Here’s a shocking truth: Nottingham Forest’s decision to sack Ange Postecoglou after just 39 days has left fans and pundits alike scratching their heads. But was he ever truly the right fit? Let’s dive into the whirlwind saga that unfolded at the City Ground.
Ange Postecoglou had barely settled into his new flat when the axe fell. The Australian manager, appointed with high hopes on September 9, became the shortest-serving permanent Premier League manager in history. To put it in perspective, he didn’t even have time to unpack his bags before being shown the door—just 17 minutes after a 3-0 defeat to Chelsea. Talk about a brutal welcome to English football.
Postecoglou was brought in to replace Nuno Espirito Santo and tasked with leading Forest to their first major trophy since 1990. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was the club’s expectation realistic given the circumstances? Instead of a triumphant rise, Forest now find themselves in disarray, searching for their third manager of the season just two months in. The question lingers: Was Postecoglou the wrong choice, or was he simply dealt an impossible hand?
The defeat to Chelsea was the final straw for owner Evangelos Marinakis, who stormed out of his seat in the Peter Taylor Stand after just an hour. It marked Postecoglou’s eighth game without a win, cementing his place as Forest’s shortest-serving permanent manager—even shorter than Alex McLeish’s 40-day stint. And this is the part most people miss: Postecoglou’s approach wasn’t just about results; it was about a philosophical shift that the squad struggled to embrace.
In his first week, Postecoglou gave the players space to process Nuno’s departure, respecting the bond they shared with their former manager. While the players didn’t openly rebel, doubts began to creep in. Postecoglou’s high-pressing, fluid style was a stark contrast to Nuno’s pragmatic counter-attacking approach. For some, like Elliot Anderson, it was a perfect fit. For others, such as centre-backs Nikola Milenkovic and Murillo, it was a recipe for nervousness and exposure. Was the transition too abrupt?
Morgan Gibbs-White boldly claimed that once the team ‘clicked,’ they’d be ‘unstoppable.’ But the reality was far from it. Results plummeted, and the unity that had propelled Forest to a seventh-place finish last season—earning them a European spot for the first time since 1995-96—began to fracture. Postecoglou’s decision to switch to a more defensive five-at-the-back formation in his final games felt like a betrayal of his principles, further eroding trust within the squad.
Those close to Postecoglou describe him as honest, principled, and unapologetic about his vision. Yet, his pragmatic adjustments in those last games hinted at a man trying to survive rather than thrive. Did Forest hire him for his philosophy only to abandon it at the first sign of trouble?
The fans’ reaction was equally telling. After a 3-1 defeat to Midtjylland in Forest’s first European home game in 30 years, a section of the City Ground turned on Postecoglou, chanting, ‘You’re getting sacked in the morning.’ The manager stood on the sidelines, hands on his head, as the jeers rained down. Was this a fair response, or did the fans lose patience too quickly?
Behind the scenes, tensions had been brewing long before Postecoglou’s arrival. The appointment of Edu as Forest’s global head of sport in June marked the beginning of the turmoil. Edu and Nuno clashed, particularly over transfer targets. Nuno wanted Adama Traore, but Edu prioritized younger players with higher resale value—a common strategy in modern football. The result? A disjointed squad and a manager who felt undermined.
Forest spent £180m in the summer and recouped over £100m, including the £55m sale of Anthony Elanga to Newcastle. But were these moves enough to build a cohesive team? Of the summer signings, only loanees Douglas Luiz and Oleksandr Zinchenko started against Chelsea, leaving fans wondering if the club’s recruitment strategy was flawed.
Postecoglou didn’t inherit a fully functioning machine, but the writing was on the wall. His sacking raises bigger questions about Forest’s direction and Marinakis’s decision-making. Is the owner to blame, or is this just the harsh reality of Premier League management?
As Forest scramble to appoint a new manager, one thing is clear: Marinakis needs to get this right. But what does ‘right’ even mean for a club in such flux? What do you think? Was Postecoglou given a fair chance, or was his sacking inevitable? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments!
