westcoastcanary

Have PM-ed you Purple

[quote user="Newton"]Westcoast do you seriously believe that Norwich City have never had any approach from a 3rd party to buy the Stowmarket 2 out - while other clubs above and below us with substantial debt and minimal assets (don''t even own there ground) are changing hands at the drop of a hat Get real man [/quote]It''s you who need to get real Newton. You clearly don''t have a clue. Why not ask yourself WHY the clubs you are referring are attractive to investors despite their debts. As to offers for NCFC, it''s public knowledge that Peter Cullum and Tony Fernandes had their interest rebuffed. You are just talking out of your hat as far as any other approaches are concerned.

[quote user="Newton"]Love the club YES Love the owners NO If we don''t go up this season the blame sits solely with the Stowmarket 2 who have a history of cr@p appointments at Managerial level stretching well beyond McNallys appointment - but the appointments which fail are almost identical - only connection - Stowmarket[/quote]Have you been refused a seat on the board Newton? Or had an offer to buy a controlling interest in the club turned down? You sound like Usmanov at Arsenal! Maybe you wanted Tony Fernandes owning the club? You seem to think there are people queueing up to buy NCFC. Maybe you should ask yourself why there aren''t. Funny that we seem to slip under the radar of  all those rich investors from the Far East, Middle East, USA, India, etc., not to mention anyone in the UK. Your bile against the current owners is not just tiresome but utterly pointless.

Against Wigan, Redmond started and played until subbed in the 77th minute, while Hooper came on at half-time. Did we break down Wigan''s packed defence with those two on the field? And over the Wigan game as a whole, we had fewer shots on target than yesterday and scored zero goals. On a more general note, I see distinct tactical similarities between AN and CH, the main difference being that AN favours dispensing altogether with "wingers" whereas CH opted for inversion. Is it only a matter of time before the moaning starts from those who continue to think that old-fashioned wing play getting crosses in from wide is the answer to everything?

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]....... I suspect the Swansea "philosophy" is indeed a help in continuing to pick good managers. Not least because it probably does limit the choice. Even so there is no guarantee Swansea won''t choose a dud sooner or later. But if it ended up in relegation that shouldn''t be a catastrophe. From the outside they seem a well-run club, just - as The Swiss Ramble acknowledges - as we are. West Brom strike me as another example of sanity.[/quote]West Brom is interesting. For quite a time now under Jeremy Peace''s ownership they have operated with a more or less continental set up of Director of Football Administration, Technical Director, Head of Recruitment, Coach. On the other hand it is difficult to identify a WBA philosophy or style of play, and their managerial appointments over the years don''t exhibit much continuity or coherence -- Mowbray, di Matteo, Appleton, Hodgson, Clarke, Pepe Mel, Irvine, Pulis. What seems to have kept things together over the period when they were yo-yoing between PL and Championship and then establishing themselves in the PL was having Dan Ashworth as Director of Football. His going to the FA appears to have de-stabilised the club and Pulis''s appointment maybe signals abandonment of the structure hitherto favoured by Peace. The fact that Peace has declared himself ready to sell adds to the feeling that all is no longer so healthy at the Hawthorns. Just my opinion looking from the outside.

[quote user="Mr Jenkins"]Agree with that Westy.[/quote][B]As a newcomer on this board I hadn''t read Purple''s original post until the thread was revived a couple of days ago. So I''ll add my thanks to Purple too. That said, I have some methodological reservations about his conclusions, which I will try at some time to put together. For the time being though, the present is too enthralling!

