Unfortunately, the logical thing is to try to tap into the way the Board are thinking right now.
Parkinson has, thus far, been an abject failure and yet he has been rewarded with the manager’s job for an as yet ‘undefined’ period.
Football management is a pretty fraught hand to mouth existence. Yes, you earn great money when in a job, but once your star begins to set, or you mess things up once too often, you might find yourself in your late 40s with a stigma attached to your name. Then what?
So Phil Parkinson, as part of Pardew’s spectacularly bad managerial team, is hardly flavour of the month. Add to that the fact he hasn’t ‘managed’ in two years and only then at Colchester and Hull for relatively short periods, he would be very lucky to get a full-time gig above League One at best.
I suspect, as the Board is skint and PP has few alternatives of his own, we have given him the job but without any especial financial recognition of that fact.
So, basically, he is nice and cheap and we could afford him even if we are relegated. My view is, if he keeps us alive and in the hunt for survival until the second half of April before mathematics send us down, he’ll keep the job with RM and DC trotting out the same line they used to appoint him in the first place.
‘He knows League One, we have improved, Kins is a Charlton man blah blah blah….’
ps If he keeps us up, he undeniably deserves it of course and even new owners, assuming any come in, would then need to give him a crack, in my opinion, with greater financial resources.
That's because if they had admitted it was only to the end of the season, the bookies wouldn't have paid out on the millions messrs Murray and Chappell put on Parky at 7-1 and which is now going to fund the Man City style spending spree which is going to keep us up...
Sorry ...I think I've been taking Oggy's happy pills !!!!!!
See Nigel, we will lure you over to the rose-tinted side in the end :-)
Given the position we're in, I'd be amazed if the board were willing to offer anyone terms beyond the end of the season. Which may have been part of the problem.
Comments
Parkinson has, thus far, been an abject failure and yet he has been rewarded with the manager’s job for an as yet ‘undefined’ period.
Football management is a pretty fraught hand to mouth existence. Yes, you earn great money when in a job, but once your star begins to set, or you mess things up once too often, you might find yourself in your late 40s with a stigma attached to your name. Then what?
So Phil Parkinson, as part of Pardew’s spectacularly bad managerial team, is hardly flavour of the month. Add to that the fact he hasn’t ‘managed’ in two years and only then at Colchester and Hull for relatively short periods, he would be very lucky to get a full-time gig above League One at best.
I suspect, as the Board is skint and PP has few alternatives of his own, we have given him the job but without any especial financial recognition of that fact.
So, basically, he is nice and cheap and we could afford him even if we are relegated. My view is, if he keeps us alive and in the hunt for survival until the second half of April before mathematics send us down, he’ll keep the job with RM and DC trotting out the same line they used to appoint him in the first place.
‘He knows League One, we have improved, Kins is a Charlton man blah blah blah….’
ps If he keeps us up, he undeniably deserves it of course and even new owners, assuming any come in, would then need to give him a crack, in my opinion, with greater financial resources.
The announcement said undisclosed which I hope means until the end of the season.
Maybe the deal is, retains existing cotract, gets a bonus at the end of the season for keeping us up.
That's because if they had admitted it was only to the end of the season, the bookies wouldn't have paid out on the millions messrs Murray and Chappell put on Parky at 7-1 and which is now going to fund the Man City style spending spree which is going to keep us up...
Sorry ...I think I've been taking Oggy's happy pills !!!!!!
Given the position we're in, I'd be amazed if the board were willing to offer anyone terms beyond the end of the season. Which may have been part of the problem.