Laughable. It’s been explained multiple times, but you choose to ignore it. If his responsibilities don’t involve the squad compilation or the choice of manager and thus league position he may be the least influential CEO in world football.
Did the Birmingham CEO did after appointing and subsequently sacking Zola, Redknapp and Cotterill? As for the squad composition, aside from a goalkeeper it’s a very decent squad and one that should survive although I appreciate that games aren’t won on paper hence Sheff United, Brentford and Millwall flying high whilst Sunderland are already relegated.
What a glorious example of a well run football club Birmingham are. The squad hecky had was disgusting. Simple as that.
You can’t have it both ways. You’ve said a CEO should be responsible for the manager, therefore when a manager fails it’s a slight on the CEO. As for the squad, yes the CEO is involved in the actual signing of the finalised targets yet to my knowledge the CEO isn’t part of the actual recruitment team. If we’ve signposted the wrong targets then that’s not a slight on the CEO.
If your reputation relies on a business performing, it doesn’t matter whether part of it feels your remit or not. You make it mattee. He is at fault for appointing the clueless manager, don’t really get your angle there?
So every time our CEO appoints a manager that fails he should fall on his sword? That’s what you’re clearly suggesting.
In the same piece in the Chronicle around Mills and Townsend leaving it also says that Adam Hammills future at the Club is unclear. GG has said " we will see what happens at the end of the season."