Warne's managerial start at Rotherham (it wasn't very good)

[Bob The Badger]

In the remaining 29 games Rotherham played that season the won 4, drew 4 and lost 21.

I have no clue how he managed to hang on in the job, but I bet Rotherham are glad he did.

Calls for him to go this early on are preposterous and only based in prior held convictions, not the realities of what is needed to succeeded in football.

Half this board would have had Clough sacked in his first season as well as Cox. And Jim Smith would have been hung, drawn and quartered after the Tranmere game.

[Ghost of Clough]

12 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

In the remaining 29 games Rotherham played that season the won 4, drew 4 and lost 21.

I have no clue how he managed to hang on in the job, but I bet Rotherham are glad he did.

Calls for him to go this early on are preposterous and only based in prior held convictions, not the realities of what is needed to succeeded in football.

Half this board would have had Clough sacked in his first season as well as Cox. And Jim Smith would have been hung, drawn and quartered after the Tranmere game.

You aren't the first to claim this, but what are you basing it on? Poor results? The majority of the people who don't think Warne should be manager are basing their opinion on much more than results. Style of play, damage to the academy, reducing the chances of keeping our academy graduates, dwindling attendances, the destruction of the feel good factor around the club, etc...

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

You aren't the first to claim this, but what are you basing it on? Poor results? The majority of the people who don't think Warne should be manager are basing their opinion on much more than results. Style of play, damage to the academy, reducing the chances of keeping our academy graduates, dwindling attendances, the destruction of the feel good factor around the club, etc...

This.

The "you have to give the manager time" maxim is absolutely correct, but the most important corollary is that you have to believe in where the manager is taking you.  I would not give Nigel Pearson or Gary Rowett time to build the team they wanted, but I would give, say, Steve McClaren all the time in the world. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

19 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

In the remaining 29 games Rotherham played that season the won 4, drew 4 and lost 21.

I have no clue how he managed to hang on in the job, but I bet Rotherham are glad he did.

Calls for him to go this early on are preposterous and only based in prior held convictions, not the realities of what is needed to succeeded in football.

Half this board would have had Clough sacked in his first season as well as Cox. And Jim Smith would have been hung, drawn and quartered after the Tranmere game.

I'm guessing very limited expectations from a Rotherham side totally outgunned in the championship?

I think there's been some overreacting to a few poor results, I think we'll get better at being a Paul Warne team.

 

 

[Crewton]

Both Cloughs might have been sacked using the same criteria - certainly, no-one was convinced by Nigel at the end of his first half-season, though iirc with his Dad the fans could see that something was building, particularly after a 4-0 victory over top of the table QPR towards the end of the season. 

We've had so many managers, eventually successful, whose initial impact seemed "meh" at best, but now they're instantly compared to Nigel Pearson, and not, say, George Burley or even Arthur Cox, who both had to resurrect the club from virtual bankruptcy. As a fanbase, we seem to have gone from immensely relieved and grateful to survive to entitled and hyper-critical in record time. We're "so over" Administration and teetering on the edge of liquidation, aren't we?! 

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Both Cloughs might have been sacked using the same criteria - certainly, no-one was convinced by Nigel at the end of his first half-season, though iirc with his Dad the fans could see that something was building, particularly after a 4-0 victory over top of the table QPR towards the end of the season. 

We've had so many managers, eventually successful, whose initial impact seemed "meh" at best, but now they're instantly compared to Nigel Pearson, and not, say, George Burley or even Arthur Cox, who both had to resurrect the club from virtual bankruptcy. As a fanbase, we seem to have gone from immensely relieved and grateful to survive to entitled and hyper-critical in record time. We're "so over" Administration and teetering on the edge of liquidation, aren't we?! 

Probably because of where we were when Rosenior was relieved of his duties. We were outside the playoffs on goal difference and his overall record as manager was the best we've had in 75 years. Instead, we're now 5 points behind 6th, with only Pearson having a worse record since Jewell.

There's no sign of things improving. If anything, results and performances are getting worse. He's pointed the finger at a number of players already, specifically regarding injuries and is ignoring his own role in that. It's no surprise that players who haven't had a good pre-season and others who no longer have the fitness levels required are picking up injuries. Yet, Warne consistently keeps players who are running on empty on the pitch and sticks to a style which puts the older players (specifically our defence) at risk of picking up muscle injuries.

[Crewton]

16 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Probably because of where we were when Rosenior was relieved of his duties. We were outside the playoffs on goal difference and his overall record as manager was the best we've had in 75 years. Instead, we're now 5 points behind 6th, with only Pearson having a worse record since Jewell.

There's no sign of things improving. If anything, results and performances are getting worse. He's pointed the finger at a number of players already, specifically regarding injuries and is ignoring his own role in that. It's no surprise that players who haven't had a good pre-season and others who no longer have the fitness levels required are picking up injuries. Yet, Warne consistently keeps players who are running on empty on the pitch and sticks to a style which puts the older players (specifically our defence) at risk of picking up muscle injuries.

