Official Thomas Tuchel *Now Sacked*

[EdinburghBlue]

8 hours ago, just said:

Myself and others have called him Tommy Tactics. General calls him Tommy Tickle. There's been a few other ones too. Tommy Too Cool I saw somewhere on here. You have to admit EB his name rather lends itself to it!

And for the record I think the bloke has done about as much as could reasonably be expected since since he has taken over. IMO haven't seen any big transformation as some claim there's been. Are we playing attractive attacking football? Nope. Do I agree with all his player selections? Nope. And personally I didn't like what he did to CHO. Too humiliating for a young player I think. But he is winning games, he has shored up the defence, at least so far, and he comes across well in the media clips I have seen. Seems like a reasonable fella and I hope he has every success with us.

I wouldn’t say they’re particularly digging at him though is what I don’t understand? I thought Slojo was comparing them to the “Alonslow”, “Fat Frank” type of sh*t that we’ve seen before. I’d say those ones are different IMO.

 

I agree with everything you said in the second part.

[Wearyourcolours]

14 hours ago, Valerie said:

To bring the thread back on topic, I can't imagine my life without Tuchel now. I measure everyone, including myself, to his skinny frame. At the start of the year I felt like 3 TTs, now that I have exercising again I feel better, surely I must be back to 2.2 TTs. My neighbour however has grown to at least 4 TTs, he must gain 1 TT every fortnight.

I’m trying to get to 1.5 TTs ultimately, I think I’m destined to fail, however I think 1.75 TTs may be attainable. 😂

[ozboy]

23 hours ago, yorkleyblue said:

As @just pointed out, you swung the other way until you got all upset about the Arsenal game.

And no, you're not just "having a snide dig at people who constantly give out snide digs,"  You and @Brutos are constantly whining on at anyone who isn't 200% over the top in Tuchel-awe.  

In my opinion, with the exception of Atletico, the bloke has done nothing more than would be expected, nothing more than I would have expected Lampard to get and the smug, childish one-liners from the pair of you  ( plus some other armchair managers ) are getting tiresome. 

I've moved on from Lampard being sacked, but it looks very much like a small coterie of you lot just want to besmirch and distort the history of a loyal club servant.  I think it's shameful, but to be expected in the society we have today.

How come it’s us and them? This is the Tuchel thread. Slojo made the point that some folk constantly exactly as you say above that Tuchel has done no more than Lampard would be expected to do. That is what slojo is complaining about. No matter what Tuchel does it’s only weak opposition, or just what lampard would have done. No credit for Tuchel at all, just doing what lampard would have done, useless prick ain’t he? Never mind he’s changed the formation, changed the lineup and got points. That doesn’t count coz lampard would have got the results anyway. Very negative approach in my book, but I guess that’s north of England style. Lampard was a loyal club servant, and a fantastic player, with overall the best record of ant Chelsea player I’ve ever seen  but in my view he hasn’t got a great coaching record. So  can everyone move on from what lampard, or Peter is good or Eddie mcreadie would have done to what Tuchel is actually doing, good or bad. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by ozboy

[Argo]

15 minutes ago, ozboy said:

How come it’s us and them? This is the Tuchel thread. Slojo made the point that some folk constantly exactly as you say above that Tuchel has done no more than Lampard would be expected to do. That is what slojo is complaining about. No matter what Tuchel does it’s only weak opposition, or just what lampard would have done. No credit for Tuchel at all, just doing what lampard would have done, useless prick ain’t he? Never mind he’s changed the formation, changed the lineup and got points. That doesn’t count coz lampard would have got the results anyway. Very negative approach in my book, but I guess that’s north of England style. 

Exactly. If people said there wasn't yet much improvement compared to the autumn i can understand that, but it's light years above the absolute non football that was being played over the winter.

[just]

8 hours ago, Argo said:

Doesn't that kind off prove what he's saying? If someone sarcastically called Frank "tactics Frank" to pluck a random example he'd have faced a firing squad. 

