Here they are as I see it although some will appear in both camps a Positives ++++++++++++++++ Stability Pragmatic Risk Aversive Structured side Generic Premiership style Inoffensive Inexpensive Reasonably experienced Perceived good signings b Negatives ----------------------- Inflexible Perceived Negative style Defensive orientated Perceived negative persona Lack of flamboyance Generic Premiership side Concentration on physical attributes Risk Aversive c ================ Perceived poor results Lack of clean sheets Lack of goals Reasonable points tally Split support from fans Boring football Vast financial success and progression Lack of obvious playing improvements Rarely in real relegation trouble Full attendances Steady side Media friendly Perceived happy playing staff Aura of blandness Is he worth sticking with? Can standing still and the expected remaining in the division be percieved as progression as we get a fat cheque each year? Are we happy with being the richest we have ever been but provided with little entertainment? Do we just want plain money, or value for money? It appears to me that CH will be keeping those important far happier than the fans themselves, DM really has no reason to fire him.
Good post. The problem with your four questions at the end is that you don't specify any time reference. Do you mean is it enough right now this season? Or you might mean is it enough until June 2015 when Chris Hughton's contract runs out. My answer regarding this season is Yes! in all four cases. Regarding next season (i.e. the final year of CH's contract), if you were asking the same questions in a year's time my answer would still be Yes! But in fact I don't think you will be asking the same questions in a year's time. Also, your final sentence is IMO correct, except that you lump all fans together into one dissatisfied camp.
I think the problem might come if we finish mid table.It's quite possible this season that we might end up with 40 points in eleventh or twelth place.Do you ditch a manager who has delivered that?
I'm fed up with the whole in/out debate which I feel is debilitating, but at least this is an attempt at a balanced view. The key, IMO is the amount of 'perceived' elements included, as perception always depends on the perceiver (eg. glass half empty or half full). Take 'Perceived Negative style' for example. Has City's approach really been 'negative' this season? Another would be 'Defensive orientated'. Bringing in 3 new strikers doesn't seem 'Defensive orientated' to me, or indeed suggest a 'Perceived negative persona' either. Even more than that is the 'Lack of clean sheets' item under C. City have 6 clean sheets in 20 games - are we really expecting more than that? Lambert's City team had 3 clean sheets in 38 games, ffs! Then there is 'Boring football' and 'Aura of blandness' which are not even graced with a 'perceived' label, so they must be absolute truths. The fact is that all of these things will come down to expectations, and the conclusions different individuals draw as a result of their personal expectations. It certainly isn't an A+B=C to me, and that's where I differ with the final conclusions as well.
Totally agree Rick, and I shared similar thoughts about how many of the inputs of Carrabuh's formula are based (whether highlighted in the OP as such or not) on perceptions - which we are all well aware can differ from one extreme to the other, even within such a small sample of Canary fans, thus rendering the use of any kind of scientific approach fairly pointless and up for scrutiny.
Yes, carrabuh's "formula" is all about people's perceptions, but the question he implicitly poses is a good one, namely: "Should those whose perceptions are predominately negative actually be satisfied?" Hence my point about the time scale. Satisfied for now?: Yes! Satisfied if it's the same this time next year?: Yes (but it won't be)! Satisfied if it's the same come June 2015?: No!
No, we were rarely last however. A position we regularly take, not through who we are, or who we play. Aura of blandness reinforced through poor entertainment and a lack of spectacle.
We were often earlier in the programme, but as a newly promoted side doing better than expectations you would expect that. At the end of the season we weren't on so early as we were safe and therefore not interesting
It tied in with the performances, when we played well we were on because we were scoring goals and letting them in. We were very rarely in the last 2 games. Presently we rarely seem to be in the first half of MOTD.... unless we are getting hammered!!
