Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by westcoastcanary

  1. Blades are putting two on Josh whenever he gets the ball, and matching him for pace; never been able to get clear. Looks a bit lost actually (maybe he''s missing Naismith''s encouragement ..........)
  2. Too much concentration on individuals on here; we are defending properly as a team (when did we last do that with such conviction?), concentrating on shape and position. Also getting the necessary number of bodies in our box. Good display. Progress in a much needed direction..
  3. @The gut"Nothing wrong with my memory in this respect ...... please remind me of a game when we got beat in similar circumstances at this level, at home. Nonsense."Sat 22nd October 2016:  Norwich 0:1 Preston"I am completely amazed by your post westie, in essence you are saying Danny out thought clough ……"No, what I said was that Clough didn''t out think Farke, as someone said on another thread. "….. and restricted his team to only a point by a masterly tactical decision of sticking to his plan of 6 defenders against cloughs cunning of having no intention of risking any attacks. That cloughie would reveal genius and attack should we risk going down to only 5 defenders. Overcommitting FFS."I didn''t say anything about "a masterly tactical decision", and the rest of that sentence is simply your reading of my post. What I said was that Farke correctly focussed on what he clearly sees as the immediate priority, turning us into a team which can actually defend properly; not just occasionally when reminded of the need, but routinely, every game, irrespective of the opponent or whether home or away. Nowhere did I say that DF set out simply to "restrict [Burton] to only one point"; he clearly set out to win the game and, with just one instance of better finishing, that would have been the outcome. "I can only hazard a guess that you were not at the game and have not played or been involved in much competitive football." Whatever guesses you hazard about me are irrelevant. It would matter not one jot if my post was written by the proverbial monkeys randomly pressing keyboards. The only thing that matters is the content of the post, irrespective of its aetiology.
  4. @BaldyboySo, since the stats disprove your claim that Vrancic "barely made a successful pass throughout the game", you resort to bluster and fabricate a different, face-saving, accusation that most of his accurate passes were short? And this about a player who regularly makes more longer successful passes than anyone else in the side! Indy_Bones''s own reply to you (4:40 on this thread) shows just how far off the mark you are.
  5. Re. the 4:5:1, best to just treat it as a conventional way of displaying the starting eleven. A good way of seeing how much resemblance it bears to the on-field reality is to look at the player heatmaps for the match on WhoScored. (PS. Judging from the frequent complaints on here about selections forcing round pegs into square holes, being confused by the convention is not the prerogative of so-called plastics!)
  6. [quote user="Making Plans"]Which of course brings us back to the very first post in this thread.[/quote]Actually no. My point was specifically replying to posters apparently assuming Wes was unlikely to play against Millwall because he played last night (i.e. failing to take account of the international break).
  7. [quote user="Making Plans"][quote user="westcoastcanary"]The international break is from Monday 28th, with the final internationals of the break (including the RofI) being played on Tuesday 5th. So Wes will be available for the Millwall game and, in theory, the Birmingham game.[/quote]So what you''re saying is then that he won''t exactly be at home with his feet up getting some rest and between the Millwall & Birmingham games he could potentially play 2 games for RofI.[/quote]That''s why I said he will be available "in theory" for the Birmingham game. Whether he will be considered a starter against Birmingham will likely depend on the degree of his involvement for the RofI. But the point I was making originally was about him playing last night and on Saturday, not about him playing against Birmingham two weeks later as well.
  8. [quote user="The gut"]I think Naismith is a bit of a conman. I''m not buying this working hard business. I would say he always looks like he''s working hard. He looks like he''s passionate and fighting hard for the team. In my opinion he lazily moves around waving arms, moaning, sulking and arguing rather than digging in with the team. I suggest that fans making their minds up he is rubbish has come about in the fashion of him playing rubbish and fans that pay their money to watch him make up their minds that he deserves that label. If in fact he is trying too hard now cos fans are against him and that is what is making him rubbish why was he just as bad when the fans were seemingly for him.[/quote]Have you ever asked yourself how likely it is that Naismith suddenly underwent a complete personality change once he put on a Norwich shirt? Have you bothered to find out anything about him, to see whether your impressions, formed on nothing more than what you think you witness on the pitch, bear even a remote resemblance to the real Naismith? Do you really think that "fans that pay their money" are entitled to peddle any obnoxious nonsense irrespective of whether it bears any relationship to truth?