I think Slojo has gone well too far with suggesting people are waiting for us to lose but i do feel Tuchel is unfairly being held to different standards compared to what i saw with not only Lampard but the other manager's aswell. For example we've had runs of controlled/boring games under the vast majority of manager of the Roman era yet i've never seen it become such a "thing" as it currently is, especially while the results have been good (even Sarri's unpopular cautious possession approach was overlooked until the results started eluding us).

The fairest direct comparison would be Hiddink 1.0 who took over in similar circumstances to TT (mid season after our previous manager nosedived after a promising start) and he approached the rest of the season in a similar way, ala a controlled/cautious approach (the majority of our games under Guus 1.0 were draws or narrow wins) yet Guus was idolized (almost as much as Jose) while TT is having similar tactics used as a black mark against him despite (so far) getting the results.

Not really. Frank Tactics wouldn't upset me. I doubt it would many other people either. 

[yorkleyblue]

2 hours ago, ozboy said:

How come it’s us and them? This is the Tuchel thread. Slojo made the point that some folk constantly exactly as you say above that Tuchel has done no more than Lampard would be expected to do. That is what slojo is complaining about. No matter what Tuchel does it’s only weak opposition, or just what lampard would have done. No credit for Tuchel at all, just doing what lampard would have done, useless prick ain’t he? Never mind he’s changed the formation, changed the lineup and got points. That doesn’t count coz lampard would have got the results anyway. Very negative approach in my book, but I guess that’s north of England style. Lampard was a loyal club servant, and a fantastic player, with overall the best record of ant Chelsea player I’ve ever seen  but in my view he hasn’t got a great coaching record. So  can everyone move on from what lampard, or Peter is good or Eddie mcreadie would have done to what Tuchel is actually doing, good or bad. 

I'm not getting dragged into the relative abilities of the two managers other than to repeat my view that Tuchel has done no more than should be expected (Atletico result apart), and has done no more than I believe Lampard would have done in the same fixtures, and anyone claiming that we are now a much better team is either deluded or disingenuous or on a wind-up. 

My complaint was about the few whiney smug f**ks who pop into nearly every thread with their childish little snide digs at people who had expressed the view that Lampard should have been given more time.

[RMH]

1 hour ago, Argo said:

Exactly. If people said there wasn't yet much improvement compared to the autumn i can understand that, but it's light years above the absolute non football that was being played over the winter.

Focusing on what TT has brought, I think that he deserves credit for bringing stability to a group of players that was in a free fall form since mid December, which is great and what we needed. We are winning points, which is also great and we are back in the mix to get top 4. So he deserves a lot of credit for that. But I am still to watch a game as entertaining as Leeds, Sevilla away or, for the sake of argument, WestBrom where we came back from a 3-0 playing a high intensity and fluid football (and 5 more minutes and we would have won). And all this with 4 at the back. Under Tuchel, I've seen a too safe strategy against Wolves, entertaining wins over Burnley and Spuds (though he went so defensive in the last 20 minutes or so that they were close to equalise), a win against Sheffield that took more work than it should have (nervy), the most disgraceful performance against Barnsley (yes, field variable taken into account), an expected win against the barcodes (who tend to lose at the Bridge more often than not), a disaster at Southampton that had bad tactics and management from the get go, and a really, really, really boring match against Atlético, but tactically what you want in an away CL night (but my god it was dull to watch). I'm really happy for the wins and not so much for the way we play (fortunately, I'm not spending the money I used to going to matches at home and away). So no, other than the points we are getting, I see not much of an improvement over the whole season, we were top of the league at some point and playing good attacking football, that should be the aim towards the end of the season. I hope that Tuchel gets the time to develop an entertaining style, next season is a minimum for me, and you won't see me pushing him under the bus as the sh*t hits the fan and others start turning on him.

