BY APPOINTING NOEL King as caretaker manager of the Irish team, the FAI have seemingly taken a big risk.
Of course, what King does in his short time in charge of Ireland is not especially important, given how little is at stake for the games he will likely oversee (though, granted, such matches could hardly be considered insignificant on account of the opportunities they provide for the team to experiment for the future).
However, more pertinent is the message that hiring King sends out to prospective candidates, and in particular, Martin O’Neill.
There is little evidence that O’Neill is not interested in the job. If that were the case, he could have simply come out and stated that he did not want it, as others such as Mick McCarthy and Brian McDermott have done.
Moreover, O’Neill is understood to have privately admitted he is keen on the post, therefore, it is a safe assumption to deduce that the FAI are well aware of the former Celtic boss’ interest and that he is one of the leading candidates to assume the role of Ireland manager.
Nevertheless, King’s temporary appointment would suggest at least one or perhaps both parties have reservations about the arrangement, and that alternatives to the 61-year-old are seriously being considered. To wit, surely, if the FAI had genuine faith and confidence in O’Neill and were intent on employing him, they would not have had to take the considerable step of appointing a recruitment committee as part of the process.
Furthermore, if the organisation selects O’Neill after engaging in these stalling tactics, it would smack of a lack of conviction and give the impression that the formulation of the committee was little more than an elaborate waste of time and resources. And similarly, if O’Neill is the leading candidate for the post, such a move seems equally ill-advised and tantamount to at best doubting his ability, and at worst, coming across as an outright snub.
Indeed, the association have orchestrated circumstances dangerously, to the extent that it could turn into a no-win situation for both parties. If O’Neill is eventually appointed, it will look as if the FAI simply couldn’t find anyone better for the role. To make matters worse, O’Neill will have to swallow his pride and accept the fact that the organisation weren’t overly eager to appoint him in the first place should he persevere and continue to offer his availability.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with the FAI taking their time over the process, but bringing on board Ray Houghton and Ruud Dokter threatens to complicate matters irrevocably and undermine those who have already applied for the position. Essentially, what they seem to be saying is that the managerial search has only just begun, thereby disappointing those enthusiastic enough to express an interest in the role early on.
What, therefore, must O’Neill be thinking? Is there a possibility that he’ll withdraw his assumed candidacy owing to these shenanigans? The veteran coach has shown little tolerance for inefficiency at the top level in the past. For instance, he was all set to replace Avram Grant as West Ham manager back in 2011, however he pulled out, after the club allowed news of his interest in the job to leak while the Israeli boss was still in charge. Accordingly, is it inconceivable to imagine he’ll be similarly upset by the manner in which the FAI have handled this issue?
It is consequently surely no exaggeration to suggest that, by taking such a definitive measure as hiring a selection committee (which, it must be said, they also chose do prior to Giovanni Trapattoni’s appointment), the FAI seriously risk making life more difficult for themselves. The association’s aim is undoubtedly to attract the best possible candidates, but surely an accomplished manager interested in the position does not need to be minutely scrutinised — choosing the person with the most impressive or promising CV invariably amounts to little more than common sense rather than an extensive operation.
By asking managers to undergo a rigorous interview with Messrs Dokter and Houghton — two individuals who themselves have no real experience of coaching at a high level — it could be argued that instead of attracting talented coaches, they may be discouraging them from applying on account of this unenviable prospect.
Moreover, there remains the lingering sense that the FAI are overcomplicating matters for no good reason. For argument’s sake, imagine if tomorrow, Jose Mourinho declared an interest in the Ireland job. Would he then be told that he has to sit in front of a selection committee and explain at length why he is more deserving of the job than Roy Keane or David O’Leary? Obviously, it’s a fanciful scenario and one that will never transpire, but the underlying point about this flawed system remains valid — the reasons for choosing one prospective manager over another are normally fairly obvious, and it doesn’t take hours of indulgent deliberations or a high-profile committee to make the right decision.
There is, however, one potential get-out-of-jail card in this saga. If the FAI do manage to land a distinguished, ambitious coach, all will surely be forgiven. But if they ultimately opt for O’Neill, or someone deemed inferior to the Northern Irishman, the organisation will risk looking foolish, as they did the second last time a selection committee was famously established, with the promise to recruit a “world class manger”. After much discourse back in the heady days of 2006, they ended up with Steve Staunton.
