“Be careful what you wish for Brighton fans” - How the football world owes us an apology

[Seasidesage]

This seems to resurface time and time again. Hughton did a fantastic job for this club and deservedly will go down in its history as one of the greatest managers we have ever had. Anyone who thinks different is an idiot, but the time had come to make a change and so far at least it looks like we've made a good one. Potter has had the sense to build on the good foundations left while improving the style and lowering the age of the squad. The two things are not mutually exclusive, if he does well its all CH's doing or if he does bad its all CH's doing are ridiculous arguments.

We made a change at a good time rather than wait until we had a run of bad results etc. It's proved to be the right decision and we are undoubtedly in a better position than we would have been otherwise because while Chris may well have kept us up he wouldn't have evolved the style of play or the younger players to the same degree.

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

We made a change at a good time rather than wait until we had a run of bad results etc. It's proved to be the right decision and we are undoubtedly in a better position than we would have been otherwise because while Chris may well have kept us up he wouldn't have evolved the style of play or the younger players to the same degree.

Errr.....

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Imagine if someone suggested to him there are big races and small races. Big races have had empires and welath and expectations. Small races should think themselves lucky if they win a few olyimpic medals but they really mustn't expect to achieve as well as the big races.

Races like Africans. Teams like Brighton.

Imagine how he'd feel if John Terry told him he'd done awfully well, for a black man?

Talk about lack of introspection <sigh>.

It should be noted that Barnes was subjected to some of the most vile racist abuse while he was playing - including from opposition players. He deserves huge credit for highlighting the issue and keeping it in the public eye - even if occasionally he makes a ham-fisted effort of it.

Barnes also makes a lot of comments as a pundit that are built rather in thin ice - particularly given the fact that he was born in Jamaica (his father was captain of the Jamaican national team at one time) - yet Barnes ended up playing for England on rather spurious grounds.

As an aside - his father, Ken Barnes, was a really interesting character - including being involved in the first Jamaican bobsleigh team (Cool Runnings).

 

[highflyer]

Races like Africans

I suspect, on review, you'll be unhappy with that.

 

[Stato]

So far this thread is making me like John Barnes more and hate Twitter more

You've hit the nail on the head there. John Barnes is defending a perfectly reasonable view that, in getting us to 17th and a cup semi final, Chris would have every right to be shocked and surprised at getting his cards. Before the sacking, there were threads on here saying that his time should be up, but there were also threads saying that he needed to be supported with better signings and there was probably more clamour for the reinstatement of bottle caps than there was for sacking Chris Hughton. We had gone ultra defensive to avoid the drop, but then we had done that in the Championship in Chris's first season and then bounced into fast attacking and a third place finish the following season. All of us could only take our best guess at what was to follow.

John Barnes is just expressing the view that football chairmen are often too quick to believe that the grass is greener and that Hughton was just one casulty of this. His view was widespread at the time, particularly among those who didn't pay much attention to us. A more nuanced view was written by Nick Ames in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/may/13/brighton-sack-chris-hughton, saying "Brighton, though, are not asking to be like Manchester City or even, at this point, Brendan Rodgers’ Leicester. They hope a more expressive outlook will sustain their top-flight future and it is simply unfortunate that Hughton, a thoroughly decent man and a fine manager, becomes collateral damage now."

The fact that it was such a hard decision for Tony Bloom to make points to there being a good case for the opposing view. That some idiot has to harangue John Barnes about playing race cards simply for saying that his approach would have been more conservative than Tony Bloom's is unfortunate, but fairly predictable. Twitter and Facebook have proven that the Tower of Babel story was definitely a myth; Providing evidence that, given the ability to communicate with all, mankind wouldn't work together to build a tower to challenge the authority of its maker, it would spend eternity squabbling about where the first brick should be laid.

 

[Seasidesage]

Errr.....

I mean at a natural break eg the end of the season rather than being 10 points adrift at Christmas for example?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I suspect, on review, you'll be unhappy with that.

Read the whole post. Try not to politically point score.

 

[Doc Lynam]

To understand the reaction of the ex pro pundit community to Chris's sacking you have to consider a number of their motivations.

The first is that, for the large majority of his tenure, Chris Hughton did do an excellent job as Brighton manager. Given the facts about his full term as Brighton manager, he would have every right to be shocked and disappointed at his sacking. Only those who saw a lot of the later matches would fully understand that the downturn was looking permanent and irretrievable and would understand that it was only the late timing of the collapse that had allowed the club to avoid relegation. Those who watched closely saw that, if nothing changed, the drop had been merely delayed, not avoided. It was my impression that the reaction of good football journalists rather than pundits was more understanding of the reasons for the change.

