Will history look kinder on Hughton?

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,777]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]Thoroughly professional and nice in all interviews, and a decent player in his day, but my lord he should be remembered as a managerial failure on almost every level.[/quote]Thing is though, he has done well everywhere else he has been. I know it isn''t a consolation for us, but he took Newcastle up and was harshly sacked when they were comfortably mid-table, he took Birmingham to the Championship Playoffs on a shoestring, and he is doing an excellent job at Brighton.It just seemed that when he was here, he had totally the wrong mindset- he just set up with ten men behind the ball, strangle the life out of the game and tried to nick a 1-0 win all the time.

[Katie Borkins 1]

Yes, and in his defence he does hold the achievement of managing our highest-ever Premier League finish.

It wasn''t the defeats, it was the manner of the defeats.  We were so timid, so cautious, and following the "up and at them" approach of Lambert (and similar with Neil), his "sit deep, press in our own half, hit on the counter down the right hand side" tactics were almost apologetic.  I never really believed Houghton saw us as a Premier League side, and everything about his approach in that second season felt defeatist.

He can''t take all the heat for that, of course.  I presume the board felt there were no credible alternatives who would have fared any better with our squad and budget, and we''ll never know whether that view was justified.

 

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]Yes, and in his defence he does hold the achievement of managing our highest-ever Premier League finish.

 

[/quote]

Does he Bor? Not sure Mike Walker or the thousands that watched us knock out the mighty Bayern Munich would agree with you there. Fairly sure I''m right in saying 3rd is better than 11th?

[mrs miggins 0]

He hasn''t been a managerial failure anywhere.

Did fantastic at Newcastle- got them promoted easily (as expected with that squad) and was mid-table before he was sacked, which was very strange at the time considering they had just been promoted. Perhaps Ashley expected Europe?

Did well here. Finished 11th in a side that was favourites for relegation with an ageing, unwanted striker...the only striker. In his second season he bought in a lot of players and it was seen as transitional season, again, favourites for relegation but were never in the relegation zone except when he was sacked with 5 games to go.

At Brighton now - we''ll see.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Was never given a fair chance.  A divide in the players - those that were used to Lambert style - and those that were brought in by CH that were more familiar with what he was about.  A divide in the fans between those that wanted to see him develop things and those who wrote him off almost from the beginning - a divide that just grew as time went on. 

The players weren''t up to what he needed from them as a group and he was castigated by fans for everything that happened, even strong performances were somehow not to his credit.   Constantly villified for things that were proved not to be so - like last minute substitions - which were a fallacy created by the negative mindset of the fans.  The whole reign was doomed to failure because he was not Paul Lambert and some fans turned on him almost immediately and the leap in playing style was too much for some of the players o deal with.  On top of that, he was not a particularly strong or inspiring manager so all in all it was doomed from the start. 

An impossible job, circumstances against him all along the way - including injuries to key players at key times.   He carried the can, but the circumstances conspired to create a situation that was difficult for everyone - the manager, players and fans alike.  On paper he looked like a good candidate for the job, in practice he was not. I hope the club learned from it.

[westcoastcanary 173]

@PurpleCanary

The "improvement" represented by the stats you quote cannot be attributed unqualifiedly to Adams, since some degree of short-term "bounce" is a common upshot of any change of manager in those situations.

Indeed, given the consensus that the players had been significantly underperforming BECAUSE OF how they were managed, removing Hughton should surely have seen a much greater bounce than actually occurred quite irrespective of who the new manager was. I imagine that was what the board expected in removing Hughton, but their expectation was unfulfilled.

[KiwiScot 1,436]

"Will history look kinder on Hughton?" Than a bunch of Norwich fans who are clearly annoyed and frustrated with him.Well.....Yes

[Buh 0]

The general consensus from my point of view seems to be that Adams is more hated than hughton. Which I find a bit bizzare.

Why do some people hate Adams like he''s a scummer?

[Daz Sparks 1,149]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]Yes, and in his defence he does hold the achievement of managing our highest-ever Premier League finish.

It wasn''t the defeats, it was the manner of the defeats.  We were so timid, so cautious, and following the "up and at them" approach of Lambert (and similar with Neil), his "sit deep, press in our own half, hit on the counter down the right hand side" tactics were almost apologetic.  I never really believed Houghton saw us as a Premier League side, and everything about his approach in that second season felt defeatist.

He can''t take all the heat for that, of course.  I presume the board felt there were no credible alternatives who would have fared any better with our squad and budget, and we''ll never know whether that view was justified.

 

[/quote]

He achieved the highest finish in the Premier this side of the millennium, but Mike Walker holds the overall honour.

