Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pete

McNally should go

Recommended Posts

Any CEO who by their inactivity loses their organisation 75% of its income doesn''t deserve to keep their over inflated package or their job.

Many will argue the decision to keep Hughton was a Board decision. The CEO advises the Board who in most cases take that advice. McNally appointed Hughton when most considered it a sound appointment, but failed to advise action when it became obvious the club were going backwards.

McNally got lucky with Lambert but the manner of his leaving was badly handled, Mcnally appears to be stubborn and likes his own way all the time and is inflexible in his attitude.

Whereas our Board are spineless and take no responsibility for our current predicament. To quote a Board member "Where are you". Has anyone heard anything from our Chairman whoever he might be?

For 4 years McNally ran City to our complete satisfaction but has failed singularly this season and therefore ought to seriously consider his position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m tired of this stupid, spoilt-brat routine from our fans.

"For 4 years McNally ran City to our complete satisfaction but has failed singularly this season and therefore ought to seriously consider his position. "

- So even though you acknowledge you have had 4 years of complete satisfaction, you think after 1 bad season and 1 bad decision that McNally has to go? Where''s the fairness in that?

And as for McNally being lucky with Lambert - why, exactly is hiring Lambert lucky (when he was obviously targetted for very specific reasons) and hiring Hughton a mistake?

Only the top 3 or 4 clubs in the premiership expect success EVERY season. The rest of the 88 football league clubs realise many of the decisions they make are gambles, some of which will not turn out, and will result in a period of decline.

If you''re going to throw your toys out of the pram when it''s not going well so soon after such an unprecedented period of success for our club, then you shouldn''t support a club like Norwich. Your mindset is more suitable to supporting a club such as Manchester United.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m not sure that the football "business" can be seen as completely analogous to business as a whole. I do however take your point that McNally should be sanctioned in some manner, although I imagine a performance related pay clause is already in his contract, thus he will take a financial hit if we go down.To my mind this would be sufficient- he knows he has failed in his handling of Chris Hughton''s dismissal, he will feel it in wallet and hopefully he will learn lessons from it in a footballing sense as well.

I''m not sure some supporters appreciate quite how radical the transformation has been under McNally''s watch, but it doesn''t take much to recall the ineptitude of our previous board with regards managerial appointments, and myriad other matters (Doomcaster''s infamous "deadline day diary" anyone?). I still trust McNally to get the right manager in to revive our fortunes next season, which is more than I could have said for our previous CEO and board, so for me, he should remain our Chief Exec for the time-being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="pete"]blurblurblurblurblur[/quote]"McNally should go""our Board are spineles""To quote a Board member "Where are you""Has anyone heard anything from our Chairman whoever he might be?

So it''s not just McNally you want out, it''s the whole board?Why didn''t you just say so? [:S]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bearing in mind the 2013 accounts showed a bonus for "achieving financial targets in the period and the retention of premier league status" of £867,000 (2012 it was £967,000) - and a contribution to a pension for one director of £76k,  I think it possible that DM may quite like this level of income and make our minds up for us by seeking pastures new . It could be argued that the Club will hit "financial targets" this year so he may still get a healthy bonus.

 

Personally I think it would be a disaster if DM leaves the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="pete"]Any CEO who by their inactivity loses their organisation 75% of its income doesn''t deserve to keep their over inflated package or their job.

Many will argue the decision to keep Hughton was a Board decision. The CEO advises the Board who in most cases take that advice. McNally appointed Hughton when most considered it a sound appointment, but failed to advise action when it became obvious the club were going backwards.

McNally got lucky with Lambert but the manner of his leaving was badly handled, Mcnally appears to be stubborn and likes his own way all the time and is inflexible in his attitude.

Whereas our Board are spineless and take no responsibility for our current predicament. To quote a Board member "Where are you". Has anyone heard anything from our Chairman whoever he might be?

For 4 years McNally ran City to our complete satisfaction but has failed singularly this season and therefore ought to seriously consider his position.[/quote]The short answer is "No", because the OP is wrong in pretty much every respect, including the line about  McNally having run the club to our complete satisfaction for four years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Gingerpele"]If he didn''t Purple why are you the only person who thinks that?[/quote]I''m not the only one, but even if I was that would still make me right! Seriously, GP, McNally has made mistakes. You would have to be blind to think otherwise. He is not some Hollywood superhero incapable of error. All that is happening now, as with the OP, is fans who thought of him in that infantile way are shocked to find their hero isn''t infallible. I think some almost feel betrayed by him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course he''s made mistake he''s human.

