English Premier League: Who Is a Director of Football?

In a week where two managers in the English Premier League have resigned, it's time to uncover some hidden facts, or should I say hidden figures?

The Director of Football has always been a very ambiguous post in English football. It's often referred to as a continental post which can only work outside England. However, few realize that it is a post that has been used quite well in England itself.

First off, a Director of Football, according to former footballer Dave Bassett, is a buffer between the board and the manager and is appointed to take some burden off the manager's shoulder.

While the manager carries on the day-to-day activities, the Director of Football trims costs and scouts for players.

Tottenham Hotspur were one of the clubs to have controversially installed someone in this position, with Frank Arnesen becoming Football Director there. He had continuous disagreements with Jacques Santini while the Frenchman was manager there, and somehow it led to Santini quitting, for "personal reasons."

Avram Grant was also a Director of Football at Portsmouth, but the players called him "BBC"—Balls, Bibs, and Cones—as he was often found in the training ground carrying those things.

In fact, Grant was one of the reasons why Harry Redknapp wasn't happy at Portsmouth for a while, but things eased off soon for the Pompey boss.

As Avram Grant moved to Chelsea, another man felt that his toes were being stepped on, and this time it was Jose Mourinho. He was always uncomfortable with a man being above him and seemed to have some insecurity.

Ultimately, Mourinho was sacked and Grant was appointed as his replacement.

That seems to be the problem with most managers in the English Premier League as well.

The rationale behind appointing a sporting director is essentially to develop a better scouting network. In a certain sense, he is a glorified scout. He organizes the various resources to look at the best and the brightest, while the manager should ideally be left with the choice of who he wants to bring in.

It is very important that under this system, the manager and the sporting director get along. They have to work in tandem and it is the job of the board to appoint such a Director of Football.

That's where many clubs are getting it wrong.

Stoke City and Reading are examples of how sporting directors have managed to forge a successful relationship with the managers.

John Rudge of Stoke, and Nicky Hammond of Reading have both done sterling jobs at their clubs. Has anyone even heard of them?

I'm not so sure.

In this BBC article, a source has revealed that Newcastle's ex-boss Kevin Keegan wanted the likes of Thierry Henry and Ronaldinho as part of a list which contained players who may have costed over 200 million pounds. Apparently, Keegan had very little knowledge of emerging talent around Europe.

That's why Mike Ashley appointed Dennis Wise and Tony Jimenez to co-ordinate the scouting activities. What I feel went wrong was that Kevin Keegan didn't have the final say in the signings.

What's more, he didn't have a say in who was sold.

The same thing happened in West Ham, where Alan Curbishley was disillusioned after Gianluca Nani sanctioned the sale of George McCartney and Anton Ferdinand to Sunderland. While that may have made good financial sense, to not even consult the manager over sales was a massive error in judgement by the Board.

People say that Sir Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger run their clubs from top to bottom, but they have excellent contacts after being at their clubs for such a long time.

A sporting director is meant to be of help to both the manager and the board, but instead he's helping no one.

The owners/boards of the respective clubs must take the blame for that.

At the end of the day, it is the manager who takes the blame if a player doesn't play well. To not consult him while signing or selling players is a grave mistake.

That will certainly be realized soon by Mike Ashley, and Björgólfur Guðmundsson.