Speaking as an Albion fan, there is definitely scrutiny on the recruitment processes (or lack of) and those who oversee them.
Mason certainly wasn’t helped by our then President Andrew Nestor stating that his appointment was ‘data driven’ and made with the view to establishing a ‘defined game model’. Unfortunately these became sticks to beat Mason with when our form stuttered as even those who pay no attention to the metrics that sit behind football, understood that there was insufficient data to support these claims and no such model followed.
It’s also worth noting the club released a statement on 23/12 calling for patience to allow new coach and players to settle. Evidently these words were not adhered to and the decision to sack Mason and replace with Ramsay ultimately led to the departure of Nestor.
All in all, it’s been a mess from a new ownership group that clearly have good intentions but a severe lack of football personnel around them to advise and guide key decisions. This may well cost us our status in the second tier.
I think the fanbase has played a big part in the lack of patience that has been outlined at board level:
1. Masons confidence started to crumble when the midweek fixtures started to hit. The team changes and last minute goals eroded confidence on the pitch and in the stands, and the 2 goals conceded against Swansea on 29/11 created a big fracture between club and supporters. That led to Wildsmith being brought in to protect Griffiths, Mason and his relationship didnt recover and his position did feel untenable.
2. The pressure was on Ramsey right from the off in game 1 against Boro. 'what the hell is this' was the general reaction to his low block approach. In short he stepped into the toxicy surrounding Mason and never got going.
I do think our inexperienced board have buckled like our inexperienced managers, but it does have alot to do with the civil war that has been experienced everywhere from board level, manager and player relationships, potentially player to player relationships and the fans Vs anything with a pulse. A proper Royal Rumble of a season desperately needs to be rectified now!
Interesting article. Worth comparing what happened with Chris Davies at Birmingham. Very similar style of team to WBA under Mason, decent xG performance, also struggled away from home. The manager was under pressure. But he was backed instead of sacked, iterated his style of play and we are now one of the form teams in the league. Sometimes the 'do nothing ' option is the right one.
Although unfortunately ‘do nothing’ can also deepen the issue to unsustainable levels.
With Hamshaw at Rotherham, the owner has practised patience with our poor form, no doubt because we’ve undergone a period of hiring and firing at an alarming rate over the last few years. But he’s paying for that now as we continue to regress and are threatening to relinquish our L1 status.
The commitment to a long term process where we’ve set our stall out to bring the average age down and go through a period of restructuring is commendable, but at the end of the day sadly it is a results business.
Yep. In the piece, I'm not trying to come down too hard one way or the other on the existence of sackings -- they have to exist. It's more the decision-making in sacking someone, which you could equally apply to retaining a manager performing badly.
What is guiding owners? It often seems to be something OTHER THAN or MORE THAN the evidence - something fans don't see.
Interesting piece.
Speaking as an Albion fan, there is definitely scrutiny on the recruitment processes (or lack of) and those who oversee them.
Mason certainly wasn’t helped by our then President Andrew Nestor stating that his appointment was ‘data driven’ and made with the view to establishing a ‘defined game model’. Unfortunately these became sticks to beat Mason with when our form stuttered as even those who pay no attention to the metrics that sit behind football, understood that there was insufficient data to support these claims and no such model followed.
It’s also worth noting the club released a statement on 23/12 calling for patience to allow new coach and players to settle. Evidently these words were not adhered to and the decision to sack Mason and replace with Ramsay ultimately led to the departure of Nestor.
All in all, it’s been a mess from a new ownership group that clearly have good intentions but a severe lack of football personnel around them to advise and guide key decisions. This may well cost us our status in the second tier.
I think the fanbase has played a big part in the lack of patience that has been outlined at board level:
1. Masons confidence started to crumble when the midweek fixtures started to hit. The team changes and last minute goals eroded confidence on the pitch and in the stands, and the 2 goals conceded against Swansea on 29/11 created a big fracture between club and supporters. That led to Wildsmith being brought in to protect Griffiths, Mason and his relationship didnt recover and his position did feel untenable.
2. The pressure was on Ramsey right from the off in game 1 against Boro. 'what the hell is this' was the general reaction to his low block approach. In short he stepped into the toxicy surrounding Mason and never got going.
I do think our inexperienced board have buckled like our inexperienced managers, but it does have alot to do with the civil war that has been experienced everywhere from board level, manager and player relationships, potentially player to player relationships and the fans Vs anything with a pulse. A proper Royal Rumble of a season desperately needs to be rectified now!
Interesting article. Worth comparing what happened with Chris Davies at Birmingham. Very similar style of team to WBA under Mason, decent xG performance, also struggled away from home. The manager was under pressure. But he was backed instead of sacked, iterated his style of play and we are now one of the form teams in the league. Sometimes the 'do nothing ' option is the right one.
Although unfortunately ‘do nothing’ can also deepen the issue to unsustainable levels.
With Hamshaw at Rotherham, the owner has practised patience with our poor form, no doubt because we’ve undergone a period of hiring and firing at an alarming rate over the last few years. But he’s paying for that now as we continue to regress and are threatening to relinquish our L1 status.
The commitment to a long term process where we’ve set our stall out to bring the average age down and go through a period of restructuring is commendable, but at the end of the day sadly it is a results business.
Yep. In the piece, I'm not trying to come down too hard one way or the other on the existence of sackings -- they have to exist. It's more the decision-making in sacking someone, which you could equally apply to retaining a manager performing badly.
What is guiding owners? It often seems to be something OTHER THAN or MORE THAN the evidence - something fans don't see.
The contrast in fortunes between the clubs relegated from the championship at the end of the 23/24 season is really very stark...
Yes. I certainly think that "doing nothing" can be just as transformative as doing something. Look at Argyle!