I thought this decision crazy at first, given the clean sheets and the recent team improvements.
Sanctioning the Sven spend, only to fire him at this stage really comes down to the owners guessing their way through. Sure it's their investment, and most likely someone elses money, but frankly I doubt they understand the game. I question their collective football knowledge, not in the "they're not football people" or Alan Young's "they're foreigners", but rather that their reference points and understanding of the game. I suspect the owners introduction to the game consisted of watching broadcasts of the Prem's big four - this is not typical.
It's apparent they are too desperate for success and the reflective glory of owning a premiership team - let's not kid ourselves - they bought the club to promote the King Power brand, similar business motives are everywhere in football.
On Sven himself, he came across as a considered and honest coach, a friend to the players which no doubt they appreciate. Was this style going to get us promoted? .. who knows. What is clear is that Sven knows the price of players but maybe not the value. We overpaid for some average players (Mills & Beckford), this is countered by the some strong value signings (Schmeichel, Nugent, Bamba). Ultimately I think the problem has been the average players Sven signed, to play in a system that doesn't suit them. Konchesky is a solid and reliable defender, but he's not an overlapping attacking style full back - which was key to Sven's diamond formation. Last years loans of Naughton & Cunningham DID offer that type of player (Lets not forget Naughton created much of our attack from RB!).
The signings and loans of Danns, Pantsil, Fernandes, Johnson were reasonable, but not given the similar players we already had on the books - Abe, Wellens and King. It was clear we didn't have the full backs to provide the width required. Another somewhat odd decision was Sven's sanctioning of pay rises for Wellens and Gallagher midway through last season - play well and at the seasons end we'll take stock, that should have been the message, but instead Sven the mate beat out Sven the coach.
Why did Sven not sign a wide player on loan? We badly needed a forward that could stretch the play and chip in with the goals. Beckford It's sad to say, has resembled a poor man's Schlupp.
The owners need to surround themselves with the right people to direct the club. They'd hoped Sven was this person - can Neville now provide the necessary leadership. The club desperately needs stability more than anything, if at the end of the season it meant a play-off place, great, that's a vast improvement on last season. What we didn't need is more turnover, but that's exactly what we've got. Along with some of the most irritating fans who seem to want the moon on a stick, whilst booing all the way!
I still think Sven going was the wrong decision at this stage. As it raises more questions than answers. Most important; can the new boss improve performances with the current squad? If he doesn't what are the consequences?
If we fail to make play-offs, and finish mid-table (or lower) it's a zero sum game for the owners. No better than when Sven was here and little to show for the heavy investment. Whilst looking at a summer of rebuilding, which would have been the case anyhow had Sven failed this season - I really hope this isn't the scenario.
Let's hope the team responds and put in a good performance against West Ham and end the week on a high.... Wish I was there.
But is 9 wins out of 27, never been in the top 6, no back to back wins this season or even his post match interview from the Milwall game not enough to make people think this was the right decision??
