They've been very open and transparent to be fair, and that comes with a risk as we can see. If it were me, i'd have named the people being interviewed but not given any information about who was favourite. That way once the process is done you can ask your preference if he will take the job. If he says no, you can always ask the next person without having put all your cards on the table.
You mean like Wolves did on Sunday! That is how to do it. The club should have had a plan for when they got rid of Hill, it had been coming for weeks and after they sacked him Rowing came out and said that theyy had not even thought about what happened next !! Not often I agree with tyrone1 , but on this he is spot on.
Wolves are on their 4th manager in 11 months. Not sure that's a good thing. The only worry for me is that the players are left hanging around.
I'm assuming he means they should have had a new manager waiting in the wings. Sounds reasonable, as they knew in advance where / when they were going to fire Hill - irrespective of the result in his final match.
Eh? How do you know? It isn't often I agree with your posts Tyrone but I am with you on this. Perhaps a contingency was put in place (perhaps) but it hasn't been executed well. Not well at all.
I was not saying they are correct with who they employ or how many they employ! Just that they knew who they wanted and went and got him, within 2 days of sacking their previous manager, they had a new one in place. At Barnsley I would have thought 2 weeks is at least a wekk too long !!
I cant see beyond lfictcroft at the moment, becuase we are in such a hole no one will take the job. Hence the current incumbent will get the job by default