[Argo]

23 minutes ago, RMH said:

Focusing on what TT has brought, I think that he deserves credit for bringing stability to a group of players that was in a free fall form since mid December, which is great and what we needed. We are winning points, which is also great and we are back in the mix to get top 4. So he deserves a lot of credit for that. But I am still to watch a game as entertaining as Leeds, Sevilla away or, for the sake of argument, WestBrom where we came back from a 3-0 playing a high intensity and fluid football (and 5 more minutes and we would have won). And all this with 4 at the back. Under Tuchel, I've seen a too safe strategy against Wolves, entertaining wins over Burnley and Spuds (though he went so defensive in the last 20 minutes or so that they were close to equalise), a win against Sheffield that took more work than it should have (nervy), the most disgraceful performance against Barnsley (yes, field variable taken into account), an expected win against the barcodes (who tend to lose at the Bridge more often than not), a disaster at Southampton that had bad tactics and management from the get go, and a really, really, really boring match against Atlético, but tactically what you want in an away CL night (but my god it was dull to watch). I'm really happy for the wins and not so much for the way we play (fortunately, I'm not spending the money I used to going to matches at home and away). So no, other than the points we are getting, I see not much of an improvement over the whole season, we were top of the league at some point and playing good attacking football, that should be the aim towards the end of the season. I hope that Tuchel gets the time to develop an entertaining style, next season is a minimum for me, and you won't see me pushing him under the bus as the sh*t hits the fan and others start turning on him.

But like I said earlier, the majority of our managers in the Roman era (Frank included) has had a long/longish spell of cautious/safe football yet with none of them (not even Sarri) was it made such a big thing to the extent it is currently and certainly not while the results were there. Also as I said Hiddink 1.0 took over at a similar time of the season and with a few exceptions played similar controlled/cautious tactics (for I'm assuming the same reason) as to what we're seeing at the moment and he had us almost universally begging him to stay.

And yes you have a point that those games you mentioned being more entertaining and I actually agree, but it's a moot point purely because if we maintained the level of performance from that time Frank would still be here, if we for argument sake sacked Frank after Leeds then yes those comparisons would be fair game. Again to bring back the Hiddink example when we assessed the improvement he made from Scolari did/do we look at the period we were playing well under the Brazilian hitting 4s and 5s or did/do we look at the period that ultimately caused us to turn to Guus? When we raved about Conte's spectacular impact the comparison was always to the mess he inherited and not the title win before that.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Argo

[ozboy]

59 minutes ago, RMH said:

Focusing on what TT has brought, I think that he deserves credit for bringing stability to a group of players that was in a free fall form since mid December, which is great and what we needed. We are winning points, which is also great and we are back in the mix to get top 4. So he deserves a lot of credit for that. But I am still to watch a game as entertaining as Leeds, Sevilla away or, for the sake of argument, WestBrom where we came back from a 3-0 playing a high intensity and fluid football (and 5 more minutes and we would have won). And all this with 4 at the back. Under Tuchel, I've seen a too safe strategy against Wolves, entertaining wins over Burnley and Spuds (though he went so defensive in the last 20 minutes or so that they were close to equalise), a win against Sheffield that took more work than it should have (nervy), the most disgraceful performance against Barnsley (yes, field variable taken into account), an expected win against the barcodes (who tend to lose at the Bridge more often than not), a disaster at Southampton that had bad tactics and management from the get go, and a really, really, really boring match against Atlético, but tactically what you want in an away CL night (but my god it was dull to watch). I'm really happy for the wins and not so much for the way we play (fortunately, I'm not spending the money I used to going to matches at home and away). So no, other than the points we are getting, I see not much of an improvement over the whole season, we were top of the league at some point and playing good attacking football, that should be the aim towards the end of the season. I hope that Tuchel gets the time to develop an entertaining style, next season is a minimum for me, and you won't see me pushing him under the bus as the sh*t hits the fan and others start turning on him.

