I want my Farke back

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, Fiery Zac said:

Also depends on context.

Liverpool and Man City obviously were and are the best teams in the league.

Arsenal were most definitely not one of the best teams in the league at that point. Lost 3 in a row without scoring. Then barely troubled against us. Leicester...are 14th. Not played well all season yet, we looked weak and rarely threatened.

My metric is my eyes. Farkes Norwich was even worse than Smith's. Smith had a plan, one that showed promise. Farke had lost all sense of his own philosophy and partially retrieved it for too late.

Context does indeed matter, and the fact is that the Leicester and Arsenal games you refer to we would and should have got a point in a world were officials are competent/unbiased (delete as per the level of your belief in conspiracy).

7 points from the first 11 games, whilst not great, isn't an horrendous yield from that set of fixtures and actually would represent a PPG similar to Smith.

Farke's two awful results were Watford and Leeds at home (although even Leeds we were somewhat unlucky). Chelsea was obviously dreadful but it's the nature of the EPL and it's grossly unfair mismatches that games like this will happen (ask any Southampton fan). But if your metric is your eyes, I can only assume they were closed during the Aston Villa game in December, the Arsenal Boxing Day fixture (both in a month where we failed to score a single goal), or the two recent home games versus Newcastle and West Ham. As bad as anything we saw under Farke, probably worse.

It was a bad idea sacking him for Dean Smith and that has been emphatically demonstrated.

[canarydan23 4,060]

9 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

And we rarely threatened considering we were playing a very poor Leicester side. 

I guess we'll see how very poor they are on Wednesday.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

53 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

And who is responsible for that? Farke had influence over transfers, even if Webber had the ultimate say. Smith has had none.

 Dunno, had enough of all three of them.

Newman and Warne for me, new era.           

[Terminally Yellow 2,448]

43 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Nathan Jones in his second spell.

😂 

Sorry yes that's who I meant. Got him muddled with the Burnley defender.

[Matt Morriss 69]

2 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Whats funny is that Dean still has a better record with Norwich in the Prem than Daniel ever did and I think that says enough.

 

Nostalgia is a blinding thing. If we still had Fark now and were will in the same position the same people saying they want Farke back now would be the  people who would be screaming for his sacking.

Trying to work out how this is true. Smith has amassed 16 points so far with 4 wins. We wont win another point and judging on the state of the team now under Smith, I doubt he would have done any better in the first 10 games of this season. 

Farke had 21 points and 5 wins in this first season also.

[Monty13 2,235]

45 minutes ago, Orly said:

Did he?  Genuine question, as I was under the impression that his influence was minimal, if he had any at all.

Of course he did. If he really thought the approach we were taking this season was so disastrous he should have been stronger in those meetings, he could and arguably should have forced the issue.

If he just meekly accepted whatever he was given from Webber and tried to bake a cake out of sh!t that’s as much on him as Webber. 

He was happy to sign a nice new contract and take the extra money, if he truly believed we were making wrong decisions he should have made a stand.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Monty13

[Nuff Said 5,142]

59 minutes ago, Orly said:

Did he?  Genuine question, as I was under the impression that his influence was minimal, if he had any at all.

I think (could be wrong) that it was described along the lines that Webber and Farke would discuss the squad and agree where improvements were needed. So Farke would tell Webber if he thought a player had reached their limits and we needed an upgrade. Equally if the recruitment team found an outstanding player in a position Farke hadn’t identified as lacking, that wouldn’t stop them taking it further. None of which sounds like rocket science. It would be more surprising if the recruitment team just dumped players into the squad without any discussion first. 
 

Although sometimes we bought (I guess we still potentially buy) players with a view to flipping them, and it’s entirely possible they will never go anywhere near the first team. Raggett for example. So the needs of the squad are irrelevant then. 

[Nuff Said 5,142]

2 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

Seems to be working for Luton quite well.

Jesus. Have we now the reached the stage of “why aren’t we Luton?”. 😕
 

😉

Edited May 9, 2022 by Nuff Said
Added winky emoji before anyone gets literal

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

3 hours ago, Ren said:

The second time around rarely works. 

That's very true but nevertheless I'd say it's pretty understandable that people would love to see someone who worked so well, so recently, back in preference to someone who hasn't worked at all first time around.

