It is not great surprise to learn that Blackburn have sacked Paul Ince. The self styled guv'nor has been given the boot after only 17 league games in charge, during which time he has won 3, drawn 4 and lost 10.

It all seems so sad after the jubilation of June when much was made of him being an exciting young appointment to the job. He had served his apprenticeship in the lower leagues with Macclesfield and MK Dons and done a good job too, reviving a lifeless Macclesfield who were seven points adrift at the bottom of the league when he took over and saving them from relegation. And at MK Dons, he gained promotion and the Football league trophy in only one season at the club.

And now he is without a job. I hope, and don't think, that he will have difficulty in getting a new job, although it may not be in the top league any time soon. He seems to have the respect of the players (even at Blackburn they were still fighting for him) and the confidence and self belief to be a success. He is a good manager and i am sure with the right luck can be a great manager.

But the sacking of Paul Ince brings forth the eternal question. Should Blackburn have given him more time? It is a position that I would hate to be in if i were a football club director. The problem is that clubs in the Premier league are so worried about being relegated, and the subsequent loss of revenue that will suffer, that they feel they must sack the manager if things are not going right.

The premier league system has put so much financial pressure on clubs that they cannot afford to be patient. For a club of Blackburn's size, who have been in the premier league for a number of years and probably have a substantial wage bill, the fear of relegation is that they will end up in a position in a few years where we now see Leeds, Nottingham Forest, Charlton, Southampton, Norwich, Derby, Watford. Leicester and Bradford, all clubs who were in the top league but have since dropped down and suffered horrendous financial problems.

The solution? As always, its about the money. Clubs are spending too much chasing the dream and not thinking of the bigger picture and the longer term.

By the bigger picture, I refer to the whole football community, from the top to the bottom of the football pyramid. Not enough money is spread around the lower leagues. The premier league gives relegated clubs 'parachute payments' so help them survive but these last only 2 years.

The answer is for more of the premier league pot to filter down the leagues to make the difference between leagues a lot less than it is now. This is especially relevant between the premiership and the championship where championship team get about £1 million a year from TV and Premier League clubs get about £22 million a year. This is a huge amount.

And the longer term? Clubs are not concerned about their financial viability, they spend all their income on player wages, milk the fans dry and hope that the TV revenue will keep going up. Well as property bubble bursts, we now know that not everything always goes up.

Clubs need to learn how to say no to players and to walk away from deals if it does not suit them. I have no idea how regulations could be imposed to control this but it can't be beyond the minds of the great and good to come up with a system to solve this problem.

I also think that there should be more security for manager. For example in Spain, managers are not allowed to manage more than one club (in Spain) in a season. This is part of the reason why Juande Ramos got the Real Madrid job as he wasn't tied in. There has even been talk of a managerial transfer window, which i think would not work.

But then again, the managerial merry go round is part of the fabric of football and keeps the scribes in business! But at a time when we want to encourage young British managers, the system seems to be in place to keep them down.