Should Fans Have More Of A Say Over Managerial Changes?

For months I have been pondering whether football fans should have more of a say over managerial changes that occur within the club they support.

It has brought up some interesting conversations with friends and football fans alike, that have provided some very good arguments for and against why fans should, or should not, have a say.

There are many reasons for allowing fans to pick their team's next manager, such as:

Would fans be able to come to an agreement?

The first issue that this dilemma faces, is whether fans would actually be able to come to an agreement or not. Different fans prefer different playstyles, different management styles, varying types of experience, young managers or old managers, every personal preference comes into play.

Standing in Block B at Bloomfield Road, you hear differing opinions about every player on the pitch, some slating them for every wrong pass, wanting them out of the club, whereas others love them and blame others for the mistakes.

If one block of fans at a club in, now, League One, cannot decide if a player is good or not, how could a club with a capacity of 40,000 or more decide on one single manager to manage their side?

Again, using Blackpool as an example, the return of Neil Critchley was a controversial one. At the end of the season, many fans were pining for him to return to the club, yet the other half did not want to see him at Bloomfield Road again.

Fans will find issues with every manager on the market. It would be near impossible to get any fans of a club, of any size, to agree on one candidate.

This could easily be solved by the fans deciding on a shortlist of 3-5 managers, and then the board interview and decide which one gets the job.

Who would be to blame if things went wrong?

Typically, the chairman and the board are to blame when things are going wrong. If the manager is not working, it is the boards fault for hiring them or not getting rid of them in the first place.

When things went wrong for Michael Appleton at Blackpool, the fans blamed Ben Mansford for keeping him for so long, partly because of their personal relationship, partly because of their reluctance to sack him in the first place.

However, if the fans were to decide who got the job, then the board cannot be blamed. On the other hand, if every single fan in the ground does not agree with who gets the job, then can the fans be blamed?

In addition, would it be up to the fans or the board in regards to a manager being sacked? The board would have to issue a payout, but the fans would be not fazed by this as they just want to see games being won at the end of the day.

Would young managers, or managers for U21’s or U23 teams be given a chance?

Every fan wants the best possible manager at their club. Every fan at every club would love to have a Guardiola, Mourinho or Klopp to manage their team week in week out to bring them success.

Unfortunately, they do not grow on trees, and there are not enough to go around, and so most clubs have to look elsewhere. Some clubs like to take risks with managerial choices.

They may pick up and coming managers that have done a good job in the lower leagues, or they may pick an under-21 or under-23 that fits the vision of the football club well.

If fans were allowed to choose which manager joined their club, would we still see these managers being given a chance? Would Neil Critchley have arrived at Blackpool and guided them out of League One?

Would Michael Carrick have been chosen by Middlesbrough fans? In short, no. Fans will always want a well known name, that has done a good job at a club previously, that can come into their club and do a good job.

Nobody would want to choose a nobody or an unknown that could work, but at the same time could be an absolute disaster. So, if fans did have a choice, managers could have a much harder time finding their way up the ladder than they do currently.

How would clubs conduct a fair search that represents their entire fanbase?

One issue would be how clubs would go about getting fans to vote or choose a manager that they would want at the club. The most obvious choice would be over social media, such as Twitter, Facebook or on the clubs official website.

The only issue with this, is that other clubs could easily hijack any decision making that goes on. Kalvin Phillips almost winning Man City‘s player of the season is one example. Twitter users flooded the poll with votes for the midfielder who hardly played all season.

The fact that people from other clubs were able to vote for another teams player of the season, to the extent of trying to get someone who has barely featured to win it, would only spell problems.

It could mean that rival fans would vote for the worst option presented, or pick names that are completely unrealistic or would never come to the club, thus wasting time.

With social media being a near no go, clubs could send a questionnaire to all season ticket holders asking them for who they believe should have the job. But, it would take a long time for these responses to be sent out, filled in, sent back and analysed into a shortlist.

One solution would be to ask a supports club. For example, Blackpool could attend a Blackpool Supporters Trust (BST), and get responses from the fans there. The only issue with that, is that they would gain a very small proportion of responses when compared to the whole fanbase.

What would happen if the fans first choice turns the club down?

We already know how long some appointments can take to make. There are extensive searches to generate a shortlist of suitable candidates. Those candidates are then thinned out with who fits the clubs vision.

Then managers are invited for an interview, and may be shown around the club. If more than one manager interviews well then there may be a second round of interviews.

Even then, when one manager has been picked, a contract must be offered to them, which they need to agree to. If they do, then they can be announced. This process can take a long time as it is.

Adding in fans opinions and managerial choices would take a lot of time. It requires a plethora of fans to actually recommend managers, combine all the results together, and then start the process mentioned above.

There is still the chance that a manager turns the club down as well. If a manager did turn the club down, does the whole cycle start again? Or would the fans second choice be interviewed instead? What if a more attractive name comes available that fans would prefer?

The owner pays for the club, so why should the fans choose?

