Surely Thorn is destined to go down in history as the worst City manager ever (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Otis
- Start date
JulianDarbyFTW
Well-Known Member
Worst? Statistically I guess. Personally i think Phil Neal takes some beating.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
That he will, and he has few reasons to complain.
WillieStanley
New Member
It is sad. I liked the fella. I met him last Christmas by chance at my works do at the Chesford Grange with the lovely Ken D. Thorn genuinly wanted to chat, was very apologetic about the the way the season had been up til that point. He seemed very confident of improvement. He also seemed to have bought into KDs new role following his departure as chairman (This was about a week or so prior to "benchgate").
For the sake of the club though, I hope that stat does remain in place forever.
Last edited:
Otis
Well-Known Member
That's what I am saying. A bloke can be guilty of a crime but be found innocent and that is a statistical fact. Statistically AT will never be bettered (or worsened) as the worst ever City manager.
When people look back through history that is all they seem to remember. When you look at who won the cup in 1987 it will say Coventry City. You have to look much deeper to find we won it with an own goal.
Gaz
Well-Known Member
@richh87
Member
Well said that man - so would I.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
I'm not sure that will explain the massive contrast between home and away results.
@richh87
Member
Utter shite. He has more to complain about, resources wise, than any City Manager in history.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Depends if people deem the 'worst Manager' to be the man to have the lowest win percentage.
I don't.
Stats will say that though.
That's what history books will say and that's what football experts will look at.
Any manager that has been linked with us and the first thing we usually do is to look to see if they have had any success at all and at their win ratio.
Just the way it is.
I don't.
Stats will say that though.
That's what history books will say and that's what football experts will look at.
Any manager that has been linked with us and the first thing we usually do is to look to see if they have had any success at all and at their win ratio.
Just the way it is.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
Resources don't account for the disparity between home and away results. To focus on resources is to overlook the factor that really did him in - the away record.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
And the away record had nothing to do with inexperienced kids defending for their lives did it?
WestEndAgro
Well-Known Member
I'm no Thorn fan, and statistics say he was the worst, however the football witnessed under Butcher, Howe, Neal, Coleman to name a few was far worse, if slightly better results wise
SydneySkyBlue
Member
Otis, you're shit stirring here and you know it!
Stats mean nothing without context.
Where are the stats for each manager and how much they were given to spend? Or which manager had most of his key players sold? It's all relative.
You know it is though. I'm wasting my breath!
Stats mean nothing without context.
Where are the stats for each manager and how much they were given to spend? Or which manager had most of his key players sold? It's all relative.
You know it is though. I'm wasting my breath!
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Defence of Keogh Cranie Hussey with Murphy as back up? Christie yes but he preferred him to Wood. Still the answer to the question will be answered in basic economic terms of supply and demand. Thorn is available to 91 clubs - how many will demand his services.
@richh87
Member
Otis, you're shit stirring here and you know it!
Stats mean nothing without context.
Where are the stats for each manager and how much they were given to spend? Or which manager had most of his key players sold? It's all relative.
You know it is though. I'm wasting my breath!
Strachan was a good Manager until McAllister and Keane went - now he's continually slated. He was still the same man who'd given us 'The Entertainers' when we got relegated.
It's all about context.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
You make it sound as though we fielded an entire team of children, bizarre hyperbole once again.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
You're actually going there? That somehow these professional footballers become lesser beings when they play away from home? Maybe the question you ought to be asking yourself is why they were having to defend so much away from home...
@richh87
Member
It wasn't far off. It was an absolute joke the amount that we're fielded.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
No, it is not as simple as that. Do you not remember Strachan's refusal to play guys like Breen and Edworthy and Aloisi, insisting instead on the likes of Barry Quinn to play full-back? Gordon's stubbornness had a lot to do with his decline at CCFC.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Otis, you're shit stirring here and you know it!
Stats mean nothing without context.
Where are the stats for each manager and how much they were given to spend? Or which manager had most of his key players sold? It's all relative.
You know it is though. I'm wasting my breath!
Not shit stirring at all. Why do you say that? I have said several times that I find the whole thing saddening.
I was not shit stirring just wondering if we will ever see such low stats again ever.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
You must be the only anti-Thorner that won't accept he had an inexperienced squad last season.
Clarke? Cameron? Hussey? Christie? Bigi? Thomas? I seem to remember our average age towards the end there being 18 or 19.
Until he is given a fair crack of the whip nobody can properly judge him as a manager.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
Because we didn't have decent cover on the bench? Because we were forced to field unfit players half the time? Because we weren't able to compete with clubs that could bring the likes of Kevin Phillips off the bench to change a game? Because young players don't have the same mental strength and leadership qualities?
That's just off the top of my head. Take your pick.
SydneySkyBlue
Member
You know very well that it looks like a dig at the outgoing manager on the day he was sacked as opposed to a reflection of the state of the club!
@richh87
Member
Listen - last year's resources weren't acceptable for a club trying to stay up. The club have even admitted it - so anyone saying otherwise is talking rubbish.
This was the season to judge Thorn. There was a question mark hanging over him over whether he was crap tactically. The first 3 games have suggested that yes, he is crap tactically.
To be 2-0 up at home to Bury and concede twice is frankly shit.
No doubt he could scout and is a nice guy who likes attractive football. Sadly the amount of games we drew or lost from winning positions does say a lot.
This was the season to judge Thorn. There was a question mark hanging over him over whether he was crap tactically. The first 3 games have suggested that yes, he is crap tactically.
To be 2-0 up at home to Bury and concede twice is frankly shit.
No doubt he could scout and is a nice guy who likes attractive football. Sadly the amount of games we drew or lost from winning positions does say a lot.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
None of which explain the disparity between the home and away records. Had we sucked at home too, you may have had a point.
Colonel Mustard
New Member
Nobody is saying that. There is this bungee effect where we see a reversion to the all-in-one excuse of "no resources" when examining Thorn's record. But there's no avoiding it - there are very questionable things to ask of Thorn based on both eyeball opinions and cold, hard, black-and-white statistics.
I remember a cup game against Tottenham, around 2004ish. The CCFC team that day gave absolutely everything they had against Spurs, but were thoroughly outmatched. That is the vision of Thorn's reign that some are trying to put across, but it's just not true.
