Nigel Clough - "I Didn't Fail"

[WhiteHawk]

http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/shef...ld-united-says-ex-boss-nigel-clough-1-7601616

 

[sheffielder]

Swiss is going to be all over this like a wank sock

 

[boo radley]

I agree.
Is this team playing better than his - even when he first took over?

 

[Kev Gee]

Hard to argue with such facts tbh!!

 

[zablade]

History will be the judge. He can definitely argue he didn't fail, but others can definitely argue he didn't succeed either.

 

[Small Mendonca]

I don't miss him at all, even if we are doing worse under positive Nigel. Obviously I'd rather be doing better than what we are but so glad we don't have to put up with him anymore.

 

[alcoblade]

I'm not sure a measure of how wank we are now can be used to measure Clough's success?

UTB

 

[JohnDenver]

On my basis of 4 transfer windows before pulling the trigger, he's miles from a failure. But did have some major issues to overcome this summer if he was to unequivocally succeed.

 

[zablade]

I would love to know what triggered the sacking though. I can only think it had to be sight of the list of players Clough wanted to bring in and the board didn't like the look of them.

Having said that they would struggle to do any worse than Adkins signings, none have which have been a success.

 

[Harry's Game]

Surprised he didn't blame Macnulty for the sacking.

 

[Balham Blade]

Let's check that statement against his objectives:

2013/14 - keep us up: success
2014/15 - promotion: failure

Ultimately, he failed. Whether he stood a chance is a different matter but I don't think you can say that, ultimately, he wasn't a failure. Anyway, he's only got himself to blame.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

I'm afraid he's right and his detractors can disagree all the live long day it doesn't make them right. His sacking was very harsh if measured against performance.

It's emphasised further by the fact that his proven and experienced successor can't get a decent performance out of them.

 

[Slug]

Well he certainly didn't succeed

 

[Balham Blade]

I'm afraid he's right and his detractors can disagree all the live long day it doesn't make them right. His sacking was very harsh if measured against performance.

It's emphasised further by the fact that his proven and experienced successor can't get a decent performance out of them.

An alternative view would be that he left the club with a bloated squad devoid of talent in key positions and that has hamstrung his successor. Measured against performance his sacking might have been harsh but that doesn't seem to be the reason behind his departure: that would be his refusal to accept that his decisions might have been substandard.

 

[Keef Chedwyn]

Can't really argue with what he says. We're a top end third division club and unless the club really commit to a promotion push instead of putting it all on the shoulders of managers, that's what we'll be.

He gave us some of the best memories in years and I'd be happier with an orrible cunt who could make the players put a bit of effort in rather than a nice cunt who's players are taking the piss out of him.

 

[Harry's Game]

Maceverly and Allcock centre back paring in a play off semi final...

That suggests failure to me.

 

[Bartleby]

Interesting timing just after Dean Saunders gets the boot from a certain club that is commutable from Matlock. Deserves his say though given the public criticism he's had from Jim Phipps.

 

[Dec]

I think if a manager is allowed to spend circa £3M on transfer fees in League 1, they bloody well should turn a team into promotion contenders - at the very least.

 

[robbiez666]

Failure? quite possibly
Success? Nope

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

An alternative view would be that he left the club with a bloated squad devoid of talent in key positions and that has hamstrung his successor. Measured against performance his sacking might have been harsh but that doesn't seem to be the reason behind his departure: that would be his refusal to accept that his decisions might have been substandard.

Here's another alternative view. He was getting a tune out of some players and the current manager isn't (not that I blame Adkins). Admittedly it is likely because Clough built that squad and knew more about the players in it.

The sensible thing would have perhaps been to stick with a man that they had allowed to build the very squad you speak of. Perhaps he could then take them on a step further like he had already done right before they sacked him.

This view that he has "bloated the squad" and made it useless to the next bloke is neither here nor there. He was preparing a squad for his own tenure, not for someone else's. Hence that argument is entirely irrelevant.

 

[SUFC Handsworth]

"An alternative view would be that he left the club with a bloated squad devoid of talent in key positions and that has hamstrung his successor."

