Three Reasons Why Dijkhuizen Was Sacked
- essentialbrentford
- Sep 29, 2015
- 4 min read
The news that Brentford manager Marinus Dijkhuizen had been sacked by Matthew Benham after only eight league games in charge was shrouded in mystery, with the club refusing to offer much information to the supporters on why such action had taken place.
Brentford have become very reluctant to release information to the fans in recent years, and has left many fans speculating as to what caused Dijkhuizen's departure.
Here are the most likely reasons for the decision...
1. Disagreement in Philosophy
The reason given for Mark Warburton's departure in February last year was "a difference in footballing philosophies", and it appears that the club has gone along the same lines to explain Dijkhuizen's sacking.
Cliff Crown stated yesterday that Dijkhuizen did not fit "the long-term vision and philosophy" of the club. What we can take from these carefully chosen words is that Dijkhuizen was not a manager who was compatible with the infrastructure at Brentford and our unique footballing philosophy - the statistics based emphasis.
However, there is a major difference between the departures of Warburton and Dijkhuizen. Whilst the vast majority of uninformed outsiders believed that Warburton was "sacked" (including several respectable media outlets), this was not the case. Warburton decided to leave of his own accord because he couldn't work under the guidelines that Benham had set out.
Dijkhuizen, however, has been involuntarily ousted from the club. One would think that when he was interviewed for the role in May that a long and in-depth discussion would have taken place over the circumstances in which Dijkhuizen would work (e.g. his footballing philosophy).
The essential ingredient that Benham, Ankersen and the rest of the interviewers were surely looking for is a man with the same philosophy, and someone who is willing to fully embrace the statistical approach that Brentford have adopted.
So why, after just two months in charge, has it only now come to light that Dijkhuizen did not match "the long-term vision and philosophy" of the club?
2. Poor Relationship with Players
The role of a Brentford head coach is slightly different to the role of the traditional manager.
The fact that the recruitment of players, as well as the selling of players, is dealt with by Ankersen and his team (based on mathematical models and statistical data) means that Dijkhuizen's primary job was one of dealing with the current players.
This makes man-management skills crucial to any Brentford head coach. Warburton was exceptional in this field, and the players adored him. His sensible, logical and upbeat approach to football made him extremely likeable, and the players (as well as the fans) were behind him 100%. He could have asked you to jump off a cliff and you'd have complied.
However, despite this working to our advantage last year when the team gelled around Warburton and formed a close-knit group, this year it had the opposite effect.
Warburton was the glue which held many of the players together, and when he left the squad entered disarray. Douglas fell out with the club because he thought Warburton had been unfairly treated. Dallas and Gray were heavily upset by the situation (think back to Gray's goal against Wolves when the players swarmed around Warburton), and soon left the club. Every player was affected in some way or another by their leader departing the club.
Dijkhuizen faced an impossible job in uniting what was once such a close-knit group of players. Add the number of new faces in the dressing room to the players who have been unsettled by the club's drastic changes and you are left with a divided and unfamiliar atmosphere. Performances on the field this season have served as evidence that the current squad haven't gelled yet.
Dijkhuizen's faulty English and naivety to English football meant that his man-management wasn't up to the almost impossible task of uniting the Brentford squad.
If Warburton was like a father to the class of 14/15, then Marinus was the bumbling step-dad who was a less than adequate replacement. This was not Dijkhuizen's fault by any means, but was a contributor nonetheless to the reasons that saw him binned.
3. Post-Match Interviews
Many reports have suggested that Benham was not happy with Marinus' approach to interviews. Brentford has become a club of many secrets, unwilling to release too much information.
Quite rightly, the owner wishes to carefully guard the formulae associated with our recruitment of players. What Brentford is doing is innovative; we are 'ahead of the game' in terms of how we a rectruiting players. Not all clubs know how to buy a striker for £500K from Luton Town and sell him on for £9m a year later.
Matthew Benham is the Billy Beane of football. For those Brentford fans who haven't read Michael Lewis' "Moneyball", I would highly recommend it. It documents the statistical revolution in baseball, which was founded by Beane. Although highly criticised at first, now every major league Baseball team uses mathematical modelling and it has been proven to work.
In essence, if you fast forward ten years into the future every football club will be doing what Brentford are doing right now. At least that's the hope.
Anyway, theories are suggesting that Marinus was too open in interviews, which is why he had to go. Whilst honesty is something which the fans love, it is not always something which is best for the club.
Sometimes there are things that we shouldn't know, even if we want to. For example, if Mark Warburton's departure hadn't been leaked to the fans in February, we may have had a better shot at automatic promotion last season.
Some have argued that another fault in Dijkhuizen's approach to the media was that he lacked passion. He stated recently that he felt "no pressure" on him despite a run of poor results. This relaxed stance can be refreshing, but a bit of pressure is never a bad thing. Pressure allows us to strive for greater achievements.
Warburton has said that he felt a great deal of pressure, which lead to him waking up at 5am to go to the training ground and working as hard as possible for the succes of Brentford FC.
Perhaps in the same way that the increased pace and physicality of the English football league is demanding on players, it is equally as demanding for managers. And Dijkhuizen just wasn't up to the task.
Comments