Where it started to go wrong....

[Farkes The Herald Angels 0]

It is very easy for all of us to point to moments in the last couple of years when things went wrong. This game, that player, the damn referee, the wrong substitutions, the wrong line up, the superior opposition, the fact that the CE didn''t fire the manager and so on.We can all point fingers and in my case I am guilty of sitting on the other side of the world watching every single game and proffering up my own armchair view of how to run things better than those who actually run things. While it would be wrong to point to a defining moment, I sense that where the amazing tide of optimism turned into the embarrassing catastrophe that the Southampton game represented centered on Chris Hughton''s appointment, not in Hughton''s subsequent management approach.To have a go at Chris Hughton is short-sighted.He has not done a great job to put it mildly, but let''s look at what he inherited.This argument is not about heralding the greatness of Paul Lambert, but about the shifting from one management ethos to something diametrically opposite. Lambert may not have provided evidence of this since he joined Aston Villa, but Lambert''s Norwich was a swashbuckling, carefree, anti-establishment approach that resonated with owners, players and fans alike. And although my days as a Norwich supporter has witnessed plenty of paltry fayre, at our centre we have always been a club that surprised in both great (Bayern Munich) and bad (Blackburn away in 1992) ways.In the last 30 years we haven''t done ''average'' very well.So to go from Lambert''s ''Pirates-of-the-Carribean'' crusade to Hughton''s ''The Archers'' approach was always likely to be flop.Our players went from being competent professionals encouraged to outperform and make of themselves what they could (e.g. Holt) to being ''great'' players who should perform within a restrictive system (e.g. RVW).The fault - if one can pinpoint it - has been in the rapid switch from one culture to another. And like any team, if you get a radically different set of guides within a short space of time, you end up not being able to make sense of a new set of rules.Hughton, yes, was a safe choice, but culturally was a complete disaster, because what he represented was completely at odds with the club we had become.And the ultimate buck, therefore, stops - from my armchair perspective - with those who appointed someone who was incapable of building on and perhaps tempering the gung-ho spirit of what came before him.

[lake district canary 4,830]

I think it started to go wrong around the time of the Leicester Cup game when Lambert left out Holt.   It seemed strange at the time, after we had put out such a strong side against WBA in the previous round.    After that things never seemed quite so positive...............and that was under Lambert.

As for the change of culture - I think the powers that be could see that we would have to rebuild after lambert - lots of championship players starting to look maybe as if they had reached their peak......so change was maybe necessary - and if we survive this season in this league - that change could still lead to something long lasting.

[coachkemp 0]

Not sure I agree with the "fault" you claimFootballers are all well skilled and ultimately it is their job to use

whichever tools and skills that are asked of them by their manager. The

players we have are all good enough, so its either they are being asked

to do the wrong things or they are being asked and aren''t doing it. They

can all play, and it is down to the manager to tell them what to do and

they sohuld/will do it. Also, whilst stoke aren''t pulling up trees and

they still mix it with a cement mixer at times, they are capable of

playing football so you could argue that they are changing. Same with

palace going the other way, from a swashbuckling 4-3-3 gung ho attack

policy with dainty players like bannan to bashing about with chamach and

jerome...So i am not sure I agree with that although I agree its a

shock all the same.

[Beefy is a legend 224]

A well written piece but it seems to me that it is written with a strong degree of hindsight, which was not afforded to the board when they appointed CH.

When he was appointed there seemed to me to be a reasonably strong sense of approval from supporters. Let''s not forget CH had won the Championship with Newcastle with 100pts and over 90 goals, and done a good job on a shoestring at Birmingham.

I would seriously take issue with your contention that ''he has not done a great job to put it mildly''. I think in comparison with his resources, he''s done pretty well. We finished higher than expected than last season and we are, like it or not, about where most neutrals would expect us to be right now.

The issue, for me, hasn''t necessarily been about results, for which I believe CH has done a pretty decent job, but about style - that seems to me to be the reason why the majority of outers want him out.

My feeling is that whatever happens he will now be gone in the summer. But if he keeps us up, he should go with another plus on his CV, and certainly not with the kind of divisive derision that went his way on Saturday for the crime of bringing on two strikers and Redmond.

[Green and Yellow 0]

It all went wrong when someone from within the club contacted Lambert''s ex-wife and tipped her of about something. And I''m not a billy bullsh*ter

[morty 0]

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]A well written piece but it seems to me that it is written with a strong degree of hindsight, which was not afforded to the board when they appointed CH.

When he was appointed there seemed to me to be a reasonably strong sense of approval from supporters. Let''s not forget CH had won the Championship with Newcastle with 100pts and over 90 goals, and done a good job on a shoestring at Birmingham.

I would seriously take issue with your contention that ''he has not done a great job to put it mildly''. I think in comparison with his resources, he''s done pretty well. We finished higher than expected than last season and we are, like it or not, about where most neutrals would expect us to be right now.

The issue, for me, hasn''t necessarily been about results, for which I believe CH has done a pretty decent job, but about style - that seems to me to be the reason why the majority of outers want him out.

My feeling is that whatever happens he will now be gone in the summer. But if he keeps us up, he should go with another plus on his CV, and certainly not with the kind of divisive derision that went his way on Saturday for the crime of bringing on two strikers and Redmond.[/quote]Good stuff Beefy[Y]

[Beefy is a legend 224]

quote user=" Green and Yellow"It all went wrong when someone from within the club contacted Lambert''s ex-wife and tipped her of about something. And I''m not a billy bullsh*ter/quote

Evidence please.

[Green and Yellow 0]

It''s unimportant if you believe me or not but a very high profile person phoned Lambert''s ex-wife and tipped her off about something. That is what Lambert is referring to when he mentions the issue that he will never discuss. Read my reply the clues are in the there. I am not a Billy Bullsh*ter. If I named the person and the incident it would be pulled of the message board because it is correct.

[simmo_2 6]

[quote user="Beefy is a legend"]A well written piece but it seems to me that it is written with a strong degree of hindsight, which was not afforded to the board when they appointed CH.

When he was appointed there seemed to me to be a reasonably strong sense of approval from supporters. Let''s not forget CH had won the Championship with Newcastle with 100pts and over 90 goals, and done a good job on a shoestring at Birmingham.

I would seriously take issue with your contention that ''he has not done a great job to put it mildly''. I think in comparison with his resources, he''s done pretty well. We finished higher than expected than last season and we are, like it or not, about where most neutrals would expect us to be right now.

The issue, for me, hasn''t necessarily been about results, for which I believe CH has done a pretty decent job, but about style - that seems to me to be the reason why the majority of outers want him out.

My feeling is that whatever happens he will now be gone in the summer. But if he keeps us up, he should go with another plus on his CV, and certainly not with the kind of divisive derision that went his way on Saturday for the crime of bringing on two strikers and Redmond.[/quote]

It is common knowledge that anyone with a hole in there ar&e could have managed Newcastle to win that championship. Houghton is simply not up to managing a premiership team

[ricardo 8,034]

It all started to go wrong for me one day in 1953 when my dad first took me to Carrow Rd. Simce then I have had to suffer 7 relegations and an application for re-ellection to the League. Twenty five (plus) managers have been shown the door for this 60 years of failure.When will this misery ever end.[N][:(]

[Dubai Mark 0]

Interesting stuff and my sympathy to Ricardo for being miserable so long. One thought I have continually when I read threads similar to this, is that I am  in agreement that in reality Chris Hughton hasnt done such a bad job when taking everything into account, perhaps few will agree.

Also, and this is more controversial I guess.......putting aside our two seasons when we were the big fish in a small pond with comparitively huge resources to the majority of the clubs in those divisions, in that first season Paul Lambert didnt actually do as well as some are making out with some of the extravagent claims..........I genuinely cannot remember many times in the EPL when we were for example "swash buckling"...yes there were some decent offensive performances and more offensive than the current set-up for sure..........but I can also remember plenty of scraps and a decent dash of good fortune along the way, which all added up to I think a flattering league position. Sure there were more risks taken...."swash buckling"...........hardly.......but we all remember it the way want.......   

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Dubai Mark"]

Interesting stuff and my sympathy to Ricardo for being miserable so long. One thought I have continually when I read threads similar to this, is that I am  in agreement that in reality Chris Hughton hasnt done such a bad job when taking everything into account, perhaps few will agree.

Also, and this is more controversial I guess.......putting aside our two seasons when we were the big fish in a small pond with comparitively huge resources to the majority of the clubs in those divisions, in that first season Paul Lambert didnt actually do as well as some are making out with some of the extravagent claims..........I genuinely cannot remember many times in the EPL when we were for example "swash buckling"...yes there were some decent offensive performances and more offensive than the current set-up for sure..........but I can also remember plenty of scraps and a decent dash of good fortune along the way, which all added up to I think a flattering league position. Sure there were more risks taken...."swash buckling"...........hardly.......but we all remember it the way want.......   

[/quote]Football management is a bit like politics DM. With a few notable exceptions most career''s end in failure. Looking back over my list of ex NCFC managers very few have got out at the top.

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]It all started to go wrong for me one day in 1953 when my dad first took me to Carrow Rd. Simce then I have had to suffer 7 relegations and an application for re-ellection to the League. Twenty five (plus) managers have been shown the door for this 60 years of failure.When will this misery ever end.[N][:(]

[/quote]

Ha ha, I can closely identify with that !

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Snoots"][quote user="ricardo"]It all started to go wrong for me one day in 1953 when my dad first took me to Carrow Rd. Simce then I have had to suffer 7 relegations and an application for re-ellection to the League. Twenty five (plus) managers have been shown the door for this 60 years of failure.When will this misery ever end.[N][:(]

[/quote]

Ha ha, I can closely identify with that ![/quote]There''s still a few of us Snoots. There isn''t a single argument in the Hughton debate that I haven''t heard expressed hundred''s of times before and about lots of different City manager''s. When things are going badly the manager eventually gets shown the door and I can confirm the truth of that all the way back to Norman Lowe and Tom Parker.When was supporting ever anything other than a roller-coaster ride?Ans why do so many think the future is going to be somehow different to the past?

[morty 0]

Good op Ferry.I think what underpins most of it, for me, unfortunately is money.We have the standard of manager we can afford, and the standard of players that we can afford. We have no wealthy benefactors throwing us some extra cash, so the whole thing has to be self sustaining.We need the luck of not being saddled with too many injuries, we need to produce good youth for the team, and also for profit.Like you, I don''t entirely blame Hughton either.

[norfolkbroadslim 225]

[quote user="morty"]Good op Ferry.

I think what underpins most of it, for me, unfortunately is money.

We have the standard of manager we can afford, and the standard of players that we can afford. We have no wealthy benefactors throwing us some extra cash, so the whole thing has to be self sustaining.

We need the luck of not being saddled with too many injuries, we need to produce good youth for the team, and also for profit.

Like you, I don''t entirely blame Hughton either.
[/quote]

 

What about FFP?[^o)]

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

[quote user="morty"]Good op Ferry.I think what underpins most of it, for me, unfortunately is money.We have the standard of manager we can afford, and the standard of players that we can afford. We have no wealthy benefactors throwing us some extra cash, so the whole thing has to be self sustaining.We need the luck of not being saddled with too many injuries, we need to produce good youth for the team, and also for profit.Like you, I don''t entirely blame Hughton either.[/quote]

 

What about FFP?[^o)]

[/quote]What about it?You are not seriously suggesting that it''s going to level up the playing field between NCFC and the top eight are you?

[Indy 3,471]

We don''t have hero''s anymore, we don''t lik our players and manager and Holt''s departure although right, has left us with a squad full of journeymen who are just here for the money! Theres not much genine love for the badge or city, you only have to look Wes with his antics and comments and he should be the one the fans turn to!

 

We have normally had a Huck''s, Iwan, Eadie, Channon, Green, Gunn, Frobes etc. who the fans relate to, this is just another premiership squad who as no great love for City just picking up a wage and making sure their profile doesn''t deminish for the summer merry go round.

 

It all started to go wrong when we hit the promised land, the gread of the premiership has taineted our club......so is it really a good place to be?

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Indy"]

 

It all started to go wrong when we hit the promised land, the gread of the premiership has taineted our club......so is it really a good place to be?

[/quote]Not a good place but when you are out of it, it becomes the promised land.Perhaps we should arrange relegation and promotion on alternate years. The inners and outers, the happy clappers and miserablists could then take turns dominating this forum.[Y]

[PurpleCanary 6,384]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]

[quote user="morty"]Good op Ferry.I think what underpins most of it, for me, unfortunately is money.We have the standard of manager we can afford, and the standard of players that we can afford. We have no wealthy benefactors throwing us some extra cash, so the whole thing has to be self sustaining.We need the luck of not being saddled with too many injuries, we need to produce good youth for the team, and also for profit.Like you, I don''t entirely blame Hughton either.[/quote]

 

What about FFP?[^o)]

[/quote]What about it?You are not seriously suggesting that it''s going to level up the playing field between NCFC and the top eight are you?[/quote]No, ricardo, but that is not really its point. The aim, realisable or not, is to make it more of a level playing field for clubs that are roughly of similar size in terms of support, catchment area etc, but where until now some have had the advantage of rich benefactors and others have not.The idea is not that we can compete with Man City, or Arsenal, but that we can compete on roughly equal terms with, for example, Fulham, West Ham or Southampton, or QPR if they were to be promoted. In other words a level playing field within the various sectors of the Premier League.

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Snoots"][quote user="ricardo"]It all started to go wrong for me one day in 1953 when my dad first took me to Carrow Rd. Simce then I have had to suffer 7 relegations and an application for re-ellection to the League. Twenty five (plus) managers have been shown the door for this 60 years of failure.When will this misery ever end.[N][:(]

[/quote]

Ha ha, I can closely identify with that ![/quote]There''s still a few of us Snoots. There isn''t a single argument in the Hughton debate that I haven''t heard expressed hundred''s of times before and about lots of different City manager''s. When things are going badly the manager eventually gets shown the door and I can confirm the truth of that all the way back to Norman Lowe and Tom Parker.When was supporting ever anything other than a roller-coaster ride?Ans why do so many think the future is going to be somehow different to the past?[/quote]

Well, I certainly can''t argue with any of that (it was ever thus) even though I must confess I''m in an argumentative mood !

[Farkes The Herald Angels 0]

Well, Ricardo, I, like you and many others have witnessed many ups and downs and we will no doubt continue to experience many more,But, to infer that all this is the inevitable way of things is as if to say ''let''s just accept it all'' which seems a little lacking in ambition.  And in response to another respondent to the original post who said ''it''s all easier in hindsight'' I did actually say at the time of Hughton''s appointment I thought it was a cultural mistake and so it now seems.It is not just about our means, but our style as another respondent pointed out. Not the style of play alone, but the style of approach: our attitude and mindset on and off the pitch.It is this that changed most from the Lambert era to the Hughton era and it is this that I think has been the basis of the current malaise. Not the managers relative successes and failures, but the shift between Approach L and a seemingly diametrically opposite Approach H.NCFC will rise again, whether we go down or not, and we will  still all be here supporting our team whatever. But it shouldn''t stop us at any point in time from offering opinions about what might have made things better and what might make things more palatable from hereon.

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

Checking the FFP rules this season in the Prem they are :

 

Clubs can''t lose more than £105m over 3 seasons.

 

Clubs can''t lose more than £15m over 3 seasons unless the owner injects equity.

 

Also wages over £52m can only go up by £4m per season plus any amount from "new commercial deals"

 

So I hope that this will start to restrict clubs in future like West Ham or QPR just getting a bundle of cash from a new owner.  £105m over 3 seasons is a lot though.  And the £52m limit can be avoided like Man City did by their owner''s company signing up to a massive sponsorship deal.  FFP is better than nothing for us but not a panacea.

[Surfer 1,547]

It''s certainly not a panacea, just a way for the big boys to continue to cement their top dog status. As you say it helps prevent a QPR, but does almost nothing to restrain Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal or Chelsea from spending almost what they want to...

[Surfer 1,547]

The problem being the definition of "income" - it''s like taxing wages at a different rate to investments - the big boys have all sorts of commercial deals that they can leverage to walk around the FFP rules as written.

[Rolf Harris 33]

[quote user="lake district canary"]I think it started to go wrong around the time of the Leicester Cup game when Lambert left out Holt.   It seemed strange at the time, after we had put out such a strong side against WBA in the previous round.    After that things never seemed quite so positive...............and that was under Lambert.

As for the change of culture - I think the powers that be could see that we would have to rebuild after lambert - lots of championship players starting to look maybe as if they had reached their peak......so change was maybe necessary - and if we survive this season in this league - that change could still lead to something long lasting.

[/quote]

You have serious issues.

Lambert left because we did not meet his ambitions.

Hughton stabilised us when others in this league went into melt down and got relegated.

Hughton has failed to process his team this season resulting in us either getting relegated or staying up by the skin of our teeth.

Pro or Con Hughton... Your sir are deluded!

[Mello Yello 2,572]

Maybe Chris Hughton is our David Moyes?......Both have had a successful managerial hard act to follow?

[ZLF 335]

as much as I hate typing this,  IF (and that clearly hangs in the balance right now) we remain in the prem league next season more will have gone right than wrong so its hard to assume there is a start to it?  The message from the club is that has always been the priority,  and if some Stoke/Pulis standard of entertainment is to be endured then its a fair compromise as we continue to strengthen our finances.

 

For me alarm bells were ringing with the cubs admitted failure to strengthen our own stated two key targetted positions - an additional centre back (alderweireld) and a further creative midfielder (Quag/Toivenon/Rodwell) - the latter essential to get the most of two great strikers who needed a different style of chance created than the existing midfielders could supply.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user=" Green and Yellow"]It''s unimportant if you believe me or not but a very high profile person phoned Lambert''s ex-wife and tipped her off about something. That is what Lambert is referring to when he mentions the issue that he will never discuss. Read my reply the clues are in the there. I am not a Billy Bullsh*ter. If I named the person and the incident it would be pulled of the message board because it is correct.[/quote]

daily mirror pay good money for that kind of thing, plus will keep you anonymos...

what''s stopping you?

[Syteanric 1]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/paul-lamberts-wife-targeted-by-text-1280265

this is what is being referred to..... i would very much doubt it was someone at the club