Preetz verliert die Nerven

​Preetz loses his nerve. His post is irrelevant. The use of the term 'putsch' is inappropriate in the context of the German language. 

According to Wikipedia, a coup is "a mostly violent and surprising action by members of the military or paramilitary organizations and/or a group of politicians with the aim of overthrowing the government and taking power in the state. The putschists are mostly senior military officers or leaders of paramilitary organizations." 

Preetz puts the comparatively insignificant events in a Bundesliga club close to historically significant negative events such as the Kapp putsch in 1920 or the Hitler putsch in 1923.

Preetz on Klinsmann's diary: "Perfidious and inappropriate"

Preetz describes Klinsmann's memorandum as "accusations and reproaches", as "disgusting and outrageous attacks on the employees",  as "perfidious and indecent" . He expressly refused a factual statement. 

Now the creation of internal memoranda is quite common. Only the leak of this internal memorandum justifies the above quotes at all. Regarding the revealer, however, Preetz could not contribute to the clarification. The public does not know who leaked Klinsmann's memorandum. Was it Klinsmann himself or someone from his team? Was it someone from  ​Hertha BSC ? Was it someone from the team of the new major investor?

Especially someone who takes on such a demanding change task as Klinsmann would do well to keep records. One can also assume that Windhorst asked him to be informed about essential things. Last but not least, it is also tactically smart for a change and innovator to document the status quo when taking office. If you don't do this, you inherit the debts of your predecessor. 

Incidentally, something similar happened at Daimler when Källenius took office. He immediately launched a cost-cutting program worth a whopping EUR 1.5 billion. The old Zetsche faction spoke of a reckoning, the new Källenius faction spoke of self-defense. After that we went back to work. That's it.

Preetz reminded me of a statement by the best lawyer I have ever met: "When the facts speak for you, then rely on the facts. When the law speaks for you, then rely on the law. When neither facts nor law speak for you speak to you, then scold as loud as you can." Preetz scolds as loud as he can.

Manageable success under Preetz

In any case, Preetz is no stranger. He has been sports director of Hertha BSC since 2009 and is not responsible for any track record. There have been a total of 13 head coaches in almost eleven years. Of these, only the 4.5 years under Pál Dárdai were successful. For the rest of the time, the Hertha BSC coaches have been in office under Sport Director Preetz for an average of six months and there is a tendency towards the elevator team, which is now threatening again. With Markus Babbel there was also a coaching dismissal, which ended with mutual reproaches as loudly as Klinsmann's departure. One is inclined to attribute the success under Pál Dárdai to this and not to Preetz.

It was apparently a power struggle between Klinsmann and Preetz, which is not unusual or reprehensible per sé. Power struggles are common when people come together. Preetz spoke of an unsuccessful 'coup attempt'. Preetz will certainly not decide who will be the winner or the loser in this power struggle.

Preetz initially succeeded in portraying Klinsmann as the villain in this play. He received support from his president and, to a limited extent, from the new major investor. But he also made it clear between the lines what value Klinsmann could have had for Hertha BSC. 

What is Windhorst doing?

It is clear that Windhorst brought Klinsmann to the club. It is clear that Windhorst does not have the decision-making power due to the 50+1 rule, despite his enormous investments. As the decision-maker, Windhorst might well have voted for Klinsmann and against Preetz. In any case, it is certain that Preetz played spades solo at the recent press conference. One can assume that the president and the major investor were not sitting at the table by chance, but made a conscious decision to do so. In writing, President Gegenbauer spoke in the spirit of Preetz. It will be interesting to see what Windhorst has to report when the time comes.

Windhorst must have considered all these things when he decided to pay 224 million euros for 49.9% of the shares. With Jürgen Klinsmann he had the right partner for his plans as a big city club, but Klinsmann obviously couldn't become effective. Now Windhorst should have known which partner he would get with Klinsmann. 

Klinsmann has an excellent knowledge of global football and is a perfect fit to lead an emerging and revolutionary project. He acts as a coach or manager as well as a player: fast, with a direct train to the goal. Windhorst wanted to offer that, but with 49.9% he couldn't. And everyone knows that Klinsmann doesn't like to be worn out in trench warfare.

As an external observer, one suspects that the whole truth is not on the table. It is known that Preetz is not a successful manager and certainly not for the Big City Club.

The treatment of this topic in the media is very questionable. By that I don't mean the inevitable Marcel Reif, who for months already commented on the national team in a crisis in 2018 with the daily, mocking firing of the Özil Gündogan photo campaign, which led to the preliminary round. In general, the Germans are even more inclined than other peoples to choose a scapegoat when things go wrong, who then has to bear all the blame. 

It is rationally difficult to understand why everyone is beating up Klinsmann. It is also completely incomprehensible why officials from other clubs such as Horst Heldt, Rudi Völler or Dieter Hecking speak up. You don't even know what happened. You really can't contribute anything. Do you need such a topic to play in the public eye? Don't they have enough of their own topics to comment on? believes Horst Heldt, to owe it to the FC fans to comment on a Hertha BSC topic, although he doesn't know what happened?

The fact is that Preetz has not performed well in eleven years as a manager. The fact is that Klinsmann has the potential for Windhorst's plans. The fact is that Klinsmann has every right to leave if he disagrees on strategic issues. We don't know in detail who acted better or worse in this exit. In this respect, it is dubious to blame one side.