The tension between Howe and Mitchell is uncomfortable and unhealthy – Eales must resolve it

Uncomfortable, unwanted and unhealthy.

Newcastle United may not be in a “civil war” but the internal tension is real and needs to stop bubbling to the surface. When the sporting director and head coach engage in (veiled and sometimes unintentional) verbal banter in public it only prolongs the discomfort and confusion that has arisen during a tumultuous summer.

Ever since Paul Mitchell arrived on July 4, following a restructuring that saw Amanda Staveley and Mehrdad Ghodoussi leave as co-owners, his relationship with Eddie Howe has been strained.

At the height of the transfer window, when Newcastle were scrambling to try and strengthen, resolving differences was always going to be difficult. But it can no longer be allowed to happen, not when it threatens to affect Newcastle’s objectives on the pitch.

It is time for Darren Eales, the CEO, to get Mitchell and Howe in a room and have a head-to-head. Egos need to be put aside, grievances need to be aired in private and then a shared path forward needs to be mapped out.

Part of the blame for this friction lies with Eales, who seems to be the architect of the summer commotion. If his grand plan was for Mitchell and Howe to work harmoniously together in a new environment, the project has not had an entirely smooth start.

Eales (right) created the structure in which Mitchell and Howe now operate (Serena Taylor/Newcastle United via Getty Images)

It is not yet the case that the situation is untenable, but it must be resolved before it escalates and becomes insurmountable.

Sadly, dysfunction and Newcastle have too often gone hand in hand in the 21st century.

From overtly political press conferences urging owners to “do things right” (Rafa Benitez), to anonymous club statements effectively bashing the head coach for wanting more from the transfer market (Steve Bruce), to managers pressuring players before they resigned in protest (Kevin Keegan), the Mike Ashley era was ripe for internal division.

Under the billionaire businessman, civil war was never far away.

There were 10,000 season tickets given away when Benitez left, after the success of the “If Rafa Goes, We Go” movement. Then there was (Alan) Pardew Out, Ashley Out, and a sense of them and us, the team and the fans, united against a regime that many felt was actively damaging the club.

On the scale of disorder, Mitchell and Howe’s verbal handbags can barely hold a candle to those of others (yet).

The cause of this undesirable situation lies in the conscious choices made this summer and their effect on relationships.

The theory was that Newcastle needed to professionalise their executive structure, to move beyond the unconventional but largely successful intimate environment that Staveley, Ghodoussi, Howe, Jamie Reuben et al had created. Eales and Dan Ashworth, the previous sporting director, may have lost some of their responsibilities as a result, but on the whole it worked.

If Eales was leading the calls for review, he did not refer them to Howe. Turbulence has been created as powers have been redrawn, boundaries blurred and spheres of influence changed without all those affected having been given advance notice.

Apparently Mitchell had a vision of what his role would entail and how far his authority would extend.

The problem is that Howe didn’t know this transformation was coming, and he wasn’t reassured. Clashes with Mitchell therefore felt inevitable, as two strong personalities were brought together with no shared appreciation for what their precise working dynamic would be.

That has created confusion and distrust behind the scenes, and dangerously enough, it is seeping into the public domain.

Mitchell may have been right to argue that “positive conflict” can be healthy, but his interview and Howe’s trenchant assessment of it definitely represent negative conflict.

On Friday, Howe vigorously defended his transfer record after Mitchell questioned whether Newcastle’s recruitment processes were “fit for purpose in the modern game”. Mitchell’s claim that he played a “supporting role” within an “existing strategy” during the failed summer transfer window has also troubled the head coach, given that the sporting director oversaw the failed month-long pursuit of Marc Guehi.

Guehi was a key target in Newcastle’s disappointing transfer window (KIRILL KUDRYAVTSEV/AFP via Getty Images)

That doesn’t mean it has to continue like this. Howe wants to stay at Newcastle in the long term and Mitchell has already refuted suggestions that he wants to leave, saying he has a plan for the club for the next three to five years.

But something will have to happen before both statements are proven true.

As Howe points out, the two don’t have to have a ‘bromance’, but they do need to have a constructive working relationship – one that can’t last nine days without communication between the club’s two most important football figures.

It is astonishing and self-defeating that Howe has had “no contact” with Mitchell during this international break, given the fallout from the sporting director’s press conference. Rather than addressing the discord, Mitchell’s silence has allowed the discord to fester to a point where Howe – almost universally diplomatic in press conferences, rather than fiery like some of his predecessors – has felt unable to hide his true feelings.

Howe may not have inflamed tensions with his carefully selected comments, but he did not extinguish them either. Instead, Howe allowed them to smolder.

That someone who has preached unity for nearly three years would pass up the opportunity to change the prevailing narrative is indicative of how irritated Howe is by Mitchell’s comments.

Again, this is due to a communication breakdown, which has caused confusion.

Howe has been outstanding for Newcastle; his coaching is exemplary and his recruitment record overwhelmingly positive. That is not to say that scouting processes cannot be modernised, or that the reforms Mitchell has signalled are not welcome in the long term.

But, as Howe has repeatedly stressed over the past two months, there needs to be “collaboration” between the technical director and the head coach. He wants to have power as part of a collective decision-making process, rather than feeling like a junior partner in a strategy over which he has no input.

Howe and Mitchell both claim they can find common ground to improve the club, but their current stalemate is having the opposite effect.

It was Eales who brought them together in this arranged marriage and it is up to the CEO to ensure it does not end in an untimely divorce.

This back and forth “he said”/”he said” between technical director and head coach is counterproductive for everyone at the club. If it is allowed to fester much longer, it risks developing into something much more damaging.

(Top photos: Getty Images)