The bewildering boardroom at Nottingham Forest! (part deux)

The situation at the City Ground is awfully familiar. Different manager, similar story. Pat Riddell explains.


If the noises Steve McClaren made before the end of the transfer window weren’t alarm bells enough, the newspaper reports on Friday morning were Code Red. And then, almost as soon as it had happened, it was all over. But not without Nottingham Forest’s dirty laundry being hung out in public. Again.

Given that the ‘McClaren on the verge of quitting’ stories were published across all the national newspapers — and written by many of Fleet Street’s finest — there seemed more to this than mischief-making or a slow news day. Journalists were very obviously, and purposefully, briefed with McClaren’s consent.

Having demanded three players by the close of the transfer window following the 4-1 home defeat to West Ham, and asserting “over the next few days, we will see the ambition of this club”, McClaren had made his feelings very clear after just 11 weeks in the job.

So there was a sense of inevitability about ‘Deadline Day’ last week – and a serious case of deja vu for most Forest fans. Billy Davies experienced similar troubles during his final 18 months as manager but his reputation often made it difficult for many to side with him. A new manager with a distinguished career making the same complaints makes it very difficult to ignore — and very uncomfortable reading for anyone who cares about the club.

Chairman Nigel Doughty, who has been fairly prolific on Twitter this summer, has spent most of the time warning of the impending Financial Fair Play (FFP) implications from the 2012/13 season onwards. He explicitly said that he doubted there would be any net increase in the squad size. More pertinently: “Everyone but Leicester seems to have got the memo [on FFP].” It seems McClaren didn’t get it either.

Interestingly, the Football League announced the FFP agreement on 10th June. McClaren was officially appointed on 13th June. The big question is: what was agreed/promised/discussed during contract negotiations between Forest and their manager-to-be on 12th June?

In his first press conference, McClaren stated: “I bought into Doughty and Arthur’s dreams and vision.” Did that include promises on transfer budgets? Was FFP discussed? Why exactly does McClaren feel so betrayed? For over a month now, McClaren has called for new players while Doughty continued to bang the FFP drum. What, precisely, is Forest’s strategy? It was clear things had to come to a head.

The much-maligned chief executive Mark Arthur, on McClaren’s appointment, said the new manager would be backed and the first priority was the “left-back situation”. He was suitably vague in both comments. Despite talking figures, most of the millions mentioned were funds Doughty had pumped into the club to keep it going – Forest remain one of the biggest spenders in the Championship.

Annoyingly, it’s an all too familiar story and all too worrying for a club that has been two or three signings short of challenging for an automatic promotion place for the third season in a row now. The squad doesn’t need an overhaul — it just needs balance.

But the question is: how did it come to this again? Why is the Forest manager publicly questioning the board within three months of being appointed? More importantly, why appoint someone of McClaren’s pedigree if there is no intention to back him and heed his advice. And why pay off Davies and spend, presumably, more on McClaren?

On the other hand, did McClaren actually do his homework? It’s been very clear now for a few years that Doughty’s sensible, albeit poorly-executed, vision for Forest is of a self-sufficient club bringing youth players through its growing and respected academy. And then there’s the ‘transfer acquisition panel’, which we’re told no longer exists, yet something remains seriously wrong with the transfer process.

In reality, business should be completed by deadline day. And poor management is to blame when it goes down to the final hour. The breakdown of Alvaro Pereira’s proposed transfer from Porto to Chelsea obviously had a bearing on Ryan Bertrand arriving at the City Ground either on loan or as a permanent signing. Now he’s been named in Chelsea’s 25-man Premier League squad that move looks unlikely. The collapse of Wesley Verhoek’s move was something of a disaster – moves for other wingers were obviously abandoned and no new ones were followed up. But if there was £2m to spend on Verhoek then why wasn’t it forthcoming?

It would be ridiculous to try and compete with the money West Ham and Leicester have spent this summer — The Swiss Ramble’s extensive, and timely, assessment of Doughty’s years at Forest proves the debt that the club has to him, both financially and otherwise.

The key point for doom-mongers and naysayers is that the squad has strengthened, they are now managed by someone who has won silverware and there is still a loan window to come – the importance of which is boosted by the Premier League 25-man squad rule. The implications of FFP have cast a shadow over the top flight and there should be a glut of talent available.

