Webber protection

[Jersey Canary 149]

Do you think one of the reasons Webber sacked  Farke's was to protect himself? 

[chicken 2,649]

Nope.

[hogesar 9,760]

No because it literally does the complete opposite.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

No

[? 20]

Yes.

His signings have been awful. He's replaced decent, hard-working players with utter dross. The one PL quality player he did sign, in Normann, was signed far too late.

To not sack Farke would be to admit the squad wasn't up to it. And that would be down to Webber.

Sadly, we're still going down regardless, so Webber has merely managed to postpone his reckoning with reality. Worse, we have less of a chance of coming straight back up without Farke.

Webber will be gone at the end of the season.

Edited November 7, 2021 by ?

[Ulfotto 644]

I think Webber will hold his hands up at the end of season if we go down and say ultimately it was the failed recruitment that did is to protect whoever the new manager is.

I would though like to think after sacking Farke he commits to the club for at least 2 more years. 
 

I don’t think it’s a good move to lose both the manager and sporting director in the same season.

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

I think it was because he parked in Webber's reserved space at the training ground.* 

 

 

 

 

* I have no idea if this is true but then neither do any of the other posters so I just thought I'd join in by saying something silly. 😀

[Branston Pickle 3,696]

6 minutes ago, hogesar said:

No because it literally does the complete opposite.

 I think one of the biggest issues has been the lack of a cohesive formation/plan this season, and we’ve appeared to have little idea how to use the players we’ve signed.  That has to rest with DF - there’s no way SW just goes out and buys players without any input, that would be insanity.   Leeds was surely the crucial game, where even Hucks on the pitch at half-time said the selection looked a bit hickledy-pickledy (pretty sure he used those words?).  

[Mello Yello 2,303]

7 Important Rules of cut-throat business management and being a DOF...."Deflect, discredit, dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge." ...

....."You betcha!".....

[Baracouda 47]

4 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

 I think one of the biggest issues has been the lack of a cohesive formation/plan this season, and we’ve appeared to have little idea how to use the players we’ve signed.  That has to rest with DF - there’s no way SW just goes out and buys players without any input, that would be insanity.   Leeds was surely the crucial game, where even Hucks on the pitch at half-time said the selection looked a bit hickledy-pickledy (pretty sure he used those words?).  

are you sure? The director of football role in Spain its a common they purchase a player and then introduce them to the head coach. The evidence suggests without a plan/cohesive formation that exactly that did happen. Farke's comments in the summer that he trusts SW to sign the right players, also implies he wasnt largely involved.  

[Branston Pickle 3,696]

4 minutes ago, Baracouda said:

are you sure? The director of football role in Spain its a common they purchase a player and then introduce them to the head coach. The evidence suggests without a plan/cohesive formation that exactly that did happen. Farke's comments in the summer that he trusts SW to sign the right players, also implies he wasnt largely involved.  

Absolutely.  We all know SW is in charge of transfers, but he’ll hardly just go out and buy 3 attacking m/f on a whim.  

Edited November 7, 2021 by Branston Pickle

[Baracouda 47]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

We all know SW is in charge of transfers, but he’ll hardly just go out and buy 3 attacking m/f on a whim.  

that were largely sat on the bench

 

[sgncfc 1,259]

Webber can't have been happy that the "best young player in Greece" hasn't got a game; that the "brightest Scottish talent in a decade" sits on his hands on the bench, and one of our own brightest stars loses his first team place in the dressing room.

He provided the ammunition. Farke chose not to load the gun.

[Branston Pickle 3,696]

4 minutes ago, Baracouda said:

that were largely sat on the bench

 

Yes, which is down to DF.  You don’t appear to get it. 

[Baracouda 47]

 

1 minute ago, Branston Pickle said:

Yes, which is down to DF.  You don’t appear to get it. 

if he wanted these players, not sure he would have had them on the bench. What's hard in understanding that?

[Michael Starr 521]

I feel like something was happening behind the scenes that became quite toxic. I suspect that Farke & his staff have a zero tolerance / total professional approach and it's become apparent that players that don't fully tow the line were hung out to dry with very little chance of returning. It looks like the fallout stretched far and wide... Buendia, Cantwell, Leitner, Trybull, Olivera, Tzolis, Gilmore, Sorensen, Placheta, Soto all spring to mind. A pattern starts to show. To be a Prem manager you need to be able to handle the egos. The only reason we got Buendia back in after he threw toys out was because he simply had to start each game. The rest... shipped out, released or banished to the u23s.

[yellow_belly 226]

43 minutes ago, chicken said:

Nope.

Yes. A little bit.

if he kept Farke and results stayed poor, then he would be in the firing line given that this is his second go at the PL and his players / transfer policy would be lacking again.

[1902 1,167]

9 minutes ago, Michael Starr said:

I feel like something was happening behind the scenes that became quite toxic. I suspect that Farke & his staff have a zero tolerance / total professional approach and it's become apparent that players that don't fully tow the line were hung out to dry with very little chance of returning. It looks like the fallout stretched far and wide... Buendia, Cantwell, Leitner, Trybull, Olivera, Tzolis, Gilmore, Sorensen, Placheta, Soto all spring to mind. A pattern starts to show. To be a Prem manager you need to be able to handle the egos. The only reason we got Buendia back in after he threw toys out was because he simply had to start each game. The rest... shipped out, released or banished to the u23s.