Don't agree with that at all. There's plenty of talented players in the squad, what the team lacks is steel and leadership in those key areas of the team - 2 centre halves, target man up top and a hard man in midfield. This team is literally spineless. Adkins sorts the spine of the team out and we might get somewhere, leaves it as it is and expect more of what we've had over the last 3 months.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

I think if a manager is allowed to spend circa £3M on transfer fees in League 1, they bloody well should turn a team into promotion contenders - at the very least.

Depends how utterly dog shit it was in the first place.....it was very.

 

[Ashtonsmashton]

Let's check that statement against his objectives:

2013/14 - keep us up: success
2014/15 - promotion: failure

Ultimately, he failed. Whether he stood a chance is a different matter but I don't think you can say that, ultimately, he wasn't a failure. Anyway, he's only got himself to blame.

2014/15 league cup semi final: success

 

[United Aren't Back.]

I detest the man I have to admit.

 

[alcoblade]

Here's another alternative view. He was getting a tune out of some players and the current manager isn't (not that I blame Adkins). Admittedly it is likely because Clough built that squad and knew more about the players in it.

The sensible thing would have perhaps been to stick with a man that they had allowed to build the very squad you speak of. Perhaps he could then take them on a step further like he had already done right before they sacked him.

This view that he has "bloated the squad" and made it useless to the next bloke is neither here nor there. He was preparing a squad for his own tenure, not for someone else's. Hence that argument is entirely irrelevant.

It's relevant in that one of the ways you judge performance is by the resource they had at their disposal. In that way, a bloated squad goes in the "against" column.

UTB

 

[boo radley]

Let's check that statement against his objectives:

2013/14 - keep us up: success
2014/15 - promotion: failure

Ultimately, he failed. Whether he stood a chance is a different matter but I don't think you can say that, ultimately, he wasn't a failure. Anyway, he's only got himself to blame.

Was he promised more from the board that he did not get?
Yes I know they spent 1.5m on a player he wanted but?

 

[The Bohemian]

I would love to know what triggered the sacking though. I can only think it had to be sight of the list of players Clough wanted to bring in and the board didn't like the look of them.

Having said that they would struggle to do any worse than Adkins signings, none have which have been a success.

This is probably the closest you'll get, where Phipps talks about Cloughie failing to adhere to the technical board "process." If he accepted the job in the knowledge he was expected to work within constraints which he later ignored, fair enough. We should also consider the possibility that the "process" is not fit for purpose.

To my eyes, Cloughie's signings were generally an improvement on what he inherited and, more importantly they appeared committed, irrespective of whether he was stubborn and arrogant.

The club's decision to sell Maguire and Cloughie's inexplicable failure to sort out central defence was probably the key factor in his sacking and our failure to win promotion.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/shef...ed-chairman-jim-phipps-answers-fans-1-7535983

 

[blade.i.am]

Cup runs apart getting us to fifth in League 1 from the relegation zone in two seasons doesn't seem like a great achievement. Admittedly, Adkins appears to be going fo r the reverse in only one season.

 

[Barney]

Clough was bordering on unbearable, and Adkins is even worse.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

It's relevant in that one of the ways you judge performance is by the resource they had at their disposal. In that way, a bloated squad goes in the "against" column.

UTB

Let's bear in mind that the vast bulk of what he spent on transfer fees was spent on Done and Brayford whom to my mind were bought in the January window (because as always we didn't invest in the summer).

This meant that they had to be integrated into an already inconsistent squad. Prior to that he had to build a larger and more diverse squad due to the as usual limited budget for playing staff. It seems a perfectly logical thought process to me that if you're not allowed go and pay for quality, you simply pay to have more options at your disposal. Warnock did the very same thing when he was working on a limited budget. He used to have huge squads of journey men.

It doesn't change the fact that in a season and a half he took the club from the relegation zone to 5th. The so called bloated squad didn't prevent that. Anyone believing that £3m (or whatever is was) over 18 months should take no hopers to automatic promotion needs to visit the rest of us on planet earth when they get the chance.