In '1001 Arabian Nights' Scheherazade had to tell a new story every night to impress her husband and ensure he did not execute her.
Over the last couple of weeks the coalition government has been just a prolific with its storytelling, with each new day bringing a new initiative to put the country back on track.
In the last week the country has been informed that the government intends to slash incapacity spending (Sunday), impose an immigration cap (Monday), introduce a regional stimulus fund to help struggling areas (Tuesday) and keep low level offenders out of prison (Wednesday).
All of these proclamations are intended to present the new government as pro-active, progressive and forward thinking. Not everyone is impressed though.
There has been criticism in the House of Commons that all of the government’s initiatives tend to come to light away from the despatch box.
The ConDems seem to prefer pre-arranged press conferences, like the love-in at the rose garden or Laws and Osborne's cuts presentation, to debate in parliament.
Theresa May had to apologise on Wednesday that her immigration cap proposals were leaked to the media before being read to the House.
This morning the ConDems are at it again, with the BBC reporting the scheduled date for a vote on electoral reform before the official announcement due next week.
Convenient leaks to the media are nothing new of course and Tony Blair used them to great affect during his time as PM.
The criticisms were much the same then as they are now. By revealing policies to the press before the House, government press officers can spin the story and gain popular support before they are debated by all sides in parliament.
With such controversial policies being suggested it is easier to control a stage managed press conference then the unpredictable reactions of MPs.
The government’s continued storytelling is helping to dominate the political agenda in the same way the Labour government did for most of Blair’s time in power.
The opposition is wounded and leaderless making it easier for the ConDems to act as if there is no opposition.
Like Scheherazade the creation of a coherent narrative is important to the government’s survival. The story Nick and Dave want to establish is that everything is Labour’s fault and that their decive reforms are the only solution.
So far the strategy is working but it is how the governments policies conclude not how they start that will decide their fate.
The Arabian princess managed to put off a definitive conclusion to her stories until the prince decided he wanted to keep her, the ConDems are looking for a similar result.
Friday, 2 July 2010
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
Interview: Adrian Windisch, Green Party candidate for Reading West
The Green Party candidate for Reading West, Adrian Windisch, believes he and other candidates from his party can more independently champion local causes than their rivals. He said: “ There is no party whip at the Green Party, so individual members are freer to campaign on issues that are important to them.”
Cynics may suggest that the Green Party lack a 'party whip', a system of controlling how their members vote in parliament, because they do not have any MP's. Windisch believes that the independence of the Green Party is more fundamental however, and said: “You can go against party policy; an example of this is Chris Goodall, candidate for Oxford West and Abingdon. As a party we are against Nuclear Power but he has decided personally to support it, he was not disciplined by the party leaders or advised against it.”
Without clear party lines it could be difficult to identity what a party stands for but Mr Windisch believes the Green Party focus is clear, “Our my message is fairness”.
This may sound familiar to even casual election observers, as fairness seems to be all the main parties' favourite word. “All the parties are talking about fairness now but we began that campaign with our ‘fair is worth fighting for’ slogan which we launched first” he said.
Influencing the mainstream parties is one of the principle purposes of the Green Party according to Windisch and one they have had success at in the past.
“Although it is unlikely I do think I can win this election. Even if I do not the campaigning I have done during this time may encourage people to vote for the Green Party in other elections" he said. "As a Party we have also pushed a green agenda onto the other parties. It is similar to when the BNP gain support the other parties move slightly to the right on issues like immigration. We can be a positive pressure group on the political system.”
Although he remains hopeful his chances of victory on May 6th are pretty slim. The Green Party has stood in both the Reading East and Reading West seats at the last two elections and both times they have polled less then the five per cent of votes required to keep their £500 deposits. “Not just in these constituencies but right across the country, for a Green Party candidate to keep their deposit is an achievement" he says. "We have a very small budget compared to the larger parties and can not compete with their level of exposure”.
