Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Sorry, but he didn't lose the plot, and I say that as someone still arguing Farke's defense right up until his sacking.

The outcomes of those first 10 games were abysmal. Not just bad, but truly abysmal; I can't think of any club in English football that gave a manager more slack in fallow periods than Farke had. He was given a whole season in the Premier League with a dire points tally, a whole season to get us back there from the Championship, and a good chance to show he could do better the second time around. He failed and his dismissal was entirely defensible and there are plenty of threads from the period illustrating that the decision was well-supported by fans at the time it was made.

It wasn't a balanced decision to sack Farke with no clear idea who might take his place.  It appears he might have set his sights on Lampard, which would have been truly awful and I said so at the time, but he backed out, with Smith becoming conveniently available, equally awful as a choice - and I said that at the time as well.

I am truly fed up with the "ooh, but his record at PL level is so bad" stuff.  It's the PL ffs - and he had so much going against him, with injuries and covid. I don't have to lay it all out again, because the arguments are well documented, suffice to say that he changed the losing formula to tighten up defensively and as a result we had started picking up draws and then made the breakthrough win which would boost confidence, only for Webber to lose his nerve.  How can anyone possibly justify giving a manager a four year contract on the strength of a record breaking season, only to sack him ten games later?  It can only be because of the pressure. 

You have to be strong under pressure and Farke stayed strong throughout and most importantly he still had the players as proved by the Brentford win. We had sold Emi and lost Skipp and not really replaced them and Cantwell was being Cantwell. Gilmour was not good enough to play well in our set up. Sargent/Tzolis clearly weren't ready.  The fixture list was truly awful at the start of the season - and we were still getting players in who had no pre-season to acclimatise, two of  them arriving after the season had started! 

The subsequent down turn since then has proved the point - hindsight or not - it was not a balanced decision. 

Edited by lake district canary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The final act was cowardly to say the least. The moment the board decided to sack him Farke should have been informed. Everyone remembers those pictures of the assassins as we led 2.0 at Brentford. To allow him to do a final media interview was beyond belief. Would anyone in their right mind want to work under this regime again after treatment like that. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

I don't suspect I'm the only one, but I now admonish myself for my indifference to Farke's sacking at the time it happened. 

In fact, there might even have been a slight element of relief.

I now, in hindsight think it was a bad decision all-round ... especially considering what has followed.

Maybe the regular and commonplace defeats/hammerings that the team was beginning to be subject to during that last fateful season up there had clouded my judgement as I had begun to see the man's intransigence towards  some players in a somewhat exaggerated way. There's no smoke without fire, but I saw a bigger blaze than was probably the case.

Others did too, and I remember, not long before the sacking, a fellow supporter telling me that it was in his mind that two youngsters, in varying ways, who were undermining DF and the season's campaign ... Todd Cantwell and Billy Gilmour. This view is probably an over-emphasis of the facts also, but again there was some smoke.

Other undercurrents were piling up though.

Before all this I had long since imagined the Farke regime at Carrow Road lasting for years, with its own distinct identity and dignity, through thick and thin. Another cause for self-admonishment is that it didn't in the end need much 'thin' for this fickle fan to begin to lose faith.

There is a lot of criticism above of the man's style when faced with the challenges of Premier League football. Talk of clumsy changes in philosophy regarding the way the team should have been set up and the like.

There may well be something in all that, but the main reason we failed, apart from the obvious loss of key players, was that it was not on just for the first venture that he was "sent in to battle without a gun" but, imo, both times.

Of course the poor recruitment might partly have been Daniel Farke's fault but events, failures and finances since have told us who the real culprit is.

Even then that culprit can be excused by the fact that the model imposed upon the club by financial restraints was incompatible with Premier League existence in the first place. 

 

Great post - this deserves a thread of its own.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Before all this I had long since imagined the Farke regime at Carrow Road lasting for years, with its own distinct identity and dignity, through thick and thin. Another cause for self-admonishment is that it didn't in the end need much 'thin' for this fickle fan to begin to lose faith.

Great post. Especially this bit. I really identify with the second sentence there. We didn't ignore the noise. We should have ignored the noise. And some of us were making the noise.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never wanted him sacked but it was arguably very difficult to defend the decision to keep him after our previous Prem season combined with the start we had made. People pointed to the Brentford win but if we're all completely honest we were pretty fortunate to win that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I never wanted him sacked but it was arguably very difficult to defend the decision to keep him after our previous Prem season combined with the start we had made. People pointed to the Brentford win but if we're all completely honest we were pretty fortunate to win that.

