  Well, that man deserves some praise, but that is not good enough.  That is just one part of a very flawed operation for which the CEO has responsibility.  If he is responsible, he must be held accountable. 
By all measures except for the success of the Academy he has failed the club and failed it badly.  He needs to be fired - sooner rather than later.
And for all those who ask for reasons, just look at the bloody league table!  The buck stops at the top and we're at or near rock bottom.
Nogood "CEO is responsible and accountable, isit" Boyo 

Outstanding compilation, Boyo.  Well done, sir.

[TonyGilroy]

Unfortunately though it's bollox.

A dictionary definition of CEO does not describe what the CEO of a football club does when there's an owner.

AM's role may well have changed under Khan but I guarantee that under MAF it was MAF who made all major decisions delegating implementation to others and maybe considering advice.

We do not know the dynamics of the Khan/AM relationship and that's without getting into a discussion about how reasonable decisions seemed at the time they were made.

If Khan thinks AM let him down he'll be sacked soon enough. None of us can know how Khan feels about the quality and suitability of his senior executives until he makes the big decisions no doubt this summer.

[Pluto]

Here are a few questions you might wish to consider:
1.   In any operation what does the CEO do?  He/she hires and fires the senior operational managers who are responsible for the company's revenues, cost centres, financial jurisprudence and position in its chosen field
2.   He/she is responsible for the success or failure of his appointees
3.   He/she is the person who reports into the Board acting as a conduit to the operational managers in passing the Board's  financial and strategic plans down through the ranks so that everybody from the top to the bottom buys into the company's culture and objectives
4.   He/she is responsible for creating and/or maintaining the Company's brand.  What does the company stand for?  How does it want to be perceived in its marketplace (=brand equity)?  How does it take its brand equity and profit from it?
As far as Fulham FC is concerned, reading through all the press releases, club statements and resulting press articles, all senior managers over the last couple of years including Hughes, Jol, Meulensteen, Curbishley , Wilkins and Magath were hired or approved by Macintosh.
After the embarrassment of having Hughes stand up to the club's BS about transfer funds, who was the CEO who took that bad decision and pursued another – Martin Jol? 
Who was the CEO who failed to see the irreparable damage caused by Jol's terrible man management skills (with his toxic mixture of un-droppable duds and cast-asides all praised or damned in unequal measure in the press) and inexplicable tactical disasters? 
Who was the CEO responsible and accountable for running the club through five different managers (or quasi-managers) in just three years as it was being laid to waste through an over-reliance on ageing legs, free transfers, low wages and a naïve belief in the strength of untried, untested youth?
Who was the CEO who hired Meuelensteen to be Fulham's Head Coach in name but manager in nature? 
Who was the CEO who failed to recognize the negative impact that would have on the team's morale and on the club staff who could see that Meulensteen did not have the full confidence of the man who had hired him?
Who was the CEO who allowed two failed coaches/managers (the aforementioned Wilkishley)to be hired in what was viewed (correctly in my book) as a charade of an inoperable management system that only served to confuse, bewilder and demoralise the club's team and staff even further?
Who was the CEO who panicked just a couple of months later in hiring Felix Magath, a manager who appeared to be unemployable in Germany without first having had the good grace to sort his hired man Melensteen's position within the organisation, let alone the ridiculously unemployable Curbkins?   
Who has been the CEO throughout this epistle of disasters that has beset the club in the last three years since Hughes stood up to weak management and/or lack of owner interest in the long-term future of the club? 
Who was the CEO who introduced Huw Jennings and the Academy set-up?  Well, that man deserves some praise, but that is not good enough.  That is just one part of a very flawed operation for which the CEO has responsibility.  If he is responsible, he must be held accountable. 
By all measures except for the success of the Academy he has failed the club and failed it badly.  He needs to be fired - sooner rather than later.
And for all those who ask for reasons, just look at the bloody league table!  The buck stops at the top and we're at or near rock bottom.
Nogood "CEO is responsible and accountable, isit" Boyo 

Excellent post!

[Me-ate-Live, innit??]

Boyo only knows how to write beautifully  :54:.....but 
We have no way of knowing how much power Khan has gave or  (taken away) from Alister.

I also question the timing of this post by : Nick-Nack Paddy Wack give a dog a bone and the general hysteria on this thread.  It appears:  The Judge and Jury are FOFFERS and it is all negative.

We must hear from Mr Khan but that may not be until AFTER we play our last game.

[TonyGilroy]

THE MOB WANTS

BLOOD

[MJG]

THE MOB WANTS

BLOOD

They need to blame someone

[RaySmith]

Scapegoating.

[Lighthouse]

I find it all very hard to understand. I am told the new owner might know more about football then we think. Not just the business side but the day to day aspects of the game. But we don't know what our CEO is responsible for. He just does the deals and is ordered to buy players for a certain fee and has to ignore medical reports and the rest because he is just a puppet whose strings are being worked by somebody else.

We seem to have people at the top of the club who some argue have no resposibility. This baffles me. For the last three years nobody must be held accountable because these things just happened when our old owner didn't want to put money into the club and our new owner may or may not have known what must be done about it.

Don't blame anybody except those stupid fans who want to blame people. I understand now. Despite actually pointing the way things were going when Hughes left, it's stupid fans who are to blame. What a relief we have found some of the fans as scapecoast.

[TonyGilroy]

Well let's simplify things.

1. Much has gone wrong.

2. Some of this may be the fault of certain individuals but we don't know who because we don't know who has responsibility for what.

3. The person in overall charge is a Mr S. Khan who will have to decide which of his senior managers he keeps and which he fires.