Latest on Thalhammer (from Nixon)

Here is Nixons latest article.

I question the accuracy of his story though because a quick google search shows Thalhammer does meet the criteria from his three years coaching at Lask, Brugge & Oostende. I’ve attached a pic of the criteria for convenience taken from this website: https://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2022/04/06/brexitball-what-about-the-coaching-staff/

 

Wouldn't be averse to Williamson, former commanding centre back so should be able to sort our defence...........ahh.

 

Rather have Williamson over Thalhammer

 

Why wouldn't we just go for Duff? The proof is in the pudding, and we all know he's well liked and can do a job.

 

I wouldn't trust a word that comes out of Duff's mouth. #MLH

 

That would make the most sense, but then our insistence on forcing managers to play a certain formation & style will probably put most candidates off, why would he want to come back to that?

 

Big fan of Williamson,done great in a short period of time at Gateshead now MK dons

 

Which is all well and good but what if he doesn't want the gig.

 

If we are paying compo for a successful league 2 manager, get McCann in first thing tomorrow morning....

 

I just can't see what major difference any new manager is going to make between now and Friday and next Tuesday.

Same group of players to work with and those on the bench and beyond aren't exactly game changes (perhaps Jalo).

 

Bottom line 2nd attachment

'Must have clear overall responsibility for the first team'

He'll fail to get his work permit then.

 

I think that means he must be a head coach. Not an assistant. He’ll be have clear responsibility for the first team

 

So what? Any manager we appoint is likely to be off quicksticks if we have success. It happens time and again and isn't surprising. Whatever appointment we make successful or otherwise is unlikely to be here long. At least with Duff we know we're getting a good manager for 12 months rather than taking a punt.
Loyalty in football was always in short supply but is now virtually extinct.

 

Williamson comes across well, has good numbers, and seems a good tactical fit.

Proof is in the pudding, obviously.

https://www.google.com/search?q=mike+williamson+tactics&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari

 

So was Collins. That went well…

 

Ah .... Plum Duff.
Now there's a pudding !

 

Thalhammer doesn't meet the criteria as he has only done 32 months in total and maximum 14 months consecutively in the last five years as opposed to the 36 in total or 24 consecutively required. The only way he can come is via the appeals panel.

 

I fully expected when Collins went that they'd look to appoint a permanent coach after the current season ended, but it looks like they tried to get Thalhammer in for yesterday's game and any play-off campaign that followed. I really don't get that approach as no-one is going to be able to bring a fundamental change in philosophy in such a short space of time, so all that can be achieved is someone who can work with the tools at his disposal to get a response - a motivational head coach, essentially. A foreign, unknown doesn't fit that bill in any way, so it's an odd choice, from a timing perspective. If that's who they want for next season then that's a different matter, as he'll at least have the summer to work on things.

What they don't seem to have considered is that if Thalhammer is in the dugout for an abject play-off campaign that was little to do with him then he'll become a 'tainted' appointment, compared to if he'd been brought in after it ended. We'd be potentially putting him in an invidious position, as he'll be coming in with the baggage of the memories of Schopp and Asbhagi still fresh as our recent overseas appointments. Not achieving anything in two games would result in a summer of questioning his capability for the role.

Yesterday exposed any hope that having Devaney in as interim would be sufficient to do the job. He picked essentially the same team, in the same formation, as Collins would have with arguably a little more positivity in approach. In the Board's shoes I'd be looking to bring someone in for a 3 game campaign, and nothing more, right now. It doesn't have to be a contender for the job long-term, but it does need to be someone who can get a response, and quickly. I don't think names such as Warnock are particularly realistic in that regard, but I had hoped that Heckingbottom might be persuaded to do that role, particularly as he'd worked with most of the coaching staff already and has seen us through a play-off campaign. Ultimately, it could be anyone who fits that short-term profile, which is a totally different requirement to the long-term head coaching appointment. Trying to combine the two, as they seem to be doing, is a mistake.

I still think that removing Collins was the correct decision, and yesterday at least showed that we didn't really get worse as a result of it. The problem is that we didn't get much better, if at all, as a result of it. I'd be looking to bridge that gap in the short-term and worry about who the long-term head coach will be once the dust has settled on this season.

 

Part of the problem we have is a turnover of Head Coaches out of all proportion to our success as a Club. Some continuity wouldn't go amiss and we, as supporters, have to accept that there might be a period when we're not challenging for the play-offs. The first season Danny took the reins at Oakwell we finished 6th and only managed 10th in his 2nd year. The rest is history as we made automatics in his 3rd season.