This sounds harsh, but I think the sacking was inevitable. First, it is very rare indeed for a manager to survive once there is a lot of speculation about him being dismissed. Ferguson at MU, perhaps? But generally hanging on to a wounded manager is an attempt to avoid the unavoidable, which we have a record of as a club (Hughton, Neil, Worthington, etc). Second, Webber could see fans starting to question his recruitment in the summer, so he has to cover his own back. I know this makes him sound cynical, but I am not trying to portray him as a 'bad guy', since he probably felt he had to be seen as doing something rather than sitting on his hands. He has chosen to gamble that a new manager can get more out of these new recruits to rescue his reputation. As fans, let's hope he's made the right gamble.
Sorry, me again. I feel the seeds of this season's events were sown in the post-lockdown period of 19/20 and the truly awful run of 10 consecutive abject defeats. I still have no idea why we were so woeful. Yes, before the lockdown we were bottom, but we were by no means doomed, especially since we had several games at the beginning of the re-start that looked winnable. But whatever the reasons, during that terrible run, I think Farke lost confidence in his own style of football at Prem level, and other people in the club also did. This led to an over-reaction against what we did last time we went up, so instead of more or less keeping the same squad, we swung to the opposite extreme, kicked out players who had been a big part of our recent success and focused on buying or loaning a virtually new squad. The change in playing style and the change in personnel was too much, and the Covid outbreak in pre-season exacerbated that. The renewed confidence that the team had found by breezing the Championship dissipated very quickly, and the long-term plan suddenly seemed very shaky.
Sunday times think "Frank Lampard in frame for Norwich City job after club sack Daniel Farke. Lucien Favre, Steve Bruce and John Terry also being considered " Which suggests to me they don't have a clue.
Agree with the sentiments being expressed that the sacking was inevitable, but I think we were all surprised at the timing, just after our first win. I suspect that Webber et al will have contacted somebody already. It’s now a waiting game. Perhaps the likes of Gilmour and Cantwell may very well stay and get regular starts. Farke has, no doubt, brought a lot of success to the club in the Championship. He will be remembered for this and have a place at the top table of managers.
Michael Bailey in the Athletic has some details of the timeline: Webber told the board that he felt they needed to replace Farke on Thursday Directors slept on it, agreed Saturday morning that Farke would be replaced regardless of result. Webber spoke to Farke alone in the away dressing room, once the squad was on the bus. Webber then went to the bus to inform the team. Squad reconvened at Colney, where Farke & staff spoke to squad for last time. "Others in attendance appreciative of the rare opportunity to get a proper and personal goodbye" Sounds like Webber's press support was to try and get a reaction from coaching team. Seems like giving the squad the usual 2 days off after the Chelsea defeat didn't go down well. Decision came down to the belief that a different manager could get more out of a group of players Webber believes are good enough to survive. Confirms the story that Cantwell lost his place in the first team dressing room. Cantwell expected to be restored to the first team dressing room and training from next week. No official talks (emphasis mine) had occurred with potential replacements before Saturday, but club are confident of appointing someone long before the Southampton game.
If Jake is excited because he knows, I'd guess it's likely to be Lampard? If he's just excited on the other hand, Pascal Jansen is an interesting call. Having been born in London to an English mother, he presumably has British nationality. There's a Sky interview with him here. Note the ambition to manage in the EPL EDIT: two pertinent extracts from that interview. "Even before I became head coach, you could find me at academy games and training sessions watching the U13s or the U17s. That is just in my upbringing as a coach. I was already interested and I know what is going on in the academy. We invite talented players from the age of 16 and upwards to train with us if they deserve it." "When I close my eyes and see my team perform, it is about pressing, it is about being dominant, being disciplined but with room for creativity. We have a clear idea of how we want to play."
https://www.pinkun.com/sport/norwic...paddy-davitt-farke-webber-sack-column-8469762 Paddy Davitt confirming a contract extension for Webber is expected.