But this is the mental trap that people keep falling into. They ignore the circumstances and just quote the bare stat that we hadn't won since the Leicester 1-0.  The circumstances were a huge factor, in the covid season and surrounding the start of the 2nd PL season. Factors that made success almost impossible. 

Don't know why Farke bothered to have a record breaking season in between, it seems to have counted for nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Webbo hadn't sacked Farke do you think Stu would still be here....apart from the fact, I'm astounded that he still is?.... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lake district canary said:

But this is the mental trap that people keep falling into. They ignore the circumstances and just quote the bare stat that we hadn't won since the Leicester 1-0.  The circumstances were a huge factor, in the covid season and surrounding the start of the 2nd PL season. Factors that made success almost impossible. 

Don't know why Farke bothered to have a record breaking season in between, it seems to have counted for nothing. 

I don't think it helped Farke that the record-breaking season was behind closed doors. Completely out of his control of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I never wanted him sacked but it was arguably very difficult to defend the decision to keep him after our previous Prem season combined with the start we had made. People pointed to the Brentford win but if we're all completely honest we were pretty fortunate to win that.

I never wanted him sacked either, but we got two points from our first 10 games and it just wasn't working. Much as I'd have persevered with him (and that statement is much more defensible with hindsight), the error was not deciding to sack the manager after 2 points from the first 30; nor even the decision to pull the trigger irrespective of the result at Brentford; the error was replacing him with Dean Smith.

For four and a half years, we got to learn 'the new Norwich way': an element of 'moneyball' in our backroom dealings, headed up by a man with previous for shoestring success at Huddersfield; a charismatic, brave manager who spent a year installing a style of football that was never going to bring immediate success; a broad acceptance of our financial ceiling and a quelling of the clamour for 'camels down Carrow Road'; rough diamonds unearthed from the continent, alongside a slew of bright young academy prospects; and the knowledge and insistence that the 'template' was sacrosanct, even if the head coach needed to take the fall.

And then, we hit the panic button. We wound up with a knee-jerk appointment of a dull, directionless, obdurate manager tasked with 'toughening up' a squad that had been assembled to implement a completely different style of football, while refusing to acknowledge the fans that had spent the last four years building a 'yellow wall' with the aforementioned bold, brave and charismatic young manager.

I'm not suggesting that Farke would have miraculously turned the season around and Kabak, Williams, Normann and Gilmour would suddenly have become inspired signings. But, given where we are now, I would hope that the hierarchy at the club are humble enough to consider that either keeping Daniel on his horse, or at least replacing him with someone who had more stylistic and philosophical footballing consistencies with him, might have offered more continuity and yielded less damaging results.

Bridges need (re)building. Let's hope that a new set of Milwaukee tools can aid us with that reconstruction, and soon...

 

Edited by Feedthewolf
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I don't think it helped Farke that the record-breaking season was behind closed doors. Completely out of his control of course.

Sure, but it still seems bizarre to put two seasons results together and ignore the season in between. I know it was the PL results people refer to, but then some people are obsessed with the PL as being the only benchmark to regard a team as being successful....the media pushes that line of course, but that is what the media does....

Edited by lake district canary
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

If Webbo hadn't sacked Farke do you think Stu would still be here....apart from the fact, I'm astounded that he still is?.... 

Well if Farke had won promotion the season after then undoubtedly yes. 

Nobody actually wanted Farke sacked but many/most understood why and thought it was the best thing to do.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but clearly appointing Smith was a catastrophicly poor decision on so many fronts.

We just have to hope Wagner gives us something to cheer about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

But this is the mental trap that people keep falling into. They ignore the circumstances and just quote the bare stat that we hadn't won since the Leicester 1-0.  The circumstances were a huge factor, in the covid season and surrounding the start of the 2nd PL season. Factors that made success almost impossible. 

Don't know why Farke bothered to have a record breaking season in between, it seems to have counted for nothing. 

Yeah I just don't buy the idea that it was all beyond his control. 

If he's the great coach people make him out to be then you have to be able to overcome adversity to a certain extent. We had a largely fully fit squad vs Watford, 'the season starts here' and we totally **** the bed.

I get he wasn't helped but he's managed 49 Premier League games and now 32 Bundesliga games. So a combined 81 top flight games for a total of 16 wins- a winning percentage of under 20%- and a points total of 65 pts- 0.8 ppg. At some point it has to be his fault at least in part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

If Webbo hadn't sacked Farke do you think Stu would still be here....apart from the fact, I'm astounded that he still is?.... 

He'd still be here. The Webbers have got a nice little number going and there's no way they're going to throw it away, unless they get the chance to make megabucks in the US by sucking up to Attanasio. I'm betting Stuart won't make his annual resignation offer this season because it might be accepted.

Edited by canarybubbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Capt. Pants said:

Well if Farke had won promotion the season after then undoubtedly yes. 

Nobody actually wanted Farke sacked but many/most understood why and thought it was the best thing to do.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but clearly appointing Smith was a catastrophicly poor decision on so many fronts.

We just have to hope Wagner gives us something to cheer about.

Faith, hope and Charity....for the real couple running the show....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canarybubbles said:

He'd still be here. The Webbers have got a nice little number going and there's no way they're going to throw it away, unless they get the chance to make megabucks in the US by sucking up to Attanasio. I'm betting Stuart won't offer his annual resignation this season because it might be accepted.

He won't resign....it'll for one upset the current majority shareholding duo....and yet, if he'd got that Chelsea gig Neeyul Adams would have had to initially grasp the DoF reins....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chickens have finally come home to roost having lost their way since 1996.

 

The support have simply got the club they deserve. Village mentality at the top and a fanbase obsessed with being 'woke' rather than 'successful'.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

It wasn't a balanced decision to sack Farke with no clear idea who might take his place.

I think Howe was most likely in Webber's mind, but by the time we'd dismissed Farke he was already sealed with Newcastle behind the scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nora's Ghost said:

The chickens have finally come home to roost having lost their way since 1996.

 

The support have simply got the club they deserve. Village mentality at the top and a fanbase obsessed with being 'woke' rather than 'successful'.

Warning the tawt is back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That whole period from the sacking of Farke to the appointment of Smith screams out a lack of corporate governance at the club.

Who was there to question any of the decisions and caution Webber to stand back and look at things without listening to the noise?

Irrespective of the decision to sack Farke, who was there to ensure the dismissal was handled decently in accordance with the supposed values of a community club?

Who was there to ensure a proper recruitment process  was created where a list was drawn up and worked through?

And to ensure that time was taken to properly evaluate any changes to that list caused by unexpected opportunities arising?

The decisions may not have altered in the end, but I was concerned over the lack of corporate governance before this period, but was absolutely convinced the club was in serious trouble after it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Obviously Farke was sacked post Brentford match but when was the decision made? 

I believe in a hotel at Heathrow the morning of the match as Smith & jones returned from a trip abroad. It was apparently the first time Webber could speak to the Board as a whole of his intentions. In my view, this was like a shotgun to the head of the Board, an independent chair would have adjourned the meeting to properly allow Board members at least 48 hours to reflect on the issue. The Board would not have been "bullied" into allowing the crass actions that occurred after the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I believe in a hotel at Heathrow the morning of the match as Smith & jones returned from a trip abroad. It was apparently the first time Webber could speak to the Board as a whole of his intentions. In my view, this was like a shotgun to the head of the Board, an independent chair would have adjourned the meeting to properly allow Board members at least 48 hours to reflect on the issue. The Board would not have been "bullied" into allowing the crass actions that occurred after the match.

Here’s Webber’s thoughts before humiliating Farke. 
 

The decision comes just over a week after Webber told the Guardian it would be “incredibly unfair” to question Farke. “We can’t be setting targets of ‘someone’s got a game left, two games left, 10 games left, a season left, two seasons left’,” he said. “We’re fully committed to Daniel, that’s why we gave him a four-year contract in the summer. The work he’s done at this club has been beyond incredible.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  •  
  • 1 hour ago, Midlands Yellow said:

    Here’s Webber’s thoughts before humiliating Farke. 
     

    The decision comes just over a week after Webber told the Guardian it would be “incredibly unfair” to question Farke. “We can’t be setting targets of ‘someone’s got a game left, two games left, 10 games left, a season left, two seasons left’,” he said. “We’re fully committed to Daniel, that’s why we gave him a four-year contract in the summer. The work he’s done at this club has been beyond incredible.”

  •  
  • What is the conclusion then? Webber has systematically destroyed our club and wasting all that was built up during life in the time of Farke. 
  • Seems simplistic, but from reading some of the above it does seem that overmuch control was handed to that chancer.
  • What an absolute sh-te, with knobs on. 
  • Quite frankly, I can't stand the sight of the man any more and resent the Svengali-like hold he seems to have over our 'owners.'
  • Of course he works tirelessly in club matters, never ever stops and certainly never ever fails to put on a convivial face when confronted with the ****-licking groupies who gain credence from acquainting themselves with any hierarchy of any sort. Not happy clappers, more toad-eaters in my book, those who continually fall for the dominant strategy of the Webbers of this world doing what they do with bullshine constituting their mode of operation, They probably coat their tongues with it each and every morning.
  • He's not fit to wipe Daniel Farke's backside in my book. Let's hope the Americans see through him.
  • I do like indulging in the extreme view occasionally.
Edited by BroadstairsR
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

That whole period from the sacking of Farke to the appointment of Smith screams out a lack of corporate governance at the club.

 

 

1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

In my view, this was like a shotgun to the head of the Board, an independent chair would have adjourned the meeting to properly allow Board members at least 48 hours to reflect on the issue.

Honestly is there anything that doesn't point to a lack of corporate governance to you? I'm convinced you're doing a bit at this point.

'Tim Krul kicking the ball straight to a Burnley striker could have been prevented by better corporate governance. In this essay I will show...'

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:
  • What is the conclusion then? Webber has systematically destroyed our club and wasting all that was built up during life in the time of Farke. 
  •  
  • Seems simplistic, but from reading some of the above it does seem that overmuch control was handed to that chancer.
  • What an absolute sh-te, with knobs on. 
  • Quite frankly, I can't stand the sight of the man any more and resent the Svengali-like hold he seems to have over our 'owners.'
  • Of course he works tirelessly in club matters, never ever stops and certainly never ever fails to put on a convivial face when confronted with the ****-licking groupies who gain credence from acquainting themselves with any hierarchy of any sort. Not happy clappers, more toad-eaters in my book who continually fall for the dominant strategy of the Webbers of this world doing what they do. Bull shine constitutes their mode of operation, they coat their tongues with it each and every morning.
  • He's not fit to wipe Daniel Farke's backside in my book. Let's hope the Americans see through him.
  • I do like indulging in the extreme view occasionally.

Quite right. If he had any honour he’d hold his hands up, admit his failures and resign. There’s just no one at the club to hold him accountable, it’s a poor state of affairs at NCFC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:
  •  
  • What is the conclusion then? Webber has systematically destroyed our club and wasting all that was built up during life in the time of Farke. 
  •  

A bit extreme, and even then you'd have to acknowledge he was a big part of building it in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

A bit extreme, and even then you'd have to acknowledge he was a big part of building it in the first place.

Operative clause.

What since then?

Besides, I haven't eaten my toad sandwich yet so am thinking that maybe he struck lucky by appointing Farke in the first place. Was it a risky stab in the dark? ... it's what chancers do after all (see above.)

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, king canary said:

Honestly is there anything that doesn't point to a lack of corporate governance to you? I'm convinced you're doing a bit at this point.

I really like Shef, but you do have a point here.  Could we have some parliamentary procedure perhaps? :classic_blush:

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I never wanted him sacked but it was arguably very difficult to defend the decision to keep him after our previous Prem season combined with the start we had made. People pointed to the Brentford win but if we're all completely honest we were pretty fortunate to win that.

It does seem that many are forgetting what they said and thought at the time, doesn’t it.  They have completely forgotten Chelsea away, Leeds at home etc. that season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, king canary said:

Don't disagree with any of that.

However when considering 'why did we sack Farke' you have to put yourself in Webber's shoes.

We can look back now and say the recruitment was all wrong. However Webber had spent £60m odd on new players and he clearly believed he'd given Farke a squad with enough to compete at this level. He clearly wasn't going to throw his hands up after 5 points from 11 and say '**** it, clearly I've made a hash of it and this is the best anyone can do.'

 

What Webber should have done was take his head out of his arrogant a$$ and admit that the players bought for Farke to replace 8 highly, highly influential players utterly pivotal to our success, were woefully inadequate to compete at the highest level, let alone get results against Chelsea, Man City, Liverpool and Arsenal. And that a knee jerk reaction and sacking Farke was not the correct decision at the time.

Of all the things Webber has done, and lets not forget he has overseen one of the best periods in our history, relatively speaking, but sacking Farke and appointing Smith was a catastrophic error and grounds for dismissal.

Its the stock market equivalent of a bad trade costing the firm millions and millions. Im sure a trader would be relieved of his duties in that scenario.

Webber seems to be beyond reproach however with the current state of nepotism within the club.

I am of the opinion that had Farke not been sacked, we may well still have gone down as I believe the squad was not capable, but we would have made more of a fight of it than we did under Smith (Southampton away anyone).

We would have then gone into this last season with the leagues most savvy operator. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...