Duncan Ferguson the coach

[Lanolin]

A coach can only do so much. He's not ultimately responsible the same way that a manager is, and may completely disagree with the manager on many things but just coach in the way they are instructed to, because that's their job. If you've ever had a job, you've probably done exactly the same thing. If anyone has seen him coaching at FF and thought it was awful, or has been told by players that he's not a good coach then fair enough, if you're just assuming he's no good because the team's not very good, you're just not quite understanding how the world works.

 

[davek]

A coach can only do so much. He's not ultimately responsible the same way that a manager is, and may completely disagree with the manager on many things but just coach in the way they are instructed to, because that's their job. If you've ever had a job, you've probably done exactly the same thing. If anyone has seen him coaching at FF and thought it was awful, or has been told by players that he's not a good coach then fair enough, if you're just assuming he's no good because the team's not very good, you're just not quite understanding how the world works.

Then we should have kept Graeme Jones, Dennis Lawrence, Inaki Bergara, Erwin Koeman, Jan Kluitenberg, Patrick Lodewijks etc etc. Afterall, you've never seen them coaching at Finch Farm so by your logic it was unreasonable to see them moved on.

 

[Methuselah]

I was once at a dinner where the after dinner speaker was the ex Governor of Barlinnie jail when Duncan Ferguson was a 'guest'. He said that big Dunc asked for the wall to be moved back 10 yards.

 

[Lanolin]

Then we should have kept Graeme Jones, Dennis Lawrence, Inaki Bergara, Erwin Koeman, Jan Kluitenberg, Patrick Lodewijks etc etc. Afterall, you've never seen them coaching at Finch Farm so by your logic it was unreasonable to see them moved on.

Except that's not my logic at all is it?

I didn't say he shouldn't be moved on, that he's a good coach, or that they're bad coaches. I'm simply saying that assuming he's a poor coach because the team isn't performing well is rather foolish.

 

[everton1953]

No point carrying on with this, once someone gets it under their bonnet that the axe must be wielded on someone or other. I made a mistake years ago for not hounding Everton to sack the doorman for refusing to let me take a load of horse shittt from the police van parked in Goodison Place. He explained the horse shitttt was already claimed by persons unnamed. I returned home shitttless.

 

[davek]

Except that's not my logic at all is it?

I didn't say he shouldn't be moved on, that he's a good coach, or that they're bad coaches. I'm simply saying that assuming he's a poor coach because the team isn't performing well is rather foolish.

His ability as a coach isn't the issue. The issue is that he's been part and parcel of multiple failed regimes and to see him retain his position makes no sense at all and ingrains a sense that nothing will change.

 

[everton1953]

Ferguson would be delighted to hear that such is his influence at Everton nothing will change. If he knew he would ask for a pay rise commensurate with his new found importance.

Forgot to mention that my son never forgave me for the humiliation of going to Goodison expected to take home horse shittt. That doorman had a lot to answer for.

 

[blue62]

I do find it odd that he and Unsworth seem able to survive successive regime changes, but maybe the intention is to add a bit of stability or possibly an attempt to copy the 'boot room' model that brought so much success to our lovable neighbours few years back?

 

[Tubey]

His ability as a coach isn't the issue. The issue is that he's been part and parcel of multiple failed regimes and to see him retain his position makes no sense at all and ingrains a sense that nothing will change.

That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater though.

You want some consistency to counteract measures of change. It's what Moyes screwed up at United - binning everything immediately.

 

[davek]

That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater though.

You want some consistency to counteract measures of change. It's what Moyes screwed up at United - binning everything immediately.

You want consistency with people touched with success in the role, not failure. Why on earth would you want to keep on taking someone with you who's only known failure?

 

[Tubey]

You want consistency with people touched with success in the role, not failure. Why on earth would you want to keep on taking someone with you who's only known failure?

OK, name the alternative. Because Everton have only known failure since 1995, so I have zero clue who the alternative would be.

Plus, Everton are the failure as a club - it doesn't mean Ferguson is responsible; hell, it's incredibly unlikely he is. It's perfectly possible to be a Seamus Coleman surrounded by Cuco Martinas, for example. Perhaps, just perhaps, Ferguson does well behind the scenes and is well suited to adapting to new teams.

 

[dancing llama]

That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater though.

You want some consistency to counteract measures of change. It's what Moyes screwed up at United - binning everything immediately.

This. Not an easy thing to quantify but I suspect there are a lot more examples of wholesale changes leading to problems than leading to success. Not a football example but the aussies who bought Homebase immediately sacked all the management and have lost a BILLION quid in the last 2 years from trying to change everything too quick.

Consistency is also why I'm very pleased to have a real DoF now, means the whole club doesn't lurch direction just because we change manager

You want consistency with people touched with success in the role, not failure. Why on earth would you want to keep on taking someone with you who's only known failure?

So you want to sack anyone who joined EFC later than 1995? Jimmy Martin will be staying but I guess we will have to get new people in every other job...

 

[dancing llama]

Although I will say that if he's here for solid footballing reasons, all well and good - but if he's kept for sentiment then needs binning post haste

 

[davek]

OK, name the alternative. Because Everton have only known failure since 1995, so I have zero clue who the alternative would be.

Plus, Everton are the failure as a club - it doesn't mean Ferguson is responsible; hell, it's incredibly unlikely he is. It's perfectly possible to be a Seamus Coleman surrounded by Cuco Martinas, for example. Perhaps, just perhaps, Ferguson does well behind the scenes and is well suited to adapting to new teams.

Why look for continuity at all if none of them have had success?

The new manager should never be told that DF comes with the job - like some new owner of a house who gets told they have a residents charge they have to inherit and hadn't bargained for. Silva has his own team he always uses. He should be left to get on with that. This isn't DFs personal charity.

 

[Blues Harp]

His ability as a coach isn't the issue. The issue is that he's been part and parcel of multiple failed regimes and to see him retain his position makes no sense at all and ingrains a sense that nothing will change.

Thats Kenwright you are talking about.....Isn't it ??lol