It Could Be Worse, It Could be.............

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

Now I have had some time to calm down after this afternoon''s shambles I thought I would make this post having had some time to contemplate it. I see many posters on this board

reacting (some could argue over-reacting) about today''s result at the

KC Stadium with calls for the manager''s head. Let''s consider the

current situation at the football club with a level head shall we? I

am not a fan of changing the manager just because a couple of results

went against us or a couple of poor performances. However, I am a fan

of learning from history so that we do not make the same mistakes.

This season marks our 3^rd consecutive year in the Premier

League, which equals our longest ever run (because as we all know top

flight football did not begin until the 1992/93 season). I am already

starting to become concerned that we are able to draw very similar

(not identical, but similar) parallels with those previous seasons.

1992/93 saw the club managed by a

popular manager playing expansive, attacking football that took the

league by storm. That manager left during the 93/94 under a cloud and

was replaced by another who''s footballing philosophy, more often than

not, did not bring the best out of the players that he had at his

disposal. This led to the club going on a post-Christmas run of of

just 3 wins from 21 games, relegation form that was only avoided

because of a pre-Christmas run of 1 defeat in 11 which saw the club

finish a respectable 12^th, thanks in part to a fine 1-0

win at Liverpool in the last game ever played in front of the Kop (I didn''t mention Munich so I had to get this one in). The close

season saw our top scorer sold and our record transfer fee paid (£1m

for new star striker Mike Sheron). Despite the sale of Sutton the

season began with quiet optimism, Deehan had had all summer to work

with the team, surely we couldn''t be as bad as our end of season form

had suggested. After all, form is temporary, class is permanent. City

started the season with a 2-0 defeat to an average Chelsea side that

were on a high after winning the FA Cup, they followed this up with a

disappointing draw at home to newly promoted Crystal Palace, who

would struggle all season. Their first 3 points came the following

week, at Carrow Road, against a West Ham side that were trying to

establish themselves following the previous season being their first

back in the top flight. City then flattered to deceive and went on

another good run of just 3 defeats in 13 games, winning 5 of those

games. The cracks that had been papered over though resurfaced after

Christmas and come April 6^th John Deehan chose to fall on

his own sword with City rapidly plummeting to the depths of the

relegation zone. This proved to be to little, to late and the

original Ginger Pele (Gary Megson) was unable to prevent City slipping from the top flight for the first

time in 9 years.

Now I am not advocating full scale

panic, and protests outside of the City Stand like those dark days

witnessed, but I am aware that in football history can have a funny

way of repeating itself. After all, every club has their bogey teams

(the Canaries have more than most!), and no matter how poor those

teams are, for some reason, you still can''t beat them. The thing that

we have in our favour this time though is that instead of Robert

Chase running the football club into the ground financially, we have

the very business savvy David McNally looking after the interests our

club. After my first intitial over reaction had died down this began

to dawn on me. Although things can often repeat in the world of

football and many parallels can be drawn between our 1992-95 Premier

League stay and our current one, I do not believe that Mr McNally

will allow it to get to a position where with 5 games to go City are

staring down the barrel of relegation. I have full faith that if,

come January, Hughton, Trollope and Bewilderwood are still struggling

to get this squad of multi-million pound imports to gel, they will

probably be heading to Pottergate to start claiming their JSA.

So in short fellow members of the

Yellow and Green Machine, yes loosing to a newly promoted team who

played most of the game with 10 men is not acceptable for a team that

has spent £25m on new recruits. It is also not as disastrous or

embarrassing as loosing 7-1 at home to local East Anglian rivals on

the 1^st day of the season, and that turned out alright in

the end. Remember, it could be worse, it could be Gary Megson.

[Orly 277]

An elegantly written, if not (in my opinion) largely irrelevant comparison with 20 years ago.Also, it''s "losing", not "loosing".  Sorry to be a grammar-corrector, but this particular typo always irritates me.

[Houston Canary 0]

Settle down, Orly. You''re loosing it.

But you are correct. He should of spelled it with only one "o".

(I know, should have). ;)

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="Orly"]An elegantly written, if not (in my opinion) largely irrelevant comparison with 20 years ago.Also, it''s "losing", not "loosing".  Sorry to be a grammar-corrector, but this particular typo always irritates me.

[/quote]

Apologies, my proof reader has been horse whipped. Rest assured that I am fully aware of the difference between losing (1-0 Hull) and loosing (unshackling your central midfielders and allowing them to play free flowing expansive attacking football).