Sunderland: Was Paolo Di Canio's Sacking An Inevitability?

The news of Paolo Di Canio's dismissal as Sunderland Manager has brought the football-loving populous among us into a state of shock. This early in the season, it appears ridiculous for any club to see fit to remove their manager, as a team's season is not determined in the first five games of the campaign. Lest us forget that whilst Sunderland's end of season run-in was not exactly the most scintillating of action, Di Canio's passion and freshness brought the club three vital wins in avoiding relegation. Furthermore, the board had seemingly given the Italian, 45, the opportunity to scour the globe for new players, with Sunderland bringing no less than fourteen new players, whilst simultaneously casting out a further sixteen players from Martin O'Neill's former conglomeration. That much of an overhaul would normally demonstrate a supreme confidence in the manager's vision and his ability to turn these players into a well-oiled machine. Quite frankly, any team that made this many changes would be bound to fall below expectations for a time. The players don't know each other, the manager, or the manner in which they are going to play in the long-term. Heck, half of them probably don't even know the language properly yet. Therefore, with an entirely new team, many of which are entirely new to the Premier League, Di Canio would hopefully be able to forge a side that had repaired the cracks that had developed in the Black Cats and restore the sunshine in the Stadium of Light. However, without a win in the first five matches, with three goals scored and eleven conceded, they did not hesitate on breaking their ties with the controversial Italian. This consequently leads to the question of whether Di Canio's spell as Sunderland manager was fated to be short-lived.

There is no shortage of reasons for this assumption. Firstly, there is the furore that surrounded Di Canio's arrival at the club. Always regarded as a fiery and aggressive player, the media's fixation following appointment turned from his footballing accomplishments to his political tendencies. At Swindon, the national newspapers were more pre-occupied with Luis Suarez's latest scandal, so his management fell under the radar. Surprisingly, however, as soon as Di Canio was catapulted into the highest division in the land, he was found to be a prime target for their reports. His appearance at the funeral of Paolo Signorelli, a convicted collaborator in a fascist terrorist attack, left his tactical expertise the last thing on people's minds. Despite reiterating his anti-political stance in general, his fascist sympathies led to then-Sunderland vice-chairman David Miliband resigning from the club. This obviously set a poor tone and gave the club a fair amount more negative publicity than it would have desired. Next, it would be churlish to not examine his actual capability as a coach. Whilst Di Canio's success at Swindon cannot be denied, his passion and fiery temper could sometimes overawe the elements of restraint necessary to be an effective manager. Some of his post-match interviews would reveal too much information that should have been contained in the dressing room. His long-running spat with Phil Bardsley was played out for everyone to see, like an unhappy couple in the local pub. It was also reported that in the final week of the season, he fined up to seven players for varying offences. That is not to say that these players weren't being spoilt, arrogant morons, especially in Bardsley's case. But this attitude towards his players made it public that nobody in the team was safe in their position, rather than keeping the issue private and allowing the newspapers to rely on mere speculation. That is not the situation you want to be in if you are a player, and the number of departures and new arrivals would have been bound to disrupt any harmony at the club. Any player he sold he openly attacked for a lack of effort and desire, and seemed to be unwilling to work with any player that had brought the club to the brink of relegation. Di Canio therefore had very little in the way of man management skills. Despite his obvious eloquence and knowledge of football, his hard-line attitude meant that he could not really gain any form of trust or support from his players. It is rumoured that prior to his sacking, a number of unnamed senior players approached CEO Margaret Byrne and described the manager's attitude towards them as "brutal and vitriolic", which would have been a commanding sway on his departure from the side. This can be coupled with doubts surrounding his ability as a manager in general. His spell at Swindon did bring success and a certain level of flair, but it may have been too soon to try his hand in the Premier League. It is a big jump even for a player with as much confidence in his ability as Di Canio has, and he may have been intimidated by his new surroundings. Especially in a culture where players have more power and influence due to their names and valuation, which meant that they were more able to kick up a fuss than a club like Swindon, where players come and go in spades every year. His transfer policy could also be drawn into question. It is apparent that he was quick to determine which players had a future under him and who didn't, and so may have been as quick to wield the proverbial axe as much as the board was with him. Di Canio then brought in a number of new faces, most of whom had little experience in the league or in their previous stints had shown a lack of quality. Players such as Fabio Borini, Andrea Dossena, Jozy Altidore and Modibo Diakite were unlikely to set the side to winning ways if their previous attempts were anything to judge them by. Nevertheless, perhaps the key reason for the Italian's sacking was the culture towards management in the Premier League, and at Sunderland in particular. As has been stated numerous times before, the manager at a football club has a lower average lifespan than a particularly accident prone mayfly. Moreover, the club was likely compelled to act due to the circumstances surrounding QPR's relegation last year, where the decision to replace Mark Hughes with Harry Redknapp seemingly came too late to revive the club's fortunes and save them from the drop. Sunderland appeared to dramatically lose faith in Di Canio's methods and decided to bite the bullet early to prevent that fate befalling their own club. There does appear to be a need for new managers to get instant results, especially at clubs battling at the foot of the table. A new manager, like signing a new player, will usually bring about a renaissance of optimism and hopes for change for the better, but it's only after this honeymoon period is over that the hard work really begins and the credentials of a manager are truly tested to their fullest. Di Canio was certainly not given a great deal of time outside this period to prove himself, and seemed in the eyes of the board fail instantly to match their expectations. But, Sunderland has had a culture of being quick to pull the trigger on the man in charge, with the club now looking for its sixth manager in five years. The club has been perennially stuck to the lower regions of the table during the majority of this period, and they continue to oust their manager at signs of peril rather than trying to find some element of stability in their management. Granted they are no longer the yo-yo club of the top two divisions that they previously were, but one has to question for how much longer they can continue to keep their head above water if you examine their recent finishes. The players also have to shoulder a great deal of the blame in this regard as well. Whilst Di Canio was not exactly professional in spouting his doubts of his players in such a public forum, the players were quick to revolt against his rule as if he was the root of all their problems. Players such as Adam Johnson and Sebastian Larsson have quality, but show it too little, and it doesn't help when players like Lee Cattermole are sent off every two games they play. Besides Steven Fletcher, for the past two seasons the whole squad has underperformed and has consistently assured the club's struggles against the drop. Was Paolo Di Canio's sacking an inevitability? I believe so. He probably should have been given more time to instil his philosophy in the side and allow his new-look team to gel together. But, if it is true he was just creating more friction amongst his players than was acceptable, than it may have been the right decision after all. In the end, he was a polarising figure that would speak his mind without any kind of filter, and it was bound to make him more trouble than he's worth. It is a part of his style that he will need to address to have any prolonged spell in charge of a side. It was also an inevitability due to the league and the club he was managing in. After only thirteen games, Di Canio had managed to worry enough people to lose his job, demonstrating as clearly as ever that there is a massive tendency to push the panic button at the earliest opportunity to try and freshen up the side. Sunderland are one of the kings at this, and unfortunately are not in a position like Chelsea or Manchester City to finish in fourth or fifth place if it were to go wrong. The club may not be hanging onto their Premier League status by a thread this early in the season, but they need to find goals, form and a functional system quickly in order to ensure this short rut doesn't become a catastrophe by mid-season. That will be the job of the new manager to bring some confidence and unity back to a team in desperate need of both. But, if I were the new manager, I wouldn't start personalising their office too much, as it could be gone in an instant.