, how does any of that answer my two questions? Obviously you can't because I made two excellent points and you will look silly disagreeing with either of them. I see that you won yesterday without Berg in charge, that's as many times as he managed in ten games. I really don't think that Kean left behind as big a mess as you like to portray. A good manager will sort you out. It’s up to Venkys to bring somebody good in; you can’t blame Kean for Berg’s failings.
Also, that article is massively hypocritical:
Like Steve Kean before him, the tragedy of Henning Berg is not that he was sacked but that he was ever appointed in the first place. Kean bore the brunt of the fans' anger -- rightly so, given that he took their club down -- but why was a rookie coach installed in place of an experienced and proven manager? Berg won just a single game in his 10-match spell, but why was a man with such a modest track record appointed to such a challenging role in the first place? Was he given the job purely because he had once played for Blackburn?
So Berg takes no responsibility and receives little anger for performing far worse than his predecessor because he's a rookie manager, yet Kean is lambasted for exactly the same thing? Lol. The article lost all credibility after that. Why is one manager abused for being wrongly appointed while the other isn't? Regardless of that, nether should be targeted during games; ALL of the hatred should be aimed towards Venkys. The buck stops with them.
Oddly, it was the supporters who were pilloried for their reaction to last season's inevitable relegation. When they had the temerity to protest against a manager out of his depth and owners that appeared to have all the football knowledge of a 10-year-old boy who had just played "FIFA 2011" for the first time, they were dragged through the mud. "How can they boo their own manager? Don't they realise that it's not helpful to attack their own club?" asked the pundits.
What those experts failed to grasp was that Blackburn Rovers had ceased to be "their own club" when Venky's first arrived. The fans knew exactly what was happening. They knew that their future had been squandered by feckless know-nothings. They knew they were going down and were paying through the nose for the privilege of watching it firsthand. And they were expected to paint their faces, dance a jig and blow kisses to the owners while it all went up in smoke in front of their eyes? They had every right to jeer.
So it's justifiable to boo the manager because the owners are runing the club, what kind of logic is that? Venkys hired an unqualified manager who wasn't up to the job, so they should have been booed, not the guy whose removal wasn't going to fix the real problems at the club. Terrible article that completely lacks sense.
You're also being rather patronising seeing as Norwich fans have already been through all of this with the 'Chase out' era in the nineties. You act as if this has never happened in football before! We managed to get Chase out in a similar scenario by targeting him, and only him. Did we target any of the failing managers including Gary Megson (awful) during that time? No, because we saw the bigger picture. The fact that your lot only now understand that your problems lie beyond the underperforming managers (something that clueless outsiders
have realised for some time) and that you were misguided in targeting Kean (which achieved the best part of nothing) proves that Blackburn fans were rightfully viewed as a joke by the media and other football fans. You were right to be angry, but your direction was aimless and pointless. I still empathise with your club’s supporters despite this. Nobody should have to suffer the same fate as we did nearly two decades ago; going from a top half club challenging for Europe to a ‘money making’ asset that was stripped of all its value and ended up in the second tier for a long time.
EDIT- Why has this stretched the page so much? FFS!