Lack of experience

[dpit 1]

“It (the summer transfer window) has certainly been difficult for us. It is a newish scenario for me in terms of trying to get so many players in at a different level."

I am delighted with our manager''s work so far but this quote does draw attention to his lack of experience. I remain hopeful that the waiting game will bear fruit but one does have to ask is a lack of wizened wiliness a factor working against us.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

AN isn''t responsible for the transfer negotiations though is he? That will be down to McNally so I don''t see how his lack of experience is going to have too much of an impact.

I think he is just reflecting on the fact it is far easier in the lower leagues to go and spend £500k on a player, when compared to £5m/£6m/£7m in the Prem.

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

I very much doubt that Alex Neil had any experience of spending anything like 500k even, on players before he came to us.

[Miss Bum Bum 0]

Damn that incompetent Mcnally

[lake district canary 4,531]

He may not be experienced at buying players, but as the prospective purchase of Allivery or whatever he was callerd showed, he knows his own mind and won''t buy players just for the sake of it.   If it comes to it, we should be happy with whatever we end up with - the players we have and the additions of Mulumbu and Dorrans and I''m sure we will get one or two more in - and then sit back and watch as AN works his magic. He is the real deal - and much like Clough and other natural footballing man managers - he will get us functioning better than a lot of other managers would - and that is the most important thing - getting the best out of what you''ve got.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

The handling of the Arrivey transfer was, unfortunately, AN''s inexperience very much showing. You shouldn''t invite players over to take medicals if you are still uncertain whether you want to purchase them or not. Any discussions regarding attitude should have been carried out before things go that far.

Arrivey''s agent described Norwich as unethical and unprofessional after the collapse of the deal - and whilst the first is probably not true, the second probably is. Hopefully Norwich aren''t interested in any more of that agent''s players.

AN''s strength isn''t so much his man management, but his attention to detail and planning. The exact opposite to Clough, who was all bluster and bravado, whilst his assistant Peter Taylor who prepared detailed analysis and reports. Managers don''t get too far without being able to do the tactical bit, and Alex has shown he excels at that.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]The handling of the Arrivey transfer was, unfortunately, AN''s inexperience very much showing. You shouldn''t invite players over to take medicals if you are still uncertain whether you want to purchase them or not. Any discussions regarding attitude should have been carried out before things go that far.

Arrivey''s agent described Norwich as unethical and unprofessional after the collapse of the deal - and whilst the first is probably not true, the second probably is. Hopefully Norwich aren''t interested in any more of that agent''s players.

AN''s strength isn''t so much his man management, but his attention to detail and planning. The exact opposite to Clough, who was all bluster and bravado, whilst his assistant Peter Taylor who prepared detailed analysis and reports. Managers don''t get too far without being able to do the tactical bit, and Alex has shown he excels at that.[/quote]

I wouldn''t take the word of an agent as being anything significant.  His sour grapes were just trying to cover up the fact that his player might not have given a good account of himself, or some other thing that affected the deal.  And to assume that a player on interview should assume the deal is done and dusted before they meet the manager is naive.

Also, I think you underestimate the manager''s man management skills.  It would be expected of any good manager that they prepare and are meticulous with details and tactics - AN offers that elusive something extra - an ability to get the best out of nearly every player - a skill that Clough had in droves. Yes Clough had Peter Taylor who was undoubtedly a big factor in preparation, but with AN you get that detailed approach AND the man management.   You can be he most meticulous manager in the world, but if you haven''t got the man management skills, you''ll just be a Peter Taylor........and he didn''t have a great time as a manager. 

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

I think that any player should expect an intensive interview with his prospective manager, whatever has gone on before. Larrivey obviously failed his.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

Players will sometimes have some kind of interview, although not always. However, these interviews don''t need the player to fly in from another country to meet the manager. There are these wonderful things called phones to do this over.

If I had an interview for a job in Spain I wouldn''t expect to have to go over there for it, but could carry out a phone or Skype interview to make sure our expectations where the same.

It is pretty unheard of for a club to invite a player over from abroad, to then send them back once they have arrived on grounds over than a failed medical.

It is possible the player''s financial demands changed once he got here - but if it was a change in heart from the manager - then that does show a lack of experience when dealing with transfers, certainly international ones.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Agree with Bethnal...handling of the Larrivey transfer was not "the way to do it"...

