Should a football manager be allowed to have administrative duties?

[Pulsar36]

Which way is better? The English model where the manager is involved with everything- or the continental model where the coach identifiers targets but after that is it up to the general managers to decide and run all those transfer operations?

 

[Handoyo]

Yes and no. If someone is already integrated into the club's system and is familiar with everyone, then he should be allowed to extend his jurisdiction. Obviously, Alex Ferguson is a perfect example. Coaches who have been in the game for a long time can be included as well

But if someone is fairly new to the club and just know about coaching football only, then he shouldn't. Someone like Guardiola perhaps, or Walter Zenga.

The duties should be optional though, ie, if the managers want to mingle around, then so be it, but if they don't want to, don't disturb them.

 

[Pulsar36]

I think it is too much for the manager to focus on duties like that of a general manager and coaching. Stick to tactics. However, I think in cases where the coach gets enough cred, they should be allowed to formulate who they want and provide backups, like Mouirnho is doing.

 

[Stefan]

Article about the same issue.

Friday 5 September, 2008 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]Blog:[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular] Manager or Coach?[/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]As English bosses realise their transfer input is no longer needed, [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]Steve Wilson[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular] muses that this has successfully been the case in Italy for years[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]The English Premier League prides itself on being The Best League In The World™, but the latest round of managerial madness just highlights another example of the game on these shores becoming more like it's continental cousin in Italy. We've already seen the influx of foreigners that the peninsula felt in the 1980s and last season British clubs such as Manchester United and Rangers progressed in Europe thanks to a stereotypical Italian defensive style. Now English gaffers are starting to realise that with foreign owners comes foreign methods regarding transfers.

It is why we refer to bosses in Italy as Coaches rather than managers. The traditional model of hierarchy sees the Coach do exactly what his job title suggests. His weekly job is to train the squad, tell them how to play, decide who will be in the XI on a Sunday and pat them on the back/kick them up the backside in the dressing room after the match. Who is actually in the squad is a different matter. That is usually dealt with by another person entirely - for example Fiorentina's Pantaleo Corvino, or in pre-Calciopoli days Luciano Moggi at Juventus.

English football has tried in the past to copy this system, with the laughable Director of Football role - a position in name alone. The system in England is too set in its old-fashioned ways, characters like Herbert Chapman, Brian Clough, Bill Shankly, Jock Stein and Alex Ferguson fit the bill of tough tactians who controlled every aspect of their club from top to bottom - the true Misters like their predecessors who bossed so many of the Italian outfits in their formative years. But times changed in Italy, evidently the trends of the future were being set in Serie A - as usual.

Nowadays very few chiefs in Italy can claim to have complete control, Jose Mourinho says he asked for three players this summer and got them all - bar Frank Lampard, for whom he got his second choice in Sulley Muntari. But do you think Carlo Ancelotti wanted Ronaldinho and Andriy Shevchenko? The long-suffering boss knew it was the other end of the pitch that needed strengthening, but he didn't utter a word. Instead he will take what he has been given and do what he is best at - moulding a successful team. European and World championship winning teams.

Is it not a sign of weakness that the likes of Kevin Keegan and Alan Curbishley felt they could only build a winning machine if they chose every cog and gear themselves? Is the true mastery of the managerial game not taking the sum parts on the table and working to get the best out of them? Times are changing, to become the so-called best the clubs of the Premier League have had to grasp the nettle and turn themselves into continental operations. It's nice of them to catch up, but how many more of the old guard will fight the tide before realising that it's better to swim than sink?[/FONT]