  9. [quote user="Tetteys Jig"]Would agree with a decent chunk of that, particularly Wes and Oliveira. Bit harsh on naismith considering he''s been back 1 game but yeah the money he is on, we''re gonna have to start seeing him make a big difference. Hopefully we will see Klose soon as well. Seems like he''s been "almost fit" for a while now and I wonder if there is more to it as we''ve seen before with players. I''d be going with Wes, Maddison and Josh today with reed and vrancic given another go to try form a partnership. That means back to a back 4 with pinto, Franke, Zimmerman and husband tho I''m yet to be convinced by the latter. was hoping toffolo would have been given a go.[/quote] It is difficult for Naismith to be seen to make a big difference when the big difference he makes is invisible to most fans [;)]
  10. [quote user="Felixfan"]Anyone else try to use iFollow at Fulham. Paid the monthly sub. and looked forward to hearing Chris Goreham identifying all our new players for me only to find the much hyped new system did not work! Can we get refunds? In all other respects it was a great afternoon and felt like a win.[/quote] "UK and overseas iFollow Norwich subscribers can listen to full commentary of tonight’s match against Swindon Town. Although Carabao Cup matches are not streamed live to overseas subscribers, they are available as audio-only commentaries. You can listen on desktop, mobile, tablet and our official app. We have been reassured by our broadcast partners that the issues with the app that meant Saturday’s match against Fulham wasn’t broadcast have now been resolved. Again, we would like to apologise for the inconvenience this will have caused. You just need to make sure you download or update to the latest version of the app." See canaries.co.uk
  11. [quote user="Budapest Canary"][quote user="kick it off"]Fully agree. Was 1000% more effective than Jerome, who worked hard (as always) but never influenced the game at all.Oliviera fits this style of play far better than Jerome imo.[/quote]I absolutely agree with that. Jerome needs more space.  This slow build up that allows defenses to regroup is not really Jertome''s cuppa. In a way he would have fitted better in Fulham today. [/quote]Which style of play? We weren''t able to play much possession football in the first half, since Fulham were doing it (excellently) instead. Farke had clearly anticipated just this and chose his starting eleven accordingly. As the game wore on we got more control and were better able to impose "this style of play", at which point Oliveira was brought on.
  12. "One wonders if we''d have won the game outright if Olive had started"Or,alternatively, if the game might have been over by half time so great was the Fulham pressure. "Strikers" don''t just strike (see Farke''s after-match comments on why CJ started).
  13. [quote user="Mr Angry"]Husband had a much better second half-wasn''t being beaten for pace so much as having two players down his side of the pitch and nobody helping out defensively.[/quote]Exactly.
  14. [quote user="nutty nigel"]Really looking forward to the season proper now. Even beginning to feel a little confidence over a trip to Fulham....[/quote]Confidence over a trip to Fulham? Have you thought of changing your user name to "even nuttier nigel"? [;)]
  15. [quote user="peter-plastic"]Westcoast, I got the game on the android app on my phone without any problem. And had it playing on a couple of devices. Still managed to miss Birghton''s goal, though![/quote]Looks as if there is an issue with the Safari browser then. I tried  the mobile app on my iPhone and just got the black screen. That''s what made me go back and reread the announcement on the club website, which I understood to say that live streaming on the app wouldn''t be available until the start of the season.Anybody get the stream working using Safari?
  16. [quote user="lharman7"] Yes, the option to go live is there but then I get nothing but black picture.[/quote]I too got the black screen initially when using the Safari browser on my Macbook. I then switched to Chrome and there was no problem. Stream was good, though the camera work and commentary (provided by Brighton?) left a bit to be desired. At the dollar equivalent of £110 for every league match, home and away, this season (less any matches the rights for which have been sold to TV), I''d say it represents great value for us plastics, oops, I mean ex-pats [:D]
  17. [quote user="Helsinki canary"]I joined iFollow today and installed the norwich app on both iphone and ipad. I was unable to get the live stream working on both devices even if the old videos and interviews were working fine. I was also in contact with ifollow support and they were not able to help so also pushed me to send an email to their main support. All other live stream apps work on these devices so I am sure the problem is with their service. I shall be demanding the money back if they don''t fix it for next week.[/quote] As I read the news item on the club website, the first iFollow stream on the mobile app is next week''s season-opening game. Today''s friendly was only available on PC or Mac. Not a great piece of timing to trumpet the arrival of the mobile app just ahead of today''s game when it wasn''t actually being shown on iOS or Android platforms, but it was simply a failure in communication on the club''s part rather than a technical failure on the part of the providers.
