Topic: Why do coaches get sacked over poor performance of players? - page 5. (Read 759 times)

That is why coaches has to maintain a good relationship with the team but for me this is some sort of an unresolved conflict within the team like undisciplined players, no teamwork and many other possible reasons. Coaches knows what is good for the team so his decisions might anger or agitated and as a result conflict is getting worse that is why sometimes it ends up firing when not resolved.

Coaches are the custodian of the team and he is responsible for the tactics and Man management of the squad. All the players can't be bad at the same time, so it's the duty of the coach to identify a player or players that are not doing well and replace them, if he is unable to to this then he is not a good coach. His tactical work has to show too, because it is what he tells the players to do on the pitch that's what they will rely on. A coach is the leader, if it's going well all credit to him and if it's going bad he is responsible.

It's funny that team won 4 matches in a row after changing Mourinho with Daniele De Rossi.
By the way, Roma had almost zero budget and Mourinho still won them their first European trophy in 11 years. They shouldn't sack him, he is not a type of coach that should get sacked because he is one of the most experienced coach that can make weak teams play well.
OP I don't think players intentionally played bad to get rid of Jose Mourinho, the fact is, Mourinho is a demanding person, he always expects more from his squad and squad failed to deliver. It just happened that Mourinho got with wrong team and squad.

My brother, I see it just the way you see it and I am baffled often just the way you are baffled and I've complained about it many times even on this forum. It doesn't truly make sense, and it has never solved the problem in my opinion. This is so rampant in Europe, that most clubs are not patient with their coach, and a little underperformance will easily show the coach the exit which I think is not supposed to be so. You can see what is happening in Chealse, several coaches have been sacked, I mean the coaches that were supposed to have been given time to stabilise the club in most cases (although not in all cases as some coaches are obviously bad and deserved it) will just be sacked abruptly, which is bad in my opinion.

I do see it and am always so surprised, even some external coaches will speak against it as they were also shocked. Well, let me say that too much money is intoxicating these clubs as many of these coaches would have their deals terminated before their time and this attracts more money against the club. But clubs like Liverpool which didn't sack their coach for a long period of time even when the club was being challenged have it better these days. You can't compare the Liverpool of 10 years ago with the Liverpool of now, that is what we are talking about. At times, some coaches need more time to stabilise the clubs, this is even as they need the cooperation of the players and not fair to always absorb all the faults in this case which the club will always want to put on them.

Fans need someone to take responsibility for the poor performance of their favorite team, and usually the coach will be used as a scapegoat for this. This is because the coach is the person who is responsible for training the team, providing strategies, analyzing opponents, etc., and because of the fans' high expectations for this, when their team loses, the coach will be blamed for it. Even when the coach has actually worked optimally, fans will still blame them if their team still loses because the coach is responsible for the overall success of the team.

For each match played that ends in a victory for the club, players must receive their bonuses. I don’t think that a personal attitude towards a coach will prevail in denying oneself financial support.
Coaches are fired due to unfulfilled obligations. Each coach is given a task, and failure to complete it means that the coach cannot continue the contract. Everyone knows that every professional coach has a strategy; how he lines up the players before the game depends on how the game goes. But there are still other points on which the main players can be bribed, who are capable of creating a bad game, and sometimes these players act together with the coach.

From my perspective there alot of things that contribute to firing of coaches not just the poor performance of the clubs players. If I could speculate there are lots of agreement/documentations that happens when it comes to appointment a coach for a club and maybe in this process they contain rules that me and you may not be aware of that leads to firing of coaches.

If it's only about the performance of players sometimes I see clubs selling out the players which they feel are not helping the team, so it's not only the coaches that gets firing as a result of poor performance.

That's how they hide bad management.
Just look at the NBA, they fire coaches left and right even if they just serve 1 or 2 years. When there's a locker room problem with players they don't blame the players, the coaches will be the ones to receive the bad figure.
Even the ones who served for almost half their life in one team can be fired anytime and I think this is just the management doing things improperly.
Players are like gems to them, they are paying them millions of dollars for that but coaches are always replaceable and it will go on even in the future.
I don't think it's because of bad coaching, it's just the management doesn't want to get all the media attention so they will do something in their favor and the first in their eyes will be coaches.
It takes time for a player to be traded if they are the ones who made the mistake so the easiest path will be to point the finger on the coaches. It's sad but it's true. We don't really know the stories behind it and coaches will still make a good statement even after they are fired.

What that matters is the coach performance. A coach is hired to deliver the best and if possible, to win the lead and cup competitions. If a coach is not doing that but the club is getting poorer in performance, the coach would be removed for another coach to begin work with the team.

Has this happened before in the history of footballnor sport generally? We all know how the world is. As some people will want good for you, some people will want bad for you just as you can see in movies like Oppenheimer which is a true life story. Coach will interact with players and some interactions may lead to hatred from the players in a way the players may not show it but be playing poorly.

One of the reason coaches get sacked is partly due to the fact that they are not so much seen as an investment to the tram as players are. They are kind of like hired company directors placed on the board by owners. They will be replaced at any mishap, while players can be traded later or while on contract used to build up their value by improving them, placing them in ads etc.

Something about football is that the coach is seen to be totally in charge of the team and it's believed that the players plays accordingly to the pattern, tactics and style as directed by the coach so should any outcome emerge be it positive or negative results it's purely on the coach before anyone else.

