next_year_I_hope Posted June 7, 2006 Report Share Posted June 7, 2006 who are they how was they appointed, who pays for them and who gives them so much power.. 1st it was roeder they said he could not manage newcastle because he never had the right qualification and now they are saying that southgate will not manage middlesborough. John Barnwell is the chairman has he ever played football or managed a club how the hell does he have the gual to tell someone that they cant be employed. didnt they make labour rules where everyone is entitled to apply for whatever job they like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted June 7, 2006 Report Share Posted June 7, 2006 The regulations were agreed to by all the Premiership clubs and are enforced by the Premiership. The LMA has no power other than making recommendations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ron Posted June 7, 2006 Report Share Posted June 7, 2006 The regulations were agreed to by all the Premiership clubs and are enforced by the Premiership. The LMA has no power other than making recommendations.Neither do the regulations, it would seem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted June 7, 2006 Report Share Posted June 7, 2006 John Barnwell is the chairman has he ever played football or managed a club how the hell does he have the gual to tell someone that they cant be employed. didnt they make labour rules where everyone is entitled to apply for whatever job they like?I seem to remember John Barnwell managed Wolves a while ago. He is the elected chairman of the LMA, trying to enforce regulations agreed by the PL. Wether they are good regs is another matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted June 7, 2006 Report Share Posted June 7, 2006 Neither do the regulations, it would seem Yep, probably because they benefit noone but aging managers looking for a job, not surprising the clubs will just disregard them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ron Posted June 10, 2006 Report Share Posted June 10, 2006 Yep, probably because they benefit noone but aging managers looking for a job, not surprising the clubs will just disregard them.Is that really the point? The rules are there, the clubs have to abide by them.Southgate can have no argument if he gets sacked by the comittee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 Is that really the point? The rules are there, the clubs have to abide by them.Southgate can have no argument if he gets sacked by the comittee.The "rules" were made by the clubs themselves to stop the LMA nagging them. They can ignore them, because they're not forced on them by a higher authority. They will therefore obviously do so if it benefits them and if the LMA don't watch themselves they'll find the rules changed. They're stupid rules anyway.Southgate won't be sacked by the Premiership - they wil be scared of the legal implications and Gibson's already cleared it with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spectator Posted June 11, 2006 Report Share Posted June 11, 2006 Yep, probably because they benefit noone but aging managers looking for a job, not surprising the clubs will just disregard them.It's a closed shop for old "muckers" who are no longer capable of managing in the modern game, yet try to deny the right to the Roeders and Southgates, who are more qualified today than when the old "muckers" got their first and others jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.