But the club were on a downwards spiral under the previous regime .And under McNally we''ve now had 3 years in the PL, reduced our debt extensively, given us our biggest transfer budget, kept the stadium full despite rising ticket costs.

And not sacking Hughton wasn''t really a mistake. Clearly he, the board, whoever, decided Hughton was the long term man. They were giving him chance after chance as teams who want a long term manager do. The mistake come sacking him too late, was a bit pointless when it happened but then if we went down he was going to have to go. As his job was to keep us in this league.

And you''re not right. There is no way he has not been a success at this club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="pete"]Any CEO who by their inactivity loses their organisation

75% of its income doesn''t deserve to keep their over inflated package or their

job. Many will argue the decision to keep Hughton was a Board decision. The CEO

advises the Board who in most cases take that advice. McNally appointed Hughton

when most considered it a sound appointment, but failed to advise action when it

became obvious the club were going backwards. McNally got lucky with

Lambert
but the manner of his leaving was badly handled, Mcnally

appears to be stubborn and likes his own way all the time and is inflexible in

his attitude. Whereas our Board are spineless and take no responsibility for our

current predicament. To quote a Board member "Where are you". Has anyone heard

anything from our Chairman whoever he might be? For 4 years McNally ran City to

our complete satisfaction but has failed singularly this season and therefore

ought to seriously consider his position.[/quote]
 
 
Why do so many people revisit past successes and retrospectively put them down to luck?
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Gingerpele"]Of course he''s made mistake he''s human.

But the club were on a downwards spiral under the previous regime .And under McNally we''ve now had 3 years in the PL, reduced our debt extensively, given us our biggest transfer budget, kept the stadium full despite rising ticket costs.

And not sacking Hughton wasn''t really a mistake. Clearly he, the board, whoever, decided Hughton was the long term man. They were giving him chance after chance as teams who want a long term manager do. The mistake come sacking him too late, was a bit pointless when it happened but then if we went down he was going to have to go. As his job was to keep us in this league.

And you''re not right. There is no way he has not been a success at this club.
[/quote]I never said he hadn''t been. Overall he has been a force for good. All I was denying was the "complete satisfaction" nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mistakes have been made and I''m sure there are questions that McNally will have to answer but...

 

...I think for how far we have come since he came in he deserves a second chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Board met after every game this season and discussed possible solutions to the underperforming manager. It is clear that they would have liked to have replaced him sooner but kept facing the same question which they were unable to answer, who? Who could they realistically replace him with? To quote a conversation I had with a Board member on Saturday ‘it was a gamble to stick with Hughton and it was a gamble to replace him’. The reality was that as bad as you may have perceived Hughton to have been performing, he was not the worst performer in the league by some distance and replacing him would not have guaranteed improvements.

 

In which case you have to ask yourself whether you would still be demanding McNally stepped down had the Board gambled earlier and replaced Hughton only for the situation to have worsened, lets say in the bottom three by March? In which case would you expect further action in the style of Fulham?

 

The reality is you are unhappy, as are all of us that things haven’t worked out and you are looking for someone to blame. With Hughton gone you now look to McNally. If he goes then someone else, and so on.

 

To gamble. That is what it is to be a Chief Executive at Norwich, sometimes you strike it lucky and find a Lambert, others it is more a dud in the form of Hughton. To compare McNally with a Chief Executive with someone of the same title at a traditional, normal company is somewhat daft as such gambles largely do not exist.

 

To sack Hughton and appoint Adams was also a gamble, one which we are yet to see the outcome of. Perhaps in that case it is best advised that you leave your childish calls for heads to roll for the time being and allow to see what the future holds. After all, a season in the Championship is still a vast improvement on the position we were in when McNally arrived.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thats fine Purple, sorry my fault for assuming/getting it wrong. I just thought you were implying he was no good at all.

Some people overreact. Like you''ll find many people who couldn''t admit Hucks never made a mistake because of how good he was. Of course we don''t want or need to go over little mistakes he made because none of them were really important, and all the good he did was very very good. The problem with McNally now is he didn''t sack Hughton until very late on, leaving Adams with no chance. I only assumed he wasn''t being sacked because he couldn''t find a suitable replacement and/or wanted Hughton to be long term so was giving him chance after chance to turn it around.

