By Martin Graham
The expression “losing the dressing room” has become a familiar part of football parlance, often appearing when a manager’s position is under threat. The recent departures of Thomas Frank a Tottenham Hotspur and Sean Dyche after 114 days at Nottingham Forest both were linked to reports of behind-the-scenes unrest and doubts about his leadership.
Former England midfielder Danny Murphy describes the term as a situation where a significant part of the team begins to doubt the manager’s competence. According to him, this tends to arise during poor runs of form, when defeats pile up and scrutiny intensifies.
At this point, almost every element of the manager’s approach can be reviewed: team choices, tactical direction, training routines and even time off. Murphy explained that conversations often start in small groups before spreading more widely across the team.
Chris Sutton, who won the Premier League with Blackburn, says the problem arises when the players stop really absorbing the manager’s message. Whether the friction stems from strategy or personality clashes, he noted that footballers can be fickle and locker rooms tend to be harmonious when results are positive. When victories disappear, there is often blame.
How discontent develops
Murphy pointed to his time at Fulham under Lawrie Sanchez as an example of how doubts can grow. Sánchez favored a direct and long-ball style, despite having technically gifted players at his disposal. Even those selected in the initial training questioned the management.
As losses piled up, skepticism deepened. Murphy recalled that uncertainty could continue on the pitch, affecting confidence and ultimately performance levels. Although there was no organized attempt to remove the manager, belief in the project began to erode.
Sanchez had previously found success with this method, keeping Fulham in the Premier League and enjoying spells with Wycombe Wanderers, Northern Ireland and Wimbledon. However, Murphy suggested that reluctance to adapt, even experimentally, contributed to the breakdown.
In Dyche’s case at Nottingham Forest, sources indicated he struggled to connect with certain players, who challenged his emphasis on physicality and tactical approach. After a defeat at Leeds United, members of the squad were consulted and did not fully endorse him.
Murphy believes every coach has a chance early on, but cautioned that momentum can change quickly, sometimes in three or four games. When the majority is not convinced, unity can be fractured, especially if opinions within the workforce are divided.
Can trust be restored?
Results are still the most direct remedy. When performances improve and wins return, skepticism can fade. Murphy cited Gerard Houllier’s first spell at Liverpool, when strict discipline initially led to resistance among the players.
Over time, however, improved results validated Houllier’s methods. Liverpool won the UEFA Cup, FA Cup and League Cup in 2001, and added another League Cup in 2003. Murphy credited not only the results but Houllier’s willingness to listen and adjust.
The modern landscape also includes discussions of player influence. Sutton argued that authority seems to have shifted to footballers, suggesting that owners and players now have closer lines of communication. He highlighted Dyche’s direct criticism of fringe players after an FA Cup defeat at Wrexham and Thomas Frank’s delicate handling of Tottenham captain Cristian Romero after a costly red card at Manchester United.
As for whether a coach can really regain control once confidence is lost, Sutton was dubious, saying that once belief is gone, it’s extremely difficult to recover. Murphy agreed that it can happen, but described it as uncommon — the exception rather than the norm.