I'd have a Farke back in an instant - should never have been sacked IMO - but sadly I can't see it as realistic prospect and I think we are settling down for another sustained period of mediocre football for the foreseeable.

[Midlands Yellow 3,994]

2 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Jesus. Have we now the reached the stage of “why aren’t we Luton?”. 😕

Nathan Jones loves Jesus, should we be looking at similar type? 

[Matt Morriss 69]

50 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

People wanting Farke back, yet in October/ November they were baying for his blood.  Let's not forget when he was sacked we'd only just picked up our first win of the season in NOVEMBER.  Remember the Leeds (H) game, where Farke had completely given up his philosophy and we were just lumping it forward with no plan at all?  I do.

I was never baying for his blood and never wanted him to be sacked. The problem is Smith, Webber, the owners and the recruitment.

If Farke was the problem then Smith would have come in and we would have seen a significant improvement. We have not, and in fact we have gone backwards. The state of the team now under Smith is far worse than Farke.

People dont analyse the situation under Farke enough. They only look at the league position and the 7-0's by Chelsea etc.

Farke had just lost his best 2 players in Skipp and Buendia, along with highly influential squad players instrumental in the success he attained over the last 3 years, in Tettey, Vrancic, Hernandez and Stiepermann with Cantwell deciding to disappear also after an excellent season. Thats 7 players ripped out of the team that gained us so much success. 7 players. Not just Skipp and Emi, 7 players.

Farke then had utter dross to work with replacing the above, with Gilmour, PLM, Rashica, Sargent, Placheta, Tzolis and Normann. With only Normann showing any real promise early season before injury.

Along with Williams, Gunn and Kabak Farke had 9 new players to get to gel, into an entirely new system forced upon him with the players sold and bought by Webber. We had to play a 433 to accomodate the loss of Buendia and new wide players, and also to ensure Gilmour got game time.

It all failed catastropically, but Farkes hand was forced. 

You do not go from dominating the Championship, twice, to failing so badly in the Prem, because you are a bad manager. Both times the recruitment has failed Farke. The first season the recruitment was non existent and we only had a competitive first 11, when you clearly need 15-20 first teamers to compete in the Prem. Hence when injuries struck we collapsed. This 2nd season the players bought by Webber simply havent worked at all. Webbers decision to buy Bundesliga 2 forwards that just got Werder Bremen relegated with a handful of goals and assists between them, along with a raw greek lad clearly not ready, was a massive gamble and its no surprise it hasnt worked.

Farke was never the problem and should never have been sacked. Our current position and performances under Smith confirm that. 

 

[Worthy Nigelton 1,049]

1 hour ago, Fiery Zac said:

The rewriting was already done when it was claimed we played 4 of the best teams in the league. We didn't.

Ok I should've been more specific. We looked weak in defence. And we rarely threatened considering we were playing a very poor Leicester side. 

We did deserve more that day and yet didn't get it. Damning.

Liverpool and Man City are undoubtedly 1 and 2. Arsenal have evey chance of finishing 3rd and will certainly get 4th. He played arguably the top three teams. You can't say 'they weren't at the time, but that doesn't apply to Leicester' who had just finished 5th two years on the bounce.

You're making it up as you go along!

[Captain Holt 522]

3 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Whats funny is that Dean still has a better record with Norwich in the Prem than Daniel ever did and I think that says enough.

 

Nostalgia is a blinding thing. If we still had Fark now and were will in the same position the same people saying they want Farke back now would be the  people who would be screaming for his sacking.

It says enough does it, averaging 0.7 ppg instead of 0.4?? Neither are the answer in the Premier League but Farke is our man and knows how to storm the Championship. If anyone doesn't feel anything but total apathy for Smith I'd be amazed. 

[Matt Morriss 69]

2 minutes ago, Captain Holt said:

It says enough does it, averaging 0.7 ppg instead of 0.4?? Neither are the answer in the Premier League but Farke is our man and knows how to storm the Championship. If anyone doesn't feel anything but total apathy for Smith I'd be amazed. 

agreed, we wont win another point so that will make Smiths PPG 0.57 against Farkes 0.55 in the 1st season. Not enough to differentiate between the two managers. And certainly not enough to make the statement that "Dean still has a better record with Norwich in the Prem than Daniel ever did"

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

If Farke were to come back, I'd actually want him in Webber's position. Who better to ensure adherence to a stylish brand of football, played from top to bottom, with a focus on maintaining a clear pathway for youth to thrive, than the man who implemented it in the first place?

