Not that I know of! Apart from that Norwegians came to the UK hundreds of years ago, and raped and pillaged, so many of us Brits are related to Norwegians from a long time back!
Iâm with Oslo on this, at least to the extent that weâll never really know where Neil might of taken us, and now that heâs gone and thereâs been an uplift in our recent performances under the new man itâs all too easy to start saying that this proves that Neil wasnât up to it. I donât accept that this is necessarily the case, and itâs really just guesswork. For me though, this argument is all secondary. Regardless of whether Warnock or Hughes are the better managers, my view is that itâs simply not right to treat people the way the board treated Warnock. For me, Neil performed little short of a the miracle in getting us promoted as champions last season. A miracle made all the more impressive when you consider what he had to deal with; shifting boardroom politics, little money to spend, Faurlin-gate etc.. He was then undermined and humiliated in the summer by the Goons, had little to no time to get in any decent signings when Tony came in at the end of the window, but despite this we made a promising start to life in the prem, beat Chelsea and stayed (just) out of the bottom three. Yes the November/Christmas period was poor, but for me Neil more than earned the right to be given a fair crack at it for the second half of the season. So, only time will tell as to whether the hiring of Hughes was an inspired move by the board. As a fan I dearly hope that it does. But even so, for me that still doesnât make the sacking of Warnock right. By thatâs just my view.
I agree with about every word you say Adel, perhaps unsurpisingly! and especially this: "So, only time will tell as to whether the hiring of Hughes was an inspired move by the board. As a fan I dearly hope that it does. But even so, for me that still doesnât make the sacking of Warnock right."