Even when the players are underperforming it will still be blamed on the coach as that was the job he was employed for to come in and correct. However, there are times players can gang up against a coach they are fed up with and decide to be underperforming just to get the coach sack because he's no more appealing to their liking anymore. 

It's possible for the coach to get fired especially when their team doesn't do well. There are several reasons, not only game results. Coach-player relationship is very important, it will affect the team's morale and performance if both don't get along. If both relationship fails, club may replace coaches to improve, not to blame the coach but to ensure teamwork.

Have you ever heard of the movie 8 men out? It's about the Chicago White Sox losing the world series on purpose. 8 men banned from baseball for life. 1 was the great Shoeless Joe Jackson.

Good or bad players doesn't matter, they are destroying the integrity of the sport by losing on purpose. If they dislike a coach, then speak their thoughts to the owner and let the owner fire him if he agrees. If the owner doesn't agree, play out your contract and ask for a trade. Don't lose on purpose to suit your own selfish agenda.

That's because the one who regulates the formation of the players is the coach and if the coach cannot do his job well, the club management needs to give a warning so that the coach can improve his duties and his team can win the championship. But if several times after the warning, the coach is not able to improve the team's performance and the team cannot win the desired championship, the club management can fire the coach because he is no longer able to work well and is not responsible for managing and training the players and cannot find a strategy which is suitable for his team when his team competes with other teams. The task of a coach is very difficult so team management should be able to choose a coach who can carry out duties according to their job description.

What if it involves your important players that are putting efforts in other for the club to be successful and maybe they don't actually like the coach's way of attending to players because there are coaches that are very arrogant and pompous whenever they want to tell a player to do something, let's consider a scenario whereby his team is losing a game and instead of the coach to encourage his players at that moment but instead he keeps shouting at the players more especially when they make mistakes. I have been following football for a very long time now and I can tell you that some coaches are very disrespectful to their players even this Jose Mourinho, he also does that though he's a good and professional coach but he doesn't care about the importance of any player as he can go as far as not featuring an important in a game conspicuously maybe simply because he didn't perform well in previous match.

 Inasmuch as football is concerned, there ought to be a kind of good relationship between the players and their head coach in other for them to work together and move a team forward but a situation whereby the players decide to conspire to jeopardize the efforts of their coach, then there is really something the coach isn't doing well to his players. Players can't just betray a coach without it being that maybe the team doesn't like his coaching pattern and doesn't relate freely with their coach so in such situations the only remedy is to sack the coach rather than banning such players and moreover, I think there is also a penalty that is being set by the football apex body FIFA to any player who intentionally tries to jeopardize the efforts of his coach so for me if players team up against a coach at the expense of his job, then he isn't in good terms with the players.

I don't think it was because of losing one game that he was fired from Roma. Roma has been in poor form recently and Morinho's bad behavior was in the spotlight after he received a red card in the match against Atalanta. After all, Morinho is a legend and AS Roma management must have thought carefully about the decision to fire Morinho.

One of the considerations for firing Morinho may be due to the not compact between players and coaches, management is unlikely to fire all the players and may prefer to fire Mourinho. Apart from that, his replacement coach is Daniele De Rossi, who may not be as good as Morinho. But hopefully with the new coach Roma will find unity and performance again. But in the end we can only speculate about what happened to them

This is normal thing to happen and of course many other teams out there fire coaches when they cannot work according to expectations and the dismissal is aimed at being able to replace better coach.
Not only Mourinho but also several other coaches out there who have had the same case but to say that Mourinho is actually still too early to fire him more quickly like some time ago.
At least we have to give Mourinho the opportunity to finish this season and give him time to prove whether he can make changes and show improvement by improving the standings.
I was quite surprised when I first heard that Mourinho was fired early and if you look at Mourinho previous performance it wasn't too bad, but this is what happened and the AS Roma owner ambition is to become one of the top team.

But dismissal or change of coach will not always match the hope of having better changes.
It can be seen from Manchester United and Napoli who always make firm decisions about their coaches by dismissing and replacing them but in the end fail to get these changes.

Any fairytale story is really possible.

The players perform poor to make the coach to get fired is possible.
The coach didn't select the player even he has show a good performance in both training camp and friendly match, it's possible.
Both players and coach working together to destroy their own team is possible too.

Here, Mourinho don't want to get blamed for Roma that perform bad in this season, that's why he blames the players.

When it comes to football, the coach is almost responsible for everything that goes on in the team, because he is the one that select the type of players he needs for his team, he is the one training them, he knows there strength and weakness, he knows system that suit them most, he does the selection during match day, so all this things are what most management in football expect the coach to know, because he is not just a coach but he is also a manager, so when things are not going their way, then their would be consequences which the manager is going to pay with his job.

So if as a coach or manager you feel like the players are not playing well just to sack you, their are so tough decisions that needs to be taken after having a meeting with them, to arrest the situation.

I think blaming solely the coach for player underperformance isn't always fair. But even if players disliked him, intentionally throwing matches is unprofessional and detrimental to their careers.

Could the players feel disconnected, demotivated, or unhappy due to the coach's methods, which can reflect their on-field performance?

It might seem more practical to replace the coach than to overhaul the entire roster of players.

Sometimes coaches are unfairly scapegoated for issues that may stem from deeper-rooted organizational problems.

Club management should do a thorough analysis.