In the least surprising news of the century, Russell Martin has been sacked by Rangers. It's the second time the former Scotland international has been sacked in the last year, after suffering the same fate at Southampton at the beginning of last season.
The decision wouldn't have happened fast at Rangers. In fact, the speculation has been ongoing for many weeks now, with some claiming that the board always had trust in him. As the weeks went by, though, Martin slowly lost the trust of his Ibrox higher-ups.
It's a familiar tale to his time at Southampton, except this: Southampton could learn a thing or two.
Rangers do what Southampton should have done ages ago
It only took seven games for Rangers to make the decision to part ways with Russell Martin. They had to swallow their pride in doing so, since there was plenty of hope and optimism when he arrived.
Let's be completely honest, Rangers is known for this. They make decisions to part ways with managers just as quickly as they do to welcome them, if not quicker. But that's not necessarily a bad thing, and we all know the Glaswegian team is far more successful than Southampton is.
Rangers making this quick-fire decision (literally) casts an awful light on Southampton. Why did the Saints wait so long to fire Russell Martin last season?
Much like it was at Rangers, everything was working against Martin at Southampton, but he did nothing to actively try and fix it. Instead, he let his stubbornness drive both clubs into worse positions.
Perhaps at Southampton, he was given a bit more leeway as a token of appreciation for achieving Premier League promotion in the prior season. But let's be honest, Premier League clubs shouldn't be strictly bound by sentimentality. That's a sure-fire way to ensure your downfall as a club.
Southampton should absolutely learn from Rangers. The difference between the two clubs is not the conditions they face, but how quickly they act to make those conditions redundant.
Rangers act fast, Southampton acts slow. It's hardly surprising that the two clubs have starkly opposite histories.
This leads us to the present, and I'm going to massively contradict myself here. I recently sided with Will Still, claiming that he should be given more time to prove himself.
Is that the tainted vision of watching Southampton shoot themselves in the foot so many times? Who knows? Let's just say, I am more open to replacing Will Still if the bad results keep coming.