I think that bit about entertainment, at least in terms of goals scored is fair.  If opposition aren’t scoring at all and we only score 1 a game clearly there is less goal entertainment. That’s where a Tuchel supporter might point to only 6 games   

[RMH]

1 hour ago, Argo said:

But like I said earlier, the majority of our managers in the Roman era (Frank included) has had a long/longish spell of cautious/safe football yet with none of them (not even Sarri) was it made such a big thing to the extent it is currently and certainly not while the results were there. Also as I said Hiddink 1.0 took over at a similar time of the season and with a few exceptions played similar controlled/cautious tactics (for I'm assuming the same reason) as to what we're seeing at the moment and he had us almost universally begging him to stay.

And yes you have a point that those games you mentioned being more entertaining and I actually agree, but it's a moot point purely because if we maintained the level of performance from that time Frank would still be here, if we for argument sake sacked Frank after Leeds then yes those comparisons would be fair game. Again to bring back the Hiddink example when we assessed the improvement he made from Scolari did/do we look at the period we were playing well under the Brazilian hitting 4s and 5s or did/do we look at the period that ultimately caused us to turn to Guus? When we raved about Conte's spectacular impact the comparison was always to the mess he inherited and not the title win before that.

Fair post in general with a big but in the bolded bit. The slump was one month, give or take, under the most congested period in the PL history and with an unusual environment and player/fan situation as a result of a pandemic. Tell me how many managers/teams, with even a better CV (as some like to point out) and in normal conditions, do not have a slump during a season. The whole point in the league is to be able to manage well these dips in form to be able to end the season strong. Leicester went through a slump that made them lose the top 4 race to us and Utd last season. Did they sack their manager? Roman would most likely have sacked him. But look at them now, playing well, getting the points and looking strong candidates to top 4 this season (mind you, it can go wrong again, who knows). The point is, if Tuchel goes under a dip during the Xmas period next season, do we sack him again? I say no, some of you will say yes for the sake of getting top 4. I know that you are consistent, unlike others, and are happy to be sacking coaches as long as we keep getting trophies, and good for you to be that consistent. Others think that the unbalance we see today in the team is due to the constant coming and going of coaches, and that more patience with coaches can pay off in the long run. We are unlikely to compete in the PL or CL, regularly, with the team we have at the moment. And that's not Tuchel's fault and it wasn't Frank's either. It's the result of a short-term policy. I will be happy to say that I was wrong if we compete for the title the next 3-4 seasons.

On another point, regarding the football we are watching now. I thought that the whole point of switching from Conte to Sarri and then Lampard was to start getting more fluid, attacking, attractive football that Roman Abramovich wanted to see us play (that's what it was reported, I've never talked to him so have no idea if this is true). If Tuchel keeps the safe mode for long, will Roman have the patience?

[yorkleyblue]

One of the critical things for me is that City started the season in a slump, United were pants for a long time, Arsenal are sh*te, Spuds are in a slump, Dippers have scored less goals at Anfield this year than Everton, yet our fans are the ones who called for a manager to be sacked.  Only City and United have lost fewer matches than us this season.  Only City, United and Leicester have a better goal difference, and United's was massively padded by Southampton rolling over for them.

I've said many times, some of our fans and some of our board are way to easily swayed by the twattering types and the media, and lack any patience or loyalty.

 

[Argo]

2 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

One of the critical things for me is that City started the season in a slump, United were pants for a long time, Arsenal are sh*te, Spuds are in a slump, Dippers have scored less goals at Anfield this year than Everton, yet our fans are the ones who called for a manager to be sacked.  Only City and United have lost fewer matches than us this season.  Only City, United and Leicester have a better goal difference, and United's was massively padded by Southampton rolling over for them.

I've said many times, some of our fans and some of our board are way to easily swayed by the twattering types and the media, and lack any patience or loyalty.

