Worthington's "Man Management"

[FatMan Fat 0]

So there we have it - having thrown away another golden opportunity on Saturday, Worthington comes out and criticises IN PUBLIC just one single player.

Worthington should have known if Hucks was fully fit, and if not, then he should have made a different selection on Saturday allowing Hucks to come off the bench later in the match.

If Hucks was fit, doesn''t Worthington realise that he is essentially a striker, a "flair" player who has contributed to many of our goals this season (scoring or making), he is not a defensive midfielder - to have a go in public about his lack of defending is appalling "man management".

If he expected/instructed Hucks to track back more than he did, why wait so long before substituting him? It seems very much a case of dumping the blame on probably our most influential player over the course of the season rather than accepting where the responsibility lies - with the manager

Oh, and something for you all to ponder - I haven''t checked, but I was told by Flem that he has played in everyone of the last 90 games. Interesting ,don''t you think

[BedsCanary 0]

After last week''s 4-1 drubbing at against Pompey, Rednapp publically ripped his side to pieces and look at the result. This week they battled right to the very end and got a result against an in-form Norwich.

Worthy I feel, is just trying to do the same. He knows Huckerby is capable of so much more and I think his comments were just to fire him up for the weekend.

Norwich 3-0 Birmingham > Hucks hat-trick

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote]After last week''s 4-1 drubbing at against Pompey, Rednapp publically ripped his side to pieces and look at the result. This week they battled right to the very end and got a result against an in-form ...[/quote]

Spot on.  Redknapp called Niemi "a disgrace" last week and look at the performance he put in on Saturday!

Again though NW comments have been taken out of context and the headline of the report is far more sensational than the comments he made.  He merely pointed out that Hux could have done more, he did not slate him.  He then pointed out that he was not fully-fit, he did not blame him for us losing, he just made an observation!

[DTT 0]

no player is exempt from criticism, and very often a public display of criticism gives a player the kick up the backside they need to really put in a good performance. Its a job the same as anything else... if the boss is dissapointed with your performance, he will shout at you and explain what your doing wrong, so you can rectify the situation and improve. Granted, in a normal working environment, it wont be so public, but thats how football is. football is a very open and public sport. The players get paid rediculous amounts of money to play football, its part and parcel of theyre job to accept criticism and get on with theyre game and work harder to impress and improve theyre game.

[AJ 1,218]

i wouldnt risk a under-fit player at any time, should have started with jonson.

And now thanks to Worthingtons lack of management skills (that of a 5 year old) Huckerby is now taking the stick for it........... Still, as far as i see it, Huckerby wasnt on the pitch when the last goal went in.......

...all i can say is fleming.........

[LinkNR9 0]

Totally agree - having a go at Hucks is silly. Worthy has played him at left midfield all saeson and knows that Hucks isn''t defensive, so why suddenly have a go at him about it. If Hucks wasn''t 100% fit, he should have put Charlton/Jonsson/Brennan on from the start, then introduced Hucks for the last half hour or so. NW should look at other areas of the pitch - Fleming! - before he shouts his mouth off. 

[FilletTheFishWife . 0]

i disagree. better start with Huckerby rather than bring him on as a sub and then find out he can''t play the remainder of the game. As for Jonson he was excellent vs Newcastle (2nd half) but poor vs Charlton (athlectic not simon!) (1st half). I think NW was right to gamble on DH. 

[DumbleDelia is Magic 0]

Sorry FatMan I can''t agree with you on this one.  IMO if a Norwich player has a bad game, the management, fans etc have the right to criticise them.  They are only too happy to take the plaudits when they do well.  It''s all give and take.  I love Hucks to bits.  He''s an awesome player and almost single handedly turned this club around.  99.9% of the time he''s outstanding but he''s not perfect, as no player is. 

Worthy has the right to criticise players if he wants too.  I''m damn sure what we read about was nothing compared to what Hucks himself got in the dressing room!!

[Tumbleweed 106]

If Hux did not contribute to their first two goals, why wait for another hour before taking him off? Amazing. I think the real reason was that Worthy was settling for a point and didn''t want to admit it. Had that Charlton header gone in or the McKenzie shot he would have been a master tactician. Instead, we stuffed them, got "unlucky" to meet a keeper having the game of his season and ended up losing.

We don''t need to make excuses for that performance. We were the better side going forward- they had one of those days and we didn''t. Simple as that. They are still a worse team than us and they will get found out at Palace or v Man utd or probably both.

[silver fox 0]

[quote]Spot on. Redknapp called Niemi "a disgrace" last week and look at the performance he put in on Saturday! Again though NW comments have been taken out of context and the headline of the report is far...[/quote]

Perhaps we should get Worthy to tell his captain that he has been a disgrace for the last few months, then we might get one good performance out of the skipper in the Birmingham game.

[FatMan Fat 0]

The purpose of my original post was to express my concern about Worthington''s lack of "Man Management" in that he chose to criticise a single player in public and to infer that that single player was responsible for our defeat.

I am amazed that some Worthington lovers have actually condoned that behaviour.

I would suggest that people take more notice of how divisive Worthington''s style of management is, about how many players have been frozen out, about how if you are "in" with Worthington you will play week in week out but if you are "out" with Worthington you will not get a game. Even our local Press mentioned last week that it "doesn''t pay to cross Worthington"

Strong management is one thing, letting personal likes and dislikes clouding your judgement is another thing. The evidence that Worthington allows personal issues to affect his judgement has been evident all season in terms of his team selections and his treatment of certain players.

Combine that with his lack of coaching and tactical nuance and that is why I don''t think he is the man for us.

[Old Boy 0]

This guff about "freezing out" of players is based on what, exactly? Genuine trustworthy inside information, fake "inside information", or just observations from the sidelines? Admittedly I couldn''t understand why Safri and Charlton weren''t played whenever they were fit, but there are many other possible reasons for that apart from Worthy''s grudges. And this "criticism" of Hux, it wasn''t exactly crucifixion was it? Worthy just said he didn''t defend well (which he didn''t) but that he''s been unwell. And he was only responding to questions as to why he took off our star player. He played him from the start, IMO, because he''s head and shoulders above our other options in that position, and if he''d put in the same performance as he did against ManU we''d have won the game.

FatMan is struggling for sticks to beat Worthy since the win over ManU took everyone by surprise, so falls back to his "Worthington''s vendettas" line, and spins the facts to suit. Worthy''s not perfect, and needs to improve in some areas if he wants to move the club on and up, but he''s our manager and he''s got us where we never expected to be so soon.

[FatMan Fat 0]

Old Boy, you must have read a different article to me.  In the one I read Worthington blamed Hucks for two of the goals stating that he didn''t backtrack and defend well enough.

Well, surprise, surprise that a "flair" player who is actually a striker (and shouldn''t be playing left midfield) didn''t play in a defensive midfield role

As for evidence of Worthington freezing out players just ask Malky how he heard he was being transferred - his wife saw it on evening TV and told him when he got home -fact! What happened to Helveg and Safri earlier in the season when they WERE fit and we were dropping points all over the place. What happened to Leon earlier in the season? What has happened to Brennan ever since he has been here? And Docherty? Why wasn''t Shackell played earlier? What happened to Higginbottom (if that was his name) and Briggs? They were signed by Worthington and never given a chance. Whether the Worthington defenders like it or not he has a long list of falling out with players. He has a history of sticking with players who are not performing as well as they should, or no doubt you would dispute that as well?

Couple all of that to our record this season in terms of goals scored away, and goals conceded, our inability to defend a lead, our lack of concentration and overall tactical naivety and it all adds up, in my opinion, that Worthington is not the right man for the job.

Evidently, in your opinion, he is the right man for the job.

So be it