Too good to go down?

Bad refeering decisions, the luck of the opposition, unfortunate injuries, even a DFB conspiracy against 1.FCN – just a few of the reasons cited for the current predicament of a team with so much promise and exciting potential. The very same team which now sits precariously in 15th place in the Bundesliga, with just three wins from the first 12 games of the season. With just three teams beneath Glubb, and the bottom five separated by just four points (ahead of basement club Augsburg’s home game against Bayern), it appears that Nuremberg will now be drawn into a relegation battle which only the most pessimistic few would have contemplated back in August.

In his weekly Bundesliga blog following game day 10, The Guardian’s Raphael Honigstein described 1.FCN as,  ”…a team with a worrying tendency to pick up fewer points than their efforts and organisation deserve.” A fair and accurate analysis of the majority of performances this season. Another way of looking at this, and adding even more negative conotations to the phrase ‘a worrying tendency’, is to start to wonder whether Nuremberg are a team who, on paper at least, are too good to go down. And the words ‘too good to go down’ are almost like a football manager getting the dreaded vote of confidence from the powers that run a club – the problems often deepen and the worst fears are realised.

Unfortunately for Glubb, it’s also a phrase often applied during their last relegation season in 2007-08. Then, as the previous season’s cup winners, Hans Meyer’s charges were expected to more-or-less match the excellent sixth place of 2006-07, even with the added distraction of the UEFA Cup. After never recovering from a poor start (which yielded just nine points from the first 12 games), many still pointed towards the likes of Wolf, Galasek, Pinola, Mintal, Kluge and Misimovic, as well as the legendary status of Hans Meyer, as having the necessary qualities to help 1.FCN avoid the drop. Ultimately, the season went from bad to worse, Meyer was replaced in February and Glubb went down.

Now, with a slightly healthier though no less worrying 12 points from the first 12 games, and just one home victory in six home matches, a few similarities can be drawn to 2007-08.  After finshing eighth last season with a very young team and several loan players, it was expected that at least mid-table should be the target of Nuremberg, and at best, maybe even a top six finish. Dieter Hecking’s side were deemed fit enough and exciting enough to entertain and give any team a run for their money. Of course, the services of Gundogan, Ekici, Schieber and Wolf could not be retained, but in came Tomas Pekhart, Alexander Esswein and Timm Klose to add to the highly-rated talents of Cohen, Wollscheid, Chandler and Mak, and the experience of Schaefer, Pinola and Simons. The new seemed to gel with the old in the first games. Pekhart seemed a handful for defences and Esswein’s pace and skill has looked menacing. Unfortunately the creativity, that excellent final pass, or defence splitting ball, has not been present as often as it was with the likes of Ekici and Gundogan in the team, and when it has, it appears to have come as something of a suprise to Pekhart who clearly needs much more time to fulfil his potential.

The most glaring similarity with 2007-08 and, as it happens, an element of hope Glubberer can hang onto for the remaining 22 games, is the goalkeeping situation. Following the Cup Final victory, Raphael Schaefer’s move to Stuttgart and his replacement by Czech number two national ’keeper, Jaromir Blazek, was a blow but appeared to be by no means a threat. As it turned out, Nuremberg missed Schaefer enormously. That Blazek was not quite as good as Schaefer between the posts was only part of it. The defence seemed to lack the leadership and confidence provided by their familiar and respected former number one, and ultimately the 51 goals conceded were as instrumental in relegation as the meagre 35 scored. (Both the goals conceded and scored so far this season are currently on course for totals too close to comfort to those shown in the final table in May 2008.) A major problem this season has been Schaefer’s absence after just two games. After his injury, the defence did not seem as confident, with first Rakovsky and then Stephan in goals. His return in game 12 saw an uncharacteristic positional error contributing to Freiburg’s rather fortunate equalising goal but the smart money would have been on Schaefer dealing better than his half-time replacement, Stephan, with the guest’s last gasp attack which led to a penalty and winning goal. 

The hope for the remainder of the season is that Schaefer will play most of it. The reserve goalkeepers at Nuremberg do not look awful but they the do not yet have the presence of the club captain ‘Rafa’. There are other concerns of course, and Bader and Hecking  may already be thinking of reinforcing the striking department in the January transfer window(Schieber returning for another loan spell from Stuttgart maybe? Please!).

Too good too go down? Maybe on paper, but the key to any team’s success is how good they are at overcoming the injuries, bad decisions and other mis-fortunes they face during a season. At the moment 1.FCN do not appear to be able to cope well with all that is thrown at them, and appear less than effective at creating their own luck. Hopefully Raphael Schaefer will play a major role in providing the resilience required over what will undoubtedly be a tough period for all involved with Glubb, and lead them to the safety of the mid-table mediocrity many were taking for granted a few weeks ago.

Advertisement