thing is, the argument that it does change things doesn't really hold water either

Most teams go through good spells and bad spells during the course of the season whether they change manager or not.
Most managerial changes happen after a really bad spell (say 1 point in 6 or 7 games) in which case it might often appear to lead to an improvement because the starting point is so low. But of course such teams would almost certainly have done much better in the next 6 or 7 games (say) even if they had kept the same manager, because from that point the only way is up.
Owners know this - one of the reason managers get sacked so often at such points is that the subsequent improvement looks as though it was caused by the change (even if no-one really knows if it was) and thus makes the owners look smart.

You have to take a lot of factors into account when deciding on a managerial change and current form is far from being the most important one.

Incidentally this isn't an Inner post, it's a Not Sure post (I do know that I think 4-4-2 is generally s**t these days and we should mostly avoid it)

Posted By: mr carra, Jan 29, 07:57:58