 

I apologise if I've misinterpreted you but are you suggesting we've been the only ones that called for the manager to go while all the others you have mentioned have largely remained fully behind their manager? That simply isn't true, a significant majority of Spurs fans now want Mou out (some going as far as hoping they lose to get him out quicker) a decent portion of United fans would replace Ole in a heartbeat despite their current position (ive seen them lot compare almost every manager under the sun favourbly against Ole) and a very vocal minority at Arsenal want Arteta and they went to sell "Arteta out" shirts, to my knowledge no one went that far (hoping we lose and selling t shirts) with Frank.

I know you don't agree with a high manager turnover which is fair enough but it's certainly not just a Chelsea fan thing, I can name atleast one example of the fanbases of most if not all PL clubs calling a manager being sacked at some time relitevely recently.  

[yorkleyblue]

I stand corrected. 

But then I don't spend time on other club forums, so don't know the depth of the feeling at those clubs, but specifically because we had a lot of people defending or even praising the managers of those clubs, even when they had as bad or even worse slump than we did.

I think I was mislead by the number of our fans who were firmly in the camp of Lampard had to go because we had a minor slump.  Though I stand by my view that a fair number of our fans have little or no concept of loyalty and all the patience of @Munkworth's cat when its food is half an hour late.

PS - I can understand Arteta Out T-shirts though - Arsenal fans are the most fickle I ever met, and that includes @Slojo and @Brutos

Edited February 26, 2021 by yorkleyblue

[dansubrosa]

Let’s move on, it’s not really doing anybody good bickering.

Meanwhile I agree Lampard would have achieved what Tuchel have so far, I don’t think he would have got a win against Atletico or Man United. Liverpool probably, we’ve played well against them under Frank.

But if Tuchel get a few more wins in the next month or so, that’ll put the argument to bed. Frank probably wouldn’t have done well against the opponents we are facing soon.

Let’s move on and hope Tuchel can give us a few very good results in the next few weeks.

[Slojo]

Just now, yorkleyblue said:

I stand corrected. 

But then I don't spend time on other club forums, so don't know the depth of the feeling at those clubs, but specifically because we had a lot of people defending or even praising the managers of those clubs, even when they had as bad or even worse slump than we did.

I think I was mislead by the number of our fans who were firmly in the camp of Lampard had to go because we had a minor slump.

PS - I can understand Arteta Out T-shirts - Arsenal fans are the most fickle I ever met, and that includes @Slojo and @Brutos

I really don't want to get into all this again. 

But come on, it wasn't just about a minor slump, like others have pointed out, Frank had no experience, no CV, nothing. That was the deal changer. If Frank came here after winning a Serie A at Napoli, or got into a Champions League final with Wolfsburg, do you really think I would be that dismissive of his ability to turn things around here and be the manager we need to win titles? I was never optimistic on Frank to begin with, I said before last season he would be gone by November/December, that's how much confidence I had in a manager with no experience in such a difficult job at the time. 

Even after that I said, if the defence isn't sorted, we have to start asking serious questions. Credit to him, he did that and things were going well early, I got very optimistic about it, then things took a dive. But here's the thing, I stuck by Jose despite how awful things were, I stuck by Ancelotti and that sacking still annoys me to this day, I wanted Di Matteo to have more time. But because I changed my opinion on Frank, again a manager who's won nothing and only started his job just over 2 years ago, I'm one of the most fickle fans you've met? A load of rubbish. I know many people who wanted Jose gone in that 3rd season, I wasn't one of them, and it was one of my most humiliating experiences as a Chelsea fan having to defend him week in week out when fans were turning against him. 

[yorkleyblue]

10 minutes ago, Slojo said:

But come on, it wasn't just about a minor slump, like others have pointed out, Frank had no experience, no CV, nothing.

We'll not get into it all again, but this is the sort of bollocks I mean.

It was a minor slump, we've lost 6 matches all season, only City and United have lost fewer.  Only those two and Leicester have a better goal difference.

