Steve Clark sacked

kryogen

jimjamcos wrote: »

You can take any period of games to prove a particular viewpoint but fact remains, West Brom finished 8th last season, a real positive result. Clarke struggled to replace Lukaku and bought a dud or two but the least he deserved was more than one transfer window to fix his sides problems given his decent record in market and on pitch before then.

That period of games is longer then his "good" period of games You may also be right, he may have done better with more time, however;

The progression of the team has gotten worse or at the very least, has not gotten any better for 12 months, that's a year, its hardly a small sample size. 34 league games, 7 wins. 15 points from 16 games this season. That's relegation stuff.

The board acted before they were deep in a dog fight, you cant really blame them for that can you? He spent big relative to WBA previous spend on transfers in the summer and wages, which were big in regards to turnover already. Not turning around the poor form from last season cost him his job, when a team has been heading down one track with no sign of recovery after almost a full season worth of league games, and 12 months and two transfer windows then there is always a chance the manager will get the chop

Steve Clark is a likeable guy, a good coach, but to say it is an disgrace that he has been removed based on his results is a bit hysterical

Paully D

jimjamcos wrote: »

Think it's one of the harshest sackings yet. Massively overachieved last season and as a result tied the noose for his own neck. Lost his top scorer but still beat United, got robbed against Chelsea and had little luck in other games. Also played an okayish brand of football and represented the club with real class in all media duties. Can think of little he did wrong bar signing one mule from Everton.

Hope they go down now. It's the least they deserve.

Winning 3 games all season, the second lowest total in the league, wouldn't have helped. Every single team at the bottom of the league would be able to point to at least ten incidents this season where luck went against them too.

His top scorer from last year was never his in the first place. If you choose to develop players from other teams instead of signing permanent players then you've got to live with the consequences. He spent £12m on forward reinforcements in the summer anyway so it's not as if he couldn't do anything about replacing him.

He seems to have the motivational skills of a crisp packet, has been in charge of a team in free-fall this season and over a larger sample size has won 7 games out of a possible 34 (of which he had his top scorer for the majority, 18 of them). As for media duties, he does a half hour press conference once a week and a thirty second interview on Match of the Day for the most part. There's not too much he can do wrong there in fairness.

I tend to find that the specific clubs fans are the best indicator on these issues (give or take the few clowns that every club has) and about 90% of West Brom fans on their forums were calling for him to be given the chop this evening. They can't all be wrong and a lot of them will pay their money to watch the side so will be quite close.

Is he a nice guy? He sure seems like it. But with relegation from the Premier League costing teams around £50m + and West Brom being awful of late, they can't be blamed for making the decision. I suspect if you were spending 75% + of all money that comes into the club back out on wages and had £50 odd million on the line you wouldn't be as sympathetic.

jimjamcos

Paully D wrote: »

Winning 3 games all season, the second lowest total in the league, wouldn't have helped. Every single team at the bottom of the league would be able to point to at least ten incidents this season where luck went against them too.

His top scorer from last year was never his in the first place. If you choose to develop players from other teams instead of signing permanent players then you've got to live with the consequences. He spent £12m on forward reinforcements in the summer anyway so it's not as if he couldn't do anything about replacing him.

He seems to have the motivational skills of a crisp packet, has been in charge of a team in free-fall this season and over a larger sample size has won 7 games out of a possible 34 (of which he had his top scorer for the majority, 18 of them). As for media duties, he does a half hour press conference once a week and a thirty second interview on Match of the Day for the most part. There's not too much he can do wrong there in fairness.

I tend to find that the specific clubs fans are the best indicator on these issues (give or take the few clowns that every club has) and about 90% of West Brom fans on their forums were calling for him to be given the chop this evening. They can't all be wrong and a lot of them will pay their money to watch the side so will be quite close.

Is he a nice guy? He sure seems like it. But with relegation from the Premier League costing teams around £50m + and West Brom being awful of late, they can't be blamed for making the decision. I suspect if you were spending 75% + of all money that comes into the club back out on wages and had £50 odd million on the line you wouldn't be as sympathetic.

Utter hyperbole!

West Brom have had the worst luck so far in this years PL. There hasn't been a worse, crucial, decision than the Chelsea penalty one. It's a cliche to say "all teams have same amount of good/bad luck in end".

Don't be pedantic, Lukaku was his player while there. As for this crap about choosing to develop other teams players, he did so because it was to the benefit of West Brom. Will you be slating Martinez for doing likewise this season? I've already said he made bad signings. Happens.

How do you know what motivational skills he has?

With regards to his interviews, he reacted with dignity is the aftermath of the awful decision at Stamford Bridge and it was rare you'd see him throw a tantrum of any sort or spoof bull, unlike some managers.