I feel we have missed the boat already if it comes to transfer dealings this summer, players will not have time to bed in once they arrive...

I have faith in AN as a manager , but clearly he hasn''t been able to persuade the players on his wishlist to come to CR ...this is naturally not only up to him, club has to want to pay the fee and agents have a lot to say... I''m not convinced we will have signed 6 players by the beginning of septembre...like we envisaged...hope I''m wrong though

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Players will sometimes have some kind of interview, although not always. However, these interviews don''t need the player to fly in from another country to meet the manager. There are these wonderful things called phones to do this over.

If I had an interview for a job in Spain I wouldn''t expect to have to go over there for it, but could carry out a phone or Skype interview to make sure our expectations where the same.

It is pretty unheard of for a club to invite a player over from abroad, to then send them back once they have arrived on grounds over than a failed medical.

It is possible the player''s financial demands changed once he got here - but if it was a change in heart from the manager - then that does show a lack of experience when dealing with transfers, certainly international ones.[/quote]

I''m sorry, I just don''t accept that this transfer failed because of inexperience or bad ethics on the club''s part.  Misdunderstandings happen and if things weren''t what they appeared over skype or whatever, or if the demands changed, or if in person the player appeared to be different than he had previously - then to let the player go was the right thing to do, whether the agent liked it or not.   It may be unusual for the signing not to go through, but as we know AN will not stand for any nonsense - so he should be congratulated, not doubted.

[Legend Iwan 30]

No one''s inferring that the transfer failed due to Norwich. If anything, they''re content with Alex Neil saying no when he wasn''t happy about going through with it.

What''s up for discussion is the manner in which the outcome was reached, and why a potential player was flown over here for an interview when it can be done, as so often is the case, through electronic devices. Because face-to-face interviews aren''t the norm, Norwich backing out of the move having held one looks quite odd.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Legend Iwan"]No one''s inferring that the transfer failed due to Norwich. If anything, they''re content with Alex Neil saying no when he wasn''t happy about going through with it.

What''s up for discussion is the manner in which the outcome was reached, and why a potential player was flown over here for an interview when it can be done, as so often is the case, through electronic devices. Because face-to-face interviews aren''t the norm, Norwich backing out of the move having held one looks quite odd.[/quote]

Then we can only assume that the player/agent changed the goalposts on arrival in Norwich, expecting that we would roll over and give in.  To assume that the club is at fault just because the agent says so, would be unfair, especially as the club can''t reveal the reasons why they pulled out.   Ethically the club has done nothing that can be seen to be wrong - the fault can therefore only lie with the agent and player.

[Legend Iwan 30]

The discussion wasn''t about trying to find guilt for the transfer not being finalised, was it? I thought it was about AN''s experience, which, going by how this potential move was conducted, demonstrates a certain level of naivety.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Legend Iwan"]The discussion wasn''t about trying to find guilt for the transfer not being finalised, was it? I thought it was about AN''s experience, which, going by how this potential move was conducted, demonstrates a certain level of naivety.[/quote]

And that has been my premise!  AN - ergo the club - have done nothing that can be seen to be wrong (excepting for what an agent says).   The fault has to lie with the agent/player - therefore AN''s experinece or not does not come into it. 

[Woodman 92]

I wonder how many of the current squad would have failed the face to face interview with Neil when they signed.  I suspect most are already no longer with the club (Becchio, Garrido) or are probably on their way out (Lafferty, Turner - though he''s gone on the tour, and possibly RvW - though again, he''s been given the opportunity to prove himself).

I like the fact that the manager''s seeing the whites of the player''s eyes before they sign, but it makes you question some of the scouting.  I guess you can''t question someone''s attitude from videos and stats.

[Kingston Yellow 220]

Hang on a minute. What is there to suggest that the deal broke down due to Larrivey deal broke down due to AN’s inexperience?

Quite the opposite to my mind... I suspect the deal broke down due to the club’s inexperience of working with a ‘Footballing Board’ - or whatever it’s called.

To my mind, it’s pretty likely that the Football Board identified Larrivey as a target based on what AN said he felt he needed (and based on the relatively low cost). My guess is that the Board then arranged for him to visit CR. At which point, AN met him and felt he wouldn’t integrate well into the set-up.

