chuz

Don't disagree with any of what you are saying, but I'm aware that most if not all Championship Managers will have a similar clause in their contract. It would have been inserted when he first signed and said something along the lines of "In the event of promotion the club has to offer him a contract on a minimum of XX percent more for a minimum of the same length as the first contract" I'd actually say the fact the second contract was not longer than three years shows doubts at board level about him. Had we marched to the Championship title with more than 100 points I suspect the second contract might have been longer. Not saying the situation is the same as Ipswich at all and clearly McKenna did a brilliant job at Ipswich and thoroughly deserved the new contract - but these clauses are pretty standard...

To be fair (and personally I'm not a fan) to SR, it's a pretty standard clause which - if it happens rewards the manager with a (nearer to) Premier League salary. If promotion happens it rewards the manager with a new deal. Ipswich did the same https://www.itfc.co.uk/news/2024/may/30/kieran-mckenna-signs-new-four-year-deal/ There's a few other myths about sacked manager's contracts: it's very rare for someone to get "paid off" the entire contract in one go when sacked (unless you were a Chelsea manager during the Abramovic era) - instead managers continue to get paid until they get another job - when the payment stops. Most clubs are used to paying two (or more) managers at any one time (due to still paying a sacked one).

This is exactly what I was told....it was a clause in the first contract that promotion automatically triggered a second contract.

As I understand it, the new contract was guaranteed if promotion was achieved…ie in the old contract it stated a new one would be offered on promotion…

I'd heard he fell out with Ralph after Ralph dropped him for the FA Cup game v West Ham and then claimed he'd been dropped because he was distracted by an up and coming Poland game. All of this without speaking to Bednarek directly about it. I was told it wound up several other players that Bednarek had been singled out for criticism in this way (partly because Bednarek was fairly popular in the dressing room and partly because the players thought any one of them could be subject to similar). We then went on a terrible run of form. There's usually more than one side to any story and I've probably only been told one side, but I was led to believe the players didn't like the fact that Ralph increasingly singled out players in public for criticism towards the end of his tenure...

I think these "cross club" philosophies are conjured up whenever anyone feels like a change. As you mentioned Ralph apparently spent the whole of Covid writing a "playbook" for the whole club to be deployed at every level. Yet after he was sacked the club chose a manager with a completely different philosophy (in Jones), before going back to the Ralph way again (in Selles) before ditching that for possession football. I suspect they simply looked at Burnley getting promoted from the Championship and decided to get a manager that played that way. When Martin moves on I guess the new manager will be either a clone of his (if he's successful and poached by another club) or a different style (if the possession football gets found out in the Premier League.

McCarthy’s contract rewards him significantly for being in the matchday squad (even if on the bench). It’s cheaper to have Lumley on the bench than McCarthy. However McC s the better keeper. So when you need the better keeper McCarthy comes straight in…

Pretty lucky to have started going to games the season after the FA Cup win, having watched that as a fan on the TV. @Turkish mentioned above we were spoilt at the time (76 to 84) but it almost seemed normal then for us to be winning games with exciting teams playing great football and a mix of older and younger players. As a youngster you knew no different.... Was at the League Cup 79 final which was heartbreaking, Dellhurst Park (which was brilliant), last game at Dell (just incredible), the 2003 FA Cup final (kinda expected to lose), Milan for the Europa with my son - all great days out in hindsight. But my absolute favourite was the JPT final. As a STH we were entitled to 2 tickets each so my parents and son could all go. Best of all was sitting in Wembley at 4-0 up, with 60 minutes gone, knowing for certain that we were going to win the match. Relaxing into the final 30 minutes of a final (or any other game) is soooo not Saints....

The reason behind the embargo was to give print journalists something to write about for the print editions, in the hope that people keep buying newspapers. When there was only print and broadcast press at these events, the embargo gave the print guys something new to write for the paper - ideally with a catchy headline that would help sell papers. You are right that - with 24 hour social media - its fairly pointless now. But that was the original objective...

Exactly this. Or his signing on fee would easily pay for a second property anywhere in the country as a weekly place to stay... Let's not pretend he's going to have to jump in a second hand Ford Fiesta every morning and do the commute like a normal person. Even if he was to go to Manchester or Newcastle there would be a private jet option for commutes back to Southampton (either paid by him, his club or likely a combination of both....) I'd love him to stay but lets not pretend a long daily commute will come into the equation...

Because he’s got two years left on his contract so it’s sell now or get very little in a years time. Post Bosman not so easy for clubs….

It'll be interesting to see if Semmens etc are still here after the first anniversary of the acquisition....possible a 12 month stay of execution was part of the deal...

This idea of paying up a contract in full is an utter myth. Either the manager will continue to be paid monthly until they get another job or a settlement is agreed. The settlement is unlikely to be the entire contract apart from in very unusual circumstances (such as Lampard at Chelsea)....

Personally I'm not a big fan of the way a comment made by Ralph after the Man City game has become indisputable fact that Bednarek didn't want to play (and that's not aimed at you @Appy but it seems to have become an accepted view that Bednarek was reluctant to play for us... I read the situation as Ralph didn't think Bednarek would give 100 percent in the game and decided to drop him. We only ever heard from Ralph that: "He [Bednarek] is ok. He has a big game for Poland next week and it seems to me that he is not 100 per cent with his mind for us here today, so I didn't want to take a risk that perhaps in some moments he didn't want to take the last step to hurt himself. We need everyone in this game." Personally I'm not a big fan of managers throwing players under the bus like this and I would have hoped Ralph had learned from doing so with McCarthy earlier in the season, which I believe he said he regretted later. Bednarek has (again) to the best of my knowledge never mentioned this but perhaps wasn't especially pleased to be singled out for criticism in a game he didn't play in.

This was a good one - although not an away game.... https://www.11v11.com/matches/southampton-v-portsmouth-07-january-1996-217153/