I'm not entirely sure that this is that reflective of Farke though, it's hard to gauge whether he is unusual in the number of players he has fallen out with or actually it is just a product of the amount of time that he has been here, there are so few managers who have lasted 3.5 years at a club that our sample size is pretty small. 

I'm also not sure Gilmore, Sorensen or Placheta were frozen out, just might not have been regarded as good enough.

Olivera had a huge ego, and had a reputation before coming here for that. Trybull just wasn't a match for Skipp and couldn't succeed in the premier league, Leitnar also just didn't look up to it in the first season in the premier. 

So the examples we have are Buendia, Soto, Cantwell and Tzolis. Buendia would have thrown his toys out on his salary wherever he was, that was inevitable and not necessarily anything to do with Farke. So then we are down to three players, which I would have thought is pretty standard for a manager over three years, no?

[chicken 2,649]

3 minutes ago, yellow_belly said:

Yes. A little bit.

if he kept Farke and results stayed poor, then he would be in the firing line given that this is his second go at the PL and his players / transfer policy would be lacking again.

Nope. Not even a little bit.

As @hogesar said, rather than protect himself, it does the opposite. Though perhaps for different reasons maybe. By sacking Farke he has left no one else to blame if the recruitment etc doesn't pay off. He actually puts more possible blame onto himself because whoever they appoint as head coach next will be on him, and if it doesn't work, it'll ALL be on him.

So no. Not even a little. 

[......and Smith must score. 1,362]

57 minutes ago, ? said:

Yes.

His signings have been awful. He's replaced decent, hard-working players with utter dross. The one PL quality player he did sign, in Normann, was signed far too late.

To not sack Farke would be to admit the squad wasn't up to it. And that would be down to Webber.

Sadly, we're still going down regardless, so Webber has merely managed to postpone his reckoning with reality. Worse, we have less of a chance of coming straight back up without Farke.

Webber will be gone at the end of the season.

According to Paddy Davitt in one of his pieces yesterday he says it's common knowledge that Webber will be here longer than that.

[C.I.D 310]

52 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

I think it was because he parked in Webber's reserved space at the training ground.* 

 

 

 

 

* I have no idea if this is true but then neither do any of the other posters so I just thought I'd join in by saying something silly. 😀

I think that is one of the most eminently sensible comments I've seen on here in the past week tbh 🤩

[A Load of Squit 5,223]

Just now, C.I.D said:

I think that is one of the most eminently sensible comments I've seen on here in the past week tbh 🤩

I'm a failure, will somebody please sack me.

[? 20]

6 minutes ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

According to Paddy Davitt in one of his pieces yesterday he says it's common knowledge that Webber will be here longer than that.

When we're relegated, I imagine it'll be very difficult for him to stick around. 

Sacking Farke for failure at his second attempt in the PL, but then shrugging off his own similar failure, would not be a good look.

Though he'll not want to walk away on a low point, so I imagine he'll need to be sacked, rather than resign as he should do.

Edited November 7, 2021 by ?

[Creedence Clearwater Couto 1,297]

Isn't there an announcement on Webbers future during the international break? Could be a bit tasty if it's announcing a new contract to stay! 

Strange to say, but as the dust settles, the sad emotion felt last night is slowly turning to intrigue, and dare I say excitement, as to what these next two weeks may bring. 

[hogesar 9,760]

6 minutes ago, chicken said:

Nope. Not even a little bit.

As @hogesar said, rather than protect himself, it does the opposite. Though perhaps for different reasons maybe. By sacking Farke he has left no one else to blame if the recruitment etc doesn't pay off. He actually puts more possible blame onto himself because whoever they appoint as head coach next will be on him, and if it doesn't work, it'll ALL be on him.

So no. Not even a little. 

Exactly this. Hes not got anything to hide behind. At least he had trust and commitment to Farke to hide behind if we went down this season. Now there's nothing.

[chicken 2,649]

3 minutes ago, ? said:

When we're relegated, I imagine it'll be very difficult for him to stick around. 

Sacking Farke for failure at his second attempt in the PL, but then shrugging off his own similar failure, would not be a good look.

 

Though he'll not want to walk away on a low point, so I imagine he'll need to be sacked, rather than resign as he should do.

I don't think it's quite the same.

Chief Execs etc in other models tend to ride out the appointment of several managers etc and with Webber it isn't just about performances on the pitch, it's the development of the footballing side of the club, and he has done too well with that to be as disposable as a head coach.

I also don't think it is unfair to say that we have seen quality in many of the signings and that what the majority of fans have been saying and are saying is that the coaching just wasn't getting it out of them consistently. Criticisms like having Rashica, Tzolis and Gilmour on the bench two of whom being £9-10m signings, our most expensive signings ever, and not getting a look in.

That isn't down to Webber, he can't interject and tell Farke who to play or he may as well sack him. In some ways, yesterday may even have helped the decision. Michael Baily felt that the formation became more of a 4-2-3-1 in the first half and we reaped the rewards of that. We have started Rashica and yesterday saw more of that quality.