The fact that you judge a manager by fans reaction explains your simplistic view. The fans you mention operate within a group mentality (where emotion often overtakes sense) but it doesn't mean their opinion is right. There's numerous examples of fans turning against a manager only for the man in charge to turn it around. In fact, fans/spectators are probably the least important stakeholders when it comes to running a football club successfully and should be treated so.

West Brom are exactly where a squad of their average ability should be, fighting it out for survival with 6/7 others. There's little proof to suggest that Clarke wasn't capable of achieving such a realistic goal.

thebaz

think he did a great job , but some people are never happy unless ther is a sacking - insanely stupid , its hardly like he had a big budget , I reckon West Brom have one of the worst squads in the Premiership, so an a shoesting he did brilliant

dreamers75

I think the Long situation was his death sentence, club invested heavily and agreed to sell Long to make some money, Clarke said no seemingly.

kryogen

thebaz wrote: »

think he did a great job , but some people are never happy unless ther is a sacking - insanely stupid , its hardly like he had a big budget , I reckon West Brom have one of the worst squads in the Premiership, so an a shoesting he did brilliant

Shoe string?

He spent 6.5 million on Anichebe!!

The wage bill is also clearly high enough there.

It is possible to understand some sackings without enjoying them, not every sacking has to be a travesty either.

thebaz

kryogen wrote: »

Shoe string?

He spent 6.5 million on Anichebe!!

The wage bill is also clearly high enough there.

in comparison to City, chelsea, swansea, southampton, liverpool, arsenal, United, everton, spurs, and a good few others what he spent was pittance - 6.5 is a staggering amount of money that I can only dream of ever having - I'd have to win 2 or 3 lotteries - but by English Premiership standards it is not much.

Paully D

jimjamcos wrote: »

Utter hyperbole!

West Brom have had the worst luck so far in this years PL. There hasn't been a worse, crucial, decision than the Chelsea penalty one. It's a cliche to say "all teams have same amount of good/bad luck in end".

Don't be pedantic, Lukaku was his player while there. As for this crap about choosing to develop other teams players, he did so because it was to the benefit of West Brom. Will you be slating Martinez for doing likewise this season? I've already said he made bad signings. Happens.

How do you know what motivational skills he has?

With regards to his interviews, he reacted with dignity is the aftermath of the awful decision at Stamford Bridge and it was rare you'd see him throw a tantrum of any sort or spoof bull, unlike some managers.

The fact that you judge a manager by fans reaction explains your simplistic view. The fans you mention operate within a group mentality (where emotion often overtakes sense) but it doesn't mean their opinion is right. There's numerous examples of fans turning against a manager only for the man in charge to turn it around. In fact, fans/spectators are probably the least important stakeholders when it comes to running a football club successfully and should be treated so.

West Brom are exactly where a squad of their average ability should be, fighting it out for survival with 6/7 others. There's little proof to suggest that Clarke wasn't capable of achieving such a realistic goal.

Well as a Sunderland fan I can point to a stonewall penalty not given at 1-1 against Spurs, a ridiculous red card at Hull while Brady escaped a sending off for the same sort of challenge, own goals against Chelsea, Spurs, Hull and Swansea and one of the worst decisions in a long time, certainly up there with the West Brom shout, when Wes Brown was sent off against Stoke, etc etc etc. I'm sure other teams will have examples of equally bad luck.

As for Clarke's conduct, he's hardly Mother Theresa. He broke accepted protocol by revealing details of a private conversation with Mike Riley when he was angry after the Chelsea game, which Henry Winter claims will damage dialogue which has been ongoing between referees and managers for the last 12 years.

Everton are never going to be allowed to keep Lukaku so they're going to be in trouble when he goes back to Chelsea next year unless Martinez can pull something out of the bag. If he does, fair enough. Clarke couldn't despite spending £12m on attacking reinforcements, signing Anelka on a free (big wages) and Vyrda on loan. West Brom's record over the last 34 games has been poor (7 wins) and they had Lukaku for 18 of those so even with him he hadn't done well from January to May.

I don't judge a manager by fans reactions, but it's one thing I consider. Despite what people think, there are plenty of knowledgeable fans out there who are well versed in analysing the game. Fans are not the least important stakeholder out there either, because without them the club wouldn't exist. Sometime in the near future, with the way the game is going, a club is going to find that out the hard way too. Look at Middlesbrough's average attendances over the years and how their finances and thus the team have been affected because of the decrease as an example.