It could be seen that fans are becoming too entitled. They demand to know every single thing that goes on at their club, they want to be part of the decision making of any major choice, they want certain players at the club, and others to leave, if things are not going well, they demand the mananger gets sacked, or protest against the board if they feel not enough money is getting invested into the club.

The fans do put a lot of money into the club, through season tickets, matchday tickets, merchandise, food and drink in the concourse, and various other ways. They spend their time every Saturday to take a break out of their week, and cheer on their team.

But the fans do not put the majority of the money into the club. The owner funds the club, he is there to make the big decisions, the club follows his vision, so he should be the one to choose which managers he believes should be interviewed, and which gets the job.

Would it be fair for fans to choose the manager they want, when the owner pays their wages, and will have to pay fee if they get sacked before the end of their contract?

Betting companies would not be allowed to offer odds on ‘next manager’ markets

A very small issue, but an issue nonetheless. Betting companies would not be able to offer odds on ‘next manager‘ markets, effectively eradicating them.

If they were to still stand, then fans could easily decide on a manager to hire prior, invest a vast amount of money on betting sites, and reap the rewards when their slips get paid out.

But, there are obviously some very positive, convincing arguments to why fans should be able to choose, such as:

Managers that the fans pick will be given more time if things go wrong

Fans can quickly turn on a manager if things start to go badly, and I believe that managers that fans are not fully on board with are given less leniency than managers that fans are on board with.

One of the more recent examples of this is when Nathan Jones got given the job at Southampton. Despite him doing a good job in the Championship, the appointment was met with disappointment by the fans.

The fans were calling for his head after his very first loss. The football on display may have been poor, but the fans were not interested. They wanted a well known manager to come in and keep them up.

The protests grew louder and louder each game, and Jones only lasted 8 games, winning just one in that time. Leading to this brilliant picture of a young fan holding up a filled out P45 form with Nathan Jones’ name on it.

Another example, this time coming from the Championship, is Michael Appleton being appointed at Blackpool. This was immediately met with concerns due to his affiliation with Preston during his playing days.

The style of football did not catch on with Blackpool fans either, with his formation, team selection, player positioning and substitutions coming under scrutiny week in week out.

When Blackpool started sliding down the table, the calls for Appleton to leave grew louder, and fans were evidently disgruntled when he did not lose his job during the winter World Cup.

On the flip side, fans would allow a manager more time when results are going bad if they were one of the top choices that the fans wanted.

Neil Critchley joined Blackpool when they resided in League One, and the fans were extremely happy with it. An understudy to Klopp, with a focus on young, exciting players and attacking football. The appointment was met with great enthusiasm and Blackpool fans wanted him in.

Things did not get off to a great start in his first full season. Critchley started the 2020-21 season with 6 losses in the first 9 games, leaving Blackpool lingering around the bottom of the table.

The fans were optimistic of achieving promotion to the Championship, and despite the early struggles, the fans stuck being Critchley, with there being next to no calls for him to face the sack.

The rest is history, as Blackpool’s form turned around, finishing in 3rd place and beating Lincoln in the playoff final to get that promotion their fans craved.

Yes, the fact that no fans were allowed in stadiums due to COVID-19 may have helped this, as fans were not able to be in the ground demanded for him to be sacked, but even on social media, fans were united and got behind him.

It keeps fans on board, and gets them more involved with the club

Allowing fans to choose which manager they want in charge gives a big insight into what the fans actually want, and shows the board how ambitious the fans are, and what they expect to see for the season.

If the fans are wanting big names, then the board know the fans are expecting a good season. If the fans are looking at a young, exciting, attack minded coach, then the board know the fans want to be entertained.

Giving the fans the opportunity to have a say in managerial decisions would also make them feel heard, and allows them to be part of big decisions at their football club. It would give them a sense of importance within their club.

It would allow the club to connect with their supporters on another level. A good club will always have strong ties with their fans. As soon as the board start to alienate fans, then issues start to rise.

Look at the way the Oyston family treated Blackpool fans. They sued fans who protested against their ownership, constantly goaded and teased fans, by bringing tennis rackets to a game where fans planned to throw tennis balls on the pitch, or posting pics next to the infamous ‘Blackpool cash cow’ sign.

If the board keep the fans on board, and keep them happy, even if they let them have a say in managerial decisions, it could strengthen the bond between the two. It would also make fans more likely to invest their hard earned money into the club, through merchandise or season ticket sales.

Gives the manager confidence that they are wanted by the fans

It must be a brilliant feeling for a manager to have a good connection with the fans, especially when things are going well.

When Blackpool were in the Championship, they recorded a brilliant 1-0 away win against Sheffield United. As Neil Critchley came over to applaud the travelling fans, he was almost in tears.

He knew these fans loved him, and he loved them back just as much. It makes a manager want to do even better for the club, it pushes them to be more successful, win more games, play more entertaining football.

He started to do the infamous triple fist bump after every win, and the fans lapped it up. They loved it, seeing some passion, and Critchley loved giving that same passion back.

It must also be hard managing a club knowing the fans do not want you there, no matter how the results are going.