Despite their small electoral chances, the Green party are fielding over 300 candidates at this election. They are hoping to achieve their very first MP with their party leader Caroline Lucas ahead in the polls in the Brighton Pavilion constituency. Despite this degree of success they are still expecting to lose a majority of their deposits and I asked Windisch if he thought the party should concerntrate on seat they could compete in.
“We have a more organic way of selecting candidates then other political parties", he says. "We ask local members if they want to stand and if people want to we will support them. We do not target specific seat necessarily."
Windisch believes this leads to a more representative and democratic party. He is very proud of the fact that four party members can raise a vote on party policy and believes Lucas is a match for any of the main party leaders. “The television debates are typical of the way the Green Party is sidelined from the main debate, I personally have been excluded from 3 hustings meetings in this campaign", he said. "Caroline Lucas is an inspirational speaker and would have wiped the floor with the other three if she had shared that platform”.
When asked to choose between one of the three main parties, he suggested that the Liberal Democrats were "a bit better". As for the Reading West constituency he had some surprising words of praise for his Conservative rival, Alok Sharma. "Alok has impressed me as a candidate I admire him because he is open and honest", he said. "I totally disagree with his policies but I think he is more genuine than the other candidates.”
It is hard to think of one of the main three parties endorsing a rival candidate in such a manner, perhaps this is the sort of new politics often mentioned by politicians. Maybe this is the kind of positive pressure Adrian Windisch thinks the Green Party can have on UK politics, with or without any MPs.
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
Reading Volunteers Challenge Tories 'Big Society'
Conservative candidate Alok Sharma faced fierce criticism over his party’s ‘big society’ policies at the Reading Faith Forum last night.
The question and answer session organised by local religious groups, featured the candidates for Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in the Reading West constituency.
Many of those in attendance are involved in voluntary work and several members of the forum questioned the feasibility of the Conservatives new style of localism, with Mr Sharma being told to “get real” in one heated exchange.
Mr Sharma told the forum: “We need an agenda of localisation; we need to have an agenda of the big society. A change that will make people sitting in this room and others feel really involved in government.”
One audience member said: “I am involved in voluntary work and it is very difficult to get others involved. I seriously doubt a sudden rush of volunteering.”
David Cameron has made the ‘big society’ the main pledge of the Tory campaign, promising to improve local services by empowering people to run them themselves.
Another member of the audience said: “It sounds like the big society would mean relinquishing responsibility and would create a survival of the fittest situation where those who can organise themselves will do well and those that really need help could get left behind.”
Mr Sharma defended arguments that much needed but unpopular infrastructure may be delayed or scrapped if opposed by empowered individuals. He said: “If you give local people the opportunity to decide, I think you will find that they are pretty sensible and pragmatic. To say that everyone is going to be a nimby and object to any development they do not like is wrong.”
Naz Sarkar, local candidate for Labour, said: “I think that government should work in partnership with faith and voluntary groups. You cannot expect government to creep back and work in isolation.”
The largest applause of the evening was given to the Liberal Democrat candidate, Daisy Benson, when she said: “The Tories talk about localisation but I have heard nothing from them about devolving more power to local councils. Local councils empower people and are accountable and
democratic. The Conservatives have said nothing about reforming local government finance which is why this just sounds like more empty words from politicians.”
The question and answer session organised by local religious groups, featured the candidates for Labour, Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in the Reading West constituency.
Many of those in attendance are involved in voluntary work and several members of the forum questioned the feasibility of the Conservatives new style of localism, with Mr Sharma being told to “get real” in one heated exchange.
Mr Sharma told the forum: “We need an agenda of localisation; we need to have an agenda of the big society. A change that will make people sitting in this room and others feel really involved in government.”
One audience member said: “I am involved in voluntary work and it is very difficult to get others involved. I seriously doubt a sudden rush of volunteering.”
