From The Horse's Mouth - Mark Van Deventer

It's that dreaded time of year when the “sack race” debate for beleaguered managers in the EPL hots up. The most common months for bosses to get bulleted are November and December. 

In 2025-26, 11 bosses left, only Enzo Maresca exiting on his own accord. And based on recent stats, managers have around ten months to make it work. That's the average length of stay for managers/ “head coaches” in the EPL.

There’s a timing factor involved in getting rid of managers before Christmas and ahead of the winter transfer period. 

Owners are obviously daunted by the financial consequences of relegation, and there's increased social media scrutiny as well. 

Of those unfortunate managers who quickly reached their expiry date, Sam Allardyce survived just 30 days at Leeds, and “Big Ange” Postecoglou, “visited” for a mere 39 days at Nottingham Forest. 

Igor Tudor, another one who had a particularly short-shelf life, was ushered off stage after 44 days at Spurs. 

Now, if you can imagine, contrast those recent E.P.L firing cases with the remarkable story of Connie Mack, an easygoing and, to put it mildly, vastly experienced manager of the Philadelphia Athletics, a baseball side in America.

It seems almost preposterous in the modern era, but he served for 50 seasons at the Philadelphia Athletics from 1901. 

He had a losing career record of .486. His side finished in last place 17 times, and for seven seasons in a row they came dead last. And yet he retained his job. 

Look, he did win five World Series titles during that spell. It was, in many ways, a more patient era. Sports culture was nowhere near as ruthless as it is nowadays, and it clearly helped that he had an ownership stake in the team. 

Mack eventually stepped down at the age of 87, saying, “I'm not quitting because I'm getting old. I'm quitting because people want me to.”

The modern-day manager is perpetually in the hot seat, under pressure from demanding owners faced with the near-impossible task of balancing the club’s books; reconciling the often-unrealistic expectations of supporters and, at times, dealing with underperforming, prima donna players with huge egos earning eye-watering salaries. 

Patience is in short supply all round, and results are expected almost immediately.

But here’s an intriguing twist to the tale, based on multiple academic studies to measure the effect of coaching changes. The results are drawn from the NFL, college football, as well as more recent studies done in soccer, in the Italian Serie A. 

In essence, all these research projects concluded there’s no evidence that coaching changes alone actually have a positive effect. The records of struggling, or even middling teams, don’t change much regardless of who is in charge.

Maybe we place too much emphasis on charismatic leadership and overlook all the myriad other, often understated, factors that determine team cohesion, match performance and results.

What drives the overly hasty “merry-go-round” of coaching staff is a type of action bias. It’s important to be seen to make changes to ostensibly improve the situation. 

Hence, the saying we’re all familiar with, “Don't just stand there, do something.”  

Stats from sports scientists suggest the opposite holds true - and it may be preferable to instead, “don’t do something, just stand there.” 

Not that demanding fans and ambitious owners buy into that notion, at all. 

So, whilst Alvaro Arbeola (Fulham) and Roberto de Zerbi (Spurs) might have eased the pressure with back-to-back wins, Michael Carrick (Manchester United) and Pierre Sage (Crystal Palace) need to “pasop”.

Sharpened daggers are poised with Carrick and Sage favourites to be next in the EPL “sack race”!

Good luck with your soccer bets @ Interbet - enjoy the weekend action!