Was sacking Farke the right decision?

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

Snap poll. A year on (Farke was sacked on November 6th) was sacking Farke the right decision?

[TheGunnShow 5,928]

An understandable decision, but one where I think Webber made a mistake and listened to the noise. I was perfectly happy for Farke to stay unless he'd lost the dressing room. That win at Brentford was not the effort of a team not playing for its manager.

EDIT: I've voted "no" here, but at the same time, it is not meant as a criticism of Smith, I'm generally pretty damned allergic to any notion of sacking a manager relatively early, and will pretty much always state I think managers get sacked far too early.

Edited November 4, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,246]

At the time yes, what followed wasn't 

[TheBaldOne66 681]

Hindsight is the most wonderful thing! We could have kept him and been even more embarrassing in the top flight than his previous effort

[Capt. Pants 4,195]

At the time it felt like the right decision, but with 12 month's worth of hindsight I'm really not sure now.

Ignoring the whys and wherefores I'm not feeling the 'love' for NCFC that I once did.

[Google Bot 3,256]

For me, it's so hard to answer, because:

Sacking Farke and bringing in someone capable of progressing his work was the correct decision.

Sacking Farke and bringing in someone with a different philosphy and ripping the script up was incorrect.

[canarydan23 4,060]

The win versus Brentford earned him the right to have a stab at the winnable run of games that followed. We had Southampton and Wolves at home followed by then bottom of the league Newcastle. Ironically, I would have said if he didn't get at least two wins out of those three fixtures then he would still have been in danger of losing his job. Smith only managed to win one of them, despite the bottom of the league, winless side being down to ten men for the vast majority of the game.

Edited November 4, 2022 by canarydan23

[DraytonBoy 142]

If sacking Farke was correct a year ago then the same must apply now with Smith despite the league position.

I think he paid the price for poor recruitment after promotion, none of the loans worked out and two of the big signings completely failed. 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

44 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

An understandable decision, but one where I think Webber made a mistake and listened to the noise. I was perfectly happy for Farke to stay unless he'd lost the dressing room. That win at Brentford was not the effort of a team not playing for its manager.

EDIT: I've voted "no" here, but at the same time, it is not meant as a criticism of Smith, I'm generally pretty damned allergic to any notion of sacking a manager relatively early, and will pretty much always state I think managers get sacked far too early.

The noise?  I think a year on people have rather forgotten the utter mess at Chelsea and team selection that was Leeds, as examples. And that was without the main covid ‘round’/injuries that saw games postponed.

He’d sadly lost it, can’t honestly say it was the wrong decision at the time, only with hindsight.  Not that I was particularly one for getting rid - I’ve never actively sought a manager to be booted.

[TheGunnShow 5,928]

1 minute ago, Branston Pickle said:

The noise?  I think a year on people have rather forgotten the utter mess at Chelsea and team selection that was Leeds, as examples. And that was without the main covid ‘round’/injuries that saw games postponed.

He’d sadly lost it, can’t honestly say it was the wrong decision at the time, only with hindsight.  Not that I was particularly one for getting rid - I’ve never actively sought a manager to be booted.

Some might, I certainly haven't. Leeds was a Frankenstein monster of a performance, but the first half at Brentford was anything but. What I did find a little odd in hindsight was the criticism that Farke didn't have a plan B, yet he was clearly trying to work on one.

EDIT: The real problem there is that the rarefied air of the Premiership is an awkward place for a newly-promoted club to realise that a radically different plan B is needed, especially when the main creative weapon is sold.

Edited November 4, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Just now, TheGunnShow said:

Some might, I certainly haven't. Leeds was a Frankenstein monster of a performance, but the first half at Brentford was anything but. What I did find a little odd in hindsight was the criticism that Farke didn't have a plan B, yet he was clearly trying to work on one.

I think Leeds was the thing - I recall Hucks doing the at half time on-pitch interview saying the team selection was all over the place (can’t recall the precise phrase).

