What is Paul Hart like as a manager?
Interview with "pompeyrug" from www.portsmouth.vitalfootball.co.uk and Daniel Hawkins from www.ltlf.co.uk
By The Godfather

As expected, former Forest and Pompey boss, Paul Hart, was appointed as the new manager of Queens Park Rangers on Thursday morning. He is the fifth manager to join the Super Hoops since the Formula One magnates took control of the club in 2007. I contacted “pompeyrug”, editor of the Vital Portsmouth website, and Daniel Hawkins, chief writer for the Nottingham Forest LTLF.co.uk fanzine, and asked them to give me an insight into what he is like as a manager.

1. How would you describe Hart's style of play? Did he have a "Plan B"?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): Hart's tenure at Nott'm Forest was a strange one. Due to our well-documented cash problems we needed to sell our talent that he brought through, so it was a case of make do after the first season. We played attractive attacking football, more often than not opting for a diamond formation which at times was frustrating and easy to work out after a season. He is stubborn to the very end and it's his way or the highway. Does he have a plan B? No!

Pompeyrug’s perspective: To be fair we played some good football, although he did not play with any width, but maybe that was because we did not have the players for this? That said, I think we did have some who could do this and we had to at least try this. Unfortunately that was most probably his downfall - if plan A failed he went with plan A – there was not often a plan B...

2. Did he have a preferred formation? Was he tactically aware?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): Tactically aware, very much so, but as I said above the Diamond formation was his favourite and he seldom changed from that.

Pompeyrug’s perspective: In the end he tended to favour a 4-4-2, with a diamond in midfield – it worked to a degree but we ain’t no Chelski! As already said, as a result, we had no width at all and the fullbacks were hardly giving us this either. Being 'tactically aware' is not something I would say Hart was, at least not that often with us.

3. What were his signings like?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): Youth signings were the best, if you want a talented youngster you can be sure Hart will find them. He has never seemed to grasp working with players he hasn't worked with from youth and, albeit with a small budget, his older signings for us weren't great... I'll name two crocks - Danny Sonner and Gareth Taylor.

Pompeyrug’s perspective: His hands were well and truly tied, being limited to freebies, usually those who no one else wanted. The Mike Williamson signing did seem a bit baffling – a fee of £3m for an untried, yet highly rated defender, is bizarre when we do not give him even the slightest hint of a look-in! Then again chances are we would activate a payment by playing him? And as for Aaron Mokoena, he was hardly an inspired signing. However, I think that he did well, on the whole.

4. Was he consistent in his team selections?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): Very much so, he's used to working with small squads and will get the best out of some players, especially the younger ones. Although he is very stubborn and if he falls out with a player I doubt very much you will see him play again.

Pompeyrug’s perspective: I would say too much so, with this again contributing to his downfall. An unwillingness to try different people, even when those playing were not cutting it, cannot have helped him.

5. What about youth development?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): The best in the business bar Dario Gradi.

Pompeyrug’s perspective: Now you are talking. This is his area and pretty much always has been – so I knew from the minute he stepped in as 'caretaker manager' last season that we had lost this. Youth development is what he is best known for, pretty much wherever he has been. I do not think that he would have been afraid to put in some of the kids, if needed, and almost certainly would have brought through some of them in the next 6-12-months.

6. How would you sum him up as a manager?

Daniel’s perspective (Forest): Stubborn, set in his ways and it seems has not changed his ethic from training the youth teams. Naturally I think he has a set way of doing things that has worked well with the youth players and sticks to it rigidly for senior players. His teams play attractive football, but they are often found wanting results wise. Personally, I think Paul Hart conducts himself very well, and if he could just harness his undoubted talent at youth level and allow himself the ability to accept his own failings then he could be one of the best managers in the game, sadly the stubbornness of himself holds him back.... Put him in your youth academy and you will be producing starlets with 3-4 years, leave him as first team manager I am sad to say you will be hovering above relegation!

Pompeyrug’s perspective: It would be cruel to say 'out of his depth', but in all honesty I am not convinced by him as a manager. He has been in the game for A LONG time, but you just have to look at the small amount of time that he has actually spent as 'the manager' with any clubs to see that this probably is not where his talent lies. Like I say it lies with youth development. All this said, I very much like the man and wish him the best of success with you – I do think he will need it as you seem to chop and change a hell of a lot! To be honest he was treated pretty poorly by us after all he did – he kept us afloat for several months when no one else wanted to, but it is a results based business at the end of the day. For what he did though he deserves a massive amount of gratitude, which most Pompey fans do have, and 'if' we do stay up I will not forget the role he played.

Conclusion

To conclude I would first like to thank Pompeyrug and Daniel for having taken the trouble to give such comprehensive answers to my questions. I was particularly struck by the similarity of their two perspectives: both see Paul Hart as a nice guy who conducts himself well albeit someone with a stubborn streak. He appears to favour a diamond formation and following on so recently from Paulo Sousa, who used to set the side up in a similar fashion, I am beginning to wonder whether this is also a preferred formation for one of the Board members... (I am not sure that Rs fans will be quite so thrilled to see its return.)

Hart seems to be a manager at his best working with a tight knit group of players and he has undoubted ability in the area of youth development. However, some themes in particular caused alarm bells to ring for me: the absence of a Plan B, his apparent reluctance to change the composition of his team even if players were not performing and some dubious signings all fall into this category. Despite his many years in the business, it would seem that Paul Hart is nonetheless a relatively inexperienced first-team manager. I obviously want to get behind him while he settles in to his new job but I cannot help but question what were the priorities for the QPR Board when trawling for a replacement for JM. The indicators are that some of the prime qualities that were being sought may have been the ability to manage on a small budget and bring through youth team players. I do approve of these but hope that it does not mean that the hoped for injection of cash and new blood will not materialise in the January transfer window.