Indeed, so it's about striking the right balance. I could understand the depth of feeling behind sacking Harry, were we - I dunno - struggling around in 8th/9th and seriously underachieving with the squad. But he hasn't. He's used the squad to recover early setbacks, and maintained a consistent position (3rd) for the majority of the season. Recently, we have slipped back - no-one can deny that, it's a fact.
But does that seriously deserve such criticism? I don't believe it does. I think it focuses too much on recent form, and ignores the majority of management which went before it. As I've outlined, it's a bit odd to criticise a manager for - perish the thought - actually slipping from a position which he himself put the club in.
I read earlier in the week on here how someone asked why we were tired, relative to other teams around us? Well, I'd hazard a guess that it's because of the tempo which we play, and which we're so feared for. Other teams around adopt a more methodical approach, whereas we're somewhat 'all guns blazin'. Likewise, we had to invest a fair amount of 'recovery effort' after early season setbacks - and there's a line of sports science which covers peak performance, how it should be managed and how it can be realised too soon. Proven to hold water too, so it's not to be dismissed out-of-hand.