Not to mention who better to know what's needed to keep such going?

Edited May 9, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[tea total 79]

3 hours ago, Satriales said:

Seriously though, would it ever happen? Even if Dean Smith resigned at the end of the season, would Delia & Webber honestly go back to Farke?

Nathan Jones isn't doing too bad at Luton 😁 He went and come back again.

[Capt. Pants 4,237]

3 hours ago, Satriales said:

Seriously though, would it ever happen? Even if Dean Smith resigned at the end of the season, would Delia & Webber honestly go back to Farke?

Webber wouldn't but it's certainly the type of thing Delia would do. Not going to happen though.

I fear we'll see Smith fail to get us where we need to be quick enough and he'll be replaced by Russell Martin.

I would prefer Warne though from the off for next season. 

As mentioned, Farke would be an interesting appointment as DoF.

[Inch High aka Inchy.. 405]

4 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

And I want a Ferrari F40, ten million quid and a mansion.

You don't leave your bedroom so that's an odd wish list.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

And who is responsible for that? Farke had influence over transfers, even if Webber had the ultimate say. Smith has had none.

The recent Athletic article put paid to this myth; I can't find it now but there was a thread last week about it. Unless it was a work of fiction, then the article proffered that Farke was unhappy with the recruitment, felt a squad had been assembled that had little chance of survival and let that belief permeate into his players and favoured a quantity over quality approach. Not shining him in a particularly great light with the negativity side of things, but certainly indicates he had next to nothing to do with the incoming players.

[Inch High aka Inchy.. 405]

3 hours ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Ffs! Get over it, Farke has been gone months, yet people still bleating they want him back? He had a woeful top flight record that would have seen us relegated in January probably! 
 

Just cos he’s won the Championship here twice doesn’t guarantee he would do it again, the squad is woeful, and he did **** all with it so why would it be different in the Championship?

 

FARKE HAS GONE AND IS NOT COMING BACK GET OVER IT!!

Eddie Howe did at Bournemouth, just saying.

[Commonsense 624]

3 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

Also depends on context.

Liverpool and Man City obviously were and are the best teams in the league.

Arsenal were most definitely not one of the best teams in the league at that point. Lost 3 in a row without scoring. Then barely troubled against us. Leicester...are 14th. Not played well all season yet, we looked weak and rarely threatened.

My metric is my eyes. Farkes Norwich was even worse than Smith's. Smith had a plan, one that showed promise. Farke had lost all sense of his own philosophy and partially retrieved it for too late.

You can’t have it both ways.Either Arsenal weren’t good at that stage ( but are 4th now!!) or Leicester were but are 14 th now. 

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

1 hour ago, Worthy Nigelton said:

Liverpool and Man City are undoubtedly 1 and 2. Arsenal have evey chance of finishing 3rd and will certainly get 4th. He played arguably the top three teams. You can't say 'they weren't at the time, but that doesn't apply to Leicester' who had just finished 5th two years on the bounce.

You're making it up as you go along!

Youre talking about now, and the past - im actually talking about what was being discussed - the first 4 games of the season.

Arsenal were not looking anything like a top 4 team at the beginning of the season. Look at their starting 11 that day, and their performances. Yes they're now a very good side, but we're not talking about now. The claim was we 'played the 4 of the best teams in the league'. 

I never said it doesn't apply to Leicester. Stop making it up as you go along!

 

Very simply - We did not play 4 of the best teams in the league at the start of the season. We played by far the best 2 and, at the time, two struggling biggish teams who were still very much finding their feet in the season. We were so poor we couldn't capitalise on their frailties. So the excuse of playing the best teams doesn't wash (imo)

[Orly 277]

2 hours ago, Monty13 said:

Of course he did. If he really thought the approach we were taking this season was so disastrous he should have been stronger in those meetings, he could and arguably should have forced the issue.

If he just meekly accepted whatever he was given from Webber and tried to bake a cake out of sh!t that’s as much on him as Webber. 

He was happy to sign a nice new contract and take the extra money, if he truly believed we were making wrong decisions he should have made a stand.

Perhaps you're right, but I don't see how him throwing his toys out the pram was going to change or help anything?  