[TheGunnShow 5,928]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

I think Leeds was the thing - I recall Hucks doing the at half time on-pitch interview saying the team selection was all over the place (can’t recall the precise phrase).

Sure, agreed that it was a shocker, and indeed wasn't the decision to sack Farke made after that game, but not yet rubber-stamped and it meant Farke had the Brentford match anyway? That's how I remember it, but could be wrong.

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

With hindsight I voted no. At the time I thought it might of been but given the cluster ups that’s happened since I’d say no. 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Just now, TheGunnShow said:

Sure, agreed that it was a shocker, and indeed wasn't the decision to sack Farke made after that game, but not yet rubber-stamped and it meant Farke had the Brentford match anyway? That's how I remember it, but could be wrong.

That seems about right. I think we all turned up for Leeds thinking it was last chance time and it was a mess.  It’s been a long year!  It’s odd that we then won at Brentford, it did cloud the decision somewhat.

[KeiranShikari 1,409]

The fact we're a significantly worse side now than we were 2 and 4 years ago in the Championship would suggest that it was indeed a mistake. 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

Thing is, this ‘vote’ is with a lot of hindsight.  At the time it was very much in favour, if with a heavy heart.  I’m not sure we’d be any better off had we kept him, we’ll never know. 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Branston Pickle

[canarybubbles 1,915]

I find it impossible to answer the question because my opinion is clouded by hindsight. For me, the key question now is not whether we should have sacked Farke, but whether we appointed the right man to replace him.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Absolutely not.

While we are not as bad as Watford, we do tend to sack managers at completely the wrong time. And it was perfectly obvious from the off last season that we did not have players anywhere capable of competing at that level. Again, DF was given an impossible task. And then sacked, to most supporters disgust, after winning a match.

Why was he judged on the EPL? Why were any of our coaches judged on the EPL? You can count on one hand the players we have recruited with a chance of mixing it with the bigger clubs and even the likes of Southampton etc.

Delia has said top 26. That includes 6 teams in the EFL. And DF was proven to be able to reach that goal.

Why don't we feel happy to accept that is not a bad position? Finishing in the top six this season means success. The top 25%. Even if we lose in the playoffs, as miserable as that sounds right now, it would be a good season.

The difference with Deano is that I don't think he has any belief in his own systems. He has two or three in his playbook. But I'm not sure he thinks they will be successful. DF may have been stubborn in certain things but his system worked and did give enjoyment and thrills in the EFL.

[hogesar 9,615]

37 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

The win versus Brentford earned him the right to have a stab at the winnable run of games that followed. We had Southampton and Wolves at home followed by then bottom of the league Newcastle. Ironically, I would have said if he didn't get at least two wins out of those three fixtures then he would still have been in danger of losing his job. Smith only managed to win one of them, despite the bottom of the league, winless side being down to ten men for the vast majority of the game.

I think the problem was the Brentford win was incredibly fortunate rather than looking like we'd solved any of the earlier season problems.

But I agree, there was no value in sacking him straight after that win. At the time I said there was no point in getting rid unless we had a manager interested in coming to us immediately who was a clear upgrade on Farke. I didn't think there was one available willing to come to us at the time.

[The Bristol Nest 513]

Was it wrong to sack Farke? I think the question should be: Was it wrong to hire Dean Smith?

Farke had an awful plan B in the Premier that made him look out of his depth. 

Hindsight says that we may as well held fire.

[......and Smith must score. 1,332]

I voted ' Yes ' on the basis of not having any hindsight. Things had just petered out under Farke and it just seemed the right time to make a change to liven things up.

 If Dean Smith was the only choice as our new manger with the benefit of hindsight I'd vote ' No '

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,409]

You have to assume the decision to sack him was made sometime preceding the Brentford game, it would have been very difficult to reverse that decision after the win. One swallow doesn't make a summer and all that.