[king canary 7,578]

As others have mentioned it was the style of play under Hughton that was the worst thing. I''ve had a season ticket since I was 12 (2001) and the time under Hughton was the first time that going to games actually felt like a chore and something I didn''t want to do. I was lucky enough to miss the season we got relegated to League 1 as I was out of the country so that could have been worse but a good 18 months under Hughton was teeth grindingly dull football.

[king canary 7,578]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Was never given a fair chance.  A divide in the players - those that were used to Lambert style - and those that were brought in by CH that were more familiar with what he was about.  A divide in the fans between those that wanted to see him develop things and those who wrote him off almost from the beginning - a divide that just grew as time went on. 

The players weren''t up to what he needed from them as a group and he was castigated by fans for everything that happened, even strong performances were somehow not to his credit.   Constantly villified for things that were proved not to be so - like last minute substitions - which were a fallacy created by the negative mindset of the fans.  The whole reign was doomed to failure because he was not Paul Lambert and some fans turned on him almost immediately and the leap in playing style was too much for some of the players o deal with.  On top of that, he was not a particularly strong or inspiring manager so all in all it was doomed from the start. 

An impossible job, circumstances against him all along the way - including injuries to key players at key times.   He carried the can, but the circumstances conspired to create a situation that was difficult for everyone - the manager, players and fans alike.  On paper he looked like a good candidate for the job, in practice he was not. I hope the club learned from it.

[/quote]

What a load of rubbish. An ''impossible job?'' He was taking over a team high on confidence having just finished 12 in the Premier League.

Any manager would have to deal with a difference between the players they bring in and those already there, hardly a unique thing. And my memory is that fans were pretty supportive and Hughton was extremely popular after the 10 game unbeaten run. However he went off a cliff after that. From the beginning of 2013 until his sacking we won 12 league games out of 51 (while also spending the biggest transfer budget in this clubs history)- you could argue the fans were remarkably patient to not have turned on him sooner.

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Was never given a fair chance. [/quote]

Come on, Lakey, you can do better than that.

Dreadful one dimensional and negative tactics

Awful use of our biggest transfer budget ever, the price for which we are still paying in wages and lack of sell-on ability.

A loss in the FA Cup to a non-league side

Was in charge for 84 matches!  84!  "Never given a fair chance?"  On your bike.

His record:

Norwich City

7 June 2012

6 April 2014

82

24

23

35

29.27

A win percentage only better than Bryan Gunn, John Deehan and Bryan Hamilton in the modern age.

Nice guy, well respected, too big a job for him.

[Van wink 2,994]

He should have gone a lot sooner than he did, just not good enough for us.

[pliff 4]

At last a sensible reasoned quote on this forum Surfbird, Chris Hughton was a decent manager at times players let him down and I still think he would have got us the points we needed to stay up.

[Bury Yellow 2]

If you look at the facts and listen to the majority of Toon supporters he was pretty average as a manager and thats being kind.

I hated all his after match comments. I hated everything he stood for. If you aint good at your job, suck up to your employers.

Nope! he is/was a bloody awful manager hiding behind this nice guy image. I don''t think he truly believed in NCFC as a top club. I will never never forgive him for the utter crap he served up for two years. You''ve all heard the views of Grant Holt diplomatically expressed at the time. There is no doubt Holt had a massive input in those last two games against WBA and Citeh

If he gets Brighton anywhere near promotion I will wear a fresh pair of underpants every day next year. I thank you.

[pliff 4]

Highest ever EPL finish can''t be that bad.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

[quote user="pliff"]At last a sensible reasoned quote on this forum Surfbird, Chris Hughton was a decent manager at times players let him down and I still think he would have got us the points we needed to stay up.[/quote]

Just maybe he let the players down, they were afraid to express themselves, why ?

[Van wink 2,994]

Just maybe he let the players down, they were afraid to express themselves, why ?

Football by numbers

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="pliff"]Highest ever EPL finish can''t be that bad.[/quote]

What is Mike Walker doing now?

[westcoastcanary 173]

"Football by numbers"? You mean instilling the essential basics of team skills? Read any book about the great Arsenal back four schooled by George Graham, which was the rock on which Wenger''s successful Arsenal sides were built and it''s clear that that is exactly how their defensive solidity was achieved. Another way of putting it is everyone being in the right place at the right time as a defensive unit. The transition from defence to attack is the hardest thing of all to get right, and our players never did under Hughton. Under AN the emphasis has shifted, but every game is still, punctuated with examples of poor judgement and loss of shape, particularly in midfield -- the chief cause of our conceding goals.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

[quote user="Vanwink"]Just maybe he let the players down, they were afraid to express themselves, why ?

Football by numbers[/quote]

If you can cast your mind back Howson used to pick the ball up mid way in our half, and stop when he reached the halfway line, as if he was told cross that line and you will be off, same with Johnston, even with Adams it was like the shackles were off.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]@PurpleCanary

The "improvement" represented by the stats you quote cannot be attributed unqualifiedly to Adams, since some degree of short-term "bounce" is a common upshot of any change of manager in those situations.