Guardiola had no experience and no CV when he took over Barcelona.  To utilise your school-boy friend's google techniques he "In his first season as the first team manager, he guided Barcelona to the treble of La Liga, Copa del Rey and UEFA Champions League. "

Klopp had "no CV and Experience" when he took over Mainz.

"Ancelotti began his managerial career with Serie B side Reggiana in 1995,^[25] where he immediately aided the team in achieving promotion to Serie A"

"Mourinho moved into coaching, first as an interpreter for Sir Bobby Robson at Sporting CP and Porto, before gaining success as an assistant at Barcelona under both Robson and his successor, Louis van Gaal."

The whole "No CV, No experience is just disingenuous bullsh*t to cover for a short-termist knee-jerk reaction to a few bad results and the desperate need to have it all and have it now or otherwise move on to the next shiny-shiny thing.

 

@just is much better than me at collating all of your flip-flops about various personnel.

Edited February 26, 2021 by yorkleyblue

[Slojo]

7 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

We'll not get into it all again, but this is the sort of bollocks I mean.

It was a minor slump, we've lost 6 matches all season, only City and United have lost fewer.  Only those two and Leicester have a better goal difference.

Guardiola had no experience and no CV when he took over Barcelona.  To utilise your school-boy friend's google techniques he "In his first season as the first team manager, he guided Barcelona to the treble of La Liga, Copa del Rey and UEFA Champions League. "

Klopp had "no CV and Experience" when he took over Mainz.

"Ancelotti began his managerial career with Serie B side Reggiana in 1995,^[25] where he immediately aided the team in achieving promotion to Serie A"

"Mourinho moved into coaching, first as an interpreter for Sir Bobby Robson at Sporting CP and Porto, before gaining success as an assistant at Barcelona under both Robson and his successor, Louis van Gaal."

The whole "No CV, No experience is just disingenuous bullsh*t to cover for a short-termist knee-jerk reaction to a few bad results and the desperate need to have it all and have it now or otherwise move on to the next shiny-shiny thing.

 

@just is much better than me at collating all of your flip-flops about various personnel.

He's not though, the pair of you have one argument and that's it. Frank Lampard, if that's the hill you want to die on so be it. 

Loads of our fans turned their backs on Jose, I bet many on here did, I didn't, so how can I be one of the most fickle fans you've met because I didn't back Frank Lampard? 

Ancelotti came here after winning two Champions League's with AC Milan. Jose Mourinho came here after winning a Champions League with Porto, then came back here after winning it with Inter, every trophy in Italy, every trophy in Spain, already had success at Chelsea. Di Matteo won us an F.A. Cup and a Champions League in the space of 5 months here. Are you really going to compare them and think that's a fair comparison? Frank's CV is nowhere near there's. 

And sorry, but did Liverpool give Klopp the job after Mainz? Did we give Ancelotti the job after Reggiana? No, so why is that relevant? 

[RMH]

5 minutes ago, Slojo said:

He's not though, the pair of you have one argument and that's it. Frank Lampard, if that's the hill you want to die on so be it. 

Loads of our fans turned their backs on Jose, I bet many on here did, I didn't, so how can I be one of the most fickle fans you've met because I didn't back Frank Lampard? 

Ancelotti came here after winning two Champions League's with AC Milan. Jose Mourinho came here after winning a Champions League with Porto, then came back here after winning it with Inter, every trophy in Italy, every trophy in Spain, already had success at Chelsea. Di Matteo won us an F.A. Cup and a Champions League in the space of 5 months here. Are you really going to compare them and think that's a fair comparison? Frank's CV is nowhere near there's. 

And sorry, but did Liverpool give Klopp the job after Mainz? Did we give Ancelotti the job after Reggiana? No, so why is that relevant? 

You're completely missing the point about the CV, aren't you? In real life, no one is born with a CV as thick as the bible, are they? The same in football, if none of those coaches had been given a chance at the start of their careers by some or other "bigger" team, they would not have become what they are. Simple as.