Secondly, Chris Hughton is, and has for a long time been, a genuinely decent and honourable man, liked and respected by a huge number of people in the game. He had already been treated fairly shoddily by Newcastle and people, especially those who knew him, felt sympathy for him and disapproved of any sniff that he may not have got a fair crack of the whip. Add in the fact that he was a champion for both the truly under-represented BME football manager community and the self imagined under-represented 'proper British' manager community and you could understand why a lot of people may want to voice negative opinions about his sacking.

A less fact based motivation is that the large majority of the pundit community is made up of ex pros who have played for teams in the top six or eight teams in the country. Many of them are of the view that football needs a strong Man United/Liverpool/Arsenal/Everton (insert whichever teams they used to play for and those that they saw as their rivals). They do tend to be of the view that this elite closed shop cannot and should not be challenged by new money arrivistes. To be fair to them. this kind of conservatism is also common in football fan circles and is responsible for the throwing around of terms like 'plastics'. However, this attitude is not shared by successful entrepreneurs, who are more likely to want to challenge orthodoxy, and less likely to believe that they cannot bend situations to their will. We see Tony Bloom as one of us, but his business success would certainly suggest that he has this streak in him. He is respected in football circles, but sometimes his ambition will conflict with this conservatism.

Finally, I think that we have to accept two underlying truths about the sacking, 1) that it was done in, what seemed from the outside, a fairly ruthless way. Thanks and goodbye. No pre-announcement, so that Chris could say goodbye, no negotiation about a mutual parting of the ways that may have allowed him to save face. As fans who have the interests of the club at heart, we can understand that there may have been reasons for this and we are more ready to forgive ruthlessness in the interests of the greater good than outsiders would be. 2) That, on previous evidence, the odds seemed stacked against Tony Bloom. The fact that Graham Potter arrived, instilled his way of playing and achieved a complete turnaround in a group of players who were not used to expansive football, is fairly unheralded. We all saw, and probably feared, the Palace experience with De Boer. There seemed a good chance that we may have followed suit. The fact that we haven't is a great testament to the ability, determination and application of the whole group, players, staff, coaches, owners and administrators.

I wouldn't be too harsh on those who predicted failure, or even those who wished it on us. There is a bit of me that knows that, had it been similar circumstances at another club, (Leicester and Ranieri anyone?) I may have reacted in a similar way. It looks like we may have now survived to fight for another season. If we do, it will have been another struggle against the odds, just done in a different way than we did under Chris. Opportunities that did not seem possible before Chris's sacking now may seem to open up. However, it is worth remembering that Chris Hughton's best season in the Premier League saw the Norwich board seeming to think that they had become a fixture in the league and that they could now look up with confidence. It's never the case for clubs of our size. In a couple of months time, if we have survived, we will be once again appearing in the list of favourites for relegation for 2020/21. It will once again take a mammoth effort from all to ensure that we don't follow where Norwich went that year and are heading again this year.

Very good post, balanced and reflective.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Very good post, balanced and reflective.

We need more of these

 

[Stato]

I think that you may want to remove that Harry. I understand your point that some pundit's view that historically smaller teams should know their place should be challenged, but John Barnes has not at any point brought race into his argument. There is no reason for anyone to. It muddies the point you want to make and could be seen as an inappropriate escalation of an argument about football.

 

[highflyer]

Read the whole post. Try not to politically point score.

I did read the whole post. It was a poor analogy, undermined further by the unfortunate phrase I highlighted.

Unworthy of the author I thought, who always seems to be a thoughtful and knowledgeable, if occasionally hasty (and prolific) poster.

 

[Eric Youngs Contact Lense]

I have joined this one late! I don't get a lot of it or the fixed battle lines that have been drawn and re-drawn for a year now!
I was definitely a "Hughton In" fan and was surprised/saddened to see him leave - I cannot see how or even why GP season needs to be compared to CH to determine how well or badly he has done. It gives us a benchmark that lazy pundits/commentators make and we are doing the same. I don't even think last season's performance per se was the only reason why those in charge decided that they needed to make a change. The vision of the Club changed. In doing that, the simple question would have been asked - "Is CH the man to lead the first team squad towards the new vision". They didn't think he was. No reflection on his last season necessarily, but almost certainly a view of how he approached things with the team, with coaching day to day based on his previous seasons too.
I really don't think the Club would think they were wrong to make that decision even if we had been relegated. Again, the day to day approach, the understanding, willingness to adapt/change, engage others on that journey would be better reference points than just the points total we amass this season.
Hence, to answer the OP question, no the football world doesn't owe us an apology. Nor would the Club have owed CH an apology had we been relegated. I am delighted with the job that GP has done, and I have no idea if CH could have done it too - I may have my doubts, but by supporting what GP has done doesn't mean I can't appreciate the job that CH did, or vice versa.
I criticise the lazy pundits, for the one-dimensional approach to simply comparing points totals, as much as I criticised their one-dimensional approach to what was happening on the pitch.. "No attacking ambition" becomes "naive approach to the game" - The salutations towards Norwich in August/September and their fresh approach are similarly turned around now.
That the Club this week feels to us fans like it is in a good place doesn't vindicate or damn a decision that was made last year - neither should it.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I did read sthe whole post. It was a poor analogy, undermined further by the unfortunate phrase I highlighted.