David Cameron has made the ‘big society’ the main pledge of the Tory campaign, promising to improve local services by empowering people to run them themselves.
Another member of the audience said: “It sounds like the big society would mean relinquishing responsibility and would create a survival of the fittest situation where those who can organise themselves will do well and those that really need help could get left behind.”
Mr Sharma defended arguments that much needed but unpopular infrastructure may be delayed or scrapped if opposed by empowered individuals. He said: “If you give local people the opportunity to decide, I think you will find that they are pretty sensible and pragmatic. To say that everyone is going to be a nimby and object to any development they do not like is wrong.”
Naz Sarkar, local candidate for Labour, said: “I think that government should work in partnership with faith and voluntary groups. You cannot expect government to creep back and work in isolation.”
The largest applause of the evening was given to the Liberal Democrat candidate, Daisy Benson, when she said: “The Tories talk about localisation but I have heard nothing from them about devolving more power to local councils. Local councils empower people and are accountable and
democratic. The Conservatives have said nothing about reforming local government finance which is why this just sounds like more empty words from politicians.”
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
Public Kept in the Dark Over Rail Bridge Costs
The costs of a rail bridge which was paid for by the tax-payer and ran nine months over schedule are inaccessible to the public.
A new passenger bridge and lift was opened at Twyford train station on 15th November 2009 providing much needed access for disabled people to the station's platforms. The construction was paid for by a Government loan under the Access for All initiative, construction was started in July 2008 and was scheduled to be completed on March 2009.
I asked Network Rail for information on the tendering process for the construction and whether it ran over the originally estimated budget of £3.6m. They responded that as a private company they do not have to release information of that nature to the public. I then asked the Department of Transport the same questions.
Martin Holt of the Department for Transport said: "Network Rail manage the delivery of the main Access for All programme and appoint contractors for each project in the programme using a competitive tendering process, and so I hope you will appreciate that much of the detailed information about delivery of construction works on site is held by Network Rail and their contractors, not the Department".
Network Rail is not currently covered by the Freedom of Information Act and as the Government does not seem to record how they spend taxpayers money, they can carry out public works without public scrutiny.
Katherine Gundersen, Research Officer for The Campaign for Freedom of Information, said: "Unfortunately Network Rail are not currently covered by the Freedom of Information Act. There is a provision in Section 5 of the Act for the Secretary of State for Justice to designate additional public authorities by Order. To be capable of being designated under this section, bodies must either (a) exercise functions of a public nature or (b) provide a service under contract with a public authority whose provision is a function of that authority. "
Network Rail is not currently covered by the Freedom of Information Act and as the Government does not seem to record how they spend taxpayers money, they can carry out public works without public scrutiny.
Katherine Gundersen, Research Officer for The Campaign for Freedom of Information, said: "Unfortunately Network Rail are not currently covered by the Freedom of Information Act. There is a provision in Section 5 of the Act for the Secretary of State for Justice to designate additional public authorities by Order. To be capable of being designated under this section, bodies must either (a) exercise functions of a public nature or (b) provide a service under contract with a public authority whose provision is a function of that authority. "
"Not that long ago the government consulted on whether it should use this power to bring additional bodies under FOI. The Campaign's response to the consultation called for Network Rail to be covered".
Despite Network Rail seeming to fit the criteria of Section 5 of the act, it was not brought under FOI following that review. For now public money can be spent on the maintenance of the railways without any public accountability.
Despite Network Rail seeming to fit the criteria of Section 5 of the act, it was not brought under FOI following that review. For now public money can be spent on the maintenance of the railways without any public accountability.
Network Rail may have to perform further maintenance at Twyford due to large puddles of water collecting on the steps of the newly unveiled bridge. These seem to be a health and safety problem inadvertently left by the contractors who constructed the bridge and will most likely need to be levelled out.
Will this work be conducted by the same contractors? Will it be added to the original costs of the construction? Will the work be paid for by taxpayers?
