U21 Confusion Reigns at City
All the talk about whether Pearce should or shouldn't take on the role of U21 Manager has left me and I guess a lot of others totally confused. There are so many conflicting claims and counter claims that the whole issue is becoming very muddied.
It seems that Pearce has accepted the role subject to City's approval, which after last night's hurried press release doesn't look likely for the moment anyway, with a three-way battle between Pearce, the FA and the City Board now looming.
Pearce is adamant the level of involvement is minimal, but the outgoing U21 Manager. Peter Taylor has said that anyone new coming into the job would need to provide a "lot of commitment" to the role ???
The other thing I find curious is that roughly speaking the U21s have a similar schedule to the full England squad. If therefore an U21 Manager could do the job on a part time basis, that surely begs the same questions about the role of the senior team management - doesn't it ?
Pearce, and City now both find themselves in awkward positions, with most City fans bewildered about why all of a sudden managing City is not a full time role. I think if we were sitting comfortably in the top 4, it would be a slightly different matter, but with our current form and quality of football that is keeping fans away in their droves, Pearce's' priority at the moment should be Manchester City Football Club and nowhere else.
Pearce has also now provided the Board with ammunition to get rid of him if they are minded to do so. It would be a tragedy and completely un-necessary if such a meaningless issue ultimately led to his downfall. Come on Stuart, it's just not worth it !
5 comments:
I don't know what all the fuss is about the job only calls for two days in February and five days in March. Both dates coincide with there being no Premiership matches. The U21 tournament is in June and Pearce has already stated he will be going to it anyway.
I can understand it must be flattering to manage your Country at ANY level (even U21) but it's not worth leaving a top-flight club to do so..
Who's talking about leaving a club to do the job ?
Hopefully no one at the moment, but there is a danger this whole thing will escalate with neither party wishing to concede their positions. I still don't see why Venables couldn't stand in and do it - what else is he doing at the moment ?
I see Peter Taylor is now saying that he had no problem managing the two roles and that Pearce shouldn't have a problem with it, which confirms my original thought that it is more to do with his Chairman Simon Jordon calling the tune.
Post a Comment