How unlucky have we been?

[JDH101]

To have had Jol, Magath and Kit as our 3 most recent managers? (I don't include RM as he wash;t given a chance).

Name me one club that wouldn't have nose dived like us after that lot.

Viva El Fulham

[Woolly Mammoth]

Two Bob Rovers ?

[filham]

Short memory, six months ago most of us were calling for Kit to be our manager. Perhaps he is in need of better players, a couple of pacey wingers for starters.

[Lighthouse]

You see this is the point I don't understand. We keep on and on about the managers. The only manager who seemed to be given the run of the club was Felix. And look what a mess he made. But the long term disaster of this club since the Europa has been down to the real people running the club and short termism.

So it is not luck or just bad mangers, The endless threads about sacking Symons and all the flowers would bloom again and we would be Champions of the league. Is frankly nonesense. I keep on hearing people tell me that I can't keep on blaming the players lack of skill. It must be down to the bloke sitting on the sidelines.

What we want is a careful restructure of the squad. No huge fees, just players who can compete in the league. Then we can build from there. Bring in a new manager by all means but bring in a coach. Bring in an MD that can advice and get things moving.

We need a set upo that will work. Not big fee players that only fill in one hole. Find a new manager but put him in a system that works and find players that can compete, not kids and overseas average posers.

Not unlucky but neglect and that isn't all down to poor managers.

[Arthur]

Seeing as the large majority of supporters were clamouring for Kit just six months ago, we are not unlucky to have had him at all.

Consider the scenario had Khan, in spite of Kit's popularity, chosen to place a different man at the helm and that he had taken us to the brink of the play-offs: there would be many on here, I'm sure, who would be claiming that, had Symons been left in charge, we would have made the play-offs and then be odds-on to turn over our opponents and secure a glorious return to the Premier League. These posters would point to the games that we had failed to win and bemoan the manager's poor tactics and bewildering substitutions as having cost us dearly, while at the same time constantly reminding us how Khan - through his failure to take heed of the fact that we, the fans, had wanted Symons - was primarily responsible.

If nothing else, that Khan did appoint Kit has at least prevented such a scenario from rumbling on into eternity and has dispelled the myth that arose in the short time that Symons was caretaker: that we had 'got our Fulham back'.

As far as having our current manager, I'd say that luck doesn't come into it: it's a case of 'making our bed and having to lie on it'.

[Robbie]

You can't get away from the fact that whoever is in charge ... this season was always going to be very, very tough. With the squad is massive transition and loads of high paid sub-Premiership players on the books.

Pretty much all the current contenders for promotion this season have squads of players from this and low leagues.  They are well organised, hungry and looking for a big break in their careers.

Think about Ruiz's (or his agent's) mind-set. He is probably thinking "this is a bit sh*t, I am not staying anyway, I can probably get another job on previous half-glories, I will play a bit ..but this is not for me".

[Arthur]

You see this is the point I don't understand. We keep on and on about the managers.

We do. And we do so because their shortfalls are more apparent: we see the consequences out on the pitch each game. Whereas: as far as decisions being made about the Club's long-term transfer policy and whether or not to sanction a particular level of spending, we know far less about the private conversations that have taken place and precisely who sanctioned what. And even when, eventually, some detail has emerged of what transpired behind the scenes, we seem to have moved on by that time and the consequences are usually retrospective. (e.g. Our transfer policy in the Premier League since the arrival of Jol has now seen us relegated and, whilst regrettable, no longer has any relevance to our current circumstances.)

This is why you keep on hearing about the managers.

I keep on hearing people tell me that I can't keep on blaming the players lack of skill. It must be down to the bloke sitting on the sidelines.

Insert the words 'in part' into your second sentence and this would be correct.

Watching the Brentford players yesterday, what was apparent was that, with the exception of the skilful Jota, none of the others stood out as being anything out of the ordinary - even at Championship level. The greatest differences between the two teams were, in my opinion, predominantly ones of organisation and self-belief: on both counts, Brentford were noticeably superior. These are features that a manager can instil in his side - and Warburton, it would appear, has done a better job in this department than has Symons.

The bottom line is this: whether the level of skill of your team's playing squad be good or poor, supporters want to feel reassured that the manager is capable getting the best possible from it. (This is as true, for instance, of Premier League Ch***ea as it is of us - hence their fans' disenchantment when they had Scolari in charge.)

Once supporters conclude that many other managers would be getting better performances from the players at the club, the ability of those players and whether or not they are good enough to achieve promotion is a separate issue - finding a manager who 'knows his onions' is what concerns supporters in the first instance.

[hovewhite]

On this subject the manager has to be responsible ,he has to be held to account its his selection,tatics,changes of players in game time.
no question buck stops with the manager.

[ToodlesMcToot]

No idea about Magath, other than he was just plain awful of course, but Fulham seem to have submarined itself where Jol was concerned. Could have invested far more wisely when we began losing players like Dempsey and Dembele. We never properly replaced very key cogs in our starting team. Jol, like Kit, might have been a much "better" manager for us had certain circumstances beyond their control been different.

That said, both wanted the job and their paychecks and could have likely done better with what they had.

And, I truly doubt that many would have been "nose diving" after Kit. No slight on him but, he was a youth team manager. It's not as if he'd set League 1 alight.

[Wearethewhites]

You make your own luck in football, both on and off the field, and what's been going on over these last 4 years isn't down to bad luck, it's down to poor decision making, poor ownership and poor management. 

[Jimpav]

I think we have been unlucky as fans but not as a club.

Jol and Magath were questionable recruitments from the start. Magaths reputation preceded him from the start and he remained true to form. Jol was okay when he had money to spend but didn't do us many favours by rubbing Zamora up the wrong way and his cronyism with Berbatov, Tarabat and co.

Kit was brave to take on the challenge and did exceptionally well to put us in a position of safety after the Magath horror show. 99% of fans on here were right behind Kit from the start - including myself. The teams performances have not been questionable though and the results speak for themselves.

I think Kit has been given more than a fair chance but he's simply not good enough for this role. I believe he would have been sacked by now by any other club but this is clearly taboo because of the way we rattled through the P45's last season.