What's all this fuss about a director of football...

The Director of Football seems to have become the most talked about role at a football club in the last couple of weeks. The fallout from the Spurs clear out on Saturday evening, manager, assistant manager, fitness coach, and director of football was a big shock - no-one expected such ruthlessness from chairman Daniel Levy, but it has done the trick, with Spurs back to winning ways under Harry Redknapp.

Yet Redknapp has been assured there will be no director of football at White Hart Lane whilst he is manager. So what is this director of football role? In all, it is a glorified way of entitling the chief scout, and it is predominantly used in Europe, where the job of manager has a limited time, but the director of football remains a constant to maintain consistency at the club. The director of football would then be responsible for recruiting the players that they thought would work at the football club, and then the manager would coach the players he was given. Managers and players come and go, yet the director of football maintains the long term vision of the club with their recruitments.

The problem with the director of football, or chief scout, in this country seems to be deep-rooted with who makes the key decisions of which players to sign. Manchester United and Arsenal, two teams that have had many years of success in the modern footballing era, do not have such a role. They have managers who pride themselves in finding new talent and then the managing director, David Gill, or Peter Kenyon, or David Dean are such examples, who would then complete the deals for the players their managers want. Can you expect a manager to work with players he hasn't bought, or doesn't want? That is all part of the short job life of a European manager. It is the manager who is brought in to work with the players, not the other way around.

The clash between Dennis Wise (DOF) and Kevin Keegan (M) at Newcastle has been widely publicised, with players being recruited by Wise who Keegan didn't want. Hence bad press and now fan revolt over Keegan quitting. Not a healthy state for a club already in difficulty.

Some clubs do have success with the director of football role. One example would be Reading, for whom former goalkeeper Nick Hammond fills this role, and Steve Coppell as manager. Reading have had some success in recent seasons, and there has been no bad press with regards to the director of football's position at Reading.

If the DOF and manager communicate and work together, then this position can work at a club. But a manager needs to be in charge of the players he works with, and the manager needs to work with players who he wants to work with and who will make the team successful. If a DOF is going to be in charge of recruitment, then he can recommend signings to the manager, or the manager can assign the DOF to research a particular player or find suitable players (as the manager would instruct a scout), but the final decision should belong to the manager. The manager will coach, the manager will effectively manage the players, so should be the manager who chooses the players they will work with.

Unfortunately, the way of the director of football implies the manager is more important than the players. One well known phrase springs to mind: too many cooks spoil the broth!