The First Statement: Dealing With The Rumours:
Brentford v Rotherham – January 10th
Oh, Brentford. What have you done.
So the news we were kind of expecting – but still in denial about – broke today. A week after speculation about Mark Warburton’s future first became public, Brentford released a further Club Statement confirming that Warburton (plus Sporting Director, Frank McParland, and Assistant Manager, David Weir) “will leave Brentford at the end of the 2014/15 season.”
It makes no sense on the face of things to have divulged this, officially, at this point in the season. That said, reading between the lines of their February 10th Statement, it felt like Brentford’s board and owner felt obliged to try and dampen the fire of rumours that had spread to the press. So let me deal with that, first.
More than just abating gossip, it didn’t feel the most professionally-written of statements; normally we expect to hear a characterless piece, with token phrases and empty soundbites. A flat denial could have been fine – uninformative, unclear, but still fine. However the statement from February 10th had every sign of a guilty conscience that’s been caught red-handed. Which is unnecessary, if they believe in the vision. Presumably, the fear is in the consequential negative PR.
Clearly, Brentford’s search for managerial guidance elsewhere escaped the close quarters it was meant to be solely privy to – and thus alarm bells tolled: ‘why would Brentford be enquiring about managers when they already have Warburton and are doing so incredibly well? Is something happening with Warburton?’ And, it begins…
My point being, it seemed like they felt compelled to explain a reason for every motive – when surely, if innocent, it should speak for itself? The club came across to me as overly keen to absolve their behaviour:
“As with every other sensibly run club, we plan for various possible eventualities. We are a progressive club who do talk to other people within the game to learn about other ways of doing things, and to consider novel strategic approaches to the game. Those conversations continue internally, and are part of a healthy dialogue.”
Instead of simply denying the rumours, that Mark is leaving, they felt the need to justify that they are a ‘sensibly run’ and ‘progressive’ club – i.e. this is sensible and progressive behaviour. The reason they’ve been engaged in talks with other people is ‘to learn about other ways of doing things.’ Implication: it’s research and education. Actuality: their ‘other way’ is one sans Warburton, and he is not on board with their vision of ‘novel strategic approaches to the game.’
Note too, the reassurance that these conversations are part of ‘a healthy dialogue’; ergo they are routine and nothing to concern ourselves with.
This next line in particular struck me for its emotive inference; it’s like ‘the club’ has taken it personally that their conversations were leaked. I guess this is the result of being an owner and a fan.
“Football is sometimes called a village, and in any village, gossip and rumours can spread like wildfire, whether or not such rumours are true. It would not be in the Club’s interests to disclose any of those discussions, but Brentford FC do want to confirm that Mark Warburton remains our manager.”
The village metaphor is merely opportunity to have a dig, it doesn’t offer anything in terms of clarity – just the implication that false rumours were being circulated. Which, it turns out, wasn’t really true… as we found out today. Clearly the upset is the breach of confidence, and the misunderstanding of motive, not the accuracy of the information.
We knew there was something afoot when all Brentford could confirm was that Warburton was going to remain the manager, in present tense. Inference being: we aren’t sacking Mark (yet). “Mark will continue to lead the club in its push for Premier League football.” (But no further than that). We just hadn’t been officially enlightened as to why, at that point.
The Second Statement: Dealing With The Truth:
And now Brentford’s top level have seen their hand forced once more, releasing a confirmation that the rumours about Mark are no longer merely rumours, but they have substance. Warburton is leaving Brentford at the end of the season.
Anticipating the backlash, the club felt the need to remind everyone that owner, Matthew Benham, is “a Brentford fan since 1979, who has owned the majority shareholding in the Club since June 2012,” and “has decided to make changes in order to ensure the long-term prosperity of the Club.”
The Bees at The Valley – February 14th
By seems of things, then, it is a clash of philosophies more than any personal distaste for Warburton’s chops as a manager. Because based on his record alone, and the performances and results he’s got from this Brentford side since his appointment, there is no logic to relieving Warburton from the role. Not when he’s been instrumental in getting Brentford this far – to being Championship play-off contenders. In fact, it’s only since the revelations about Warburton’s future were made public that Brentford fell out of the top six (having lost twice, 2-1 to Watford and uncharacteristically 3-0 away to Charlton. I was unfortunate enough to have made the trip to The Valley to support The Bees, last Saturday).