[Imran_CFC]

The CV argument is flawed in my view because a CV is only taken into account at point of appointment, the board understood he didn't have the experience and gave him the job regardless, after this point they should trust their appointment. 

What were the board expecting from Frank that he will sail through the Managerial job without ever going through a bad slump?

[Slojo]

8 minutes ago, RMH said:

You're completely missing the point about the CV, aren't you? In real life, no one is born with a CV as thick as the bible, are they? The same in football, if none of those coaches had been given a chance at the start of their careers by some or other "bigger" team, they would not have become what they are. Simple as.

I'm not missing the point at all. Chelsea isn't the place you start your career, and Guardiola won the league in his first season at Barcelona, while already managing Barcelona B, just like Zidane was with Madrid, both of them had instant success. Frank didn't, people in their position have to hit the ground running, or else. 

But yeah, I'm the one who keeps missing the point, meanwhile lets keep comparing Frank to great managers who've won things and pretend they're the exact same thing. 

[Slojo]

5 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

The CV argument is flawed in my view because a CV is only taken into account at point of appointment, the board understood he didn't have the experience and gave him the job regardless, after this point they should trust their appointment. 

What were the board expecting from Frank that he will sail through the Managerial job without ever going through a bad slump?

They sacked other managers for less, more accomplished ones, why should Frank get this privilege while others don't? Especially Di Matteo who accomplished a lot more in a shorter time and got given less time than Frank ever did. 

Being under this illusion that managers have to serve out their contract is just silly, no manager here has served their full contract, it very rarely happens. Last season was an anomoly, we'll never have a season like that again (hopefully not), and he was picked on the circumstance. He wouldn't have gotten the job otherwise. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Slojo

[Imran_CFC]

1 minute ago, Slojo said:

They sacked other managers for less, more accomplished ones, why should Frank get this privileged while others don't? Especially Di Matteo who accomplished a lot more in a shorter time and got given less time than Frank ever did. 

So because they Fired others prematurely they have the right to fire Frank prematurely?

[Slojo]

1 minute ago, Imran_CFC said:

So because they Fired others prematurely they have the right to fire Frank prematurely?

Considering we've fired managers for less, who are more accomplished, I don't see why you have to be under this illusion that sacking Frank went against football protocol. Managers very rarely serve out their contracts. If a club wants rid of a manager, they don't wait until their contract expires, they sack them, simple as that. 

[Argo]

1 hour ago, yorkleyblue said:

I stand corrected. 

But then I don't spend time on other club forums, 

 @Slojo and @Brutos

In my defense neither do I, I use a platform dedicated to all team supporters so get the general lay of the land.

Seperate note i can't get those two tags off for whatever reason so there's no reason for them.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Argo

[Imran_CFC]

2 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Considering we've fired managers for less, who are more accomplished, I don't see why you have to be under this illusion that sacking Frank went against football protocol. Managers very rarely serve out their contracts. If a club wants rid of a manager, they don't wait until their contract expires, they sack them, simple as that. 

I understand we will never come to an agreement on this argument because we are arguing over 2 completely different perspectives. Your stance is it's protocol to get rid of Managers the moment a team hits a blip and it's the footballing protocol, no one is arguing that point. Everyone understands that sacking Managers is a footballing norm and the moment results don't go your way and performances start to slip the board have every right to fire you.

The point which myself and the others are trying to make is that even if that is the footballing norm and we've done it in the past it doesn't make the firing of the Manager prematurely the right thing to do, If we don't make top 4 at the end of the season my view will be exactly the same for Tuchel that he should be our Manager for next season and be given a summer window and a pre-season to prove his worth. However based on your argument you will be happy with Tuchel being let go because it's a footballing norm and the club can get rid of the Manager regardless of contractual obligations. The stance you've taken for the argument is flawed because it justifies the firing of any Manager at any point which is exactly what is wrong with the footballing norm in the modern world.