Scott Parker has been sacked following his sides’ 9-0 defeat to Liverpool on the weekend. The reaction of most people, including me, is (or in my case, was) that he has been fired because of that result/the results that preceded his humiliation at Anfield. I now don’t think that’s the case at all.
Anyone would expect Bournemouth to lose to Man City, Arsenal, and Liverpool. Most people would expect them to lose two of those games quite badly. Losing by as many as nine goals is obviously unacceptable, but the result in itself is not as important as many people think.
Southampton have lost 9-0 twice under Ralph Hasenhuttl, but they didn’t get relegated in either season and he has kept his job to this day. Most sensible Cherries fans probably would have taken three points from the opening four games, even including a 9-0 thrashing.
They are outside the relegation zone, and their opening day win against Villa was one of the most surprising of the fixtures. I think many people would have expected Bournemouth not to have any points at this stage.
It’s also worth nothing that Parker deserves a lot of credit for getting his side promoted in the first place. He absolutely did not deserve to get sacked based on his results and his progress. But I also don’t think that was the reason.
Like everything else, football is not black and white. There is a lot that fans don’t get to see. There’s a lot behind the scenes, but you don’t even have to look behind the scenes to see that there were issues between Parker and the owners at Bournemouth.
He’s lost his job because of his strained relationship with the board, evident from his continual bashing of them in post match interviews for lack of investment, and the fundamental issue that their visions do not align. This was put plainly in the official club statement.
Bournemouth have never been a club that’s spent big- they have a sustainable model, but it’s one in which the 41-year-old doesn’t want to operate under. Parker wants to work under a model similar to that of Evanglos Marinakis at Nottingham Forest. That’s been made very clear and for any business to run coherently everyone needs to be on board with the direction that the business is heading.
If Scott Parker believes that he can’t keep his side up with the level of investment being offered by the board, they have every right to employ someone else who believes they can.
It’s hardly surprising that Parker’s side got battered when he insists to the press that they are nowhere near the right level to compete against big teams. Even if that’s true (which it probably is) what kind of message does that send to his team?
This is the same way the club was run and found success under Eddie Howe, and it’s simply come to a point where the owners views on how the club should be run has clashed with the manager’s. This happens in business all the time, and it’s no different here.
Dan's Mersey Blog 