So we hear, now, that Benham has a long-term vision for the future of Brentford FC, which includes appointing a Head Coach to work alongside a new Sporting Director. Interestingly, perhaps tellingly, the statement confirmed, too, that: “As part of the new recruitment structure, the Head Coach will have a strong input in to the players brought in to the Club but not an absolute veto.”
It becomes far clearer as to why Brentford are in this situation. Warburton is alleged to disagree with these additions to the coaching staff, and perhaps lacking the final say on player acquisition.
“The new structure is unusual in English football, although commonplace in other European countries and in other sports. We would have loved for Mark to stay, working within the new structure, but he feels that this is not right for him. We understand that completely and had to weigh up the benefits of the new structure against losing a fantastically successful manager before taking this decision.”
And herein lies the problem- for Brentford’s image, anyway.
It’s just the timing of this revelation that the football public dislike the taste of. Warburton has been an admirable character, for his quick and thorough success on the field, but also his character and back-story that saw him enter into football coaching and management. He is well respected, so this looks – on the surface anyway – to be a bit of a kick in the teeth, and a lack of gratitude for what he’s done for the club during his tenure. Certainly while other managers are being spoken to about a position Warburton already fills so well.
Even if the departure is amicable, English football being the way it is, in this scenario the fans and a lot of the media are always going to sympathise with the manager more than they make allowances to understand the intentions of the owner. There is some resentment for owners that meddle too much in the pitch-side details of management and coaching, which still makes Benham and co the pantomime villains here. No matter how long he has been a fan, or how good his intentions are.
So in the immediate aftermath, it can go one of two ways. The players unite to see Warburton gets a glorious exit: promotion to the Premier League. Or, the team morale crumbles under the weight of the upheaval; the disappointment at losing a manager they clearly respect, and the tangible reflection of uncertainty about their own futures – and Brentford fall short of making the play-offs after all.
Yet, lest we forget, Brentford had only just been promoted to the Championship. So – say none of this had got out – one wouldn’t say, really, that Brentford had failed in not being promoted to the Premier League. It might be easy to blame the board if the latter is the case (aside: would they get the reverse credit should they get promoted? Doubtful.) but it isn’t so cut-and-dry as to lay it on their door.
I suppose, perhaps only good can come of this for all involved – supposing both owner and manager will always be resolute in their differing visions, a change is inevitable. Whether he gets them promoted or not, Warburton’s CV looks dashing and he has some great connections. Benham’s long-term vision has worked for him, and Brentford, so far – there is nothing to say his structural re-org won’t continue to reap benefits. At the very least, there is no point in Benham and Warburton continuing to work together when they have disparate ideas and ideals regarding future strategies. It makes the managerial position untenable, particularly when the club are looking to create a model that works exclusive of who is at the helm in the dugout.
Obviously the biggest issue short-term is the negative PR: this makes Benham and Brentford look bad. Insensitive and perhaps illogical – to fall foul of the ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ adage. It seems to make more sense to continue with this working and winning strategy, with Warburton at the helm, until it stops working or reaches a plateau, instead of putting changes in place so immediately. I think this has perhaps been a bit of nativity on the club’s part, and now it’s out there they have felt obliged to act with a strong hand – they don’t want to be seen as indecisive or having an unclear vision for the future, so perhaps they have committed to the new direction before they have confirmed the best route.
The long-term issue of course falls at the feet of Benham; trusting that this model – and making the changes to accommodate it immediately – are the right thing to ensure the success of Brentford FC. You might be inclined to say he is taking a big gamble in relieving one of the Bees most successful managers of recent memory – but then remember he is a professional gambler. He has a physics degree and has worked for a City hedge fund – this isn’t the place for bad judgement, but it is a place for big-winning risks. Having already invested £90m into the club since he bought majority in 2012, it’s fair to say his decisions have been the right calls to spark life into Brentford so far. Bees fans have to trust he has the club’s interest at heart, and knows when to limit the risks when the odds are no longer in favour.
In the meantime, so long as Brentford can minimalise in-fighting and dissent, and retrieve the lost-confidence brought about from the revelation as well as recent results, then they can still have a strong close to the season. The manager, players and staff can finish 2014/15 on a high, and leave Benham to figure out the details of what’s next.
Pursuit of Nattiness 