Forest have a squad many clubs in the Championship envy — and, indeed, players Premier League clubs covet. The squad is almost strong enough to put out two different sides with little deterioration in quality. The main point is that there isn’t sufficient balance — there is a need for a left-back, a winger and cover at centre-back. A few loans could easily solve this problem and, rumour has it, loans have been promised in the aftermath of last week’s events.

It would have served neither McClaren nor Forest well if he had quit. His reputation needs restoring in England, unless he’s planning on returning to European football, and the Forest job is now something of a poisoned chalice — if it wasn’t already. Should McClaren fulfil the potential of the Forest squad, as Davies almost did, his decision to stay will be justified – and save the blushes of the Forest board.

Make no mistake though, this is an uneasy truce; much as the previous manager had with the chairman. Privately, McClaren is said to be furious and we can only presume his manner is somewhat more amenable than his combustible predecessor. Quite how this goes forwards is anyone’s guess…

The Seventy Two
The Seventy Two published an outstanding series of articles about the Football League between 2010-12 and was the brainchild of Leicester City fan, David Bevan. As well as collaborating with The Two Unfortunates on the Football League Blog Network and a mammoth 2011-12 season preview, the site featured a host of leading bloggers and David was rewarded with a nomination in the 2011 Football Supporters’ Federation awards. Latterly, he was joined as co-editor by Joe Harrison and TTU is happy to present this archive of the site’s output.

6 Comments

  1. Mistrollingin
    September 5, 2011

    Another very good piece Pat. My thoughts on the board are well documented but on McClaren you do wonder why he has been so forthcoming so early and maybe what we do not know is more important than what we do.
    Did the board make promises or is McClaren claiming a lack of backing because of the poor start to the season, especially the 4-1 defeat to West Ham? Why has the Forest defence so dramaticaly lost its way having been outstanding for the last two years? If McClaren is such a highly rated coach why does he not back his own ability to coach a squad that has already finished top six twice to a similar finish this year?
    The defence in particular is very thin on numbers but it would be possible to highlight that whilst still backing your own ability as a manager and coach to deliver. McClaren seems to have gone straight to “no chance” and this will have upset many fans who will feel that he is giving up whilst trying to pin the blame elsewhere.
    As you say neither party has come out of this well and with very tough games ahead against Southampton at the weekend, crucially Derby a week on Saturday in front of a sellout home crowd and then, in the light of the West Ham demolltion a possible demoraliser, Newcastle, the manager needs to get on the training ground and show that he can have a positive impact on what remains a talented (if small) squad.
    Steve.

    Reply
    • Seat Pitch
      September 5, 2011

      It’s difficult to call without knowing the full story. Was McClaren deceived or has he panicked? Should he be able to work with what he’s got? Yes. Does he need more players? Yes.

      The point about the defence is interesting. Forest’s back five were pretty watertight until our slump in March when we conceded 15 goals in seven games and later gifted Swansea three goals in the second leg of the play-off semi-final. Camp hasn’t quite been himself since Swansea’s interest, the left-back position remains unresolved and there’s insufficient competition for the centre-backs. And if we’re shifting from man-to-man marking to zonal then that will surely take time to adjust.

      McClaren knows he has to succeed — the question is has he pushed the button so early for the right reasons?

      Reply
  2. Nottingham Forest (since 1865) | The Aftermath…
    September 5, 2011

    […] Read the whole article about Forest’s Bewildering Boardroom […]

    Reply
  3. The bewildering boardroom at Nottingham Forest! (part deux) | Seat Pitch
    September 5, 2011

    […] see more, read the original post on The Seventy Two. Advertisement LD_AddCustomAttr("AdOpt", "0"); LD_AddCustomAttr("Origin", "other"); […]

    Reply
  4. Martin
    September 5, 2011

    If Mac isn’t happy, surely its a simple case of simply closing the door behind him? he’s a very naive man to think Forest fans will give him a inch this season after that. You are being watched Steve
    Nottingham Forest will be around a lot longer than your for first brolly my friend.

    Reply
  5. Richard Fisher
    September 16, 2011

    Thanks for such great story giveaway! Obviously McClaren’s consent is great for the Nottingham Forest highlight include. Keep it up mate!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

MENU