No surprise, it's Watford. Xisco Munoz sacked.

Munoz gone already !

Haha. No way?!

Not sure if this is good or bad news - I suppose the circus can only be a good thing for us.

Only three more Watford managers till Christmas.

Quote from Watford:

"The Board feels recent performances strongly indicate a negative trend at a time when team cohesion should be visibly improving. The Hornets will always be grateful to Xisco for the part he played in securing last season's promotion and wish him well for his future career in football."

Last time they won promotion they sacked the manager before the next season started so I suppose Xisco getting seven games is an improvement.

Super hero to failure in 7 matches!

WOW

I thought Watford had started better than expected this season. Unlucky not to get a point yesterday.
I can't see this sacking doing anything but undermine the team when they looked to be settling ok.

I wonder whether the inexplicable decision to disallow their equaliser yesterday had a bearing on this sacking.

Stupid but unsurprsing. They've done OK. Huge dose of realism needed by the Board.

I'd say I'm surprised, but It's Watford so I'm not really.

They've just gone up, and are sitting 14th after 7 games, what exactly do their owners expect, them to be top of the league.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 10:57 am

I wonder whether the inexplicable decision to disallow their equaliser yesterday had a bearing on this sacking.

Or the fact that 10 months is far too long to be in charge of Watford

Since they were taken over by the Pozzo family in the summer of 2012 they have now dispensed with the services of

Sean Dyche
Gianfranco Zola
Guiseppe Sannino
Oscar Garcia
Billy McKinlay
Slavisa Jokanovic
Quique Sanchez Flores
Walter Mazzari
Marco Sliva
Javi Gracia
Quique Sanchez Flores
Nigel Pearson
Vladimir Ivic
Xisco Monoz

Dont think Dyche would last long there. Never mind a new 4 year contact.

Boss Hogg wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:03 am

Dont think Dyche would last long there. Never mind a new 4 year contact.

Nobody does

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:02 am

Or the fact that 10 months is far too long to be in charge of Watford

Since they were taken over by the Pozzo family in the summer of 2012 they have now dispensed with the services of

Sean Dyche
Gianfranco Zola
Guiseppe Sannino
Oscar Garcia
Billy McKinlay
Slavisa Jokanovic
Quique Sanchez Flores
Walter Mazzari
Marco Sliva
Javi Gracia
Quique Sanchez Flores
Nigel Pearson
Vladimir Ivic
Xisco Monoz

What can’t be argued is that it seems to work for them. Can’t believe that can be a positive culture to be around though.

Diego Martinez is favourite

Appalling decision by VAR to disallow their goal at Leeds.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:05 am

Diego Martinez is favourite

Sounds like the name that would come out of a next Watford manager name generator.

Stan Tastic wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:06 am

Appalling decision by VAR to disallow their goal at Leeds.

Absolutely - Danny Murphy on MOTD described us not getting a penalty as even more bizarre than the disallowed goal for Watford.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:05 am

What can’t be argued is that it seems to work for them. Can’t believe that can be a positive culture to be around though.

Does it though?
Their highest PL finish has been 11th

Changing managers regularly works for Chelsea, as shown by the trophy haul, but Watford aren't really doing anything that would suggest their approach is better than ours for example.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:04 am

Nobody does

But yet people still agree to take up the position, I think the expectations are unrealistic why so many people seem to fail you would have thought by now a few red flags would be raised to any potential manager incoming, I guess a jobs a job when all said & done.

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:09 am

Does it though?
Their highest PL finish has been 11th

Changing managers regularly works for Chelsea, as shown by the trophy haul, but Watford aren't really doing anything that would suggest their approach is better than ours for example.

I’m not really comparing their approach to ours, as our consistency of manager and playing staff has been arguably more successful. But they’re a regular fixture in the Premier League, which for a club of their size I would consider successful.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:10 am

But yet people still agree to take up the position, I think the expectations are unrealistic why so many people seem to fail you would have thought by now a few red flags would be raised to any potential manager incoming, I guess a jobs a job when all said & done.

So is a multi million pound severance package.

Really shocked i never saw that one coming ... Yer right .

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:12 am

So is a multi million pound severance package.

You are assuming that’s the case we don’t know the full details of that, if that is the case it’s hard to believe it makes any business sense hiring & firing so often.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:10 am

But yet people still agree to take up the position, I think the expectations are unrealistic why so many people seem to fail you would have thought by now a few red flags would be raised to any potential manager incoming, I guess a jobs a job when all said & done.

Chance to put yourself in the spotlight, and a guaranteed pay off when you get sacked, it's win win really.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:14 am

You are assuming that’s the case we don’t know the full details of that, if that is the case it’s hard to believe it makes any business sense hiring & firing so often.

I think it's a fairly safe or guaranteed assumption.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:15 am

I think it's a fairly safe or guaranteed assumption.

We don’t know if the multi million severance is true it could be agreed that if a certain target isn’t met that could be waivered or substantially reduced.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:20 am

We don’t know if the multi million severance is true it could be agreed that if a certain target isn’t met that could be waivered or substantially reduced.

When has this happened in the Premier League before? The only way I can realistically see them not having to pay seven figure compensation is if he only had a few months left on his contract.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:23 am

When has this happened in the Premier League before? The only way I can realistically see them not having to pay seven figure compensation is if he only had a few months left on his contract.

It could be put into any contract all sorts of conditions can be put into contracts if it’s agreed it’s legally binding, we don’t know the full details of managers contracts past speculation or media reporting.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:26 am

It could be put into any contract all sorts of conditions can be put into contracts if it’s agreed it’s legally binding, we don’t know the full details of managers contracts past speculation or media reporting.

Of course anything can be written into a contract. It's just I've never come across a Premier League manager being sacked and not being entitled to compensation. Have you?

