What is the point of this "football board"?

[Patches OHoolahan 0]

It appears that this four man football board, composed of McNally, Adams, Ewan Chester (assuming he''s still chief scout) and the as yet unnamed technical director hasn''t really changed too much. McNally promised a review of the football management structure, but it seems like the technical director is just alleviating a relatively minor burden from the management team.

I thought the idea of a director of football had some merit, a sort of hybrid head of recruitment and board member to act as that go-between and ensure real long-term consistency with input on recruitment decisions regarding managers and coaches from first-team to academy level. This would have given consistency to the club in terms of the transition between managers. I''m not sure their conception of the technical director really changes much in the grand scheme of things. All the so-called board members have discrete areas of responsibility so the extent to which they are held to account by one another will be limited except where performance is clearly deficient (i.e. first team manager; recruitment). I believe a more fundamental rethink would have been beneficial to the long-term future of this football club.

[Phil Boyers Admiral top 0]

The point if this board is to strengthen mcanally''s position - the man that fiddled while city burned and who now presides over a shambolic appointment.

[Phil Boyers Admiral top 0]

The word "rethink" would suggest that this lot actually think about anything. I would suggest that it''s "my way or the highway" when it comes to McNally.

[Patches OHoolahan 0]

I''m not sure how much it strengthens McNally''s position. I suppose it may add a veneer of democracy to some of his decisions if he has discussed it with the football board. Really I think my objection is that it doesn''t really change much of anything.

[Katie Borkins 1]

To veto Steve Foley.

[Patches OHoolahan 0]

Do you think McNally would dictate to Adams in that way on footballing decisions? Would be interesting to know. Nothing against Mr Foley but I for one am quite happy he''s not coming back on board, feels like he''s been away from the top level for too long.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

In my view this restructure is simply about providing a shield between the board and future criticism should they fail to make an obvious decision such as sacking Hughton again in the future.