  18. [quote user="Captain Birdseye"]I feel dirty saying this but after watching that performance I feel mildly optimistic[/quote]Take heart Cap''n. I''m sure this feeling dirty and mildly optimistic is only a hiatus and, if the last hiatus is anything to go by, will not last very long. You''ll soon be back to normal.
  19. There are two different but interconnected issues here, one the changing face of the media, the other the implications for the EPL. If I understand him aright, It''s Character Forming''s view is that, even if the way coverage of live matches is provided and paid for, the billions will continue to pour into EPL coffers for the simple reason that the EPL owns the media rights. So a critical question is whether a shift to more targeted provision, e.g. being able to subscribe to particular matches as opposed to a packaged selection as now, would see clubs insisting on reclaiming their media rights from the EPL. When first set up the EPL/SKY partnership served a useful purpose, offering access to live matches to a far larger audience than individual clubs could at that time reach out to themselves. The digital revolution means that that is no longer the case.
  20. @BroadstairsYou talk as if there are no "ifs" in keeping these players. But there are, plenty in fact.Yes, recruitment has to be good; but based on the signings so far I''d say Webber and Farke deserve some trust. As for the idea that there''s no money for replacements; untrue (as the PinkUn article that norfolkngood refers to confirms). If Josh stays no replacement needed; if he goes the recruitment fund gets added to.2:0 up against Duisburg by the way, and liking what I see. [B]
  21. [quote user="BroadstairsR"]@WCC "Why should expectations for the coming season be all-round lower if they are sold?" Because they are both very good players capable of making a more than useful contribution towards a Championship team''s success. No psychology needed there.[/quote]OK, say our current squad less the Murphys is x% less strong than with the Murphys. So what if we now bring in one or more players whose arrival strengthens the squad by at least x% and possibly more? Are people saying that the Murphys bring more to the squad than any affordable replacements could possibly compensate for, or even improve upon?
  22. @Broadstairs"It would surely be bad to lose Josh just yet both psychologically speaking and on the field of play ............ it will also lower expectations all-round for the coming season. The little bubbles we were blowing up will have been burst one by one."Every time I try to coax a cogent explanation out of someone for the widespread shock/horror reaction to the idea of being without the Murphys, all I get is evasion. Why should expectations for the coming season be all-round lower if they are sold? That assumes that one or other or both is somehow essential to our on-field success. What reason is there to think that? Are people saying that Webber and Farke are planning a campaign based on a team built round one of the twins? Or is it just that a warm feeling is generated by seeing "two of our own" graduating to a place in the first team squad, a squad which, after all, benefits from the presence of roughly 12 times that number of "imports"?
  23. [quote user="writeronthestorm"]yep - I did say, if needed and tbf we have other options...I just thought Ibe was a good shout to maybe cover RM and ST will keep my trap shut from now on :)[/quote]The question is a perfectly good one reading "Murphy replacement" as a reference to both twins [:D]
  24. [quote user="Canaries north"]Scare is the wrong word. We have a young player with potential not the finished article by a long way but potential. Not on huge wages. He knows he will get game time with us but still could leave. He is a player I would like to stay but player power is what it is. 4 million is not enough.[/quote]Well OK but I''m interested in why you''d like him to stay. Has he some special value for us right now as a first team squad member, bearing in mind that, like every player, there is a cost/benefit calculation to be made every time he takes the field? It''s surely not inconceivable that an alternative could be brought in  for whom the ratio of cost to benefit would be smaller? There''s also the further question mark over exactly what Farke is aiming for, and how well-suited particular players are in those terms. As for "potential", the Murphy family and agent are clearly intent on extracting value from where they are now, not where they may or may not be next year or the year after. That being the situation, the club has to make a judgement accordingly.
  25. [quote user="Canaries north"]As said before no one but Josh really knows but with the same agent? I went too school with 2 pairs of twins. 1 pair did everything together and could not be separated. The other pair were total opposites apart from looks. The common factor being an agent is what scares me.[/quote]So the idea of losing Josh too scares you? Why exactly?
  • Create New...