It seems to be
one of "the" unwritten rules in football; a manager should never
publicly criticise his players. When they do, they often attract criticism
themselves, from fans and media commentators alike. Much of the media
condemnation comes from ex-players, often reflecting on their experience and
how they would feel.
Just taking
the last couple of seasons, Tim Sherwood has attracted condemnation from Michael
Owen for the then Spurs manager’s criticism of his side and Peter Schmeichel
suggested that Roberto Mancini’s constant disparagement of his Manchester City
players contributed to their slump in form.
Rarely, do you
see managers doing it. Therefore when it happens it is bound to grab attention
and make you wonder. Why that player? Why this particular game or moment? What
is driving the decision to go public with the comments?
Very few top
managers do it and Sir Alex Ferguson was clear about why he didn't berate his
players in the press.
"My job is not to
criticise my players publicly. When a manager makes a public criticism, he is
affecting the emotional stability of a player and that cannot be the
professional thing to do."
That is why,
as a tool of man-management, public criticism of your own employees tends to be
viewed so negatively, not just in football but any industry. Everyone prefers
to be spoken about favourably, or at least criticised in private. I have never
used that tactic and can’t imagine when I would.
Back to
football, Jose Mourinho has a slightly different approach, based on how view
the maturity of the players and their working relationships.
"It is part of my
job, to try and find the best strategy to get the best out of my players. I
love to praise my players publicly. I don’t love to criticise them. But
sometimes, either by strategy or by frustration, I’ve done it.
I think the most important
thing is the personal relationship. When you have a personal relationship, you
can accept the criticism and are open to it. You know your friend, your coach,
your father or your wife criticises you it’s for your own good. That’s the
basis of our relationship. I have a fantastic group of guys and a great
relationship with them."
“It reminds me of my first
team at Chelsea, the same kind of relationship I had with that fantastic group
of guys. I feel completely open with them. If they feel they have to do the
same with me, I don’t have a problem.”
Closer to
home, Nigel Clough has come in for criticism this season for his handling of
Marc McNulty. Match winning and goal-scoring performances have seen the player
return to the bench for the next game. Attempts to cajole praise for McNulty
from the manager in post -match interviews, instead provokes lists of problems,
things the striker has still to learn and could do better. Yes he scored, but……….
To some fans
it feels like Clough is nit-picking. To others it adds to a perception that the
manager likes to be contrary and go against the flow. Or, in a more positive
light, that he is just being his own man - a manager in the mould of his father
- willing to stand by his decisions however much others see it differently.
The truth
probably lies somewhere in the mix. McNulty does have a lot to learn; both in
terms of positioning and all round game play. At the same time, in a side
struggling for goals, fans wanted to see some positive threat on the pitch,
something that McNulty seemingly provided.
The manager
has pointed out in interviews that this is part of how he handles McNulty,
focusing on how the player responds to this criticism. This has in itself
generated concern amongst fans. They view it as a risky strategy, one that only
seems to raise the hackles of the striker's father on social media and doesn't
seem to be to the overall of benefit of the club. Subsequently, the criticism
has spread to other members of the team, as players were named as to blame for
recent defeats. This blame game, with little self-flagellation from the manager
seemed to raise ire further.
Bizarrely,
public criticism is frowned upon by any fans, yet many of these very same fans
are the ones who want and demand honesty from their manager. If the view from
the terraces is that tactically the manager got it wrong, or a player
underperformed they want it acknowledged, they want to see some form of action
taken.
Yet we all see
the game differently, within that view and opinion there will be some common
ground, but everyone is looking at the game in different ways. At half time
versus Scunthorpe, I was criticised by some for being too negative, given we
were winning 2-0. Yet, if it hadn't been for Jose Baxter's penalty we would
have been going in at half time 1-0 up, having rarely tested the Scunthorpe
keeper and the nervousness at not capitalising on our dominance of possession
would have left many fans fearing another slip up.
To test the
water I praised the first half against Crewe, one all at the time, but with a
very similar 45 minutes to the Scunthorpe game in terms of how we had played,
passed and finished. I was criticised again. It was "rubbish", the
passing was "awful". The responses highlighted the difference made by
a goal, on a rare foray forward, from the opposition, but also how we all view
matches with different tints of red and white. On this basis can a manager ever
be seen to be getting this right?
This isn’t the
first time a United manager has used this as a means of motivating his players.
Early in the 1991 season, with United yet again making a slow start in the top
tier, Dave Bassett was highly critical of his players in the press. Rarely
singling out individuals, he came down more heavily on the team as a whole, in
his own forthright fashion.
A young 16
year old fan, read and listened to his comments, thought about it and sent him
a letter. The letter largely thanked the manager for what he had achieved at
Bramall Lane, they remain some of the greatest times that fan has had watching
the Blades even twenty odd years later, but the letter also asked why he was so
openly negative about his team.
A week or so
later a letter came back to the writer, a copy is below. In Bassett’s reply, he
touched upon the fact that many of his comments were well thought out and not a
spontaneous, heat of the moment outburst that his style tended to suggest. He
also suggested that used sparingly these comments are a useful management
motivational tool in both business settings as well as sporting realms and that
he would hope that his management style had matured to the extent that he knew
the right balance to use with his players.
He went on to
make a point about using public negativity to develop a united response from
players, whether that criticism has come from the fans, media or the manager
himself.
"What you see and
what you are told by the press is only a small part of my overall motivational
strategy that has the best interests of the club at heart."
So maybe we,
as fans, have to accept a nuanced approach to man-management, more so in
football. Whilst we, as managers in our day to day work, may not take the
critical approach to personal development used by Bassett, Clough and Mourinho,
we need to accept that the manager will see fit to use what they think is
right. They will only act in a way they feel is in the best interests of the
club, they have no reason not to as it is their livelihood at risk.
The fact that
one of the most popular managers in United’s recent history used similar
techniques is often forgotten amongst his success. It certainly didn’t inspire
the kind of response Clough’s player criticism has generated, albeit the use of
social media means the strength of views are amplified these days. Who knows
how many others questioned the manager in letters to the club? We will never
know.
It could also
be argued that with his team under-performing in the league and recruitment
decisions and team selection under scrutiny, this is just another verbal stick
with which to hit the manager. But as he might argue when defending his
treatment of McNulty, ‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but saying things
won’t hurt me’.
