>>So how do manages get jobs and do so awfully when you can clearly spot what is going wrong?

>>Firstly, we should look at the Dunning-Kruger effect.

In short:people who lack knowledge and experience but house certain personality traits (e.g. arrogance, perceived superiority, cognitive bias to the self, etc) tend to be [unacademically] confident in their assertions.

>>Once they gain more knowledge, providing they seek to correct preventative learning traits – personality traits that prevent learning – such as the aforementioned they will realise that there is a large amount of information they are ignorant of.

>>Once they further their knowledge they reach some sort of enlightenment which they recognise could be changed depending on further research.

>>The problem with Football Twitter is that the majority of people are in the first section whilst they believe they are in the latter (due to preventative learning traits). Now, why is this relevant?

>>Sometimes, it is easy to spot an obvious error from a manager and other times one needs a keen eye. However, once an individual learns more they will realise it is far more important to correct the justification for an error than the error itself as the former is the base.

>>This is where you will notice the errors of Football Twitter and why most analysts on here are not actually intelligent. I will explain what I mean in the next tweet and then give an example in the tweet(s) following:

>>I may see an individual do Z [action] which is obviously incorrrct. Thus, I may critique it. However, once I know the W, X and Y that precede I will be able to guide him as to why his interpretation of those three lead him to the wrong action [Z].

>>The fact that I am able to determine why Z is wrong is not analysis especially if it seems obvious. Rather, it is for a proper analyst to look at the justification of behaviour and engage with that instead. This is where Football Twitter fails miserably.

Here's an example:

>>Notice when I joked about Luke Shaw coming on against Burnley. However, I never once said it was the wrong decision. Rather, Solskjær did this because Williams was turning back onto his right after we had beaten their midfield press. When Williams turned back it caused a problem.

>>Why? The midfield were able to get back into position and thus Wolves went from 3-4 defenders to 6-7. With Shaw (natural left foot) that problem would be eliminated. The issue is that Wolves stopped pressing and so it became an error *in hindsight*. Fundamentally, it was smart.

>>Now, how many from Football Twitter noticed this or mentioned it? Rather, a large amount of them said “we are losing and he is bringing a defender on” which sounded correct but is really just a surface-level comment with little to no analysis behind it.

>>So, your question was:

“So, how do managers get jobs and do so awfully when you can clearky spot what is going wrong?”

The answer is that I can spot the really obvious things whilst I have a bit of knowledge to understand the thinking behind a few decisions.

>>However, I do not have enough knowledge — in any way, shape, sense, form or fashion — to assert myself as an authority over and beyond a manager whom I criticise. Solskjær is a considerably manager than I will ever be; just because I can see his errors does not mean I am better.

>>It is a lengthy response to your question but I hope I have made my answer clear. To summarise:

• people speaking with confidence does not mean they're right
• spotting mistakes of another in a field doesn't make one better than them in that field

Regards,
UA