The ianevattable sacking

[TonyDomingos]

When does Sharon sack him? Do you think they’ve defined how far we need to be off the playoffs? It’s maddening. We’re now 5 points from the playoffs with a 0 GD, and in a melee with fecking Stockport, Orient and Mansfield.

Presumably, he's not getting potted this month if we're bidding for players to bolster his starting XI. He then gets February to bed them in. By the beginning of March, we're either battling for a play off place - so no sacking - or we're not. If the latter, then dismissing him at that point serves little purpose and costs more than doing it at the end of the season. We're stuck with him for the remainder of the season, I'm afraid to say.

[nicholaldo]

It won't be a matter of Sharon keeping Evatt in post against the wishes of the rest of the board.

She doesn't have that amount of authority, for one.

She’s chair and ceo isn’t she? I think she does.

She's reliant on the funding provided by others. If they feel a change of manager is in order, I'd imagine they'd get their wish.

[BWFC_Insane]

It won't be a matter of Sharon keeping Evatt in post against the wishes of the rest of the board.

She doesn't have that amount of authority, for one.

She’s chair and ceo isn’t she? I think she does.

She's reliant on the funding provided by others. If they feel a change of manager is in order, I'd imagine they'd get their wish.

She’s reliant on it but far as we know has casting vote and is running the club. Those partners are not hands on. Not running it day to day and one assumes are essentially deferring responsibility to Sharon. For all we know the Swiss investors may take a casual glance every so often but will reassess their position in May. That’s normal investor behaviour. It would be pretty abnormal for them to push for operational changes - and mechanically not even sure they could if Sharon refused. Would need to buy out her voting rights.

[nicholaldo]

It won't be a matter of Sharon keeping Evatt in post against the wishes of the rest of the board.

She doesn't have that amount of authority, for one.

She’s chair and ceo isn’t she? I think she does.

She's reliant on the funding provided by others. If they feel a change of manager is in order, I'd imagine they'd get their wish.

She’s reliant on it but far as we know has casting vote and is running the club. Those partners are not hands on. Not running it day to day and one assumes are essentially deferring responsibility to Sharon. For all we know the Swiss investors may take a casual glance every so often but will reassess their position in May. That’s normal investor behaviour. It would be pretty abnormal for them to push for operational changes - and mechanically not even sure they could if Sharon refused. Would need to buy out her voting rights.

Yes, but the scenario I was referring to was one where the investors had expressed their view that Evatt should be sacked - they may be hands off but do have a representative on the board - and she alone refuses, keeping him in post.

Regardless of voting rights and shareholder percentages, in practice it's not happening.

[BWFC_Insane]

It won't be a matter of Sharon keeping Evatt in post against the wishes of the rest of the board.

She doesn't have that amount of authority, for one.

She’s chair and ceo isn’t she? I think she does.

She's reliant on the funding provided by others. If they feel a change of manager is in order, I'd imagine they'd get their wish.

She’s reliant on it but far as we know has casting vote and is running the club. Those partners are not hands on. Not running it day to day and one assumes are essentially deferring responsibility to Sharon. For all we know the Swiss investors may take a casual glance every so often but will reassess their position in May. That’s normal investor behaviour. It would be pretty abnormal for them to push for operational changes - and mechanically not even sure they could if Sharon refused. Would need to buy out her voting rights.

Yes, but the scenario I was referring to was one where the investors had expressed their view that Evatt should be sacked - they may be hands off but do have a representative on the board - and she alone refuses, keeping him in post.

Regardless of voting rights and shareholder percentages, in practice it's not happening.

Sure. Let’s say they get on the phone and say ‘results aren’t great Sharon should there be a change?’

And Sharon says ‘no I don’t think we should change it’.

It would be pretty difficult for them to do much. And the likelihood is their involvement is relatively remote.

It’s not Eddie where in effect although he didn’t run the club if he said ‘this is what I want’ he everyone had to jump. It’s likely much more nuanced than that.

Would Swiss investors feel that bothered that they’d force something? I doubt it based on what we know. More likely to just withdraw.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Screenshot 2025-01-01 at 18.45.38.png (85.48 KiB) Viewed 741 times

.
10 games vs top 10.
11pts won.
Not even nearly good enough.

[boltonboris]

When does Sharon sack him? Do you think they’ve defined how far we need to be off the playoffs? It’s maddening. We’re now 5 points from the playoffs with a 0 GD, and in a melee with fecking Stockport, Orient and Mansfield.

Presumably, he's not getting potted this month if we're bidding for players to bolster his starting XI. He then gets February to bed them in. By the beginning of March, we're either battling for a play off place - so no sacking - or we're not. If the latter, then dismissing him at that point serves little purpose and costs more than doing it at the end of the season. We're stuck with him for the remainder of the season, I'm afraid to say.