[quote user="NCFCgardener"]Never been a fan of Turner, hopefully its the last we see of him. He reads the game well but often finds himself out of position and has very little composure on the ball. A friend of mine is a Sunderland fan and he thought it was hilarious when we signed him![/quote]Your Sunderland friend may have thought it hilarious, but in fact it was a great signing since MT played a crucial part in our surviving a second season in the PL and certainly wasn''t any more at fault for our relegation last season than those around him. He has served us well and his attitude has always been first class. A good pro of the kind every team needs.Someone comments in another post about his heading. When he was captain of Hull in their first stint in the PL,  he kept them up almost single handedly in the first year due in no small part to crucial set piece goals. He was a titan all through that season, and their Player of the Year (also in the preceding promotion year). The Hull fans voted him their POS three years in succession. Sunderland signed him precisely because he was playing so well at that time. Unfortunately for him, in his second season at Sunderland, he suffered a serious knee injury which kept him out for several months and to which his subsequent loss of pace can be attributed. So he has never regained the level of performance he once showed, but that is no reason to downplay his contribution to our club.

[quote user="Mr Jenkins"]Thanks for the post Purple, it''s nice to see an analysis like this. The point that interests me is the Swansea analogy as I see them as a pretty good comparator with ourselves over recent years. They have either been very lucky with their signings or very clever. Mitchu for example I think had been playing more of a mid field role but with them developed into a lethal striker. Was that good fortune or clever? Your ability as a club to spot potential and get a bargin or to develop your own players a la Southampton must give you more for your buck , of course if you sell the player on then this is reflected in your financial status which goes back to the theme of your post. Why is it that Swansea have been succesful under a string of new managers? Surely that is key to this, have they just flicked the coin and called it right each time, to use your analogy or do they have a double headed coin? Who knows, but I do believe that as a club they have a philosophy and style of play which they have tried to maintain under successive managers and have appointed I suspect with this in mind. Is this a factor that can swing the odds more favourably towards the lower mid table clubs such as us, or have they just been lucky?[/quote]Swansea are a good illustration of the merits of the so-called "continental" way, the basic idea of which is to ensure stability and continuity through the inevitable short term exigencies of squad changes (players and managerial). As you say, this requires a club to establish an identity on and off the field, laying down the parameters within which the director football and scouting network operate when recruiting players and coaches. Sadly very few British coaches (managers) are prepared to operate under these constraints, demanding absolute autonomy in all on -field matters from style of play to player recruitment. No wonder we tend to regard managerial appointments as a lottery. And we make things even more risky by giving managers long contracts because each new appointment has to be given time to wreak the (often expensive) changes "his" brand of football requires.

[quote user="jas the barclay king"] for me, last night was the first time we''ve witnessed Mouringho get "found out",, mind games wont work on Laurent Blanc, he knew exactly what makes Chelski and mourinho tick and how to exploit it... when Jose realised the mind games weren''t going to work he ran out of ideas... it was league 2 standard last night.[/quote]In a word "hubris"! Mourinho says his team weren''t mentally strong enough but as I see it he psyched them out himself with his pre-match comments.

Yellow Wall wrote: "I fully understand that the referee saw the incident regarding Forestieri and made his decision, but his decision was against Sako. I do not believe that any punishment was handed to Forestieri as the referee did not see the ''offence'' (is play acting and falling over an offence?). As no action has been taken against Forestieri does that not mean that it can?"I think the answer is "No". It''s not a question of whether any action was taken against Forestieri. The referee took action against Sako on the basis of his assessment of the entire incident, including Forestieri''s part in it. He, the ref, got it wrong, but a wrong decision is treated differently from an incident which the referee failed to see.I agree that the rules need to change.

[quote user="Yellow Wall"]The authorities, who have contributed massively towards creating the farce, now have a golden opportunity to set out their stall by using video evidence to ban Fernando Forestieri for a long time for his shameful gamesmanship agianst Wolves'' Bakary Sako.. I would suggest at least seven matches. Perhaps that would go a long way towards stopping others doing the same. A phrase often used on MOTD that I have heard is "He had every right to go down" even though a player only suffered minimal contact. Perhaps players should be penalised for falling over unnecessarily, whether they are fouled or not. Referees would then, of course, have to do something they rarely do, which is to give fouls and penalties to players who do not fall over (Stewart Downing earlier this season). Perhaps then players would not feel the need to act the way they do at the moment.[/quote]Forestieri cannot be retrospectively punished. The referee saw the incident and took action at the time. The most that can happen is that Sako''s red card is rescinded.Similarly in last night''s incident. Ibrahimovich''s red card can and should be rescinded on appeal, but that''s all that can happen. The most pleasing thing about last night was seeing Mourinho get what his pre-match mind games deserved. He was clearly worried by being outplayed by PSG in the first leg. His criticism (about a team of such talent resorting to aggression rather than playing football) completely back-fired on him; that is exactly how his own team "played" last night. PSG thoroughly deserved the win. If Mourinho isn''t careful Abramovich will get rid a second time.

