You may be correct but tell me the alternative?
He takes on another coach as interim perhaps against his agreement with the Tito. In this arrangement what good can at this point? No coach can prepare the team for Milan in the time allotted.
You say that... but is that true? You know the old saying about a new manager meaning surefire victory, and it's more than a coincidence. When a team is tactically ready to face another, a new manager may make the changes to catch the other side off guard.
In any case, just using the same tactics AGAIN would be a disaster with a 100% certainty.
Okay, now if he was to appoint another coach altogether and ask Tito to resign then both he and the club would look ingrates and unethical.
To whom? I mean, imagine that a teacher gets cancer and the school principal just refuses to get a sub for the time the teacher is away, allowing the kids to go unattended. Wouldn't THAT be unethical. Let alone insane?
However, can you lay out a ethical alternative to decisions the club took? I would love to hear one because I can't come up with a possible alternative. The issue with Tito's cancer is a variable that couldn't have been foreseen and acting in anyway that would have not included Tito in the club or would have discarded Tito would be a seriously effed up play on the part of the club to a coach that is partly responsible for the most successful part of the clubs history.
Unforeseen? Cancer remissions are really common. Anybody would have thought of having a contingency plan at the ready.
Its important to keep in mind many on this forum that are dismissing the club's decisions as myopic were not doing so when the decision was first taken. It is only now after some poor results that everyone is saying something should have been differently. While Rosell has made some very disagreeable sporting decisions, this one is difficult to put on him entirely.
Well, yeah. We didn't know whether the board knew what they were doing and had a strong tactician in Roura and therefore their actions would make sense. It's now that we see that no, they didn't, that we complain. That's like saying that nobody complained about a building that crumbled down while it was being built, therefore the construction company are not at fault.
I mean. am I saying anything illogical here? Because it looks to me like I'm talking nothing but common sense.
I do partially agree that Rosell should have tried something else but what if Tito was adamant about controlling the situation? If he would have told him, no I have made another decision then Tito would have felt slighted. Also, to be honest, Tito likely would have felt alienated even if he did not fight the decision for a new coach even if it is a reasonable thing to do.
Of course, Tito's likelihood of leading this team in the future is in doubt because of his health. I literally spoke about the likelihood of his resignation over the summer in this thread a few weeks ago or if not, the need for it. However, axing him now wouldn't have helped.
Then he had no right to be adamant about anything. Rosell can talk about how showing some warped sense of respect for Tito by not getting anybody is more important than getting silverware. I guarantee you that these words will come back to haunt him later, probably the next meeting of partners, because HIS job is actually ensuring the Club gets silverware, no matter whose feelings are hurt. And if he doesn't understand that, he won't last a full term.
I also agree Roura is not fit for the job but the circumstances were difficult, he was perhaps the only option for continuity. Recall also that when the decision was taken, it was only to be for half the time it has now become.
That's true. This board has shown a ridiculously cavalier attitude to the realities of what the human body can actually endure. Same thing with apparently believing htat Abi would come back or that Puyol's age would never catch with him. Sheer insanity.
Finally, Luis may have been an alternative but that would been very awkward not only because many players do not have a relation with him but because he evidently uses a different approach than Guardiola and Tito do tactically. In this regard, it may have been seen to be more viable by all sport directors at the time to use the coach that has worked with Tito as a short-term fill-in. Perhaps if they knew it would be more both legs of the CL then they would have done differently?
There are, literally, dozens of Barça-style manager just a short walk away from them.