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:28 am

Of course anything can be written into a contract. It's just I've never come across a Premier League manager being sacked and not being entitled to compensation. Have you?

No because I don’t have personal first hand knowledge of managers contracts because I’m not employed as an accountant working for a premier league club as strange as that may sound

I've just looked back at the pre-season thing I did for the Guardian which always ends with the question: "Who will be the first Premier League manager sacked?"

My answer this year was: Xisco Munoz on the basis that no one lasts too long at Watford.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:30 am

No because I don’t have personal first hand knowledge of managers contracts because I’m not employed as an accountant working for a premier league club as strange as that may sound

You don't have to be an accountant working at a premier league club. The sports media report with a fair degree of accuracy. So I think if it gets consistently reported that Munoz will receive compensation it's reasonable to conclude he will get it; likewise if it's signalled in the media he's not entitled to compensation.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:37 am

You don't have to be an accountant working at a premier league club. The sports media report with a fair degree of accuracy. So I think if it gets consistently reported that Munoz will receive compensation it's reasonable to conclude he will get it; likewise if it's signalled in the media he's not entitled to compensation.

I’m not disputing he will receive something I just think the multi millions could be a stretch, it’s hard to believe that a club would pay off so many managers with millions bearing in mind the turnover. This is a club who refused to pay will Hughes extra who’s now sat on the Crystal Palace bench I don’t believe they paid that much extra than Watford to sit on a bench.

Munoz gone at Watford
That didn't last long

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:44 am

I’m not disputing he will receive something I just think the multi millions could be a stretch, it’s hard to believe that a club would pay off so many managers with millions bearing in mind the turnover. This is a club who refused to pay will Hughes extra who’s now sat on the Crystal Palace bench I don’t believe they paid that much extra than Watford to sit on a bench.

A completely unrelated matter, but how do you know they refused to pay Hughes more if you are not the club's accountant?.

Why would anyone consider working for Watford
Would have gone by August if they owned Burnley
Pace makes all the right noises be interesting to see what he does if we continue as we are at the moment

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:52 am

A completely unrelated matter, but how do you know they refused to pay Hughes more if you are not the club's accountant?.

Just say it’s an assumption I’m also allowed 1 like you. It’s not unrelated if my assumption is true because it’s highlighting that Watford can’t afford to splash the cash.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:20 am

We don’t know if the multi million severance is true it could be agreed that if a certain target isn’t met that could be waivered or substantially reduced.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:55 am

Just say it’s an assumption I’m also allowed 1 like you. It’s not unrelated if my assumption is true because it’s highlighting that Watford can’t afford to splash the cash.

'According to Adam Leventhal of The Athletic, Hughes has turned down a new Watford contract. The offer was a five-year deal, one which would make him amongst the club’s top earners with a significant raise in pay.'

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:56 am

Screenshot_20211003-115528.png

Another assumption are we assuming that’s a continuing trend with every managers contract onwards again assuming that the article is true, exactly my point lots of assumptions but nothing is 100% factually true.

Milltown1882 wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 10:51 am

Only three more Watford managers till Christmas.

A Christmas Advent Calendar for them? Each day in December reveal a new manager.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:57 am

'According to Adam Leventhal of The Athletic, Hughes has turned down a new Watford contract. The offer was a five-year deal, one which would make him amongst the club’s top earners with a significant raise in pay.'

So basically what Watford was offering still wasn’t enough & palace offered more. palace who were also linked with a few names on transfer deadline day but pulled the plug because of finances.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:59 am

Another assumption are we assuming that’s a continuing trend with every managers contract onwards again assuming that the article is true, exactly my point lots of assumptions but nothing is 100% factually true.

It sounds like it was clear enough in their accounts. That's how we know about the vast sums of money chelsea have paid in compensation for example.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:57 am

'According to Adam Leventhal of The Athletic, Hughes has turned down a new Watford contract. The offer was a five-year deal, one which would make him amongst the club’s top earners with a significant raise in pay.'

Didn't Hughes go to Palace in the summer? He was linked with us wasn't he?

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:05 pm

So basically what Watford was offering still wasn’t enough & palace offered more. palace who were also linked with a few names on transfer deadline day but pulled the plug because of finances.

I don't know. I would have thought Hughes had other objectives too. Not that this has anything to do with whether Watford are contractually and legally obliged to pay Munoz significant compensation.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:06 pm

It sounds like it was clear enough in their accounts. That's how we know about the vast sums of money chelsea have paid in compensation for example.

I’m leaving it there unless you want me to do a like for like comparison on pozzo & Abramovichs wealth, good day.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:59 am

Another assumption are we assuming that’s a continuing trend with every managers contract onwards again assuming that the article is true, exactly my point lots of assumptions but nothing is 100% factually true.

If the number is declared a termination payment it's a pretty safe bet to state it's for managerial sackings.

You can wriggle around all you like, but Watford (and Chelsea for that matter) pay out millions to the managers they've sacked.

It's the risk clubs take when they hand managers multi-year contracts instead of yearly rolling contracts like we used to have Dyche on, although those also make it easier for a club to poach a manager with minimal compensation unless there is a minimum "release" clause.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:10 pm

I’m leaving it there unless you want me to do a like for like comparison on pozzo & Abramovichs wealth, good day.

I'm not suggesting that Watford will pay compensation at the level Chelsea have in the past. No, I don't want you compare their wealth. It's the manager's salary and length of contract that typically determines the amount of compensation payable in the event of dismissal. Pace isn't at all wealthy by comparison yet if he chooses to sack Dyche he will be due a large sum of compensation from the club. I'm suggesting it's standard practice for premier league clubs to pay significant sums of money if they sack their manager and this is reflected in the media and even a club's own financial accounts.