Michael Appleton knew that Blackpool fans did not want him at the club, he could hear the complaints from the stands, he could hear the calls for him to lose his job.

Appleton very rarely went over to the travelling support at away games and applaud them, and on the odd occasion that he did, the fans berated him. When asked about it by the press, he responded with “Damned if I do, damned if I don’t”.

The more discontent the fans were with Appleton, the less confident he and his team seemed to be. The attacking football slowed down, the confidence looked beaten out of the players, and Appleton frequently cut a devoid picture on the touch line.

Not only did it create friction between the fans and the manager, it also caused friction between the fans and the board, as they constantly backed Appleton, leaving it potentially too late before getting rid of him.

Giving the fans a say in managerial decisions would eradicate this problem completely. The manager that comes in would be one of the fans top choices, they will always be welcome into the club and accepted by the fans, as they are the ones that chose them.

There would be no negativity to start with and no friction. Nothing but positivity.

Fans can effectively choose the play style they pay to watch

Different fans prefer different styles of football. Some prefer a solid defensive showing, others prefer a counter attacking style, some a possession based style, others an all out attack. I myself, prefer the ”we’ll score more goals than you“ style that Ian Holloway brought to Blackpool, entertaining football at its best.

When the board choose which manager to bring in, they effectively choose which style of football is going to be on display to the fans. When Blackpool brought Mick McCarthy in, the board expected a defensively solid showing.

When Man City brought in Pep Guardiola, they expected a possession based style of football where they could control the game. When Liverpool brought in Klopp, their fans expected a gegenpress style.

Managers come with a certain play style. Very rarely do you see a manager come in to a new club and change their style of football completely, or try something completely new.

If fans were able to have a say in the managerial decisions that go on at the club, they would effectively be able to choose what style of football they will pay to watch.

If the majority of fans wanted a counter attacking team as they feel their team suits it best, they can go and look at managers that play a counter attacking style of football. If they want a possession based game, they can find a manager that prefers to retain possession, as opposed to one that wants their players to take risks.

There is nothing worse as a fan, than your club bringing in a manager, and you disagreeing with their play style. When Blackpool brought in McCarthy, the fans did not want a defensive approach, they wanted the team to go out and attack.

If the fans had the choice, Blackpool fans could have found an attack minded coach to come in and keep them up. Instead, they had to settle for poor football, as in the end McCarthy did not work out.

Overall, it would be an extremely hard thing to implement. Fan owned clubs obviously do not have this problem. The fans own the club, there are fans on the board, and they can help make these major decIsions.

It is impossible to get a large group of people to agree on anything, and so it would take a long time for clubs to conduct a search for a manager. But, these managers would get a lot more leniency from the fans when things are going wrong, as they are the manager they believed in, and the manager that they chose.

Despite the varying downsides, there are a lot of positives, and these could potentially outweigh the negatives if it went well. A good managerial appointment means more money coming into the club after all, through ticket sales, merchandise and through potential promotions.

Realistically it is probably too difficult to implement something like this at a football club, unless a supporters liaison spoke on behalf of the fans. It would be interesting to see how successful something like this could turn out though.

The supporters liaison idea mentioned above is the only way I could see something like this being feasible. If every club have a supporters liaison that interacted with fans on a large scale, and sat in on board meetings, reported back to the chairman, and had a hand in the running of the football club, purely based on the fans views.

Fans are getting more and more entitled and they feel they should be able to make some decisions within their respective club. Should they be able to have a hand in these decisions, as it is not their money paying for managers wages or paying compensation when they get sacked?

But on the other hand, fans invest a large amount of money into the club, and they have no say in how the club is run. As the old saying goes, football without fans is nothing, so why not give them a voice.

So, is it a good or bad idea to give football fans more of a say over managerial changes? Well, the answer entirely depends on how a club would conduct such a process. If, like mentioned previously, a supporter's liaison conveyed supporters' wants and opinions to the board, then yes, it is a very feasible thing to consider.

As long as the relationship between the owner and the fans is stable, I do not see why some clubs could start to do this. It would create a buzz around the club, the manager picked solely by the fans, and the brand of football on display is the brand of football the fans want to see.

It would be brilliant for fans to be able to have a hand in these decisions at the very least, even if a supporters' liaison sat in on board meetings and relayed the fans' opinions, this would be a step in the right direction. If the fans do not pick the manager that gets the job, at least let them put a few candidates on the shortlist.

Yes, it would be a rather difficult thing to implement for bigger clubs, but for smaller clubs, this could be a massive step in the right direction. Yes, the hiring process could take a lot longer than usual, but the fans would gain a manager that they will instantly get behind. It may reflect the European model where managers typically aren't sacked until a replacement has already been lined up.

Admittedly it would lead to the fans playing with the owners' money in terms of potential wages or through payouts if being sacked, but again, fans invest large sums into their football clubs each season, so why should they not have a say?

For clubs that lack a clear direction or identity, this could solve those issues. I believe this could be a brilliant idea for some clubs to take on.