But no real replacement for Hughton, either he/they never really looked and sacking him was just a last ditch attempt to stop the inevitable or there was just no one willing to take on a sinking ship in Feb/March maybe even Jan. Or the ''top targets'' weren''t available. I don''t suppose we''ll ever know the real goings on behind the sacking and what they did or didn''t do in looking for a replacement earlier in the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="MancCanary"]I''m tired of this stupid, spoilt-brat routine from our fans.

"For 4 years McNally ran City to our complete satisfaction but has failed singularly this season and therefore ought to seriously consider his position. "

- So even though you acknowledge you have had 4 years of complete satisfaction, you think after 1 bad season and 1 bad decision that McNally has to go? Where''s the fairness in that?

And as for McNally being lucky with Lambert - why, exactly is hiring Lambert lucky (when he was obviously targetted for very specific reasons) and hiring Hughton a mistake?

Only the top 3 or 4 clubs in the premiership expect success EVERY season. The rest of the 88 football league clubs realise many of the decisions they make are gambles, some of which will not turn out, and will result in a period of decline.

If you''re going to throw your toys out of the pram when it''s not going well so soon after such an unprecedented period of success for our club, then you shouldn''t support a club like Norwich. Your mindset is more suitable to supporting a club such as Manchester United.[/quote]

This, this and then this, a hundered times over.

People should be more worried about what will happen if he leaves. The guy knows everything there is to know and more about running a football club effectively but about running Norwich City effectively. What do you suppose Vincent Tan knew about running Cardiff City when he turned up there? What about Tony Fernandes at qpr? Mr Allam at Hull? I realise they are owners rather than CEOs but you can guarantee that people like them are running the club from on high and doing much of the job that McNally does at Norwich. People who want him gone or "blame" him for our current predicament have absolutely no clue and have absolutely no idea about what they are wishing upon their club by calling for him to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Gingerpele"]Well thats fine Purple, sorry my fault for assuming/getting it wrong. I just thought you were implying he was no good at all.

Some people overreact. Like you''ll find many people who couldn''t admit Hucks never made a mistake because of how good he was. Of course we don''t want or need to go over little mistakes he made because none of them were really important, and all the good he did was very very good. The problem with McNally now is he didn''t sack Hughton until very late on, leaving Adams with no chance. I only assumed he wasn''t being sacked because he couldn''t find a suitable replacement and/or wanted Hughton to be long term so was giving him chance after chance to turn it around.

But no real replacement for Hughton, either he/they never really looked and sacking him was just a last ditch attempt to stop the inevitable or there was just no one willing to take on a sinking ship in Feb/March maybe even Jan. Or the ''top targets'' weren''t available. I don''t suppose we''ll ever know the real goings on behind the sacking and what they did or didn''t do in looking for a replacement earlier in the season.[/quote]Don''t worry, GP. There is one of my very long posts[S] building up in my head that would argue that no blame attaches to any of the board -  McNally included - for this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Brighton Yellow"]

The Board met after every game this season and discussed possible solutions to the underperforming manager. It is clear that they would have liked to have replaced him sooner but kept facing the same question which they were unable to answer, who? Who could they realistically replace him with? To quote a conversation I had with a Board member on Saturday ‘it was a gamble to stick with Hughton and it was a gamble to replace him’. The reality was that as bad as you may have perceived Hughton to have been performing, he was not the worst performer in the league by some distance and replacing him would not have guaranteed improvements.

 

In which case you have to ask yourself whether you would still be demanding McNally stepped down had the Board gambled earlier and replaced Hughton only for the situation to have worsened, lets say in the bottom three by March? In which case would you expect further action in the style of Fulham?

 

The reality is you are unhappy, as are all of us that things haven’t worked out and you are looking for someone to blame. With Hughton gone you now look to McNally. If he goes then someone else, and so on.

 

To gamble. That is what it is to be a Chief Executive at Norwich, sometimes you strike it lucky and find a Lambert, others it is more a dud in the form of Hughton. To compare McNally with a Chief Executive with someone of the same title at a traditional, normal company is somewhat daft as such gambles largely do not exist.

 

To sack Hughton and appoint Adams was also a gamble, one which we are yet to see the outcome of. Perhaps in that case it is best advised that you leave your childish calls for heads to roll for the time being and allow to see what the future holds. After all, a season in the Championship is still a vast improvement on the position we were in when McNally arrived.

