Of course we need the best calibre of people in key management positions. But then the communication between the DoF and coach is crucial.
Example: Carrick was a playmaker who Jol coached into a top class holding C/DM. Carrick will always be an ordinary tackler, but Jol helped him with his defensive positioning so he could use his reading of the game to jockey players away from our goal etc. So, Jol's team was built around a C/DM who could protect the back four and creatively dictate the tempo.
Carrick was then sold (the reason is irrelevant). For Jol's team to carry on playing the same kind of football, we needed a C/DM who was an excellent passer of the ball and who could protect the back four through his reading of the game, discipline and positioning.
We ended up buying Zokora. Now, Zokora has his strengths - particularly his speed, athleticism and great fighting spirit. But he's not a creative passer like Carrick. And his reading of the game gets better the deeper he's playing (so he's had some of his most effective games when he's been playing as a spare CB able to step up and break up opposition attacks). One thing that's for certain is that Zokora will never be able to dictate our attacking tempo in the way that Carrick did.
So, if we were going to replace Carrick with Zokora, we were going to lose a lot of creativity in CM. This was a problem that was neither addressed nor solved by Jol or Commoli. Whose fault was that? We don't know for sure, although it's been rumoured that Commoli was very keen on signing Zokora. But once you play Zokora alongside Jenas, we were always going to be lacking in creativity in CM.
And although Huddlestone has shown glimpses of great ability, he's not shown us that he can provide that CM creativity on a consistent basis. Yet.
None of us know for certain, but my best guess is that Zokora was very much a Commoli signing. And the end result was that the coach's style of play was severely disrupted. Ultimately, both Jol and Commoli have to take responsiblity for the fact that Carrick was never adequately replaced.
Example: Carrick was a playmaker who Jol coached into a top class holding C/DM. Carrick will always be an ordinary tackler, but Jol helped him with his defensive positioning so he could use his reading of the game to jockey players away from our goal etc. So, Jol's team was built around a C/DM who could protect the back four and creatively dictate the tempo.
Carrick was then sold (the reason is irrelevant). For Jol's team to carry on playing the same kind of football, we needed a C/DM who was an excellent passer of the ball and who could protect the back four through his reading of the game, discipline and positioning.
We ended up buying Zokora. Now, Zokora has his strengths - particularly his speed, athleticism and great fighting spirit. But he's not a creative passer like Carrick. And his reading of the game gets better the deeper he's playing (so he's had some of his most effective games when he's been playing as a spare CB able to step up and break up opposition attacks). One thing that's for certain is that Zokora will never be able to dictate our attacking tempo in the way that Carrick did.
So, if we were going to replace Carrick with Zokora, we were going to lose a lot of creativity in CM. This was a problem that was neither addressed nor solved by Jol or Commoli. Whose fault was that? We don't know for sure, although it's been rumoured that Commoli was very keen on signing Zokora. But once you play Zokora alongside Jenas, we were always going to be lacking in creativity in CM.
And although Huddlestone has shown glimpses of great ability, he's not shown us that he can provide that CM creativity on a consistent basis. Yet.
None of us know for certain, but my best guess is that Zokora was very much a Commoli signing. And the end result was that the coach's style of play was severely disrupted. Ultimately, both Jol and Commoli have to take responsiblity for the fact that Carrick was never adequately replaced.