Personally, I really don't get the dislike of Webber. He's done a fantastic job at this club. He certainly isn't in line to be sacked for any drastically poor mistakes.

[? 20]

9 minutes ago, chicken said:

I don't think it's quite the same.

Chief Execs etc in other models tend to ride out the appointment of several managers etc and with Webber it isn't just about performances on the pitch, it's the development of the footballing side of the club, and he has done too well with that to be as disposable as a head coach.

I also don't think it is unfair to say that we have seen quality in many of the signings and that what the majority of fans have been saying and are saying is that the coaching just wasn't getting it out of them consistently. Criticisms like having Rashica, Tzolis and Gilmour on the bench two of whom being £9-10m signings, our most expensive signings ever, and not getting a look in.

That isn't down to Webber, he can't interject and tell Farke who to play or he may as well sack him. In some ways, yesterday may even have helped the decision. Michael Baily felt that the formation became more of a 4-2-3-1 in the first half and we reaped the rewards of that. We have started Rashica and yesterday saw more of that quality.

Personally, I really don't get the dislike of Webber. He's done a fantastic job at this club. He certainly isn't in line to be sacked for any drastically poor mistakes.

I guess it's a matter of whether we believe that the current squad have enough talent or not.

Personally, I can only judge based on what I've seen with my own eyes, and the likes of Tzolis, Rashica and Gilmour are quite frankly not good enough. I've not seen a shred of evidence that any of them are capable of performing well enough to keep us in this division. 

Obviously you think differently and believe that they do have that quality - much like Webber himself does. I can't see anything other than blind faith and presumably FIFA stats to back that up, but each to their own. Time will tell, I suppose.

However, if time does go on to prove that they're not good enough, and we do get relegated, then Webber must be held responsible. And for me that means losing his job, because what's the point in a Sporting Director who can't be trusted to buy players of an appropriate quality for where we want to be?

Ill give you that though, whatever else does happen, Webber has overseen some excellent changes off the pitch and will always deserve credit for that.

Edited November 7, 2021 by ?

[chicken 2,649]

4 minutes ago, ? said:

I guess it's a matter of whether we believe that the current squad have enough talent or not.

Personally, I can only judge based on what I've seen with my own eyes, and the likes of Tzolis, Rashica and Gilmour are quite frankly not good enough. I've not seen a shred of evidence that any of them are capable of performing well enough to keep us in this division. 

Obviously you think differently and believe that they do have that quality - much like Webber himself does. I can't see anything other than blind faith and presumably FIFA stats to back that up, but each to their own. Time will tell, I suppose.

However, if time does go on to prove that they're not good enough, and we do get relegated, then Webber must be held responsible. And for me that means losing his job, because what's the point in a Sporting Director who can't be trusted to buy players of an appropriate quality for where we want to be?

Ill give you that though, whatever else does happen, Webber has overseen some excellent changes off the pitch and will always deserve credit for that.

Funny that, I trust what I see with my eyes as well. And the quality is certainly there in those players. As I said, it isn't there consistently - but that is down to the coaching. In this set up, it's also worth noting that Farke has a say in the signings too. It's worth noting that Webber has expressed this in several interviews now and over the summer, identified that PLM was one that Farke wanted and that they didn't think a deal was realistic due to his form and importance to Nice but they were pleasantly surprised. 

[? 20]

I'd be interested in hearing where you've seen that quality, Chicken. I've been at 8 of our 11 games, and seen the other 3 on TV, and can honestly say that I've not seen even a hint of it.

Gilmour has literally done nothing of note, in his admittedly limited playing time. Tzolis looked great against Bournemouth in the cup, but so did the likes of Kenny and Gibson last season, and it's pretty much accepted that they're not good enough for the PL. He's shown absolutely nothing against any of the PL sides in his brief playing time. Rashica is a clone of Onel, but without the sense to cut inside and shoot. If he hasn't worked out that crossing the ball to Pukki isn't the way to go by now, then he's evidently not got the intelligence to make it at this level. And as for PLM, well, it says a lot that the best anyone can say for him is that he closes down well. You could get the same by picking anyone from the 27000 in the crowd at Carrow Road.

Even Klopp couldn't keep this lot up. They're hopeless.

[Monty13 2,252]

29 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Exactly this. Hes not got anything to hide behind. At least he had trust and commitment to Farke to hide behind if we went down this season. Now there's nothing.

Don’t think that’s true, this is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation for me. Sacking Farke doesn’t change Webber’s rep…unless his replacement is more successful.

If Webber had stuck with Farke and he took us down with another whimper Webber gets the blame for keeping him in post and the recruitment. There wasn’t going to be an acceptance from the supporter base keeping a failing Farke to the end.

If he changes manager and nothing changes Webber gets the blame for the change and recruitment again.

But…if he makes a change and the new guy gets the most out of the players he signed, even if we ultimately fail to stay up (which is easily blamed on Farke given the first 10 games), he’s mostly vindicated.

Webbers gambled, but it’s the only roll of the dice he had in my opinion.