As we say, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

I think the problem was the Brentford win was incredibly fortunate rather than looking like we'd solved any of the earlier season problems.

I think this has been victim to a little bit of revisionism as well. We were the better team first half and definitely worthy of our lead. Krul made a great save in the first half between our two goals, but we looked like a Farke Championship side in that first half and even the most rose-tinted of Brentford fans could not have argued that we weren't worthy of our lead.

We actually started the second half as well but succumbed to a typical goal against Norwich; a completely unmarked player in our own box slotting home. From then on, give the streak we were on, we were understandably nervous and Brentford had their tails up, but the team defending like trojans and in a manner that in no way suggested Farke had lost the dressing-room and managed to keep hold of the lead. I don't see where luck came into it, it was an excellent away victory and for the first 45 minutes was our best performance so far of the season. Other than Watford away, I don't think any performance under Smith exceeded the first half v Brentford away.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,509]

28 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

I find it impossible to answer the question because my opinion is clouded by hindsight. For me, the key question now is not whether we should have sacked Farke, but whether we appointed the right man to replace him.

Ironically, a key lesson from the Farke tenure is that Smith has not had enough time in this league with this squad to really make a clear judgement on whether we appointed the right man. What we can say authoritatively is that Smith is the most experienced and historically successful candidate to have been appointed by Norwich in the 21st century. 

[hogesar 9,615]

7 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

I think this has been victim to a little bit of revisionism as well. We were the better team first half and definitely worthy of our lead. Krul made a great save in the first half between our two goals, but we looked like a Farke Championship side in that first half and even the most rose-tinted of Brentford fans could not have argued that we weren't worthy of our lead.

We actually started the second half as well but succumbed to a typical goal against Norwich; a completely unmarked player in our own box slotting home. From then on, give the streak we were on, we were understandably nervous and Brentford had their tails up, but the team defending like trojans and in a manner that in no way suggested Farke had lost the dressing-room and managed to keep hold of the lead. I don't see where luck came into it, it was an excellent away victory and for the first 45 minutes was our best performance so far of the season. Other than Watford away, I don't think any performance under Smith exceeded the first half v Brentford away.

I 100% agree Farke hadn't lost the dressing room, or at least it didn't come across like that.

But we were fortunate in that whilst Krul made two fantastic saves, one straight after our first and one straight after our second (I think), they were straight at him and should have been goals. They'd created better chances than us who had an effort outside of the area go in from Normann with his weak foot, and a penalty.

I think Watford Away, Everton at Home were both better personally, but that's not really relevant.

[canarydan23 4,060]

16 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I 100% agree Farke hadn't lost the dressing room, or at least it didn't come across like that.

But we were fortunate in that whilst Krul made two fantastic saves, one straight after our first and one straight after our second (I think), they were straight at him and should have been goals. They'd created better chances than us who had an effort outside of the area go in from Normann with his weak foot, and a penalty.

I think Watford Away, Everton at Home were both better personally, but that's not really relevant.

Teams like Norwich aren't going to win away without your goaly making a good save or two, nor are they often going to do it by dominating possession. Look at the Watford win, we actually scored more goals than we had shots on target. Watford absolutely bossed possession and had more shots at goal, had a goal VARed out of existence and hit the crossbar. If you're calling the Brentford away win lucky, then the same absolutely must be said for the Watford game.

I don't think either were lucky, they were both good, solid away performances and deserved wins.

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

Things were bleak but beating Brentford was huge. To fire him post game was ridiculous.

He must have had a fall out with the board at some level. There are a lot of rumours about the cantwell / gilmour situation and Farkes handling of it. Players taking sides etc.

Couple of the bits I've heard from inside point to a break down of relationship between Farke and Webber.

I still find it bizarre to this day that we appointed Smith. I think our target was lampard or perhaps even Knutson? Whoever it was the homework hadn't been done (Webber again ) and we were left in the ocean without a life raft and jumped at the newly available Dean Smith.