West Brom are 2 points off relegation after 16 games. You might think they are where they should be but thankfully for those associated with the club those that make the decisions have more ambition than that. Clarke might have kept them up, he might not have. We'll never know. As you said there's no proof as we can't see into the future. I actually think he would have as it happens, but have no objection to West Brom sacking him. But what is there in black and white is his record, and to say his record is poor and has been poor for a year now would be being generous.

kryogen

thebaz wrote: »

in comparison to City, chelsea, swansea, southampton, liverpool, arsenal, United, everton, spurs, and a good few others what he spent was pittance - 6.5 is a staggering amount of money that I can only dream of ever having - I'd have to win 2 or 3 lotteries - but by English Premiership standards it is not much.

The transfer fees themselves are not that important, its the wage bills.

West Broms is the highest it has ever been, it was very big last season in comparison to turnover and can only have gotten bigger this season with the additions in the summer.

thebaz

kryogen wrote: »

The transfer fees themselves are not that important, its the wage bills.

West Broms is the highest it has ever been,

of course transfer fees matter - you actually were the one who pointed out the large Anichebe transfer fee - are you saying West Brom have one of the highest wage bills in the Premiership ? - I would extermy doubt it , but perhaps you know different

Moneymaker

Should be sacked for spending 6.5m on Anichbe tbh.

Super-Rush

Moneymaker wrote: »

Should be sacked for spending 6.5m on Anichbe tbh.

How much?

Fck me.

Corholio

Was it really 6.5 million? Was it disclosed? Im asking because I honestly dont know.

Paul Lambert came out recently and said pretty much all the reported fees for players he signed this summer were inaccurate, and in a few cases the reported fee was a good bit higher than the actual fee.

Dempsey

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

A joke really is.

Football is going to the dogs with this carry on.

He tried to flog Shane Long only to say that he always wanted him to stay.

Lukaku save him from the axe last season imo

blue-army

Dempsey wrote: »

Lukaku save him from the axe last season imo

are you serious? They came 8th!

They were a yo-yo club between the top 2 divisions for years and Clarke established them as a midtable side.
They were brilliant winning at Old Trafford this season and were only a dodgy penalty decision away from ending Mourinho's 60+ game unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Crazy decision by WBA to sack him, same with Roberto Di Matteo, who went on to win a CL 12 months later!

kryogen

thebaz wrote: »

of course transfer fees matter - you actually were the one who pointed out the large Anichebe transfer fee - are you saying West Brom have one of the highest wage bills in the Premiership ? - I would extermy doubt it , but perhaps you know different

I didn't say they didn't matter, I said they don't matter as much as wages, which they don't. I pointed to that kind of money on such a, limited, player hardly points to a shoe string budget.

I will just keep repeating the fact that the board mention the wage bill in the statement points to the wage bill being significant and the board feeling like they were not getting the return on the investment.

Clark did well initially, he did very well in fact, but he hasn't been able to stop this slump and he has handled a few things badly, the Long situation being one. He put all his eggs in the Lukaku basket again this season and that turned out badly for him.

cathalio11

In before he becomes interm boss at Chelsea and wins the champions league

Paully D

blue-army wrote: »

are you serious? They came 8th!

They were a yo-yo club between the top 2 divisions for years and Clarke established them as a midtable side.
They were brilliant winning at Old Trafford this season and were only a dodgy penalty decision away from ending Mourinho's 60+ game unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Crazy decision by WBA to sack him, same with Roberto Di Matteo, who went on to win a CL 12 months later!

One season finishing 8th is hardly establishing them as a mid-table side. They were brilliant at Old Trafford but that was one game, three months ago. If managers only needed one good game a year to avoid the chop then no one would ever be sacked.

kryogen

Paully D wrote: »

One season finishing 8th is hardly establishing them as a mid-table side. They were brilliant at Old Trafford but that was one game, three months ago. If managers only needed one good game a year to avoid the chop then no one would ever be sacked.

Plus, by and large, we are ****e

Beefy78

blue-army wrote: »

are you serious? They came 8th!

They were a yo-yo club between the top 2 divisions for years and Clarke established them as a midtable side.
They were brilliant winning at Old Trafford this season and were only a dodgy penalty decision away from ending Mourinho's 60+ game unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Crazy decision by WBA to sack him, same with Roberto Di Matteo, who went on to win a CL 12 months later!

I'd say it was Roy Hodgson who deserves the bulk of the credit.

Milkers

Saw him interviewed on LFC when he was with Liverpool. They had a bit where some 10 year old kid comes in and the two of them pick 5-a-side teams from the Liverpool squad at the time. Clarke's second or third pick was Jay Spearing. Consequently, unlike many Pool fans, I was not sorry to see him go when Dalglish left.