Do we really judge managers on their records after 5 league games, three of which have been heavily influenced by incompetent officiating? It's not really compatible with the responsible ownership model that I think the vast majority of fans were espousing as the way forward, is it? 

The collective hysteria is getting a bit much. 

[AGR]

15 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Do we really judge managers on their records after 5 league games, three of which have been heavily influenced by incompetent officiating? It's not really compatible with the responsible ownership model that I think the vast majority of fans were espousing as the way forward, is it? 

The collective hysteria is getting a bit much. 

Apparently 9 league games was enough for Rosenior.

He's got 4 games left.

[RoyMac5]

59 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Both Cloughs might have been sacked using the same criteria - certainly, no-one was convinced by Nigel at the end of his first half-season, though iirc with his Dad the fans could see that something was building, particularly after a 4-0 victory over top of the table QPR towards the end of the season. 

We've had so many managers, eventually successful, whose initial impact seemed "meh" at best, but now they're instantly compared to Nigel Pearson, and not, say, George Burley or even Arthur Cox, who both had to resurrect the club from virtual bankruptcy. As a fanbase, we seem to have gone from immensely relieved and grateful to survive to entitled and hyper-critical in record time. We're "so over" Administration and teetering on the edge of liquidation, aren't we?! 

Lol. To compare the two Cloughs is very apt. One took us nowhere for 5 season the other took us to the top!

How many successful managers of the Arthur Cox/George Burley type have we had compared to Pearson/Clement then? 

Edited October 27, 2022 by RoyMac5

[sage]

1 hour ago, Bob The Badger said:

In the remaining 29 games Rotherham played that season the won 4, drew 4 and lost 21.

I have no clue how he managed to hang on in the job, but I bet Rotherham are glad he did.

Calls for him to go this early on are preposterous and only based in prior held convictions, not the realities of what is needed to succeeded in football.

Half this board would have had Clough sacked in his first season as well as Cox. And Jim Smith would have been hung, drawn and quartered after the Tranmere game.

Did he turn it around by coaching his style to existing players or by revamping the squad?

[Jubbs]

42 minutes ago, Crewton said:

Do we really judge managers on their records after 5 league games, three of which have been heavily influenced by incompetent officiating? It's not really compatible with the responsible ownership model that I think the vast majority of fans were espousing as the way forward, is it? 

Do we really judge managers on their records after 9 league games?

A reasonable ownership model would be for their to be a similarity between playing styles of managers and keep a philosophy of football throughout all age groups at the club, Brighton, Brentford and Swansea are good examples of this.
Instead, we recruited 14 players to fit a certain style of football and to then get rid of the manager after a successful start only to appoint a manager on the opposite side of playing styles, with "no players" to suit his style.

[Beetle]

From what I've seen / heard from Paul Warne so far I like. He is telling us it is not good enough, which we can all see.

Although the football has not been great to watch I feel we are not as long ball as some people believe so I'm not buying into this total change of philosophy that people are eluding to.

We certainly move the ball faster and seem to use the channels more instead of waiting to work the ball out very wide every time. Subsequently we will be more of a threat, the away form already shows that.

I think good things are coming but it may be 18 months away yet due to us not being able to buy anyone. It's great to sit in Pride Park and know I can still come in 18 months time, maybe we might even have real ale / decent bottled beer at the ground by then ?

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Beetle said:

From what I've seen / heard from Paul Warne so far I like. He is telling us it is not good enough, which we can all see.

Yes we can all see that. What we are asking is WHY isn't it good enough?

We've seen these same players play some very good exciting football, so when we don't we ask why not.

[Tamworthram]

34 minutes ago, AGR said:

Apparently 9 league games was enough for Rosenior.

He's got 4 games left.

You’re assuming LR was actually being given the opportunity to prove himself (in which case 9 games is far too little) rather than literally being asked the hold the fort as an interim manager until a permanent one was in place. Whether it’s right or wrong, I now firmly believe that LR was never in Clowes mind. In which case, the number games he was in charge is somewhat irrelevant. If LR had been given a four year contract there is no way he would have been relieved of the managerial job after just 9 games given the hand he was dealt and the decent job he was doing.

[AGR]

5 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

You’re assuming LR was actually being given the opportunity to prove himself (in which case 9 games is far too little) rather than literally being asked the hold the fort as an interim manager until a permanent one was in place. Whether it’s right or wrong, I now firmly believe that LR was never in Clowes mind. In which case, the number games he was in charge is somewhat irrelevant. If LR had been given a four year contract there is no way he would have been relieved of the managerial job after just 9 games given the hand he was dealt and the decent job he was doing.

Fair point.

I think the sensible thing to have done. would've been to give Liam the job until the end of the season to prove himself. The situation we now have is that this season is effectively a write off as we have a manager that isn't suited to our squad and doesn't look like he's going to budge his style. I'm not sure next season will be much better as we still can't spend next summer.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lol. To compare the two Cloughs is very funny. One took us nowhere for 5 season the other took us to the top!

