sunderland

I am sure the chairmen of every company in the world would also agree totally. Making decisions and then only having to have 20% of the blame afforded to them when said decisions create problems sounds a cracking deal.

 

I may have agreed with you last season, some blamed him for everything including the Blackpool tickets getting ruined due to a leak which is just ridiculous.

But for the Collins appointment he deserves far more than 20% of the blame. He was the one who said we had quality candidates and I'm sure we did, but they didn't fancy it for whatever reason. If he'd have hired someone like a Grayson, Parkinson, McCall or McCann and we'd have been so woefully unfit and un-organised then I'd agree with you. But the fact is he hired someone not up to the job, and as the gaffer the buck has to Stop with him. If I got a new job in a junior position then a few months later the director promotes me to a manager position, either because he wants someone cheap to save money or because he's a nightmare to work for, who deserves the flack if the company starts to go backward under my un-qualified watch?

I know what most respected business men would say, and football's a business.

 

I see your point but my opinion is that if you accept the job then you are declaring yourself as capable to do the job and you take responsibility if you’re not up to it. If you, me or anyone gets promoted to a position that is out of your depth but you accept the job anyway then you have to take ownership of that decision. You can’t accept it and then entirely blame the person hiring you when it goes wrong. There has to be accountability for the person doing the job.

 

Agreed, it's just the proportion of the blame I don't necessarily agree with. As I say an experienced manager and the proportion percent would change imo, but he was not up to the job and the recruiter has to be culpable for a large portion of the blame.