Dozen Wicked Words

Milkers wrote: »

Saw him interviewed on LFC when he was with Liverpool. They had a bit where some 10 year old kid comes in and the two of them pick 5-a-side teams from the Liverpool squad at the time. Clarke's second or third pick was Jay Spearing. Consequently, unlike many Pool fans, I was not sorry to see him go when Dalglish left.

Well at least it wasn't a trivial childish reason you picked for being happy to see him go.

kryogen

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

Well at least it wasn't a trivial childish reason you picked for being happy to see him go.

This did make me laugh

Milkers

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

Well at least it wasn't a trivial childish reason you picked for being happy to see him go.

Correct. It was because his judgment of the level of player required for a successful Liverpool team was miles from the mark.

Get him back to Liverpool to sort out our useless defense!

Amirani

Milkers wrote: »

Correct. It was because his judgment of the level of player required for a successful Liverpool team was miles from the mark.

How many times have you seen Jay Spearing play 5 a side football?

Lennonist

David Moyes isn't flavour of the month as a manager at the minute, though that will change if he finds success at Man United. I don't think anyone would disagree that Moyes did a very good job overall at Everton in the 10 years he was there and built a solid foundation at that club that they are reaping the rewards from now. Moyes did have one or two poor seasons at Everton at that time where they finished down the league. After finishing 7th in 02/03, they finished 17th in 03/04. In 05/06 Everton finished 11th and struggled most of that season after finishing 4th the previous season. If Everton had sacked him then, would they enjoy the stability they have now?

I don't know what went on behind the scenes there but it didn't look like West Brom were going to get relegated under Clarke this season, would they have been better served to stick with him even if he had a dodgy season this season to see if he could improve their standing next season and bring stability to the club? It wasn't a case that he had lost the support of the players, or it wasn't obvious anyway.

You can see why clubs ditch managers when a team is struggling, because when a new one comes in, the team usually get fresh impetus and a bounce in form, but do they all have to do the same thing and act like lemmings. With Clarke, WBA weren't bottom of the table, they might have been better sticking with him. They'll never find out now.

MisterAnarchy

blue-army wrote: »

are you serious? They came 8th!

They were a yo-yo club between the top 2 divisions for years and Clarke established them as a midtable side.
They were brilliant winning at Old Trafford this season and were only a dodgy penalty decision away from ending Mourinho's 60+ game unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Crazy decision by WBA to sack him, same with Roberto Di Matteo, who went on to win a CL 12 months later!

It seems a knee jerk reaction to sack him .
Very harsh after they finished 8th last season ,the owners should be thankful they are even in the Premiership .

They are only 4 points away from 10th position and at home to Hull next week so a win there and they would have been fine .

eagle eye

I'd be of the opinion that he had to go right when they got rid of him. Hodgson built a very good team there and Clarke took them on a bit in his first season. Its clear now that it was not going to last and I'd say fair play to those who took the risk and hired him when they did and fair play again for the having the vision now to see that its the right time to let him go and get somebody in with a transfer window for the new man to get in a couple of players he thinks he needs to improve things there.

Very often managers get off to a great start at a club only to fall away after a season, it happens a lot more often than somebody being successful continuously at a club. Martin Jol is a prime example of somebody who always starts out well but never continues to do well with a club.

Corvo

Lennonist wrote: »

David Moyes isn't flavour of the month as a manager at the minute, though that will change if he finds success at Man United. I don't think anyone would disagree that Moyes did a very good job overall at Everton in the 10 years he was there and built a solid foundation at that club that they are reaping the rewards from now. Moyes did have one or two poor seasons at Everton at that time where they finished down the league. After finishing 7th in 02/03, they finished 17th in 03/04. In 05/06 Everton finished 11th and struggled most of that season after finishing 4th the previous season. If Everton had sacked him then, would they enjoy the stability they have now?

I don't know what went on behind the scenes there but it didn't look like West Brom were going to get relegated under Clarke this season, would they have been better served to stick with him even if he had a dodgy season this season to see if he could improve their standing next season and bring stability to the club? It wasn't a case that he had lost the support of the players, or it wasn't obvious anyway.

You can see why clubs ditch managers when a team is struggling, because when a new one comes in, the team usually get fresh impetus and a bounce in form, but do they all have to do the same thing and act like lemmings. With Clarke, WBA weren't bottom of the table, they might have been better sticking with him. They'll never find out now.

Great post

DerekDGoldfish

I dont think people can blame him for the poor signings, AFAIK he was a "head coach" not the manager and did not sign the players, also of coarse the clubs wage bill is the highest it has ever been with the inflation in football the same can be said for most if not all clubs in the premier league.

Still it is an exceptionally poor run of form and I can understand why the club did it