Allardyce piece in the London Evening Standard

[midlands exile]

A managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Really?

I disagree, I think that a personality is essential on how people interact.

The fans perception of personality is irrelevant.

How they work and deal with players and issues is important.

Absolute balls. No manager who alienates pretty much every "customer" (in footbiz speak, apologies) they have can expect to be judged a success. And it was that alienation turning into lower and lower gates, and such bad feeling in the crowds that were left, that forced gartside's trigger finger. Equally, "the people's man" OC tried the polar opposite it seems, of trotting out all the niceties, but not having a clue when it came to sorting out the football side of things. What's needed is balance.

So in conclusion, personality is irrelevant it's results that count?

Glad we've sorted that out!

Eh? Personality is only irrelevant if you're winning everything in sight. 99.9% of managers aren't in that position, thus they require good people skills (player, club staff and players). And meggo wasn't all about the results anyway, with us scraping survival and trying to throw the UEFA cup (on several occasions, no way was that lineup in Munich sent out to get any sort of result).

[H. Pedersen]

I'd say given that a whole variety of personality types have made good managers, there isn't much evidence that it is.

It very much depends on what you define as personality. Man management and group management skills are important. As are motivational abilities.

Do they count as personality? Not for me because they can be learned.

Personality is not a learned trait, its just how you are.

I just can’t agree with this. Knowing when to use charm and when to use the hairdryer can be learned through experience, I suppose, but some people are just never going to have the personal skills to know the difference. That’s why there are so few Mourinhos and Fergusons, and so many Megsons and Coyles.

[jaffka]

As I said shall we just leave it as showing him spouting shite again?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

A managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Utter total twaddle.

[TANGODANCER]

A managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Utter total twaddle.

BWFCi mustn't have worked under many managers in his job.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

A managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Utter total twaddle.

BWFCi mustn't have worked under many managers in his job.

... or any at all. But it still cannot fully explain why he is talking such complete baloney, bilgewater, bosh, drool, humbug, tommyrot, tosh, bollox, crap, twaddle.

[BWFC_Insane]

A managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Utter total twaddle.

BWFCi mustn't have worked under many managers in his job.

This is just simplistic thinking though.

How are you going to measure personality? What scale or test are you going to use? And what high scoring attributes correlate to a good football manager?

Fact is few have met managers, and therefore are in no position to tell their personality, let alone measure it accurately. So its basically just someone making some sort of bullshit character assessment based on a 5 minute interview every couple of weeks. Reality TV generation.

We're told Coyle was a really nice guy, and lets assume that is true (though definitions of a nice guy are hardly an accurate measure of personality), but we all accept he was a shit manager. So does that mean "nice" is not what you want?

And Megson was apparently "not nice" so you don't want that either.

Its just a bollocks word used to justify whatever position that person wants to argue. Yeah well he didn't take us down, but Megson wasn't very nice and therefore Coyle was better. Who cares? And how do you know unless you've spent a lot of time with them and seen them on a daily basis in their job? Or is it a case of judging them in front of cameras like performing seals? Plenty of "dour" characters have been very good managers and won lots of things. Equally there have been lots of flamboyant managers who've achieved lots. What does it matter?

As fans the only thing that really matters is the result they achieve. If you want a "personality" as a manager you'd be best off watching big brother.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

twaddle and drizzlepoo.

Everybody has a personality, and that personality determines how they interact with other people (including players). That in itself, without arguing any further demonstrates the inanity of your statement that 'a managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant'. Of course it's fxcking relevant.

[BWFC_Insane]

Everybody has a personality, and that personality determines how they interact with other people (including players). That in itself, without arguing any further demonstrates the inanity of your statement that 'a managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant'. Of course it's fxcking relevant.

OK, I can admit when I've said something wrong.

And I do.

However, I stand by my point that the important part that determine your abilities cannot be determined by seeing someone stand in front of a camera, or even meeting them the odd time briefly.

So making a base judgement on someones personality is irrelevant, because as has been shown if we take those very shallow determinations of personality, there are such a wide variety that make successful managers that you cannot off the information we have.

Megson and Coyle a very good case in point. Seemingly opposite personalities. Seemingly being an important word. But ultimately both not very good at getting the desired results.

And my original point was essentially that, though I may have worded it incorrectly.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Everybody has a personality, and that personality determines how they interact with other people (including players). That in itself, without arguing any further demonstrates the inanity of your statement that 'a managers personality is completely and utterly irrelevant'. Of course it's fxcking relevant.

OK, I can admit when I've said something wrong.

And I do.

However, I stand by my point that the important part that determine your abilities cannot be determined by seeing someone stand in front of a camera, or even meeting them the odd time briefly.

So making a base judgement on someones personality is irrelevant, because as has been shown if we take those very shallow determinations of personality, there are such a wide variety that make successful managers that you cannot off the information we have.

Megson and Coyle a very good case in point. Seemingly opposite personalities. Seemingly being an important word. But ultimately both not very good at getting the desired results.

And my original point was essentially that, though I may have worded it incorrectly.

I applaud your restatement sir.

[truewhite15]

I think BWFCi is trying to point out that to us, as fans, a manager's personality should mean, and generally does mean, feck all. I know I couldn't care less if our manager is a bit of a dick, as long as he gets us results.

To the players, however, a manager's personality is very important indeed, as a factor in how well they do their jobs.

So a manager's personality IS important. Just not really to us.

[jonnycooper]

And so Allardyce is still up his own arse as he always has been...

However bring back Sam..All is Forgiven

[thebish]

How are you going to measure personality? What scale or test are you going to use?

Briggs Myers would be your place to go...

(or the enneagram)