Hull City’s relegation odds shorten despite Silva’s appointment
Hull City have this afternoon announced the appointment of former Olympiacos manager Marco Silva as their new head coach. But remarkably, our traders have responded by making the Tigers’ relegation odds EVEN SHORTER.
While a horrendous run coupled with extremely little activity in the transfer market saw Hull’s odds of going down at 1/8 this morning, they’re now just 1/9 following the Portuguese’s arrival.
Though Mike Phelan’s dismissal had seemed inevitable, it’s fair to say several eyebrows were raised in the football world when Silva entered the market as frontrunner for the vacant post yesterday.
His CV is certainly commendable, having led Estoril to the Primeira Liga before taking the club into Europe for the first time in their history.
He then went on to win silverware with both Sporting Lisbon and Olympiacos, and his trophy cabinet is ever-growing at the tender age of 39.
But this is completely new territory for Silva, having never managed in England before.
And he faces a mammoth task if he’s to keep the Tigers afloat in the top-flight this year. Rooted to the foot of the table with a goal difference of -27, it’s hard to see how the new boss can stop the rot.
It remains to be seen whether or not he’ll be given much to spend on new recruits during the January transfer window.
He’ll already be taking over an already-worryingly short outfit, but his first task will be to fill the boots of two first-team regulars in Dieumerci Mbokani and Ahmed Elmohamady. That pair will be heading off to the 2017 Africa Cup of Nations, and could spent up to a month away from the KCOM Stadium.
Having already seen five managers come and go since 2010, it’s no surprise to learn that it’s just a 5/4 shot for Silva not to be in charge of the Tigers on the final day of this season.
So how do fans feel about their new boss? Are you confident he can keep your side up, or have the board made a potentially fatal decision?
Let us know in the comments section below!
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing