Butterworth, was he any good as a player? an honest question!

[Simon Lappin, King Of Spain 0]

I was just wondering about people''s opinion of Butterworth as a defender and consequently his ability to coach our current crop of defenders. I say this because we finished the 92/93 season with a -4 goal difference. Was this due to poor defending? poor support from our midfield? none of whom were particularly defensively minded, was it our style of play leaving us exposed at the back? I went to my first game (home to Sheffield Wednesday) aged six in 92 so I''m a little bit too young to remember the specifics of that season.

The reason I ask is because initially Butterworth was lauded by Doherty as a key factor in strengthening our defence (e.g. in the QPR game) but as we were obviously not good enough to stay up do people think that his decisions as an assisstant manager; e.g. playing Shackell at left back against Charlton show any great level of defensive knowledge and therefore a lack of ability as a coach? or is it simply that our player''s weren''t good enough to keep us up and there was nothing he could do personally to change the situation?

This is just a thought, I don''t mean to criticise him as a player or coach, it''s just something that struck me looking over the stats from past seasons.

[pat51 0]

Top quality centre back , came on loan initially and was quickly snapped up. Brave and very consistent, backbone of the best years in our history.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

Butterworth was a fine player. The problem is that you''re assuming a link between quality as a player and quality as a manager or coach, and there is none.If anything it works the other way. The less talented players tend to make the best coaches and managers precisely because they have to think about the game more in order to make the very most of their limited abilities. Additionally there is no link between having been a creative player and producing attacking teams as a coach. George Graham was a creative player who produced 1-0 to the Arsenal. Equally the purest football played by Norwich was under Dave Stringer, who was a journeyman defender. Oddly that makes a kind of sense; having spent his playing career thumping the ball into Row Z all his long-suppressed creativity came out as a manager.This is why there is no reason at all, for example, to think that Ian Crook is any good as a coach (he wasn''t even working as such in Australia) or that he will get us playing passing football.

[tribes 0]

Was in a very good side and in my opinion was a very good centre half.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Butterworth was a fine player. The problem is that you''re assuming a link between quality as a player and quality as a manager or coach, and there is none.

If anything it works the other way. The less talented players tend to make the best coaches and managers precisely because they have to think about the game more in order to make the very most of their limited abilities.

Additionally there is no link between having been a creative player and producing attacking teams as a coach. George Graham was a creative player who produced 1-0 to the Arsenal. Equally the purest football played by Norwich was under Dave Stringer, who was a journeyman defender. Oddly that makes a kind of sense; having spent his playing career thumping the ball into Row Z all his long-suppressed creativity came out as a manager.

This is why there is no reason at all, for example, to think that Ian Crook is any good as a coach (he wasn''t even working as such in Australia) or that he will get us playing passing football.[/quote]

An interesting and thought provoking response Purple.

But I hope you''re wrong in our current case!!

OTBC

 

 

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Quality defender whp played for us in an era when we were one of the best sides in the Country - light tears away from where we are now!

 

Whether he will be as good as a coach thats uncertain although I do think he was a wise appointment cause he knows the lower League scene well.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

Bly, agreeing on who our best managers have been is an impossibility, but I suspect the following would get on most people''s lists:Macaulay, Saunders, Bond, Brown, Stringer, Walker, Worthington.Of those only Macaulay was a star player, and only Saunders was an attacker. The other five all journeyman defenders, with one a goalie. I do think that it is that kind of player (along with hard-working midfielders such as O''Neill) that tend to make the best managers/coaches.The only great attacker I can think of who succeeded as a manager was Cruyff, but then he was Dutch, and so had been force-fed tactics from an early age.

[chocolate nutter 0]

Top player and i think a solid coach with a good knowledge of this league.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Totally agree PC. Butters was a class act. Not at all sure about his coaching abilities. He hasn''t exactly covered himself with glory has he?

BTW I am still trying to forget the Charlton game and the OP has reminded me of the crass decision to put poor old Shacks at fullback at Charlton. Aaargh!

[. 0]

He was quality player and a great loss after his freak accident.........

 

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

Butterworth was proabably a better defender for Norwich during the 88/89 season (which IMO was possibly a better team than 92/93?) .His partnership with Lininghan back then was as good a defensive partnership as there was anywhere at that time, and I would include Hansen-Gillespie and Adams-O''leary in that.

[Simon Lappin, King Of Spain 0]

PC I take your point about the ability of a player not necessarily translating well into coaching, but given comparable levels of general intelligence surely a good player should have better understanding of the game and particularly his own position than an average one and therefore if intelligence is equal a good player should make a better coach than an average one. As Butterworth was a good player then why was our defence after an initial improvement so poor? At the very least a decent player should as a coach be able to improve the performance of the players in his old position. Whilst our team can''t claim to contain any superstars I don''t believe it was so bad that given the right coaching staff we couldn''t have at least stayed up last season.

Maybe we should start psychometric testing on all our coaching staff to vet them before making job offers in order to ensure that they at least approach normal levels of intelligence. It would enable the board to make decisions based on more objective rather than simply sentimental lines. Footballers in general are not considered to be the most intelligent beings on this planet and therefore by putting too much faith in popular ex-players I feel that maybe we are hamstringing ourselves as they are simply not bright enough to understand the game at a more complex level than they did in their playing days. Afterall during their playing career they will only have to master one or two positions, three at most whereas a manager or coach will have to be able to understand and advise on all of them. Herein may lie the problem.

The intelligence of managers is a subject which I feel may have been overlooked in general by the footballing world and therfore needs to be addressed. Perhaps Norwich could pioneer the appointment of managers along scientific lines with tests of verbal and non verbal intelligence, empathy (important for man mangement), planning, problem solving and mental flexibility (must always have a plan b as a manager) as well as the normal footballing criteria. In fact I think they should be made to compete on the krypton factor before going for interview to sort the intellectual wheat from the chaff, surely it can''t be a worse method of selection than the way the board have made appointments in the past!

[city-till-i-die 7]

SOLID cb [Y]

[In Dubious Battle 0]

[quote user="NXCanary"]

do people think that his decisions as an assisstant manager; e.g. playing Shackell at left back against Charlton show any great level of defensive knowledge and therefore a lack of ability as a coach?

[/quote]Drury & Bertrand were injured that day, It was either Shackell, Lappin or? at left back who would you have played?But in answer to your question, yes he was class.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,424]

Brian Clough thought so. That''s good enough for me.

[First Wizard 0]

An excellent player, we miss his quality.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

Always seemed to read the game well and formed a very good partnership with Andy Linighan.  Would love to see that sort of partnership here again...

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Bly, agreeing on who our best managers have been is an impossibility, but I suspect the following would get on most people''s lists:

Macaulay, Saunders, Bond, Brown, Stringer, Walker, Worthington.

Of those only Macaulay was a star player, and only Saunders was an attacker. The other five all journeyman defenders, with one a goalie. I do think that it is that kind of player (along with hard-working midfielders such as O''Neill) that tend to make the best managers/coaches.

The only great attacker I can think of who succeeded as a manager was Cruyff, but then he was Dutch, and so had been force-fed tactics from an early age.[/quote]

Ever heard of Brian Clough.

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="ricky knight"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Bly, agreeing on who our best managers have been is an impossibility, but I suspect the following would get on most people''s lists:Macaulay, Saunders, Bond, Brown, Stringer, Walker, Worthington.Of those only Macaulay was a star player, and only Saunders was an attacker. The other five all journeyman defenders, with one a goalie. I do think that it is that kind of player (along with hard-working midfielders such as O''Neill) that tend to make the best managers/coaches.The only great attacker I can think of who succeeded as a manager was Cruyff, but then he was Dutch, and so had been force-fed tactics from an early age.[/quote]

Ever heard of Brian Clough.

 

[/quote]Er, yes, I have, but Clough was not remotely a great player, which Cruyff undoubtedly was. Clough had a fantastic record in club football but was only picked twice for England, didn''t score on either occasion, and was dropped for good. And that was nothing to do with his career-ending injury, which came years later.As it happens I suspect much of the drive that made Clough a great manager (in partnership with Taylor) was precisely because his career had been cut short. David Pleat, a fine manager, would be another example of that.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

Butterworth was a very good CB.

PC - I second what Ricky Knight says, have a look at Cloughies goal scoring record before serious injury curtailed his playing career

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Sons of Boadicea"]

Butterworth was a very good CB.

PC - I second what Ricky Knight says, have a look at Cloughies goal scoring record before serious injury curtailed his playing career

[/quote]SoB, we probably posted at the same time. As you will see, I was up to speed with Clough''s record. But in international terms he was a nonentity. Cruyff, by comparison, was a truly great player.

[singing canary 0]

him and andy linighan at the back were one of the top premiership duo  i  have seen .

 rated the big man very highly .