Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
1902

Firing Farke without a replacement

Recommended Posts

This point keeps coming up, but I can't see how it would be played out any other way.

We are a club with some pretty specific demands, some of which are quite alien (still) to British football culture. We operate with a head coach not a manager, who will be expected to integrate themselves with Webber and his way of working. They will need to be prepared to bring through a lot of youth and know that we won't have a big budget in January. They will probably be asked if they would be prepared to stay on if we are relegated (Webber seems to value stability) and some candidates will have clubs already so compensation would need to be discussed.

So either we were supposed to have these talks behind Farke's back and hope they didn't come out in the media, destabilising the club and leading to a load of rage and recrimination, or we were going to have them now. 

I actually didn't really think Farke should have gone as he did, but I'm not sure what else people were expecting.

Edited by 1902
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't so much Farke's departure in itself as the timing and manner of it.  It was cheap, nasty and quite unnecessary, all the more so as the club prides itself on being better than that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, benchwarmer said:

It wasn't so much Farke's departure in itself as the timing and manner of it.  It was cheap, nasty and quite unnecessary, all the more so as the club prides itself on being better than that.  

I don't really have an opinion on that, I did on the night but all firings are nasty. It doesn't get past the fact that once it had happened there wasn't going to be an instant replacement without that process having been cheaper and nastier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, benchwarmer said:

It wasn't so much Farke's departure in itself as the timing and manner of it.  It was cheap, nasty and quite unnecessary, all the more so as the club prides itself on being better than that.  

Especially since in 18/19 Farke got 20 and 18 points more than the two managers who seem to have been interviewed for the post (Lampard and Smith respectively) despite having far fewer resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a mess and can’t imagine too many top managers are particularly interested in taking a job to play second fiddle to Webber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Although it is still a bit of a mess.

When we sacked Alex Neil we had a grown up conversation and Alan Irvine stuck around to take charge of the team for a few games.

We've let Farke's entire team board a plane home.

Edited by TeemuVanBasten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 1902 said:

This point keeps coming up, but I can't see how it would be played out any other way.

We are a club with some pretty specific demands, some of which are quite alien (still) to British football culture. We operate with a head coach not a manager, who will be expected to integrate themselves with Webber and his way of working. They will need to be prepared to bring through a lot of youth and know that we won't have a big budget in January. They will probably be asked if they would be prepared to stay on if we are relegated (Webber seems to value stability) and some candidates will have clubs already so compensation would need to be discussed.

So either we were supposed to have these talks behind Farke's back and hope they didn't come out in the media, destabilising the club and leading to a load of rage and recrimination, or we were going to have them now. 

I actually didn't really think Farke should have gone as he did, but I'm not sure what else people were expecting.

I don't think that is right - we quite clearly couldn't approach people behind Farke's back unless they were out of work and even then it would be, as you say, very high risk and probably backfire badly. But succession planning, at all levels, is supposed to be part of the 'model' and I find it incredible that Webber has sacked Farke without a pretty clear idea of who he hoped to and could feasibly get in to replace him.

Smith clearly can't have been on the list at the time of Daniel's sacking, so if Webber really did want Lampard then God help us! That Smith has been considered within days of losing his job at Villa smacks of absolute desperation IMO.

Knutsen seems to be one of the few names bandied about that makes any sense at all but even a miminal amount of due diligence would have shown that he wasn't going to be available for several weeks which begs the question of why on earth was Farke sacked when he was. If Knutsen was high on Webber's list, assuming there was a list at all, then waiting a few weeks would have had two very major advantages:

  • Farke would have had a few more games to demonstrate whether or not the Brentford win was a turning point
  • If it turns out not to have been a turning point then we could have brought in a high quality replacement immediately and without this embarassing and disrepectful pantomine.

I genuinely thought that we were better than this but apparently not - disappointing isn't even close, in 60 years of supporting NCFC through many ups and downs this is the lowest ever point IMO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I don't think that is right - we quite clearly couldn't approach people behind Farke's back unless they were out of work and even then it would be, as you say, very high risk and probably backfire badly. But succession planning, at all levels, is supposed to be part of the 'model' and I find it incredible that Webber has sacked Farke without a pretty clear idea of who he hoped to and could feasibly get in to replace him.

Smith clearly can't have been on the list at the time of Daniel's sacking, so if Webber really did want Lampard then God help us! That Smith has been considered within days of losing his job at Villa smacks of absolute desperation IMO.

Knutsen seems to be one of the few names bandied about that makes any sense at all but even a miminal amount of due diligence would have shown that he wasn't going to be available for several weeks which begs the question of why on earth was Farke sacked when he was. If Knutsen was high on Webber's list, assuming there was a list at all, then waiting a few weeks would have had two very major advantages:

  • Farke would have had a few more games to demonstrate whether or not the Brentford win was a turning point
  • If it turns out not to have been a turning point then we could have brought in a high quality replacement immediately and without this embarassing and disrepectful pantomine.

I genuinely thought that we were better than this but apparently not - disappointing isn't even close, in 60 years of supporting NCFC through many ups and downs this is the lowest ever point IMO.

I would agree with everything except the last sentence. I can’t agree that this is the lowest point. But I do feel that if this situation isn’t rectified quickly, we will spiral down to such a point.

In all honesty, I feel that if this is mishandled, we could be playing ITFC in league one in three seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there genuinely wasnt a replacement.

Maybe Webber just caught wind that the training ground and changing room had just become so fractured that he simply had to act by removing Farke and then acting upon appointing a new manager afterwards

Edited by GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I don't think that is right - we quite clearly couldn't approach people behind Farke's back unless they were out of work and even then it would be, as you say, very high risk and probably backfire badly. But succession planning, at all levels, is supposed to be part of the 'model' and I find it incredible that Webber has sacked Farke without a pretty clear idea of who he hoped to and could feasibly get in to replace him.

Smith clearly can't have been on the list at the time of Daniel's sacking, so if Webber really did want Lampard then God help us! That Smith has been considered within days of losing his job at Villa smacks of absolute desperation IMO.

Knutsen seems to be one of the few names bandied about that makes any sense at all but even a miminal amount of due diligence would have shown that he wasn't going to be available for several weeks which begs the question of why on earth was Farke sacked when he was. If Knutsen was high on Webber's list, assuming there was a list at all, then waiting a few weeks would have had two very major advantages:

  • Farke would have had a few more games to demonstrate whether or not the Brentford win was a turning point
  • If it turns out not to have been a turning point then we could have brought in a high quality replacement immediately and without this embarassing and disrepectful pantomine.

I genuinely thought that we were better than this but apparently not - disappointing isn't even close, in 60 years of supporting NCFC through many ups and downs this is the lowest ever point IMO.

Excellent post IMHO,

I basically never criticise the club but this last week has felt so far removed from the ethos of the last 4 years that it is impossible for me to defend it.

Letting an excellent manager (relative to what NCFC are capable of attracting) go with very little chance of replacing him with better is a terrible mistake.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...