Indeed, given the consensus that the players had been significantly underperforming BECAUSE OF how they were managed, removing Hughton should surely have seen a much greater bounce than actually occurred quite irrespective of who the new manager was. I imagine that was what the board expected in removing Hughton, but their expectation was unfulfilled.[/quote]That is a plausible point, westcoast, although impossible to be sure about it. But the argument I was replying to was that one couldn''t attribute that relegation to Hughton because he was sacked before the end of the season, when we were not in the bottom three. The point of those statistics about the reverse fixtures earlier in the season was to show that it was likely that Hughton would not have done well enough in the last five games to save us. Whatever one thinks of Hughton, and my view has always been pretty balanced, he cannot be absolved from blame for the relegation. We needed to be effectively safe before those final five, and we were not.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]"Football by numbers"? You mean instilling the essential basics of team skills? Read any book about the great Arsenal back four schooled by George Graham, which was the rock on which Wenger''s successful Arsenal sides were built and it''s clear that that is exactly how their defensive solidity was achieved. Another way of putting it is everyone being in the right place at the right time as a defensive unit. The transition from defence to attack is the hardest thing of all to get right, and our players never did under Hughton. Under AN the emphasis has shifted, but every game is still, punctuated with examples of poor judgement and loss of shape, particularly in midfield -- the chief cause of our conceding goals.[/quote]

Yes. People can level the "cautious" accusation at Hughton, but the method and defensive solidity was a main focus to try and ensure that we didn''t ship goals - and then rely on the skill of the forwards to do the business at the other end.  The balance is some games was good, funnily enough, the few games I went to that second season - every one was a competitive feisty and good performance. Even some that I watched on a stream were the same.  That is one of the reasons I found it so difficult to see why CH was given such a hard time, all the time, by posters on here.  Yes, there were some rank poor performances too and it was plain Hughton was failing to turn it round towards the end, but I never felt that on balance, he was helped by the sea of negativity that built up around him.   He was methodical, had a plan and was trying to build a solid platform for long term development of the club and his overall aim was actually tantalisingly near success - just a clinical strike or two away from extra points in several games throughout the season.  But it was never to be, he wasn''t strong enough, the mix of players never seemed quite right and the players themselves seeing the fans so against the manager must have made it harder for them to deal with things.

I think history will show that Hughton was a brave man to take on the job after Lambert''s mega successful era, but that he wasn''t strong enough to impose his methods on players, some of whom were not self-motivated enough or clever enough on their own and needed a stronger hand  (the main culprits have thankfully left the club).   If Hughton goes on to be successful elsewhere, he will be redeemed in a lot of people''s eyes and that the NCFC experience was just that - an experience. 

But we''ve moved on from that, thankfully, we are still in the top league, we had a fantastic season last season to get promoted, so he did no lasting damage to the club - as seen by the fact that many of the same players are still here.  All part of the roller coaster of being a Norwich fan. We have a much stronger manager now and the players that have stayed have improved - Whittaker, Redmond, Johnson, Howson, Martin, Tettey and Hoolahan in particular.  Ruddy and Olsson too, although they have always been class in a Norwich shirt, apart from the odd mistake.  Bassong is back to his best too.

This is turning into an essay, but despite the jibes I received for supporting CH, I always tried to see the bigger picture and not get hung up on the emotion of  things.  Emotionally, watching some games was hard, but others were not.  Some people just let the emotion get the better of them all the time and for them Hughton could do no right, even when he won games. That is not a fair reflection of his time at Norwich and although things got too much in the end, we were, truthfully, only a small margin away from staying in the league that third season.  A good fit for us, he was not, but he was never as bad as people made out and the players had to take some responsibilty for the problems - and yes, the fans too.  Overall, it was a seethingly poisonous mixture of emotion and negativity that did for us - and it didn''t all stem from the manager. 

[SwindonCanary 455]

He still believes if he''d stayed on for those last 6 games he would have kept us up !

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="SwindonCanary"]He still believes if he''d stayed on for those last 6 games he would have kept us up ![/quote]Five games - and what else would you expect him to believe? 

[Van wink 2,994]

westcoastcanary wrote the following post at 24/08/2015 7:56 AM:

"Football by numbers"? You mean instilling the essential basics of team skills? Read any book about the great Arsenal back four schooled by George Graham, which was the rock on which Wenger''s successful Arsenal sides were built and it''s clear that that is exactly how their defensive solidity was achieved. Another way of putting it is everyone being in the right place at the right time as a defensive unit. The transition from defence to attack is the hardest thing of all to get right, and our players never did under Hughton. Under AN the emphasis has shifted, but every game is still, punctuated with examples of poor judgement and loss of shape, particularly in midfield -- the chief cause of our conceding goals.

