Last night’s Match of the Day was great fun, for obvious reasons. But as the games wore on, I couldn’t help feel sorry for Hull City. Here we saw them lose 2-0 at Burnley, and fall victim to some fairly ordinary refereeing. When you’re struggling these things seem to happen, and Phil Brown is now under a lot of pressure (as if he wasn’t before).
Brown now has a new Chairman, one who will want to understand how the club finds itself in the position of having to stay up to survive as a going concern, but also at the wrong end of the league on merit. Rival fans throughout the land are enjoying this. Brown always looks that little bit too pleased with himself, got a bit carried away with Hull’s big start last season, and hasn’t always acquitted himself in the usual manner since then (singing on the pitch when they stayed up, for example…).
I think this is partly what grates. I see more than a little of Lawrie Sanchez in Brown. Dave Kidd, writing in the excellent new TOOFIF, doesn’t say a lot about Sanchez but does note that Sanchez is a bright man, and one who likes the sound of his own opinions. That’s Brown too isn’t it? Whatever Lawrie Sanchez did wrong at Fulham he didn’t deserve the vitriol that flew his way.
But Phil Brown has achieved great things at Hull. Here’s where they were when he took over (thanks to statto.com for the tables).
Not good is it?
Here’s where they got to by the end of the season:
And here’s what happened the season after that:
And up they went.
You don’t go from bottom of the Championship to the Premier League in 18 months without a) doing something right (signing Fraizer Campbell – “simply too good for the Championship” – on loan from Man Utd was clearly a masterstroke), but b) being bloody lucky. Hull had no business being promoted that season. In the Wembley playoff final they met Bristol City, an organised but very ordinary side, and won with a tremedous Dean Windass strike (following good work from Campbell). Hull were going to the Premiership.
We all know what happened then. Fulham went to Hull first up and gifted the home side a win, and from there things snowballed. They went to Anfield and gave Liverpool a terrible fright, they beat Arsenal at the Emirates, and were quickly up to 30 odd points. Which was just as well as for the rest of the season they hardly won again (the notable exception coming at Craven Cottage, when Manucho burgled the points in the dying moments). Hull survived, despite hurtling down the league for a large part of the season. Had the season gone on two more weeks they would surely have perished, but it didn’t and they didn’t.
This season has seen more of the same, an ordinary side playing ordinary football and losing matches. Brown’s in trouble. But should we have expected any different? They lost Fraizer Campbell after the promotion season and have lacked quality ever since. They had no business being in the Premiership in the first place; staying up was a miracle, and miracles don’t repeat themselves. I suppose the argument is that having stayed up, Brown should have built on this fortune, but it’s not easy to make water into wine.
Here are some of his signings:
Geovanni, free from Man City. Good pickup. Quality player.
Bernard Mendy free. Mendy used to be a flying right back for Paris St Germain, and has had his moments at Hull. Another astute signing.
George Boateng was immense against us. I think he’s been injured rather too much, and he’s not getting any younger, but again, this is exactly the sort of player Hull needed to give some Premier League steel.
Anthony Gardner is a glorified Zat Knight, but he’s big and not bad, and again, a fair signing.
Marlon King was an aberration, a nasty piece of work.
Kamil Zayette formed a fantastic partnership with Michael Turner for a time.
Daniel Cousin was on Fulham’s radar but ended up at Hull, where he has been somewhat ordinary.
Kevin Kilbane is a good player and could do a job in better sides.
Jimmy Bullard was a calculated risk. With things going pear shaped Brown saw an opportunity to sign a recent England squad player at a decent price. He knew about Bullard’s knee, but figured that this was a unique opportunity. I think he was right. I didn’t really want us to lose Bullard, I didn’t particularly mind that he went either, but had the knee not given out then this signing could have been a very good one. Clearly this is not how things have turned out, but it was, on balance, and given the context, a bold signing that could have changed Hull’s season. They have to live with the gamble gone wrong now, and for that alone Brown may find himself in hot water, but in his position I think other managers would have done the same thing. Had they been allowed…
The latter is an important point. A few weeks ago I listened to Steve Claridge and John Motson on Radio 5 Live, and talk turned to Harry Redknapp. Redknapp, they said, had clearly left Portsmouth in a state, but someone rightly asked where the blame for this lay. Redknapp kept asking for money. Someone kept on saying yes. This being so, where do you apportion blame? It is not black and white.
Similarly, when Jimmy Bullard failed his medical, could someone have said to Phil Brown “no – this cannot happen”? I think so. But like Brown, whoever signed off on the deal was seduced by the prospect of further glory. Hull have overachieved and got caught up with the idea that somehow all it takes is a bit of money and they can stay where they think they belong. But it doesn’t work like that. Yes, you need to spend, and you have to spend well (by and large Brown has, I think), but none of this is any substitute for quality. That’s why they felt they had to sign Bullard, and why they’re in big trouble now (that and letting Michael Turner leave – how they miss him).