All of these question would yield interesting answers but by law Network Rail do not have to answer them.
Wednesday, 23 December 2009
X-Factor Democracy Is Bad News For Minarets
During a Newsnight interview with Kirsty Wark broadcast last Monday (14/12/2009), Simon Cowell proposed the idea of an X-Factor style politics programme. In his proposal the great British public would be given the chance to vote referendum style on the big issues of the day, sending a clear message to the Government on how they should be dealt with.
It is easy to be cynical. You could fear that Cowell's comments are a dangerous statement of intent from a megalomaniacal control freak who, no longer satisfied with dictating the nation's music tastes, has his surgically lifted eyes fixed on running the country. Alternatively you could also dismiss his comments as naive and ridiculous, noting that very few big political decisions come down to a simple yes/no decision.
To Cowell's credit he was honest about his political naivety and made clear he would never host or even appear on such a show. What Cowell has done, perhaps inadvertently, is to tap into an ever increasing distrust of the political system and the political class in this country. More than ever, following the drawn out saga of the expenses scandal and unpopular wars in the Middle East, British people feel Westminster has lost all accountability to the masses. Unless Cameron can impress upon the electorate that he is a new type of political leader, and it will take more than a dodgy portrait, the next election will in all probability have a very low turnout.
So some might say Cowell's televised referendums are just what the nation needs but political populism is not the utopian answer it may seem. The direct democratic process in Switzerland recently banned the building of minarets in its country, despite the decision causing alarm and confusion around the world. The referendum victory for those who wanted to ban building minarets was achieved because of a low voter turnout and a very affective campaign. Despite Switzerland only having four minarets, its populous was sufficiently scared enough to believe that the construction of anymore would lead to the countries total Islamification and the introduction of Sharia law.
The problem with public votes is that the majority of those who can be bothered to take part in them often make strange decisions. Those who follow local politics will be aware of the monkey who was elected mayor of Hartlepool and those who watch X-Factor will know all about the bizarre success of Jedward. Voters can also be highly influenced by PR and media campaigns and see dangers and problems, like in minaret referendum, where none exist.
Our democracy is not built on the masses making important decisions; it is built on electing politicians to take those decisions on our behalf. Members of the general public do not need to be experts on fiscal policy, the management of local services or foreign diplomacy, politicians are paid to do this for us. Cowell's X-Factor democracy may energise political debate if it ever happens but it should not be allowed to influence policy making. If it does, Britain may end up with its own equivalent to the minaret ban.
It is easy to be cynical. You could fear that Cowell's comments are a dangerous statement of intent from a megalomaniacal control freak who, no longer satisfied with dictating the nation's music tastes, has his surgically lifted eyes fixed on running the country. Alternatively you could also dismiss his comments as naive and ridiculous, noting that very few big political decisions come down to a simple yes/no decision.
To Cowell's credit he was honest about his political naivety and made clear he would never host or even appear on such a show. What Cowell has done, perhaps inadvertently, is to tap into an ever increasing distrust of the political system and the political class in this country. More than ever, following the drawn out saga of the expenses scandal and unpopular wars in the Middle East, British people feel Westminster has lost all accountability to the masses. Unless Cameron can impress upon the electorate that he is a new type of political leader, and it will take more than a dodgy portrait, the next election will in all probability have a very low turnout.
So some might say Cowell's televised referendums are just what the nation needs but political populism is not the utopian answer it may seem. The direct democratic process in Switzerland recently banned the building of minarets in its country, despite the decision causing alarm and confusion around the world. The referendum victory for those who wanted to ban building minarets was achieved because of a low voter turnout and a very affective campaign. Despite Switzerland only having four minarets, its populous was sufficiently scared enough to believe that the construction of anymore would lead to the countries total Islamification and the introduction of Sharia law.
