While Alan Irvine’s departure at West Brom has received an element of sympathy in the footballing spheres, no one seemed to show anywhere near as much affection towards Neil Warnock’s Crystal Palace exit.
Warnock’s media profile has always diminished his overriding popularity – it’s difficult to name a manager who complains and bemoans more than he does, seemingly only able to ever criticise others and find excuses than concede his own weaknesses.
“I thought they (Pulis’ Palace) had a lot of luck last year,” were his last comments which appear to have been the final straw. And of course, any man who’s name becomes synonymous with an explicit anagram (Colin) is always unlikely to ignite public sympathy when they go through hardship.
His doubters all refer to the same basic argument. Warnock is a respectable Championship manager with a good record but, ultimately, placed in the theatre of the Premier League where the spotlight is somewhat brighter, and he’s largely out of his depth.
There’s an array of stats that will gleefully agree with that. Warnock’s competed in 118 Premier League games, winning 27, averaging 0.93 points per game. That, across a 38 game season, amasses 35.3 points, which is relegation form. For the less than favourable media outbursts and unfashionable tactics, Warnock can’t rely on empathetic factors to buy him time. If his players slip on the pitch, he’ll usually go crashing down with them.
One win since September, a 3-1 home victory against a stagnating Liverpool, was the ammunition for Chairman Steve Parish to take aim on Warnock’s reign.
Nevertheless, Warnock deserved more time. For those who dismiss his ability to manage in England’s elite should think again. After guiding his beloved Sheffield United to FA and League Cup semi-finals in the early noughties, a feat that hasn’t been matched since, he then took them to the Premier League. It was here that he was dealt an unfortunate set of circumstances. The Blades succumbed to the most unlikely relegation via an illegally owned Carlos Tevez inspiring West Ham to a one nil victory at then indefatigable champions Manchester United. He left on the record that he’d come up to the Premier League and got relegated, when in reality he was the victim of absurd circumstances.
He then stepped into the fiery QPR boardroom where he steadied a shaky ship. Guiding them to promotion was no mean feat, and he was again highly unfortunate to be dismissed when QPR dropped to 17th in January. In that instance, he wasn’t granted the lavish chequebook of Tony Fernandes to tackle QPR’s problems, unlike, say, Harry Redknapp who was appalling in his first season with them, but was granted the opportunity to rectify his errors.
Fundamentally, Warnock is unlucky because no chairman has ever maintained a degree of faith in him during periods of difficulty. And that in many ways presents an untenable situation. Warnock will always find himself in charge of relegation threatened clubs if he is to manage in the Premier League, and periods of difficulty will be unavoidable at certain times – no manager ever goes through a season entirely flawlessly. It’s just the best and most popular managers can call upon their own defiance unquestionably to buy them time.
Sacked four days before the January transfer window opened with Palace and dismissed eight days in with QPR, Warnock, despite has flaws, has been the victim of some harsh calls.
For a man who has achieved an impressive six promotions through his time in the Football League, Warnock has never really been given a truly fair attempt in England’s top flight. At the age of 66, that may well have been his last attempt at carving out a reputation in a league he has more than earned a right to work in.
Think of him what you will, but had English football shown Warnock just a little more patience, he may have achieved much more in his career.
[ad_pod id=’ricco’ align=’center’]