You’re using the hidden premise that they’re being logical and intelligent.
They absolutely do not appear to be reflecting that to me.
I suspect the support for Russell from club leadership isn't as substantial as people think. Cook was supportive of him last year but you need to publicly back your man if you aren't going to sack him.
The vibe I get is having done a review, they have identified some areas of opportunity and they will give current personel the chance to get things right. If we have another bad year injury wise there will be a changing of personel and restructuring of that department, which most likely includes Russell.
Now that doesnt mean every injury we get is Russell's fault. Every injury is different and there are a variety of factors at play. Russell also doesn't work alone. He runs a team as a senior leader within the football department.
Ultimately what it comes down to though is his team is accountable for getting our players fit and healthy (physically and mentally). Others share that accountability but that is the primary function of his team. Our players are consistently not fit and healthy. That means his team is failing in delivering on their core accountability.
That doesn't mean Russell is rubbish. If he was he would already be gone. It just means he is a highly paid leader who's department isn't delivering the required results. When that happens you give your person every chance to get things right and if they cant you provide someone else with that opportunity. Maybe someone with some different solutions to the problem.
Also, I guarantee you knowing our presidents background that he won't be accepting "bad luck" an an excuse.
That is just my perspective from an outsider looking in.
Last edited: