Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Great Mass Debater

Media blame game

Recommended Posts

Sooooo, seeing as Chris Hughtons sacking was so unpopular with the media, if we do go down, does this mean the media will try to make out that everything was rosey until we sacked poor Chris and that relegation was a direct consequence of the boards decision to sack him with 5 games to go?  Considering the tripe that came out of most pundits mouths, I think so. On course for survival they''ll say until we took that ''bonkers'' decision which got us relegated. I can see them all guffawing about it on MOTD. I doubt we''ll hear much about needing to have made the change earlier, and we''ll probably have to endure ''CH did a marvellous job to even keep them off the foot of the table where a club like Norwich belong. He kept them out of the relegation zone all season and as soon as they removed him down they went''. I think I might have an aneurysm if I have to listen to that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]Sooooo, seeing as Chris Hughtons sacking was so unpopular with the media, if we do go down, does this mean the media will try to make out that everything was rosey until we sacked poor Chris and that relegation was a direct consequence of the boards decision to sack him with 5 games to go?  Considering the tripe that came out of most pundits mouths, I think so. On course for survival they''ll say until we took that ''bonkers'' decision which got us relegated. I can see them all guffawing about it on MOTD. I doubt we''ll hear much about needing to have made the change earlier, and we''ll probably have to endure ''CH did a marvellous job to even keep them off the foot of the table where a club like Norwich belong. He kept them out of the relegation zone all season and as soon as they removed him down they went''. I think I might have an aneurysm if I have to listen to that...[/quote]

That would just be the media spin.   No more blinkered than those that say everything has been bad this season.   It has not been ALL bad and despite the people that come on here and try to undermine things in whatever way they can by trying to find fault with every single thing that they can off the field, the truth is that on the field it has been a mixed bag.   Some good some bad.    Overall, its not been enough, but even if we had converted one chance away at West Ham and if Snodgrass had let RVW take that penalty etc etc, we could have been on 38 or more points now and sitting pretty.  The margins are THAT small - and I am 100% sure that if we were on 38 points now, the furore over Hughton would be a minor discussion on here.

So from outside it looks bad - but results don''t lie.  We are where we are and Hughton has gone.  The media can say what they like - and so can the trolls that just want to find fault with everything - most reasonable fans know the truth.    The stark truth is we haven''t got enough points yet to stay up - we need to get them and if we do,  McNally and co will be seen as heroes, if we don''t the media may have a point................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Diifuclty is that we havent got a West Brom game, and unless Arsenal sack Wenger we cant play a rudderless team either. Thats what got us out of this mess last season. Its the same mess this season, just we''re unlikely to get a lifeline this time round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the media make these claims they can be neither right or wrong. Because it''s unknown. Just like those who claim we''d be safe now if we''d sacked Hughton earlier. Another unknown. However if the media or anyone else were to claim we only stayed up last year because of the victories over WBA and Citeh they''d be wrong. Because it''s a known that we''d have stayed up if we''d lost them both.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''m not sure you can be TOO critical of the media position.

 

The facts are that Hughton was sacked while we were 5 points outside the drop zone with 5 tough games to go. They replaced a manager who had managed to mastermind just 4 away wins in nearly two seasons with a guy who''d never even managed a PL away game let alone won one ahead of a crucial away game. Hughton''s win% was a little over 25, with 4 games left we need the new guy, realistically, to hit a 25% win ratio.

 

If you remove the emotion - not easy as fans - you can see that to an outsider who has no attachment to the club at all; this could look mental. To us, the crack had become a crevasse and was irreparable, but we''ve essentially put a guy with zero experience in his chair and asked him to do as well as the last guy had been doing in order to keep us up, but from the toughest run of fixtures.

 

It''s impossible to say whether we''d have fared any better or worse under Hughton, Adams or anyone else, but while as a fan I can''t agree with the media standpoint, it''s not difficult to see where they are coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After the West Brom game, Robbie Savage predicted we''d be relegated on MOTD - before the sacking of Hughton.  So he can''t exactly turn round and say, if we end up getting relegated, it was because we sacked Hughton, because he predicted we''d be relegated while Hughton was still the manager.  And when he said that, much as I found it annoying, I had to agree with him at the time.  Appointing Adams was the right choice because it gave us a decent chance of getting at least a point at Fulham.  Unfortunately it came down to very few chances and they took one chance, whereas Snoddy''s free kick hit the bar and went over, and their goalie made a couple of great saves.  Football often comes down to very narrow margins like that.

 

Fact is that we all knew when we saw the fixtures for the season that we''d need to have 36-38 points after 34 games to be confident of safety with our run-in (and most of us were hoping it would be better than that).  Actually that target now looks easier - if we had 35 points now, that would probably be enough for safety. But Hughton failed to reach that target.

Looking back our last 7 games have been against teams from Southampton downwards, so realistically we could have got points from all those games.  If we could have averaged a point per game from those 7 games - (which was our average at the start of that run) - we''d now be on 35 points and that was what we needed to do.  But actually we''ve had a disastrous slump with W1, D1, L5 from those games, taking only 4 points from 7 "doable" games, leaving us on just 32 points and favourites for the 3rd relegation spot.  It''s that bad run (obviously prior to the Fulham game) which got Hughton the sack, and, if we are relegated, it will be caused by that slump from the Villa game to the WBA game. OK I''m sure many will say the problem was earlier, but in previous periods Hughton was able to get the key results when he needed them.  When we failed to beat Stoke, and lost at home to WBA, he''d failed to get those key results for the first time.  It''s a results business and that''s why he was sacked.

 

If you look at other clubs that have sacked their managers, normally it has been after a similarly bad run that left them in trouble relative to their expectations.  the unfortunate thing for us, in hindsight, was that Hughton was able to do - just - well enough to keep his job until so late in the season.

 

Also I don''t understand this point about Adams being inexperienced.  What about Sherwood, who had no managerial experience when Spurs appointed him.  Why is that different ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also PF, you say Hughton''s win % is 25%.  But our next 4 games are against Liverpool, Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal.  In our first set of games against those same 4 teams under Hughton this season, we got zero points.  Why on earth would people think we''d do better second time around, with the team unable to get any points from WBA, Swansea etc in its recent run ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
London journalists and TV pundits would rather Norwich went down with Hughton than Norwich survived without him.

To them we are no different to Bradford, Burnley, Swindon, Barnsley, Reading, Blackpool, Derby, Watford, Sheffield United and Oldham.

A small club who should just be happy to be in the Premiership and have no right to grumble if things aren''t going well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ICF, you demonstrate my point perfectly, can you really not see where the media are coming from?.

 

I''ve tried to indicate how our recent activity is likely to be perceived to those with no attachment to the club.

 

Sherwood was given far longer, we''ve replaced a manager who averaged more than a point a game over two seasons with a manager that''s never won a point in the PL.

With five games to go, a point a game would keep us up.

CH has managed against the big 4 previously and had obtained wins against Man U and Arsenal. A repeat of either would keep us up.

 

Your assumptions from our point of view as fans is exactly how most NCFC fans perceive it, we''d lost our last 6 away, put in an abject display against WBA and all hope appeared lost. Adams has come in, given the fans a lift, freshened things up and we believe/d we had half a chance.

 

But - if you take off the fan glasses - it''s not difficult to see why the media think that the move to sack Hughton is bonkers. It''s not my personal opinion but I can see their thinking. They aren''t attached, they''re not aware of the intricacies, they just see a few highlights and then a league table. If it had been a rival club taking this action this late in the season, what would your reaction have been?

 

And when Hughton was sacked, we weren''t favourites for the third relegation spot. Before Saturday''s game we were still odds against at 11/10. We are now 4/9 third favourites.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you''re saying the media are taking their view without paying attention to the recent situation at the club, well I couldn''t disagree. It''s not rocket science any more than Jol or Clarke had a bad run of results and were then sacked. With either of them you could have pointed to a good record over a longer period but in the Prem if your results nose dive at an important point of the season, the manager is often sacked, and Hughton was no different.

That''s what annoys me - they seem to be judging us differently from teams around us who sacked their managers - why?

I don''t see why it would make sense for Spurs, with CL ambitions to appoint someone with no managerial experience but it doesn''t make sense for us? It''s simply bias in favour of Hughton.

And the relegation odds is another red herring. After the WBA defest, the Fulham game was always going to be our best chance of survival and if we''d got a point it would have been enough to keep them favourites for the 3rd spot. I just think anyone who feels we''d have had a better chance of getting something from that game under Hughton just hasn''t been paying attention to our recent form.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...