Dean Smith appointment is a bit like Gunny's. I never grudged Gunn accepting the job (or Dean) but I do question the logic of whoever offered him the job.

As it happens Dean Smith should have been fired after the Stoke game but clings on.

I'd rather have Farke here but I think that relationship had run its course.

I still feel adamantly that Smith is not our guy and we need a new man.

That said I realised my own venom and stepped back from football for a month and quite enjoyed aspects of the QPR game.

That said the crowd around me was venom and you could feel the frustration.

I went in being up for it and left being a bit let down.

Edited November 4, 2022 by Nexus_Canary

[canarydan23 4,060]

6 minutes ago, Nexus_Canary said:

Couple of the bits I've heard from inside point to a break down of relationship between Farke and Webber.

There was quite a detailed piece in the Athletic dissecting what went wrong that sounds very plausible.

Basically, Farke wanted three signings, a marquee CB and a Skipp and Buendia replacement. Rashica fulfilled the latter, and Andrich and St Juste were lined up as the CDM and CB respectively, but we refused to meet their demands (both went on to have great seasons at their respective clubs). The story goes that we could have afforded them, but it would have depleted our budget and would have made further signings difficult. Webber decided that just three signings would have left the squad too thin, particularly with Farke's tough training regime, so opted for more signings of less quality.

It's a shame really, because I think a starting 11 of;

Krul, Aarons, Hanley, St Juste, Giannoulis, Andrich, McLean, Rashica, Cantwell, Dowell, Pukki might've had a decent stab at staying up. We'd have been relying on key players staying injury free, but would have had the likes of Rupp, Placheta, Onel, Gibson, Sorenson and Rowe to come in and have a stab. I can't see anyway they would have done worse.

Anyway, allegedly after not getting what he wanted in the transfer window, Farke became dejected and negative and the story is that Webber felt there was no way we could stay up with a coach with that attitude. In reality, I think we all know, Farke was not happy with the hand Webber dealt him and rather than front up to the fact that Webber had ballsed up recruitment, he looked for someone else to blame and Farke became the fall guy for Webber's failings.

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

7 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

There was quite a detailed piece in the Athletic dissecting what went wrong that sounds very plausible.

Basically, Farke wanted three signings, a marquee CB and a Skipp and Buendia replacement. Rashica fulfilled the latter, and Andrich and St Juste were lined up as the CDM and CB respectively, but we refused to meet their demands (both went on to have great seasons at their respective clubs). The story goes that we could have afforded them, but it would have depleted our budget and would have made further signings difficult. Webber decided that just three signings would have left the squad too thin, particularly with Farke's tough training regime, so opted for more signings of less quality.

It's a shame really, because I think a starting 11 of;

Krul, Aarons, Hanley, St Juste, Giannoulis, Andrich, McLean, Rashica, Cantwell, Dowell, Pukki might've had a decent stab at staying up. We'd have been relying on key players staying injury free, but would have had the likes of Rupp, Placheta, Onel, Gibson, Sorenson and Rowe to come in and have a stab. I can't see anyway they would have done worse.

Anyway, allegedly after not getting what he wanted in the transfer window, Farke became dejected and negative and the story is that Webber felt there was no way we could stay up with a coach with that attitude. In reality, I think we all know, Farke was not happy with the hand Webber dealt him and rather than front up to the fact that Webber had ballsed up recruitment, he looked for someone else to blame and Farke became the fall guy for Webber's failings.

Yeh that all sounds very plausible.

Also quite aggravating that we wouldn't add a couple more for Ajer who is class for Brentford.

I think Webber had now made one too many mistakes, his refusal to talk to fans and the media and him going up Everest is unforgivable.

Delia and the board need to act and get rid of him, here's hoping the American influence can spot a cancer when they see one!

[ZLF 271]

Ive not clicked - i was upset at his sacking but it really is time to move on - which is the missing option.