The timing of Daniel's sacking

[Midlands Yellow 3,980]

Just now, Google Bot said:

Then your point is valid, I support the club so we'll have differing views on whether this was 'good'

Football is a ruthless business. I’d imagine most have less venom for Lambert now. If your sacking a manager or a manager wants out it doesn’t matter how it’s done. 

[Google Bot 3,275]

Just now, Midlands Yellow said:

Football is a ruthless business. I’d imagine most have less venom for Lambert now. If your sacking a manager or a manager wants out it doesn’t matter how it’s done. 

Never once had venom for Lambert, and never have for Farke either. 

I personally feel this suited all parties, I think Farke was done and would've entered a period of irreversible hostility that most probably would have lead to Webber walking too, leaving us in utter dire straights.

Also, I have little belief in his achievements without Emi in the team to be heading as a heavily beaten team in the Championship again, made worse than Pukki would probably be finished as a threat too.

Just felt we needed a change, and couldn't go into Brentford rudderless but had the international break on hand.

But yes, this is very much a sign of how ruthless Webber can be, Delia and Co would never have done this on their own, would've u-turned on one result even if they had made a decision previously.

 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,023]

36 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Made sense to treat him with contempt and let him do a last interview post match too celebrating a win? In your head maybe but with the service he gave he certainly deserved better. 

You need to be clear what you mean by "timing". From a personal point of view the timing was right in terms of doing it just before the international break to give the club a chance to get somebody in place before the Southampton game particularly given the squad would not be together during that break. In terms of how it was handled by the club,  I agree it was terrible and Daniel Farke deserved better than that..........

[hogesar 9,667]

52 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Whatever the club do will always get a thumbs up from you regardless. 

You've clearly been incapable of reading since we sacked Farke then.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,090]

2 hours ago, Pugin said:

In terms of impact on Daniel, the timing makes not one jot of difference. It was painful no matter when it happened

 

Have you ever dumped someone by text?

[yellow_belly 226]

2 hours ago, Google Bot said:

We picked up 3 points AND look to appoint a new manager during 2 week break - how is that **** poor?

You supporting Farke or the club with that statement?

Sack him after Leeds, who fills in? We probably lose against Brentford as we're in such a shambles... It's absolute nonsense to suggest this wasn't a good time.

It was win win for Norwich (keeping Farke for Brentford)…

win and we get three valuable points.

draw / lose and it makes the chop easier

[Ian 1,129]

3 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

You're having to tie yourselves in logical knots here.

"He had to be told as soon as possible"

It was decided on Thursday to sack him. Saturday evening is not as soon as possible.

"But, but, but we needed to give ourselves the best chance of winning against Brentford."

People have spent weeks saying how crap Farke is and how he needs to go, but a lot of those same people are now saying it was right to keep him in for Brentford because it gave us the best chance of winning?

Okaaaaaaaaay.

 

3 hours ago, hogesar said:

Requires much less 'balls' to sack someone straight after a loss as opposed to a win...

There's little doubt in my mind the board thought there was a good chance of a loss/draw away at Brentford in which case it would make it easier to sack Farke on a personal level and less chance of any backlash from fans.

People can justify the boards' actions in whatever ways they choose, and I accept they have to take the sentiment out of things to a certain degree, but I completely agree that it's a weak argument to suggest leaving Farke in charge for a few days extra was our best chance of getting a win. Given he apparently is one of the worst Premiership managers we've ever had and no longer one of the key men to build the club, you would expect to let him go as soon as the decision was made rather than allow him to risk losing another critical and winnable game.

Had we had someone lined up, and had it just been a case of tying up the legals I would at least get it slightly, but given Steve Weaver's going to be taking over training anyway it seems to make even less sense. I also read that we needed Farke to take coaching during the week - because "who else could?". Well, there's our answer isn't it?

Football seems to bring out the worst cynicism of the corporate world, but IMO letting Farke celebrate a win, complete his last media interviews which would (of course) be more jubilant and less guarded given he would normally expect the spectre of a sacking to be warded off for at least another fortnight, before giving him the boot in the away dressing room prior to getting back to Norfolk was a really poor way to treat a very loyal servant of the club.

The fact he was completely blindsided by it, despite others knowing for a while and every player knowing before him, makes it seem remarkably harsh.

At the very least Webber could have gone out to face the press after the match.

Edited November 12, 2021 by Ian

[curious yellow 184]

3 hours ago, lake district canary said:

I can see that the job may have got too big for Farke with some players unhappy and causing ruptions behind the scenes, but he should have been backed rather than sacked. The timing wasn't good though and Daniel rather made it worse for Webber by winning the match.

I don't think I've ever seen such joy and exuberance from the players on winning an ordinary league match - winning it was a huge psychological barrier that had been removed - and the benefits of that to morale and togetherness for up coming matches was really important.

Now the foot has been taken off the pedal, the improved results meaningless, a new man coming in to try and get to know the players and certain players who have been less than focussed in training feeling smug that they've got rid of the man they saw as holding them back - and really, it's a rather sorry story, from top to bottom.  Through all that the only man to come through it with any credit is Daniel himself.

He got that vital first win, was trying to deal with the precious egos behind the scenes and was starting to get improved results.  Sacking him at all was wrong and should have been backed more by Webber, not thrown under the bus.

There is no evidence of any players causing ruptions, Farke's job was to sort those problems out, which he wasn't doing.

The danger is that winning against Brentford would justify Farke's tactics in his own mind but we only just held on. Telling Farke before the game might have had an impact on the preparations so telling him after the game was the earliest time. It looks bad but you don't expect them to change their minds because we won. 

The treatment of some of our players,(Trybull etc) has been diabolical, it seems that Farke couldn't deal with some strong personalities and his answer was to banish them, he can't really complain about his treatment.