The problem with public votes is that the majority of those who can be bothered to take part in them often make strange decisions. Those who follow local politics will be aware of the monkey who was elected mayor of Hartlepool and those who watch X-Factor will know all about the bizarre success of Jedward. Voters can also be highly influenced by PR and media campaigns and see dangers and problems, like in minaret referendum, where none exist.
Our democracy is not built on the masses making important decisions; it is built on electing politicians to take those decisions on our behalf. Members of the general public do not need to be experts on fiscal policy, the management of local services or foreign diplomacy, politicians are paid to do this for us. Cowell's X-Factor democracy may energise political debate if it ever happens but it should not be allowed to influence policy making. If it does, Britain may end up with its own equivalent to the minaret ban.
Friday, 4 December 2009
Friday, 27 November 2009
The Sack Race
Paul Hart has become the first Premier League manager to be sacked of the 2009/10 season after being given the boot by bottom club Portsmouth. The world of top flight football is a ruthless one and it does not take long for chairman/owners of a modern football club to decide the playing staff have the wrong boss.
The betting on which manager will be first for the axe each year, or the 'sack race', has become big business for bookies. This year's recipient of the ignoble honour is not a surprise to many but the speed of the sacking has been. Portsmouth lie rock bottom of the league table and underperforming managers are rarely given much time in the Premiership. Below is a list of all of the 'winners' of the sack race during the Noughties, most of whom were not afforded as much time as Hart. (Note that these only include sackings, not resignations or partings on mutual grounds, which occured during the season.)
So what do we learn about the sack list? Well if you make it onto the list you are unlikely to get another job as a Premiership manager. Only Peter Reid has won the race in the past ten years and managed at the top level of English football again, although this was with Leeds in the midst of their death spiral. So don't expect to be seeing Paul Hart appearing in a post match interview on Match of the Day anytime soon.
A couple of clubs seem more keen than most to help their managers win the prize, with both Portsmouth and Tottenham appearing twice. Between their foundation in 1898 and 1988, Portsmouth had 18 different managers. They have now had 18 managers in the 21 years since 1988 and coincidently so have Tottenham. Portsmouth managed to avoid relegation the last time they dished out the award and they will be hoping Avram Grant delivers a similar miracle this time around.
Few of the managers on the list have been successful with other clubs after winning the award, with Alain Perrin the notable exception, and for most it is the start of a terminal decline. Hart should take comfort though that he may now be able to secure a role on television instead. Peter Taylor, Peter Reid, Glenn Hoddle and Iain Dowie all regularly appear as football pundits on British TV and Gianluca Vialli is now a presenter and commentator with Sky Italia. If you win the sack race it would seem, you earn the privilege of telling a television audience just what managers still in jobs are doing wrong.
The most surprising aspect of the list is that the sadly deceased super manager Bobby Robson is on it and that he is in fact the ultimate 'winner' having been sacked the earliest out of all of them. This perhaps shows how sacking your manager early in the season is not always a wise move, with Robson's exit arguably beginning Newcastle's spiral of despair which led to their relegation last season. The season before Sir Bobby left Newcastle they finished 5th in the league, under Robson's replacement Graeme Souness the next year they finished 14th.
Only time will tell if Portsmouth have made the right decision.
The Sack List
2009/10 - Paul Hart
2008/09 - Juande Ramos
2007/08 - Sammy Lee
2006/07 - Iain Dowie
2005/06 - Alain Perrin
Date of sacking: 24th November 2005
Club: Portsmouth
Club's final league position that season: 17th
Manager's recent history: 'Reggie' has had a pretty successful career in French football since leaving Pompy, winning the French Cup with FC Sochaux in 2007 and then doing a league and cup double with Olympic Lyonnais the following season. He is currently manager of AS Saint-Etienne.
2004/05 - Bobby Robson
Date of sacking: 30th August 2004
Club: Newcastle
Club's final league position that season: 14th
Manager's recent history: After being sacked by Freddy Shepherd Sir Bobby never returned to football managment and died earlier this year. Between January 2006 and November 2007 he held the role of International Football Consultant (whatever that means) under the then manager of Republic of Ireland, Steve Staunton.