It''s great to have defensive structure WC it''s obviously a vital part of the rounded performance of the team.

However when structure is imposed to the extent that it completely snuffs out innovative play it''s futile. Sadly for CH and even more sadly for the rest of us CH was unable to either recognise this or more likely didn''t have the management skills to develop his system of play.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

This season we''ve started with a positive, no fear approach and I''ve enjoyed every game. Alex Neil is not intimidated by anything at all, and his confidence rubs off on his players and us fans.

Chris Hughton was a hugely fearful manager who set up each week in a negative and dour way. This type of set-up gave no faith to his players and towards the end the players were severely lacking any confidence or belief. I thoroughly hated his managerial style and was elated to see him go.

The one thing that Chris never believed was that the smaller teams in the division could employ a positive approach - with some very good football being played - and stay in the division. Come the end of the season we''ll have dispelled this myth.

Thanks for some of the players you bought in Chris, but as for the rest, not for me. I''m out.

[westcoastcanary 173]

@Wes Hooly Fan

The interesting question is why this was true of his spell at Norwich when not true of his time at Newcastle and Birmingham, and (so far at least this season apparently) at Brighton. I don''t believe CH himself has changed much between taking the reins at Newcastle and now. He has always set great store on defensively solidity as the foundation on which to build a successful team. Why did that create an apparently insoluble problem at Carrow Road? The answer surely must be that managerial success or failure is a function of many variables and it is naive to ignore other factors operative in the situation.

For those who like to contrast Hughton and Lambert, if you look at their career management stats to date, CH has a Win Ratio of 40% compared to Lambert''s 39%. If you look only at their records at Carrow Road the stats are very different. But that''s no reason to misrepresent the career stats as a whole.

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Was never given a fair chance.  A divide in the players - those that were used to Lambert style - and those that were brought in by CH that were more familiar with what he was about.  A divide in the fans between those that wanted to see him develop things and those who wrote him off almost from the beginning - a divide that just grew as time went on.  


The players weren''t up to what he needed from them as a group and he was castigated by fans for everything that happened, even strong performances were somehow not to his credit.   Constantly villified for things that were proved not to be so - like last minute substitions - which were a fallacy created by the negative mindset of the fans.  The whole reign was doomed to failure because he was not Paul Lambert and some fans turned on him almost immediately and the leap in playing style was too much for some of the players o deal with.  On top of that, he was not a particularly strong or inspiring manager so all in all it was doomed from the start.  


An impossible job, circumstances against him all along the way - including injuries to key players at key times.   He carried the can, but the circumstances conspired to create a situation that was difficult for everyone - the manager, players and fans alike.  On paper he looked like a good candidate for the job, in practice he was not. I hope the club learned from it. 


[/quote]

First paragraph is silly LDC, fans gave Hughton their backing until he proved he wasn''t capable of achieving the minimum requirements. Some realised this quicker than others, but no-one wrote him off at the start. The writing was on the wall very early during the second season - spineless performance after gutless horror show. I said in October that year that if Hughton was still the manager at Christmas, we would go down, and so it proved to be.

Second paragraph is equally as silly. The last minute subs was accurate to begin with, but he started making them earlier due to the criticism levelled at him for it. Hughton''s use of subs was the worst I''ve ever seen by the manager of any club. Bringing a striker off and a DM on in their place early on when 3-0 down against Man City must have been shattering to the players. He was basically saying "you''re not good enough to even compete, so we''ll just try not to get thrashed". I can''t see Alex Neil ever sending that message to his players. Hughton also was proven to make the most useless substitutions, having made well over 60 subs before any of them changed the game with a goal or an assist (To contextualise I think it was March before any of them did, certainly end of Feb earliest), it was by far the most subs without affecting a game in the Prem that year (around double anyone else I think).

Circumstances was not the cause of Hughton''s failure, Hughton was. Every manager has to deal with key injuries etc, that''s part of football. Yes it''s less than ideal but to blame Hughton''s failure on circumstances is lunacy. At the end of last season Brighton fans were calling for his head on their forums, as like us, despite him keeping them up, the football they played was so soul-destroying to do it that no-one feels it''s a compromise worth making, although they do seem to be happier this season from a quick browse on their messageboard (although they''re sitting top of the Champs so hardly surprising, we were more than happy with Adams at this point last season)

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

LDC just won''t have a bad word said against Hughton. Some people don''t like to be proved wrong I guess. The question I would ask of you LDC, and be honest, is did you enjoy the football he played? Did you enjoy the embarrassment of going into nearly every away game and putting in a gutless performance that we lost more often than not? Yes we were beaten heavily at City, and they''re a good side, but we turned up that day with a white flag and practically handed it to them. It was a total embarrassment that one.

The result is always the most important you could say, but when you don''t put in an even near enough good performance that''s just not acceptable.