Isn’t it quite odd that Fulham are so open with their manager dealings? In the past we have been one of the more secluded clubs in terms of player/manager targets and have almost never made any transfer fees public. Now, all of a sudden all details of the Jol debacle were public as they unfolded.
Is this something deliberate or is it just poor media management from the club? If it is deliberate, then why? The only two reasons I can think of are:
- The club was so convinced to get Jol they never saw a point in keeping the lid on.
- In order to be more open, or public if you like, with the dealings they are trying to lure some more candidates out in the open. Because let’s face it were not really big enough to be a club where managers apply to work, at least not the names we would be in the market for.
Thinking about it, none of these possible reasons make any sense, so I challenge you to share your ideas and thoughts on this new openness from the club.
Not necessarily the kind of openness one would have preferred but still a change.
Let’s not confuse openness from the club with media speculation which has run rife recently not just over Jol. As far as the club are concerned I am sure they will be just as quiet over manager and transfer dealings as before. The Jol affair was leaked to the press, but lets not assume it was FFC that did that; there were other parties who had a better reason for making the dealings public and in the days to come we may well see that it paid off for them.
Good point, openness wasn’t probably the best use of words. What I mean is that much more info (true or not) seems to be leaked recently, no matter if it is on purpose or not.
I wouldn’t expect anything to appear on the Fulham website, in this regard, that isn’t fact.
As we all know, leaks (fact or fiction) can be used to commercial advantage.
Leaks are one thing, statements on the club’s website is quite another.
Yeah – I agree with Fulham61. This wasn’t the way the club would have liked to do it’s business but was probably down to leaks from Jol’s agent. I can see no other party who could have benefitted from the situation being common knowledge in the press.
It’s happened before, Bullard’s departure was talked about fairly freely before it actually happened. There’s not really much the club can do to control this but perhaps they need to review how they cope with these situations in future because we rarely come out of them looking particularly good.