Decent managers can get players into a team straight away. We’re giving our manager a month to get a tune out of them. Another issue

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Decent managers can get players into a team straight away. We’re giving our manager a month to get a tune out of them. Another issue

I'd go further: I think that's more than just another issue, I think it's at the very centre of what's gone wrong.

As that Athletic interview at Barrow showed, Evatt is a prescriptive manager: he has his patterns of play, he wants the players to learn them, it takes them a while. We've chuckled at the #downloading #content stuff, but that's what it's about: when Player A is in Situation 3, to whom should he pass? Who should he expect to be running to where? What's the play? And if he doesn't know the answer, does he get excluded?

All managers (well, pretty much all) have suggested patterns of play - even if they're as simple as Redknapp's "run around a bit" or Bally putting his arm around Le Tissier and saying "The rest of you, give the ball to him". But Evatt's methods seem more like american football - all diagrams and counters and set plays. (The fact we've been so frequently shit at set-pieces is darkly ironic.)

There's a few problems with that approach, when rigidly applied. First, it gives players no agency to react within the game. Second, it's quickly picked up on by the opposition. Third, it gives no quick fix for when things go wrong. Fourth, all the plans in the world don't mean shit if your players continually misplace passes anyway.

I think I've related this story before, but its pertinence only grows: Steve Claridge talking about when he played for John Beck's Cambridge. They got two promotions. So far so good. But in the second half of their second-tier season, their patterns became widely known, their form fell off a cliff and Beck reacted by doubling down. Claridge recalls his opposition full-back taunting him during the game, showing him inside and saying "You're not allowed to go inside, are you? Go on, do it." After a few minutes, Claridge did so, beat his man, and was substituted before half-time.

I don't suspect Evatt is as frankly mad as Beck. And he has proved several times that his doctrine can change – back three to back four and back again, etc. But top-down changes always take time, and the innovation appears to be waning - like adopting Southgate's 3-4-2-1 then dropping it, or playing inverted wingbacks despite the fact they're our only wide players trying to break down a low block.

There's a world in which he takes the shackles off, and gives the players more freedom within the system. That is, after all, what most managers stepping in to replace him would do, while judging which players to keep and which to discard. But I can't see him having that epiphany: it would be too existentially threatening.

[TonyDomingos]

When does Sharon sack him? Do you think they’ve defined how far we need to be off the playoffs? It’s maddening. We’re now 5 points from the playoffs with a 0 GD, and in a melee with fecking Stockport, Orient and Mansfield.

Presumably, he's not getting potted this month if we're bidding for players to bolster his starting XI. He then gets February to bed them in. By the beginning of March, we're either battling for a play off place - so no sacking - or we're not. If the latter, then dismissing him at that point serves little purpose and costs more than doing it at the end of the season. We're stuck with him for the remainder of the season, I'm afraid to say.

Decent managers can get players into a team straight away. We’re giving our manager a month to get a tune out of them. Another issue

Sorry, don't think I was very clear there. I used a month as the notional period of time SB would allow before deciding whether Evatt was making sufficient progress. For all I know, Evatt might be great at bedding in players!

[TonyDomingos]

Decent managers can get players into a team straight away. We’re giving our manager a month to get a tune out of them. Another issue

I'd go further: I think that's more than just another issue, I think it's at the very centre of what's gone wrong.

As that Athletic interview at Barrow showed, Evatt is a prescriptive manager: he has his patterns of play, he wants the players to learn them, it takes them a while. We've chuckled at the #downloading #content stuff, but that's what it's about: when Player A is in Situation 3, to whom should he pass? Who should he expect to be running to where? What's the play? And if he doesn't know the answer, does he get excluded?

All managers (well, pretty much all) have suggested patterns of play - even if they're as simple as Redknapp's "run around a bit" or Bally putting his arm around Le Tissier and saying "The rest of you, give the ball to him". But Evatt's methods seem more like american football - all diagrams and counters and set plays. (The fact we've been so frequently shit at set-pieces is darkly ironic.)

There's a few problems with that approach, when rigidly applied. First, it gives players no agency to react within the game. Second, it's quickly picked up on by the opposition. Third, it gives no quick fix for when things go wrong. Fourth, all the plans in the world don't mean shit if your players continually misplace passes anyway.

I think I've related this story before, but its pertinence only grows: Steve Claridge talking about when he played for John Beck's Cambridge. They got two promotions. So far so good. But in the second half of their second-tier season, their patterns became widely known, their form fell off a cliff and Beck reacted by doubling down. Claridge recalls his opposition full-back taunting him during the game, showing him inside and saying "You're not allowed to go inside, are you? Go on, do it." After a few minutes, Claridge did so, beat his man, and was substituted before half-time.

I don't suspect Evatt is as frankly mad as Beck. And he has proved several times that his doctrine can change – back three to back four and back again, etc. But top-down changes always take time, and the innovation appears to be waning - like adopting Southgate's 3-4-2-1 then dropping it, or playing inverted wingbacks despite the fact they're our only wide players trying to break down a low block.

There's a world in which he takes the shackles off, and gives the players more freedom within the system. That is, after all, what most managers stepping in to replace him would do, while judging which players to keep and which to discard. But I can't see him having that epiphany: it would be too existentially threatening.

My cousin played under Beck at Preston in the early '90s. He has a tale or two to tell that would bring a legal challenge if I was to post them on here!

[GhostoftheBok]

My cousin played under Beck at Preston in the early '90s. He has a tale or two to tell that would bring a legal challenge if I was to post them on here!

If you were writing a Mike Bassett sequel called Bonne Jek: England Manager, what kinds of things might you "make up"?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

My cousin played under Beck at Preston in the early '90s. He has a tale or two to tell that would bring a legal challenge if I was to post them on here!

Doesn’t surprise me at all, Tony. The folk whose opinions I researched (this was for a FourFourTwo feature) regarded him with differing mixtures of awe, fear and disdain. Safe to say Claridge lent towards disdain but some Cambridge graduates (B.Sc. Beck) still clearly admired him. I imagine he was a harder sell thereafter.

[Mar]

Screenshot 2025-01-01 at 18.45.38.png
.
10 games vs top 10.
11pts won.
Not even nearly good enough.

It's clear that we don't even compete against those that we need to compete against. If there was a mini league for the teams at the top, we'd be bottom.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Screenshot 2025-01-01 at 18.45.38.png
.
10 games vs top 10.
11pts won.
Not even nearly good enough.

It's clear that we don't even compete against those that we need to compete against. If there was a mini league for the teams at the top, we'd be bottom.

Well quite - we’re 10th… and only 3pts off the bottom half…

[Mar]

Aims for the season have fast turned into 'scrape into playoffs, scrape into promotion'.

Sad when the start of the season we had them at compete for the top two.

[TonyDomingos]

My cousin played under Beck at Preston in the early '90s. He has a tale or two to tell that would bring a legal challenge if I was to post them on here!

If you were writing a Mike Bassett sequel called Bonne Jek: England Manager, what kinds of things might you "make up"?

I'd probably make up a story about an away game in London where the gaffer was handing out spliffs the night before the game. But, no one would believe that.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Aims for the season have fast turned into 'scrape into playoffs, scrape into promotion'.

Sad when the start of the season we had them at compete for the top two.

Aye. The widely-mooted 2ppg target of 92pts would now require us to hoover up 58 points from our last 24 games, ie 2.41 ppg. Even then, we'd have to hope for drop-offs from two of Wrexham (currently on course for 92pts), Wycombe (100pts) and Birmingham (104.5pts).

But in the Mansfield run-up, Ian recalibrated. The target now is 25 wins, meaning we need 15 from the last 24 games. That would take us to 79pts, plus up to 9 more if we draw rather than lose the others. 79pts should be enough to nudge into the playoffs - since Covid, the 6th-placed teams have collected 74, 83, 77 and 76. It's perhaps worth noting that in the exceptional season (2021/22) requiring 83pts, we collected 73pts - so this still-taxing 79pt target would see us having improved by 6pts in 3 years (but worsened by 8pts from last season).

[GhostoftheBok]

I'd probably make up a story about an away game in London where the gaffer was handing out spliffs the night before the game. But, no one would believe that.

I would believe that, but only about entirely fictional manager Bonne Jek, who is based on no real person.

[Harry Genshaw]

There's a few problems with that approach, when rigidly applied. First, it gives players no agency to react within the game. Second, it's quickly picked up on by the opposition. Third, it gives no quick fix for when things go wrong. Fourth, all the plans in the world don't mean shit if your players continually misplace passes anyway.

Excellent post and points DSB - thank you. For me so much of our problems lie with the bit above. Wigan x3 amply demonstrated that the players were shocked when the opposition decided not to sit back and watch our pretty passing patterns and had no idea how to reset and respond. Wembley too.

What it also does, imo, it pushes players towards Brandon Comley football. Rather than use their initiative, take a player on, try a difficult pass etc too many opt for the simple, short, sideways pass. "Not my fault gaffer, I kept possession". It ducks responsibility and makes us look leaderless and lacking in cojones.

[Spartan2]

At this point, I can't even conjure up a devil's advocate reason to keep him on. Any brain-dead, shit manager could get this lot into 10th position. The division is appalling and always has been, losing to a team with a fecking warehouse and a tractor for a stand, feck me. He's the worst manager in my lifetime.