Is there any firm evidence regarding his involvement in the transfer process other than conjecture?  I.e. statements from the club or Daniel himself?  (Not that it really matters I suppose, as we won't reappoint him)

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

3 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

You can’t have it both ways.Either Arsenal weren’t good at that stage ( but are 4th now!!) or Leicester were but are 14 th now. 

???? What??

Neither were good at that stage. Arsenal had had a very poor start to the season which was largely due to injuries, covid etc. Leicester were in indifferent form, again largely due to injuries, in defence which has lasted the majority of the season. Therfore neither were part of the 'best teams in the league'. Arsenal have become that and Leicester have continued to struggle due to injuries and form.

I'm not sure what's difficult to understand. I'm talking about what was happening at the beginning of the season. Not now, not last season or the season before, but the first 4 games of the season. Against the top 2 we had little chance and Farke cannot be blamed (even though he has beaten Man City in the past 🙂) but Arsenal and Leicester were not part of the best in the league at that time and we could have got something against them (much like Brentford managed, without much difficulty)

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, Fiery Zac said:

we could have got something against them

*would have got something against them, but for two awful official decisions (allowing Arsenal's goal and disallowing McLean's)

Edited May 9, 2022 by canarydan23

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Both decisions were actually correct. Marginal, but indeed correct. If you're dead in front of the goalie, you will always be pinged for being in active play. The unusual thing about that was that Leicester didn't keep their defenders on the post (Castaigne pushed straight out and just about got Todd offside in time).

The one against Arsenal was half-a-yard on, remember that the bounce which trickled to Aubameyang is the point at which the decision had to be made, and there he was clearly on. Remember, the shot hit the post, hit the guy who hit the shot as he slid in, bounced off his shin - and the decision is made on Aubameyang's position at that point.

Again, an unusual set of circumstances, but not a matter of incompetence.


 

Edited May 9, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[Nuff Said 5,142]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

The recent Athletic article put paid to this myth; I can't find it now but there was a thread last week about it. Unless it was a work of fiction, then the article proffered that Farke was unhappy with the recruitment, felt a squad had been assembled that had little chance of survival and let that belief permeate into his players and favoured a quantity over quality approach. Not shining him in a particularly great light with the negativity side of things, but certainly indicates he had next to nothing to do with the incoming players.

You’re misunderstanding me. I’m not saying Farke nominated or declined potential transfer targets, but that he said what he wanted to add to the squad - a CDM he could then play out of position as a CB (😉), a striker or whatever. So unless he said “I want a Skipp replacement” and we bought 11 (?) players, none of who were a Skipp replacement (which seems unlikely to me, and would indicate something is seriously broken), he shares some of the responsibility.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, Nuff Said said:

You’re misunderstanding me. I’m not saying Farke nominated or declined potential transfer targets, but that he said what he wanted to add to the squad - a CDM he could then play out of position as a CB (😉), a striker or whatever. So unless he said “I want a Skipp replacement” and we bought 11 (?) players, none of who were a Skipp replacement (which seems unlikely to me, and would indicate something is seriously broken), he shares some of the responsibility.

That's what the Athletic article stated, he wanted a Skipp and Buendia replacement and a marquee centre-back.

Arguably Rashica filled one of those requests. The other two he had to swing for.

[Nuff Said 5,142]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

That's what the Athletic article stated, he wanted a Skipp and Buendia replacement and a marquee centre-back.

Arguably Rashica filled one of those requests. The other two he had to swing for.

In which case, as has already been said, he was unusually supine for a football coach.

[canarydan23 4,060]

5 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

In which case, as has already been said, he was unusually supine for a football coach.

And also as has already been said, this is how DoF models work.

It sounds like they tried and failed to act on Farke's requests, again from another Athletic article, they refused to pay the market value for Andrich to fill the DM role, failed to match Brentford's valuation for Ajer, nor would they put forward offers sufficient enough to entice St Juste and Bournaw's clubs to sell.

Had Farke's requests been granted, it's unlikely we'd be in the position we are now, yet it's he who was the fall guy for Webber's incompetence.

I mean, what are you envisaging here, Farke stomping into the boardroom and throwing his toys out of the pram? We don't know that he didn't, to be fair. And given how his sacking was handled and his reported overt attitude regarding recruitment, it sounds like he did something to rattle Webber's cage, so I'd be careful with the assumption he meekly accepted the dross squad Webber assembled for him.