[/quote]Excellent post, although I would question the bit in red. If we are talking about companies outside football choosing senior executives - ie the equivalent of picking a manager - then it can often be a gamble and one that goes wrong. The pages of the FT and the Wall Street Journal are littered with the sackings of CEOs and CFOs whose appointment seemed like a very good idea when it was made!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Firstly, ...we''re not going down!" said David McNally in his CH post-sacking interview. A confidence not shared by many at the time - and even fewer after the second half display at Old Trafford.

Yes we need some serious good fortune to remain a Premiership club. I guess we''re about to discover how lucky our CEO really is!...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Purple, it pretty much sums up my thoughts for most of the season which turn out to be very closely aligned to those of the Board. I learned this having had conversations with various Board members on Saturday.

 

In reference to your point, I do agree on some levels however I see someone who is tasked with the running of football club to be quite different to those of most companies. Of course there are some Chief Executives who face many unpredictable circumstances on a regular basis, however most will be able to utilise a number of models and procedures such as cost benefit analysis to aide them in making decisions. In particular, picking someone to manage an element of a company they are in charge of is probably far easier to do successfully. It is simply not the case that a football manager who achieves results at one club will achieve similar at another, which is more so probable to find in the normal world, Ask Randy Lerner for example.

 

The key thing to consider when evaluating our Board is to compare what they have achieved against where they have failed. At present at least their successes far outweigh the failures. If in two years’ time we are languishing somewhere near the bottom of the Championship or worse then a re-evaluation will be necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Brighton Yellow"]

The Board met after every game this season and discussed possible solutions to the underperforming manager. It is clear that they would have liked to have replaced him sooner but kept facing the same question which they were unable to answer, who? Who could they realistically replace him with? To quote a conversation I had with a Board member on Saturday ‘it was a gamble to stick with Hughton and it was a gamble to replace him’. The reality was that as bad as you may have perceived Hughton to have been performing, he was not the worst performer in the league by some distance and replacing him would not have guaranteed improvements.

 

In which case you have to ask yourself whether you would still be demanding McNally stepped down had the Board gambled earlier and replaced Hughton only for the situation to have worsened, lets say in the bottom three by March? In which case would you expect further action in the style of Fulham?

 

The reality is you are unhappy, as are all of us that things haven’t worked out and you are looking for someone to blame. With Hughton gone you now look to McNally. If he goes then someone else, and so on.

 

To gamble. That is what it is to be a Chief Executive at Norwich, sometimes you strike it lucky and find a Lambert, others it is more a dud in the form of Hughton. To compare McNally with a Chief Executive with someone of the same title at a traditional, normal company is somewhat daft as such gambles largely do not exist.

 

To sack Hughton and appoint Adams was also a gamble, one which we are yet to see the outcome of. Perhaps in that case it is best advised that you leave your childish calls for heads to roll for the time being and allow to see what the future holds. After all, a season in the Championship is still a vast improvement on the position we were in when McNally arrived.

[/quote]

Excellent post, although I would question the bit in red. If we are talking about companies outside football choosing senior executives - ie the equivalent of picking a manager - then it can often be a gamble and one that goes wrong. The pages of the FT and the Wall Street Journal are littered with the sackings of CEOs and CFOs whose appointment seemed like a very good idea when it was made!

[/quote]

 

I''m not sure that the appointment of CH was a gamble that went wrong. At least not immediately.  I think that the Football Club , given the critieria it would have used when it replaced Lambert would have been pleased with the decision in the first half of the first season. We were well placed at Christmas. So far so good. The CEO and the board would have been pleased, as Bowkett said

" You bet we have a plan B".

and it seemed to be working.

 

As the rest of the first season unfolded , certainly results were not as good. But ulitmately Premier League status was retained, Axa got their money and DM got his bonus. Can''t see much wrong there IN TERMS OF BUSINESS MEASURES. Yes, we all wondered about the style of play (a non absolute measure) and we wondered if the slide we had been on would continue into season 2.

 

As has been mentioned, it never actually got that bad in terms of league position (which in some ways was unfortunate given where we are now) and the board chose not sack CH. Personally I believe the non absolute measures should have been looked closely at around Christmas,  as well as less points, fewer goals and worse goal difference ie actual measures. The failure to change a game, seemed to be more obvious than before.

 

Then CH lost the plot, tried to change his style, we had Wesley Gate, Becchio Gate and pretty much anything CH tried turned to dust. As we left CR after the West Brom game I think we all thought it was over.

 

Of course where we are now would probably result in any club sacking their manager, it was just a case of when the board made it''s decision. The result that we now have our U18 coach in charge suggests an error of quite stupendous proportion, and certainly in most peoples eyes was done too late.

