Fulham are on their third manager this campaign as Martin Jol was sacked and replaced by Rene Meulensteen, who was in turn sacked and replaced by Felix Magath. Carragher told Sky Sports, “You see the carry-on at certain clubs when you have two or three managers in one season and it just looks like chaos. I think there should be a rule where if you pick a manager at the start of the season then he should be your manager until the end. You've made that decision and you should have to stand by that.”

Carragher’s statement doesn’t make much sense at all. If a football player is absolute rubbish he sits in the stands or is sold to another club. In fact, it happens in any walk of life. If you’re not any good at your job why should you be protected by a rule and continue to get paid? In addition, where’s the motivation for a manager in this scenario? Why should a manager care about his side’s results if he knows he’s guaranteed a job for the entire season?

Carragher added, “Also when a team sack a manager if results aren't going well, they go and get a manager from somewhere else. That manager will normally be doing well and that takes the manager away from a club and could affect their season as well. I think that would be something for our game to bring in, whether it's just in this country or around the world: managers get a job at the start of the season and no-one can be sacked or lose their job within the season.”

Carragher’s idea simply rewards those who are mediocre or even worse at their jobs. I can’t see any sense at all in his suggestion can you?