As I sat and watched the Wolverhampton Wanderers vs Manchester United match, although I’m not sure there was anything matched about the teams, it made me reflect on change and the impact it can and can’t have on teams.
As we are all aware, Wolves took the decision to sack Mick McCarthy as their manager following a string of results that left Wanderers in the lower areas of the league. For the board, the decision was hard, but seemingly straight forward – the manager isn’t performing, so we had better sack him. Great concept there, but the results aren’t always as expected.
Sometimes Change Isn’t For The Best
Their board also made noises about getting “the right man”, who would be a “top manager”, as well as having the experience required to keep the club from relegation. Again, such rhetoric is fine, but turned out to be little more than words. Especially considering their final appointment, that of Terry Connor.
I actually feel sorry for the current Wolves caretaker, thrust as he is into a difficult situation minus the required experience to do the job well. Connor is easily turned into a figure of ridicule, a man who clearly can’t do right for doing wrong, of the same ilk as the captain of the Titanic – unable to do much against the increasingly difficult odds his team faces.
Of course he took the job, and that was something done under his own volition, but was it necessarily the right choice for either him or the club? For Connor, such a role adds little to his CV barring a football miracle, and with each passing game, that miracle become increasingly unlikely.
People may well ask why I have spent the article up until now to talk about another club, but it is fairly evident why. We, as a club, are in the same predicament as Wolves are, albeit further up the table, and we too have asked questions about our own manager and the decision to leave him in charge.
Like Aston Villa, Wolves had a solid group of personnel wanting the manager sacked but unlike Villa, they achieved their objective. Steve Morgan decided enough was enough, and McCarthy was axed with a total sub-20% win record in the Premier League as a manager.
However, as we are all seeing, change didn’t actually do much for the Black Country club. Part of this is invariably down to Morgan’s inability to find a top replacement for McCarthy, leaving the Wolves chairman with egg on his face as a string of managers were either turned down for lacking quality, or Wolves were rejected, in some case publicly, by several managers with Premier League experience. The result – Terry Connor.
Villa, admittedly a larger and more prestigious club than Wolves, would face similar circumstances in a recruitment drive should Alex McLeish fall as yet another Premier League casualty to the dreaded axe. The choice would most likely involve the selection of Villa’s own Terry Connor – Kevin MacDonald – as their saviour of sorts, but it is doubtful as to whether MacDonald has the experience or capability to drive the club forwards.
Old MacDonald – Does He Have The Credentials?
With Villa being where they are, they are, realistically, all but safe so, in that regard, MacDonald taking over would have little risk in terms of this season’s campaign. Such a choice to change however, would arguably be lacking in terms of the future of the club.
Would this be overly wise though? I can understand the rationality of those who say that MacDonald is positioned perfectly to know the youth, and I also know that the footballers at the club respect him and like him a lot. However, neither respect or being liked are traits that are top of the selection criteria for a job that regularly pays more than a million pounds, and my primary concern is that MacDonald lacks the ability to draw players to the club, and that his knowledge of the youth, while understandably valuable, falls down because personally I feel many of the youngsters aren’t up to scratch.
I may draw criticism for such a view, but it is my opinion. Of the current crop of kids, I would imagine that perhaps five academy prospects will have a future at the club, and I think that is being generous. That isn’t to say that five players coming through isn’t a massive achievement in itself – it is – but I feel many fans think far more players have a future at the club, and that they can fill the boots of much more experienced players.
Take for example Emile Heskey. Here is a player who has been chided by fans as past it, and of little long term use for the club. Whilst said description may be partially accurate, Heskey is an experienced player, and one of few actual “winners” at the club. In fact, if all Villa players were checked for their achievements over their careers, Heskey would sit towards the top.
Of course Heskey has an advantage compared to the youth in that he is older, and thus obviously more experienced, but I would also suggest that many players, regardless of whether they do or don’t have a future at Villa Park, may struggle to finish their careers with the medals Heskey has. Some may consider his haul to be meagre when compared to the likes of Ryan Giggs or another Manchester United veteran but, in Villa terms, Heskey is decorated.
So for players without any real experience, nevermind achievements, to step into his shoes is pretty naive. I appreciate the optimism of fans who laud Gary Gardner as the next big thing, and he may well transpire to be, but there is a need to transition from x to y without sudden jolts. Those that criticised Holman’s capture mentioned that he was an unremarkable player, but his experience in one of Europe’s top divisions, and several of Europe’s highest club cups is an asset. Holman may not be Cristiano Ronaldo, but he is also far more experienced, and thus, far more suitable in the short term for a first team place than many youth talents.
Of course, Holman may well fail. Gardner may well finish his career with a swathe of medals earned in claret and blue. Nobody knows the future, but we have to anticipate the reality of the present. Irrespective of the manager, or who could or couldn’t take over from him when he does eventually leave Villa Park, there is a universal understanding that youth alone are not the answer, and that risking them is a significant gamble for both the club and players’ confidences.
Could it work? Sure, but given Villa’s recent gambles with managers and money, can the club afford to take to the virtual roulette table of luck to see if youth will save the day? They might do, but a safer option, whether the current one or not, may well prove to be beneficial for the club and its future.
The Author