2003-04 - Glenn Hoddle
Date of sacking: 21st September
Club: Tottenham
Club's final league position that season: 14th
Manager's recent history: Faith healing Hoddle managed Wolverhampton Wanderers between December 2004 and July 2006, during this spell Wolves had hopes high of promotion to the Premiership but drew 34 out of 76 games with him in charge.Hoddle has not managed a club since, while without him Wolves finally made it to the Premiership.
2002/03 - Peter Reid
Date of sacking: 7th October 2002
Club: Sunderland
Club's final league position that season: 20th (Relagated)
Manager's recent history: Reid was sacked as Leeds manager in November 2003 eight months after taking over from Terry Venables. He was then hired as manager of Coventry in May 2004 but only lasted eight months again. He lasted a whole year managing the Thai national team before leaving in September 2009 to become Tony Pulis' assistant manager at Stoke City.
2001/02 - Peter Taylor
Date of sacking: 1st October 2001
Club: Leicester
Club's final league position that season: 20th (Relegated)
Manager's recent history: Since leaving Leicester, Taylor has managed Brighton & Hove Albion, Hull City, Crystal Palace, the England Under 21's, Stevenage Borough and Wycombe Wanderers. He was sacked as Wycombe manager on 9th October 2009.
2000/01 - Gianluca Vialli
Date of sacking: 12th September 2000
Club: Chelsea
Club's final league position that season: 6th
Manager's recent history: The former European Cup winner only managed one other club after leaving Chelsea. He spent the 2001/02 season at Watford before being sacked for finishing 14th in the old First Division.
The betting on which manager will be first for the axe each year, or the 'sack race', has become big business for bookies. This year's recipient of the ignoble honour is not a surprise to many but the speed of the sacking has been. Portsmouth lie rock bottom of the league table and underperforming managers are rarely given much time in the Premiership. Below is a list of all of the 'winners' of the sack race during the Noughties, most of whom were not afforded as much time as Hart. (Note that these only include sackings, not resignations or partings on mutual grounds, which occured during the season.)
So what do we learn about the sack list? Well if you make it onto the list you are unlikely to get another job as a Premiership manager. Only Peter Reid has won the race in the past ten years and managed at the top level of English football again, although this was with Leeds in the midst of their death spiral. So don't expect to be seeing Paul Hart appearing in a post match interview on Match of the Day anytime soon.
A couple of clubs seem more keen than most to help their managers win the prize, with both Portsmouth and Tottenham appearing twice. Between their foundation in 1898 and 1988, Portsmouth had 18 different managers. They have now had 18 managers in the 21 years since 1988 and coincidently so have Tottenham. Portsmouth managed to avoid relegation the last time they dished out the award and they will be hoping Avram Grant delivers a similar miracle this time around.
Few of the managers on the list have been successful with other clubs after winning the award, with Alain Perrin the notable exception, and for most it is the start of a terminal decline. Hart should take comfort though that he may now be able to secure a role on television instead. Peter Taylor, Peter Reid, Glenn Hoddle and Iain Dowie all regularly appear as football pundits on British TV and Gianluca Vialli is now a presenter and commentator with Sky Italia. If you win the sack race it would seem, you earn the privilege of telling a television audience just what managers still in jobs are doing wrong.
The most surprising aspect of the list is that the sadly deceased super manager Bobby Robson is on it and that he is in fact the ultimate 'winner' having been sacked the earliest out of all of them. This perhaps shows how sacking your manager early in the season is not always a wise move, with Robson's exit arguably beginning Newcastle's spiral of despair which led to their relegation last season. The season before Sir Bobby left Newcastle they finished 5th in the league, under Robson's replacement Graeme Souness the next year they finished 14th.
Only time will tell if Portsmouth have made the right decision.