 

I don''t accept that there was no other alternative , suitable candidates. But there certainly were more expensive ones, and maybe this had a bearing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, lets imagine its mid May and the board have just sacked McNally, now what?We have a team without a manager and a club without a CEO, now what?Care to put a name up to replace McNally with someone that you think would be a better CEO for our club?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Brighton Yellow"]

Thanks Purple, it pretty much sums up my thoughts for most of the season which turn out to be very closely aligned to those of the Board. I learned this having had conversations with various Board members on Saturday.

 

In reference to your point, I do agree on some levels however I see someone who is tasked with the running of football club to be quite different to those of most companies. Of course there are some Chief Executives who face many unpredictable circumstances on a regular basis, however most will be able to utilise a number of models and procedures such as cost benefit analysis to aide them in making decisions. In particular, picking someone to manage an element of a company they are in charge of is probably far easier to do successfully. It is simply not the case that a football manager who achieves results at one club will achieve similar at another, which is more so probable to find in the normal world, Ask Randy Lerner for example.

 

The key thing to consider when evaluating our Board is to compare what they have achieved against where they have failed. At present at least their successes far outweigh the failures. If in two years’ time we are languishing somewhere near the bottom of the Championship or worse then a re-evaluation will be necessary.

[/quote]Agreed. And doesn''t just apply to the board as constituted now, but to the whole of Smith and Jones''s 17-year ownership of the club. They are markedly in credit over that period. A glance at the list of clubs we will be playing in the second tier next season would confirm that. There are several clubs there as big or even bigger than us who would kill for our qualified success of these last 17 seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let''s get rid of McNally and replace him with a clueless tool like Doncaster that''ll be the best step forward wouldn''t it? Fans need to look at McNally''s entire tenure at the club and IMO he has been the best chairman we''ve had, possibly ever. He''s got something''s wrong which makes him Human but I can''t remember a time I felt more confident of a chairman in transfer negotiations, that together with the debt clearance more than make up him sticking by a manager to long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Brighton Yellow"]

The Board met after every game this season and discussed possible solutions to the underperforming manager. It is clear that they would have liked to have replaced him sooner but kept facing the same question which they were unable to answer, who? Who could they realistically replace him with? To quote a conversation I had with a Board member on Saturday ‘it was a gamble to stick with Hughton and it was a gamble to replace him’. The reality was that as bad as you may have perceived Hughton to have been performing, he was not the worst performer in the league by some distance and replacing him would not have guaranteed improvements.

 

In which case you have to ask yourself whether you would still be demanding McNally stepped down had the Board gambled earlier and replaced Hughton only for the situation to have worsened, lets say in the bottom three by March? In which case would you expect further action in the style of Fulham?

 

The reality is you are unhappy, as are all of us that things haven’t worked out and you are looking for someone to blame. With Hughton gone you now look to McNally. If he goes then someone else, and so on.

 

To gamble. That is what it is to be a Chief Executive at Norwich, sometimes you strike it lucky and find a Lambert, others it is more a dud in the form of Hughton. To compare McNally with a Chief Executive with someone of the same title at a traditional, normal company is somewhat daft as such gambles largely do not exist.

 

To sack Hughton and appoint Adams was also a gamble, one which we are yet to see the outcome of. Perhaps in that case it is best advised that you leave your childish calls for heads to roll for the time being and allow to see what the future holds. After all, a season in the Championship is still a vast improvement on the position we were in when McNally arrived.

[/quote]

Excellent post Brighton.

I''m glad the majority of us echo my own sentiments about McNally and the board. For the first time in my living memory, I think we''ve got an outstanding board of directors, and our CE has a record of excellence at every position he has held prior to Norwich.

I think even if he left now (god forbid) his time here would be seen as his greatest achievement. Obviously there has been the odd mistake, but you have to expect errors with humans. Even Man Utd''s directors have made mistakes - even arguably the most successful man in football, Alex Ferguson, made lots of high profile errors. But you have to look at the overall time in charge to see the big picture and judge fairly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"]Let''s get rid of McNally and replace him with a clueless tool like Doncaster that''ll be the best step forward wouldn''t it? Fans need to look at McNally''s entire tenure at the club and IMO he has been the best chairman we''ve had, possibly ever. He''s got something''s wrong which makes him Human but I can''t remember a time I felt more confident of a chairman in transfer negotiations, that together with the debt clearance more than make up him sticking by a manager to long.[/quote]

McNally is Chief Executive not the Chairman.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...