Unworthy of the author I thought, who always seems to be a thoughtful and knowledgeable, if occasionally hasty (and prolific) poster.

The ignorance of someone making a remark along the lines of ‘races like Africans’ is matched by the ignorance of John Barnes with his clubs like Brighton agenda. He seems to believe in a natural order in football which is at odds with his other views. Seems like a perfectly reasonable analogy to me.

 

[pigbite]

You've hit the nail on the head there. John Barnes is defending a perfectly reasonable view that, in getting us to 17th and a cup semi final, Chris would have every right to be shocked and surprised at getting his cards. Before the sacking, there were threads on here saying that his time should be up, but there were also threads saying that he needed to be supported with better signings and there was probably more clamour for the reinstatement of bottle caps than there was for sacking Chris Hughton. We had gone ultra defensive to avoid the drop, but then we had done that in the Championship in Chris's first season and then bounced into fast attacking and a third place finish the following season. All of us could only take our best guess at what was to follow.

John Barnes is just expressing the view that football chairmen are often too quick to believe that the grass is greener and that Hughton was just one casulty of this. His view was widespread at the time, particularly among those who didn't pay much attention to us. A more nuanced view was written by Nick Ames in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/may/13/brighton-sack-chris-hughton, saying "Brighton, though, are not asking to be like Manchester City or even, at this point, Brendan Rodgers’ Leicester. They hope a more expressive outlook will sustain their top-flight future and it is simply unfortunate that Hughton, a thoroughly decent man and a fine manager, becomes collateral damage now."

The fact that it was such a hard decision for Tony Bloom to make points to there being a good case for the opposing view. That some idiot has to harangue John Barnes about playing race cards simply for saying that his approach would have been more conservative than Tony Bloom's is unfortunate, but fairly predictable. Twitter and Facebook have proven that the Tower of Babel story was definitely a myth; Providing evidence that, given the ability to communicate with all, mankind wouldn't work together to build a tower to challenge the authority of its maker, it would spend eternity squabbling about where the first brick should be laid.

100% agree on the JB position - whatever way you look at it the CH sacking was harsh. However both TB and CH were in a no win situation. CH did get us to the PL, kept us up last season and got us to an FA cup semi but there was no doubt that the football had lost it's way. How many people here would have been happy to bet big money that this season would have been different under CH to last season? Even assuming that the players were all happy to support CH (and my opinion is that I think TB would have been less likely to sack CH if the dressing room feedback was they were 100% behind him), I would suggest that most people would foresee Brighton effectively being in a relegation battle from day one. Who would bet big money that come Xmas, Brighton would not have been in the bottom three or very close to it? In that scenario then the crowd would have been baying for CH's head on a platter which would have been an disgrace but I am sure he would have gone.

In raw terms the odds were that CH would have got the sack this season anyway. Not 100% but more likely than not. In that situation then if you get a new manager in then what's the worst that can happen? We go down anyway. In that scenario that gamble has been taken and it's not worked but what if it doesn't happen. You've bought fresh faces both to coaching and the squad. The team dynamic has changed. The style has changed. You give yourself a fighting chance just because of the change and you do that change in the summer when you have more time and more availability of manager and players.
.
I'm certainly not saying that TB did CH a favour by sacking him and of course the gamble may not have worked. It's true to say that this season has been far from the proverbial walk in the park but I think most would agree that the football overall has been better and I am more confident that GP can push the squad forward to a more secure mid table finish level of performance. Clearly there is work to do, especially with the final third but I have vastly more hope at the end of this season than those closing days of last season.

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

I have joined this one late! I don't get a lot of it or the fixed battle lines that have been drawn and re-drawn for a year now!
I was definitely a "Hughton In" fan and was surprised/saddened to see him leave - I cannot see how or even why GP season needs to be compared to CH to determine how well or badly he has done. It gives us a benchmark that lazy pundits/commentators make and we are doing the same. I don't even think last season's performance per se was the only reason why those in charge decided that they needed to make a change. The vision of the Club changed. In doing that, the simple question would have been asked - "Is CH the man to lead the first team squad towards the new vision". They didn't think he was. No reflection on his last season necessarily, but almost certainly a view of how he approached things with the team, with coaching day to day based on his previous seasons too.
I really don't think the Club would think they were wrong to make that decision even if we had been relegated. Again, the day to day approach, the understanding, willingness to adapt/change, engage others on that journey would be better reference points than just the points total we amass this season.
Hence, to answer the OP question, no the football world doesn't owe us an apology. Nor would the Club have owed CH an apology had we been relegated. I am delighted with the job that GP has done, and I have no idea if CH could have done it too - I may have my doubts, but by supporting what GP has done doesn't mean I can't appreciate the job that CH did, or vice versa.
I criticise the lazy pundits, for the one-dimensional approach to simply comparing points totals, as much as I criticised their one-dimensional approach to what was happening on the pitch.. "No attacking ambition" becomes "naive approach to the game" - The salutations towards Norwich in August/September and their fresh approach are similarly turned around now.
That the Club this week feels to us fans like it is in a good place doesn't vindicate or damn a decision that was made last year - neither should it.

Fair enough, but can you imagine the opprobrium that would have been poured on the BHA Board if the show was on the other foot and we had/do go down!! Miles of column inches I would suggest.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It should be noted that Barnes was subjected to some of the most vile racist abuse while he was playing - including from opposition players. He deserves huge credit for highlighting the issue and keeping it in the public eye - even if occasionally he makes a ham-fisted effort of it.

Barnes also makes a lot of comments as a pundit that are built rather in thin ice - particularly given the fact that he was born in Jamaica (his father was captain of the Jamaican national team at one time) - yet Barnes ended up playing for England on rather spurious grounds.

As an aside - his father, Ken Barnes, was a really interesting character - including being involved in the first Jamaican bobsleigh team (Cool Runnings).

Interesting facts.

I am commenting, however, only on his persistence in belittling my football club. I chose to highlight the rather one-eyed aspect of this. Nothing you have written has any relevance to what I wrote.

I would certainly acknowledge however that we can all be rather one-eyed when it suits us. I have certainly joined in with the lazy tropes about Palace, and tories, without really thinking it through. I hope I do this less these days. Nothing wrong with supporting your local team (even if it is Palace) or feeling that a conservative path is politically preferable.

The notion that my club is not entitled to hope and ambition, and should know its place, and be grateful for every little victory that comes our way is prejudice, however, based on assumptions about the divine rights and expectations of the 'big'. That the irony escapes people is itself not surprising. to me.

Nice to see your not straying from the rightous path of passing comment only on football.....for the time being at least

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I suspect, on review, you'll be unhappy with that.

I was aware of the absurdity when I typed it, but it seemed a nice lazy way of making the point (which was itself about the annoying and offensive nature of lazy stereotypes in the context of the persistent belittlement of my club). Perhaps I should have put it in inverted commas.

But, no, I'm not unhappy. Why should I be? Would it have been better had I simply typed 'on this occasion, Barnes can **** right off?'.

 

[andy1980]

When John Barnes says where should a club like Brighton be, I think he is looking at Brighton from a historical perspective. Perhaps a better question is. "Where should a club who have an owner, who has spent over £350m of his own wealth be."

If you ask a player like Glenn Murray, or Bobby Zamora (who have experienced Brighton then and now), they would tell you that Brighton is a totally different club now.

He then says Hughton did nothing wrong to get the sack. I agree with him, but he didn't get the sack for doing something wrong. Bloom said Brighton only managed 3 wins in 22 games and he couldn't see that changing this season, So it was a pro-active decision, not a reactive one.

 

[pasty]

I honestly don't see what all the fuss was about concerning CH's sacking, other than the fact we had made it to safety, so to an outsider the timing was perhaps a little odd.

Had the same set of results leading up to his sacking occurred at any other time of the season, and resulted in his sacking, nobody would have batted an eyelid.

And if anybody truly believes he was sacked because of his ethnicity, then they are a complete and utter bellend.

 

[Stato]

Would it have been better had I simply typed 'on this occasion, Barnes can **** right off?'.

To be honest Harry, yes it would. Had you been arguing with points made by Robbie Savage, or Jamie Redknapp, you wouldn't have considered making an analogy about race. It was unnecessary to do so to make your point about John Barnes' belittling of BHAFC. People raising race in a conversation that is not about race just because of who they are arguing with has the effect of adding to the number of barriers faced by black figures in the media that are not faced by their white counterparts. I am sure that this was not your intention, but feel that you need to reconsider and, if you agree, change it. I'd be far happier with '**** right off.' It seems the more appropriate response to anyone dropping a 'teams like Brighton'.