The Sack List
2009/10 - Paul HartDate of sacking: 25th November 2009
Club: Portsmouth
Clubs final league position that season: N/A
Manager's recent history: Hart was offered Technical Director role but was sacked while making up his mind.
2008/09 - Juande RamosDate of sacking: 25th October 2008
Club: Tottenham Hotspur
Club's final league position that season: 8th
Manager's recent history: Ramos seems to specialise in short spells with clubs, in fact his tenures are ever diminishing. After leaving Spurs he was hired by Real Madrid in December 2009, much to the british media's shock. He signed a contract until the end of the season which was not renewed. Then in September 2009 he signed a three month contract with CSKA Moscow which he only served 47 days of before leaving with the consent of the club.
2007/08 - Sammy LeeDate of sacking: 17th October 2007
Club: Bolton
Club's final league position that season: 16th
Manager's recent history: Lee got the job at Bolton after being the No.2 to Sam Alladyce and after a short hiatus the human hamster returned to coaching in May 2008 as assistant manager to Rafa Benitez at his old club Liverpool.
2006/07 - Iain DowieDate of sacking: 14th October 2007
Club: Charlton
Club's final league position that season: 19th (Relegated)
Manager's recent history: Sexy Mr Dowie seems to have a thing for the number 15 as that was the amount of games he was in charge of both Charlton and QPR(May to October 2008) before recieving his P45. In between was a spell at Coventry which he lasted seven days short of a calendar year before a bust-up with the board on 11th February 2008. He had a brief spell earlier this year as Alan Shearer's assistant at Newcastle.
2005/06 - Alain PerrinDate of sacking: 24th November 2005
Club: Portsmouth
Club's final league position that season: 17th
Manager's recent history: 'Reggie' has had a pretty successful career in French football since leaving Pompy, winning the French Cup with FC Sochaux in 2007 and then doing a league and cup double with Olympic Lyonnais the following season. He is currently manager of AS Saint-Etienne.
2004/05 - Bobby RobsonDate of sacking: 30th August 2004
Club: Newcastle
Club's final league position that season: 14th
Manager's recent history: After being sacked by Freddy Shepherd Sir Bobby never returned to football managment and died earlier this year. Between January 2006 and November 2007 he held the role of International Football Consultant (whatever that means) under the then manager of Republic of Ireland, Steve Staunton.
2003-04 - Glenn HoddleDate of sacking: 21st September
Club: Tottenham
Club's final league position that season: 14th
Manager's recent history: Faith healing Hoddle managed Wolverhampton Wanderers between December 2004 and July 2006, during this spell Wolves had hopes high of promotion to the Premiership but drew 34 out of 76 games with him in charge.Hoddle has not managed a club since, while without him Wolves finally made it to the Premiership.
2002/03 - Peter ReidDate of sacking: 7th October 2002
Club: Sunderland
Club's final league position that season: 20th (Relagated)
Manager's recent history: Reid was sacked as Leeds manager in November 2003 eight months after taking over from Terry Venables. He was then hired as manager of Coventry in May 2004 but only lasted eight months again. He lasted a whole year managing the Thai national team before leaving in September 2009 to become Tony Pulis' assistant manager at Stoke City.
2001/02 - Peter TaylorDate of sacking: 1st October 2001
Club: Leicester
Club's final league position that season: 20th (Relegated)
Manager's recent history: Since leaving Leicester, Taylor has managed Brighton & Hove Albion, Hull City, Crystal Palace, the England Under 21's, Stevenage Borough and Wycombe Wanderers. He was sacked as Wycombe manager on 9th October 2009.
2000/01 - Gianluca VialliDate of sacking: 12th September 2000
Club: Chelsea
Club's final league position that season: 6th
Manager's recent history: The former European Cup winner only managed one other club after leaving Chelsea. He spent the 2001/02 season at Watford before being sacked for finishing 14th in the old First Division.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