Pinkun's list of runners and riders: https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/ncfc-who-is-in-frame-for-norwich-job-8469798
Another, slightly less expected list from MFW: https://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2021/11/07/so-then-the-big-question-whos-next/
Interesting reading this and the mention of how managers like to play. Does Webber look to appoint the "best" manager he can find, or one that fits the squad (and how he thinks the squad should be used) best? Presumably based on the suggestion that Farke was sacked because he wasn't using the talent available to him appropriately, Webber will look for someone who can? In terms of which way to play could suit our squad... 4-2-3-1: Classic Farkeball tactics, could someone else come in and make it work better? Personally I doubt it, and I don't think we have the players in the squad to make a central midfield pairing work at this level. Similarly, I think you discount a Southampton style 4-2-2-2, a 3-4-3 or a 4-4-2 on the same grounds. 3-5-2: It could work? Farke clearly thought so. Doesn't make a lot of use of Tzolis and Rashica, or Cantwell. Perhaps a Brighton style formation could work, with Rashica/Tzolis up top in the way Trossard is used. 3-4-2-1: A Chelsea style 3-4-2-1 could work? Perhaps still has the issue of requiring a higher quality midfield pairing than we have, but you could look to play Normann+Sorensen and give them both a very defensive brief. Chelsea have used Mount, Werner, Hudson-Odoi, etc in the attacking two. So you could play Rashica/Tzolis + Cantwell/Dowell for a similar effect? 4-3-3: Obviously many ways of playing a 4-3-3, but I think Liverpool's approach could work with our squad? Inverted wingers and a withdrawn forward up front could be achieved with a Rashica-Sargent-Tzolis frontline, which Idah would also suit. Very attacking full backs (Giannoulis and Aarons fit the bill) provide width, and then a trio of midfielders are tasked with recycling and retaining possession, and not really expected to offer much in attack. Normann, Gilmour, McLean, Sorensen, PLM could all potentially work in that type of midfield? Personally I'd be tempted to play Sorensen, and have him drop back to split the CBs in the way Tettey used to, forming a back 3 and providing extra cover in wider areas. Interesting, Knutsen seems to favour that style of 4-3-3 analogous to Liverpool. A comment on the MFW article says that AU Sports mentioned during their coverage of the Spurs game this afternoon that they expect Knutsen to be announced as Norwich manager on Tuesday.
I think we need different formations for different opponents. The 4-3-2-1 worked well yesterday because we scored first and then another before Brentford knew what hit them. Against top half teams though, I'd prefer a 3-5-2 with one of the midfielders supporting the attack when we have the ball. The version against Leeds deployed Rashica as a WB to match Leeds WBs who are actually AMs. My concern about a back 4 is that our FBs play more like WBs and that can leave the CBs exposed, as happened for Brentford's goal yesterday. Aarons was up field and Omobamidele was pulled out of position. We have a deep squad and should use that versatility to suit the opposition. As for Knutsen becoming the new coach I'd be concerned about his lack of PL experience. The Norwegian league is nothing like that level and we don't have time for the new coach to adjust. We need a win or at least a draw against Southampton and that means a coach who can hit the ground running if we are to have any chance of survival.
That blows my theory out of the water of already being in negotiations for a new coach. And it puts the timing all on SW's shoulders.
Not many people who have PL experience available. Well, not many with good experience anyway. Only ones with good experiences are Bruce, Allardyce and Nuno (even he is limited). We want a coach who is going to excite the players and motivate them to play to their full potential. Yes experience in the PL would be good, but not completely necessary. Lots of managers with no PL experience have had success.
With the bookies backing Lampard and DH's AU Sports saying it'll be Knutsen, I wonder whether Villa sacking Dean Smith might throw a spanner in the works. He has an excellent record of pulling teams away from relegation, gaining promotion and surviving in the PL that could well suit our situation. He has the necessary PL experience and Villa seem to be panicking after a bad run of results. Read his managerial experience on wiki and see what you think: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Smith_(footballer,_born_1971)