How many successful managers of the Arthur Cox/George Burley type have we had compared to Pearson/Clement then? 

Err.... the father took us to unbelievable heights after he survived members of the board lobbying for his sacking before the end of his first season at the club. The son was promised funds to take us forward again, following the financial and on-field disaster of Billy Davies and Paul Jewell. The funds were not forthcoming and as he now says, if he knew those promises were to be reneged upon he would have stayed at Burton Albion and in retrospect he says he should have walked out of Derby after six months. But he stayed, significantly reduced the club's debts and built the side that took us to Wembley against QPR - only the loan signings of Wisdom, Bamford, Thorne and Dawkins were players brought in by McLaren in the squad for the final.

Just as we will never know in the case of Leroy Rosenior, what he would have achieved with a bit more patience, we will never know what Nigel Clough would have achieved had he received the financial support and patience, which he was promised when he came into the club. But his efforts made the club attractive enough for Mel Morris to want to gamble his Candy Crush money on it....maybe some will wish to lay some blame on Nigel Clough for that?.

This forum is all about opinions and that is its reason for being. But please let those opinions have some balance and fairness. I just find it ironic that we already have the cracks and divisions of opinion following the welcome solidarity and unity in the ultimately triumphant fight to merely exist over the past two years.

For me, whatever has happened in the past, Paul Warne is our manager and we should give him time to prove if he is the man to take us back to where we want to be. Six games is not long enough for us to pass judgement.

[Ghost of Clough]

9 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

You’re assuming LR was actually being given the opportunity to prove himself (in which case 9 games is far too little) rather than literally being asked the hold the fort as an interim manager until a permanent one was in place. Whether it’s right or wrong, I now firmly believe that LR was never in Clowes mind. In which case, the number games he was in charge is somewhat irrelevant. If LR had been given a four year contract there is no way he would have been relieved of the managerial job after just 9 games given the hand he was dealt and the decent job he was doing.

Then why let Rosenior recruit with his own style in mind. It added an unnecessary risk on the players we were signing not suiting a future manger's style. The likes of Chester, Hourihane and McGoldrick will be on a decent wage for L1 standards. Davies, Stearman, Forsyth, although adding depth don't appear to be Warne type players either. That's a lot of money being spent on wages to players Warne very likely doesn't want.

If, as you believe Rosenior was never going to get the job, then why not recruit to suit the style of manager Clowes did want?

[Crewton]

30 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

Do we really judge managers on their records after 9 league games?

I don't - I can't speak for others. 

I also find the idea that most of these players can only play one way. For example, Hourihane made his name at Barnsley in a direct team, Collins has played and succeeded with direct teams - check their histories and most of the recruits have played for a variety of teams. 

I agree that the style doesn't bring the best out of some of the academy graduates, but my recollection of watching our academy teams over the last few years has been that, whilst they endeavour to play out from the back and play through the thirds, they weren't afraid to go more direct and often played with wing-backs. It doesn't seem worlds apart to me. 

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I don't - I can't speak for others. 

I also find the idea that most of these players can only play one way. For example, Hourihane made his name at Barnsley in a direct team, Collins has played and succeeded with direct teams - check their histories and most of the recruits have played for a variety of teams. 

I agree that the style doesn't bring the best out of some of the academy graduates, but my recollection of watching our academy teams over the last few years has been that, whilst they endeavour to play out from the back and play through the thirds, they weren't afraid to go more direct and often played with wing-backs. It doesn't seem worlds apart to me. 

Every player has strengths and weaknesses though.  All of our centre halves are basically big, strong, but a bit slow types.  They're absolutely fine dealing with balls in the air, and wrestling with big target men, but they're much less effective dealing with pacy players running at them. The back 3 we're playing basically forces them into those situations, as the wide centre halves have to pull out wide and deal with wingers, and the rapid turnovers (sling it forward, lose it, get broken on) results in lots of breakaways running at our defence.

None of the wide players we have are suited to playing wingback.  NML/Barkhuizen/Sibley etc aren't good enough defensively, and you hamper their attacking play if you make them start 20/30 yards deeper. And Roberts isn't good enough going forward to be one of our primary attacking threats.

There are similar types of issues with some of the midfielders and forwards too. It's not that they can only play one way, it's that we're expressly setting up in a way that both limits their strengths and exposes their weaknesses.

[RoyMac5]

38 minutes ago, Brailsford Ram said:

Err.... the father took us to unbelievable heights after he survived members of the board lobbying for his sacking before the end of his first season at the club. The son was promised funds to take us forward again...But he stayed, significantly reduced the club's debts and built the side that took us to Wembley against QPR - only the loan signings of Wisdom, Bamford, Thorne and Dawkins were players brought in by McLaren in the squad for the final.

Lol. We would never have gotten to Wembley under Clough Jnr. Mac1 took over at 4-0 down and showed how to manage.

The father we were lucky to keep then, as he showed his talent at F*rest, where has Jnr shown his? He had plenty of time with us was the point. The right manager you want to stay long term, a long term manager isn't necessarily the right one!