Or to put it another way, I find it highly unlikely that AN went to the Football Board and asked them to make arrangements to bring Larrivey to the UK so he could meet him and then ultimately discard him.

There is no disputing that AN is a relatively inexperienced manager. However, I feel what is letting him down is the Footballing Board who seem to be living in the past as far as players’ values and wages are concerned.

Twice we have been lambasted in this transfer window (once by Larrivey’s agent and again by Steve Bruce). Neither of these embarrassments have been caused by AN as far as I can see.

The simple facts are, AN has done his bit and has dragged the club into the Premiership by its boot straps. The Footballing Board now seems to be making a complete dog’s breakfast out of delivering their half of the bargain - which is player recruitment.

I’m very disappointed by this transfer window so far. And by the look on AN’s face during the ‘indepth interview’ – so is he. Do not mess this guy around NCFC. He will not hang around.

[93vintage 16]

Until there''s a signature on the dotted line the buyer always has the right to pull out.But whether there was a Skype interview between manager and player is unknown. If these arrangements weren''t made then we''d have to know who was responsible for inviting him over. It could be someone other than Alex Neil jumping the gun.The whole affair points at a lack of organisation and inexperience in dealing with foreign transfers within the club itself.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Look. Lets get this straight.  There is NO evidence that the club or AN hav acted wrongly or in an inexperienced way - the only evidence that is that the club pulled out.   The supportive view of the club would be that it has reacted to a moving of the goalposts by the player or the agent.    That is a strong action, not a weak action.

Or you could believe what the agent says............

[Thetford Yellow 0]

I''m sorry to say it but Neil is out of his depth and clearly floundering. He does not have the experience or profile to attract the type of players required and the board does not have the ambition to spend the money that might pursued top players to put their doubts AN to one side and sign for us. Hell be gone by Christmas, which is a shame because the board have left him to swing in this transfer window

[Benjamin (Bradford) 0]

Happy with transfer window so far and also fully believe we are still in the market for one or two more additions before we consider who to let go.

[Just Dan 10]

Shut Up Waveney.

[Thetford Yellow 0]

Dan, old son, if you have nothing more intelligent or useful to say than that, don''t bother.

Pathetic.

[Bury Yellow 2]

I think Kingston Yellow might be correct re this Football Board.

It''s almost ''progress by committee'' It never works and is doomed to failure I fear. A genuine question - can anyone tell me exactly what Ricky Martin does and what qualifications and c.v.backs this up?

Surely it''s not simply ''he''s Norwich through and through''

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

So says the man with multiple identities, but all with one common denominator.......tw@t.........

[93vintage 16]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Look. Lets get this straight.  There is NO evidence that the club or AN hav acted wrongly or in an inexperienced way - the only evidence that is that the club pulled out.   The supportive view of the club would be that it has reacted to a moving of the goalposts by the player or the agent.    That is a strong action, not a weak action.

Or you could believe what the agent says............[/quote]It depends on what your definition of evidence is and whether you''re objectively examining it. To me there doesn''t seem to be any reason to not take what was said at face value. This is based on regarding both sides, rather than simply believing one side over the other.Alex Neil said, "Yes, he came over, I met him and decided it wasn''t for us. Simple as

that...I just

decided not to pursue it." The agent said, "There has not been any problem that may have lead to this. Nor has there been any change in the numbers of the operation."If there was a moving of the goalposts then I''d have expected the club to have come out and said so, especially if the agent denied that this was the case and layed into the club.All the evidence points towards Alex Neil deciding against signing Larrivey based on his view of the player after having met him in Norwich, not because eg wage demands were raised at the last minute.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="93vintage"][quote user="lake district canary"]Look. Lets get this straight.  There is NO evidence that the club or AN hav acted wrongly or in an inexperienced way - the only evidence that is that the club pulled out.   The supportive view of the club would be that it has reacted to a moving of the goalposts by the player or the agent.    That is a strong action, not a weak action. Or you could believe what the agent says............[/quote]It depends on what your definition of evidence is and whether you''re objectively examining it. To me there doesn''t seem to be any reason to not take what was said at face value. This is based on regarding both sides, rather than simply believing one side over the other.Alex Neil said, "Yes, he came over, I met him and decided it wasn''t for us. Simple as

that...I just

decided not to pursue it." The agent said, "There has not been any problem that may have lead to this. Nor has there been any change in the numbers of the operation."If there was a moving of the goalposts then I''d have expected the club to have come out and said so, especially if the agent denied that this was the case and layed into the club.All the evidence points towards Alex Neil deciding against signing Larrivey based on his view of the player after having met him in Norwich, not because eg wage demands were raised at the last minute.[/quote]