I’ve wandered off point. Phil Brown transformed Hull City in no time. Perhaps, like a startup company that later needs to bring in an experienced management team as the company grows, he has outlived his usefulness. Perhaps he is facing an impossible situation and done a marvellous job staving off relegation. Perhaps he got lucky with Fraizer Campbell, some mad results at the start of last season, and is now finding his level as Hull undoubtedly find theirs. Probably all of those. But I can’t hate him for any of this. In fact I admire what he’s done, and wish him well.
There’s always schadenfreude when arrogant people fail and that’s what it is with Brown.
I doubt that sacking him though will be the answer. They don’t have the money to shop big in January and Hull have already found that too many good players won’t go to Hull so they’ve attracted some less good who’ll go anywhere for the money.
They’ll likely go down and from there into administration but they’re not yet adrift of the pack and could yet survive.
Good piece though.
Comment by Tony Gilroy — November 1, 2009 @ 11:43 am |
As a Hull supporter it is nice to hear a more balanced view of our current plight rather than people talking about his fake tan. I really wanted Brownie to succeed this season and prove all his doubters wrong but recent tactics have been so negative I have lost faith. If he goes soon he will save face and allow someone to freshen things up and with the best wishes of all true City fans.
Comment by Chris — November 1, 2009 @ 11:51 am |
Interesting to see that Hull would have been relegated to League 1 had Luton not had a points deduction in Brown’s first season. Goes to show how close success and failure are to each other.
Comment by Bad Andy — November 1, 2009 @ 1:33 pm |
Luton had 0 points deducted.
Good article. We need characters in the game – and Phil is one of them – least we forget this is entertianment for us and business only for a few.
Comment by Phil Brown — November 1, 2009 @ 2:10 pm |
Sorry – you’re right. I’d read the table incorrectly. I thought it had just listed the home and away games in the league rather than the full, home and then away games.
Comment by Bad Andy — November 2, 2009 @ 11:22 am |
NEARLY a hijack … talking about the vicissitudes of football. Your first table shows Luton Town in 5th in the CCC. Today’s table shows Luton Town 5th in the Conference. The time lapse between those table? Three years and one week.
Comment by HatterDon — November 1, 2009 @ 1:52 pm |
One reason why I think people don’t like Brown is epitomized in this photograph: http://images.teamtalk.com/09/07/330/Phil-Brown-North-Ferriby-United-Hull-City-Pre_2336164.jpg
Comment by Lee — November 1, 2009 @ 4:19 pm |
How refreshing to read an article that doesn’t focus on the half-time team talk at Manchester City!
If the club’s first season in the Premier League had started a year ago today, Hull City would have finished with 23 points and been relegated. Given the expectations coming into the division, I doubt very much if Brown would have been vilified to the extent he is now. A victim of his early success last season?
Sadly, being in the Premier League is like becoming a celebrity. Suddenly the media is full of poorly-researched and inaccurate stories about you, all in the pursuit of a good headline. For example, we have only won three games since the boxing day incident, but also since Marlon King broke a woman’s nose, since the referee failed to see two fouls at Anfield that turned a 2-0 lead into a point each, since Jimmy Bullard picked up an injury, since Sunderland recalled Paul McShane, but none of the latter reasons make a good story or have a great page-filling picture for the red-tops.
Phil Brown has done remarkable things for Hull City, but neither the national media nor the people who became fans the moment the final whistle blew at Wembley will remember or care about that.
Given the club’s financial situation and the attractiveness of an outpost city at the wrong end of the M62, I cannot see who else is out there that would be willing or able to do a better job than Phil Brown, with or without a perma-tan or a penchant for karaoke.
Comment by Cath — November 1, 2009 @ 5:53 pm |
When Hull began their premier league campaign last season they attacked, attacked, attacked. And the fans and media appreciated and respected that.
But when things went downhill Phil Brown resorted to playing ugly and scrapping for points. And the fans and media turned on him.
The league already has its Megson, Allardyce, and even Pulis to some extent. No one wanted someone else, particularly Phil Brown.
Comment by timmyg — November 1, 2009 @ 6:36 pm |
I’m afraid the Hull fans I dealt with when I wrote about Bullard’s departure seemed – like Phil Brown – a little bit too full of themselves, crowing about how they were a club on the up. Thus it’s hard to feel much sympathy to be fair. Spending all that money on Bullard was, quite frankly, ridiculous. I know we criticise Fulham’s apparently over zealous medicals but I’d rather that than overt risk taking.
Comment by Rob — November 2, 2009 @ 1:12 pm |
The defence of Lawrie Sanchez intrigues me. Here’s a man so arrogant and self-absorbed he gave an interview to The Times which ran the day before our do-or-die fixture at Portsmouth in 2008 in which he said if he were still at Fulham we wouldn’t have been in the relegation quagmire. Here is also a man who publicly criticised Roy Hodgson when he took over the helm, and who claimed he was Premier League material and didn’t want to coach further down the football league. Though I find him a tad unsavoury, I think Phil Brown is in a different league to Sanchez, and this excellent post does highlight what he has achieved.
Comment by EdWrite — November 2, 2009 @ 2:03 pm |
Ed – I’d be really interested in seeing links to those quotes. Otherwise it sounds like the usual messageboard twist on his words. I’m not defending Sanchez as such, and clearly Hodgson is a different class, but Sanchez did not deserve half the abuse he took (I didn’t think).
Of course he believed he’d have got us out of the mess before the end of the season – why wouldn’t he? Whether he should have said this is highly questionable, but there’s a difference between having poor communication skills/foot-in-mouth syndrome and being the arrogant king of all evil people tried to make him out to be. Dunno. Hodgson’s different class, of course he is, but Sanchez… oh, let’s not go over all this again!
It would be good to see direct quotes for the above though.
Cheers
Rich
Comment by weltmeisterclaude — November 2, 2009 @ 2:15 pm |
There is a defence for Sanchez although clearly he’s no Roy Hodgson.
He bought some good players some of whom are still giving good value and he had dreadful luck losing McBride and Bullard when he did. Plus bad luck with referees.
I maintain that it all went wrong for him though in the last week of the transfer window. He offloaded Knight, Diop and Brown without getting in suitable replacements leaving us with a very brittle midfield.
Was he under orders to sell? Were the replacements lined up but deals fell through at the last minute? Was he just stupid?
Whatever else, he does himself no favours when he opens his mouth which is basically Phil Brown’s problem as well.
Comment by Tony Gilroy — November 2, 2009 @ 3:47 pm |
I’m not in the business of defending Sanchez but he did sign Hughes, Kamara and Murphy.
I was baffled by the fact that he wanted to play a very direct style of football but put together a squad with only one target man in McBride. He bypassed two central midfielders with the potential to be very effective with the ball at their feet in Davis and Murphy.
Getting rid of Knight was odd, especially as he’d been singing his praises only a week or so earlier. I reckon Fulham jumped at the money Villa were offering and then were scrambling around for a replacement.
Sanchez also seemed concerned with maintaining a high media profile too. He continued to mention what he’d done as a player and a manager before a particular game which began to grate with me I’m afraid.
Comment by Dan — November 3, 2009 @ 1:21 pm |
Hello!
He did sign some good players, but proceeded to either under-use them or shatter their confidence. The Kamara, Baird and Murphy we see today are a world apart from the Sanchez era. Even Seol was born again under Woy.
I have looked for the quote in question, from May 2008 in The Times (or Telegraph), but cannot find it. I certainly didn’t read them on a messageboard; if he didn’t say what I claim he said, it would be down to the Times/Telegraph hacks’ misquoting.
I used to work for a TV channel which Lawrie did frequent punditry for, and I don’t think I’m giving away any secrets when I say his arrogance is infamous, and his lack of humility extraordinary. He may not be evil, but he does appear to be deluded.
Comment by kingedwrite — November 4, 2009 @ 5:48 pm |
Cool, interesting stuff.
Comment by weltmeisterclaude — November 4, 2009 @ 8:50 pm |
[...] over at CCN has been having some fun with tables from days gone by to prove points about Phil Brown and Fulham’s [...]
Pingback by Tabling Tables - - The Offside - Fulham FC English Premiership Football Blog — November 2, 2009 @ 11:50 pm |
What if Bobby Zamora had agree to go to Hull? What if Bobby had showed the sort of form for Hull that he’s shown for Fulham – 4 or 5 goals? Hull could be mid table. Brown was ridiculed for trying to sign BZ, not least by Fulham fans, but in hindsight his judgement was correct, and he would have been lauded for turning around the form of much criticised (in my view incorrectly) player.
Comment by Mike H — November 2, 2009 @ 11:51 pm |
I think the question you have to ask is would Bobby have scored the goals he’s got this season at Hull? I don’t think he would have done. Roy’s a shreweder manager than Brown, who probably isn’t as poor as everybody seems to want to make out. I am certainly glad we’ve still got Zamora.
Comment by Dan — November 3, 2009 @ 1:16 pm |
Good point. However, Bobby would have been a vast improvement on what they’ve got so you would expect that , with Bobby, they’d have a few more points than they’ve got, and it would have been seen as a shrewd buy by Brown. Agree with you totally that Roy is far, far shrewder, which is why he wasn’t keen on letting Bobby go without a replacement. My recollection though, is that it was Bobby’s decision not to accept Hull’s offer. If he had accepted, it’s hard to see how Roy could have made him stay. Great outcome for Fulham though.
Comment by Mike H — November 3, 2009 @ 11:15 pm |
I just got the impression from the whole business that Bobby wasn’t too impressed with Hull, which from their point of view was a shame, because I think him and the lad Altidore could have dovetailed quite nicely up front – if Brown ever put him on the pitch at the start of a game.
Roy quite clearly said to Bobby that he was expecting the offer because it met/was close to meeting Fulham’s valuation, but that he would like him to stay because he still had a role to play for Fulham. Don’t underestimate how important Roy (who gave Bobby a chance when he’d slipped down the West Ham pecking order and plays him in a system suited to his strengths) and European football were in this decision.
Comment by Dan — November 4, 2009 @ 12:23 pm |