To the annoyance of many fans, owners of football clubs are becoming more and more influential in the transfer dealings of a football club. The days of a manager taking full control over his team’s transfer policy are dwindling, with only a handful of bosses seemingly having the complete control and trust from their owners to make the right moves before the transfer window shuts.
Newcastle United’s summer was dominated by renewed criticisms of the owners and the club’s transfer policy. The failure to land a number nine and replacement for Andy Carroll before the transfer window shut angered not only Toon fans but also their manager, Alan Pardew. Since the transfer window shut Pardew has admitted his frustration and disappointment that the board couldn’t complete any deals for a new striker.
The role that Mike Ashley has played at Newcastle has been a matter for debate and much anger ever since the unpopular figure took charge on Tyneside. But Pardew’s own admission about the board raises serious doubts over Pardew’s involvement in trying to find a striker and the board’s actions since they lost Carroll for £35 million back in January.
But as Pardew looks to have lost control over his team’s transfer policy, with owner Ashley seemingly playing a big role in the incomings and the high profile outgoings at the club, why are more and more managers losing control over their club’s transfer policies?
[ad_pod id=’vip-2′ align=’centre’]
The relationship between managers and owners can often be a fragile but crucial connection. A breakdown of this relationship has caused high-profile problems for many clubs. A manager’s ability to have full control over the dealings of a club, similar to that of the very successful Sir Alex Ferguson, can’t be expected at every single club as all managers and owners are different but it is worryingly becoming more and more of an extinct model of how to correctly run a football club.
Along with Newcastle, another club whose transfer policy dominated the headlines was Tottenham Hotspur. In their attempt to hold onto star midfielder Luka Modric it was chairman Daniel Levy who looked to be pulling the strings. Whilst Levy’s insistence that Modric would not be sold was admirable, manager Harry Redknapp was left in a difficult position. He is the one that has to deal with a potentially unhappy player day-to-day, and rumours inevitably suggested possible disagreements between the manager and chairman as to whether keeping Modric was the right move. Only time will tell whether Levy’s strong presence in Tottenham’s transfer dealings has a long-term detrimental effect but I am a great believer in the idea that other than a budget, managers should have control over their team’s transfer dealings.
Since the Venkys took over at Blackburn, inexplicably sacking then manager Sam Allardyce and replacing him with Steve Kean, their influence over some of Blackburn’s more high-profile transfer attempts has been clear. They apparent desire for a marquee name at Blackburn has lead to reports of failed bids for former world stars like Raul and Ronaldinho, both unrealistic and misguided transfer attempts.
Whilst every owner, either foreign or British, will run their businesses differently, Premier League clubs should avoid restricting their manager’s involvement in the transfer market. Owners are the ones who appoint these managers on lengthy and expensive contracts to run the team and stepping on the toes of managers only risks more trouble and controversial headlines.
Do you think managers should have more control over transfer policies? If you want to read more of my bite size, 140 character views and thoughts follow me on Twitter @jennyk5
[divider]
Fancy a Premier League Box Experience? Click on banner below to find out more
[divider]