You are not going to get to the truth through just accepting what the different parties say in public - there are two sides to every argument - and the real reasons, whether it is a clash of personalities, or the player said something that angered AN, or whatever, will  be kept private.  The reasons will have been good ones - and better to risk embarrassment than get a player who is not going to fit in.  

As for interview by skype or whatever - you are never, ever, going to get a good feel for a person''s real attributes until you can look them straight in the eye across a table.   When a person is in their own safe environment being interviewed over a link, they can be more in control than when they are in a room face to face - nothing can beat the real thing.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

If Norwich expect every player they want to sign to come over to Colney and have nice sit down chat with Alex Neil then it is obvious why they are struggling to sign players. It is insulting to the player.

There is no reason players should agree to that, no other club that I have worked at or heard of has such a requirement. When Norwich signed Kei Kamara should he have flown over from America for a ''wee chat'' only to be told the club ''have changed their mind''? It''s unreasonable on the players.

You do long distance negotiations on the phone, or someone from the club goes to the player. When Arsenal wanted to sign a Romanian 17 year old, they sent their chief executive and chief negotiator to Romania to meet the player. If attitude is so important to AN he should go to Spain to meet the guy, not drag him over to Norwich - it shows the correct amount of professionalism and respect, in my opinion.

Some players will want to come and look around the club, but that is up to them - many won''t bother with such a formality, especially if they have to travel a distance to do so.

[Kingston Yellow 220]

I think you''re likely pointing the finger at the wrong party Bethnal.

As I posted earlier, it''s unlikely that AN asked to footballing board to bring the player to CR and then decided he wasn''t the right fit. I think it more likely the football board / committee identified the player based on what AN said he needed. I suspect the board brought the player over and that AN vetoed at that stage for whatever reason (it sounds like it could be his lack of physical stature rather than necessarily attitude).

In any case, I find it far more plausible that the lack of signings is due to our inexperience of operating with a footballing board than due to AN not knowing who he''d like to bring in.

Can only hope we dissolve this committee ASAP and revert back to signing the players that the manager believes are critical.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

[quote user="Thetford Yellow"]I''m sorry to say it but Neil is out of his depth and clearly floundering. He does not have the experience or profile to attract the type of players required and the board does not have the ambition to spend the money that might pursued top players to put their doubts AN to one side and sign for us. Hell be gone by Christmas, which is a shame because the board have left him to swing in this transfer window[/quote]To be fair, I think there is some truth in this. Not in the eternally pessimistic ''he''ll be gone by Christmas'' guff, but in his relative lack of experience. In our eyes as NCFC fans, Neil has been nothing short of a revelation – with minimal changes to the squad, he took an underperforming group of players and took them up on championship-winning form. He''s shown he has bags of self-belief and leadership qualities, good tactical nous and excellent man-management skills.However, how are we perceived as a club outside of our yellow-and-green bubble? A management team of Neil, Frankie McAvoy and Gary Holt isn''t going to attract players by their names alone – plus there''s this ubiquitous ''football board'' that also consists of people whose roles are neither well-known nor understood by the outside world.For all Neil''s positives, the elephant in the room is that his reputation does not yet precede him – he has made ripples but not waves. He has no experience of working with a big budget – he is brash and confident, but this alone is not enough to have a ''Pied Piper'' effect on potential signings. Couple this with our relatively modest wage structure, our still-somewhat-small-time attitude as a club and our geographical isolation, and I can well understand why we are having difficulty attracting the calibre of player required to genuinely improve our squad.As I''ve said on other threads, it should not be forgotten that 17 of our 18-man squad for Wembley have Premier League experience (and most of them have plenty of it), and a bit of strengthening may well be enough to see us safe when coupled with Neil''s undoubted talent for on-field endeavours, tactics and training. However, it should not be forgotten that he is still cutting his teeth as a manager and the learning curve is part and parcel of having appointed one of British football''s brightest young managerial talents.