Lincoln, if it stays that tight right to the end, games will have to be played behind closed doors. I don''t think fans'' nerves could stand it!

[quote user="TomMoore"][quote user="westcoastcanary"]What exactly is all this about? End of season bragging rights for "I guessed correctly"? Old Moore has been trying to predict the future since 1695. Do folks never learn?[/quote]I''m not sure why a City fan posting something positive on a City forum should upset you so much. [/quote]What on earth makes you think I''m "upset"? As I said there, I''m simply mystified as to the point of the posturing on this thread.

What exactly is all this about? End of season bragging rights for "I guessed correctly"? Old Moore has been trying to predict the future since 1695. Do folks never learn?

[quote user="A Load of Squit"][quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="SwindonCanary"]Premiership for the club, Championship for the fans.[/quote]Disagree. The crucial thing is whether a club is well-run and well-equipped off-the-field for either league . A well-run, well-prepared club is able not just to survive but prosper in the PL, like Stoke, Swansea, Saints have done. For badly run clubs with off-the-field shortcomings the PL can prove a disaster, as it has done for Leeds, Portsmouth, Carlisle and others. By the same token, the Championship is only great for the fans of well-run, well-equipped clubs -- ask the Leeds fans, the Blackpool fans, and so on.In our case, when we got promoted under Lambert we were well-run, but ill-equipped for the PL. By the time we were relegated last year we had become not just well run but, largely thanks to Chris Hughton, far better eqipped as well. And for that reason we arrived in the Championship in a position to be competitive, which is why it''s been fun. If we are promoted straight back I would expect it to be good for the club and better than last time for the fans. Equally, if we stay in the Championship there is no reason to expect anything other than a season as good as or better than this. In particular there is absolutely no reason to predict a downward spiral to the lower leagues and a huge exodus of our best players. [/quote]They weren''t. But they were, against all odds, promoted to the old First Division, from which brief moment of glory they have never recovered. When were Carlisle in the PL? [/quote]

[quote user="SwindonCanary"]Premiership for the club, Championship for the fans.[/quote]Disagree. The crucial thing is whether a club is well-run and well-equipped off-the-field for either league . A well-run, well-prepared club is able not just to survive but prosper in the PL, like Stoke, Swansea, Saints have done. For badly run clubs with off-the-field shortcomings the PL can prove a disaster, as it has done for Leeds, Portsmouth, Carlisle and others. By the same token, the Championship is only great for the fans of well-run, well-equipped clubs -- ask the Leeds fans, the Blackpool fans, and so on.In our case, when we got promoted under Lambert we were well-run, but ill-equipped for the PL. By the time we were relegated last year we had become not just well run but, largely thanks to Chris Hughton, far better eqipped as well. And for that reason we arrived in the Championship in a position to be competitive, which is why it''s been fun. If we are promoted straight back I would expect it to be good for the club and better than last time for the fans. Equally, if we stay in the Championship there is no reason to expect anything other than a season as good as or better than this. In particular there is absolutely no reason to predict a downward spiral to the lower leagues and a huge exodus of our best players.

[quote user="Downloads"]Not interested in the arguments, so not taking sides. Interesting that despite the league position, a few bookies have us down to win the league. If i took the emotion out and didnt support Norwich, i think our form was such that i would bet on us to win the league. The style of footy we play now removes some of the randomness of football as our superior players to most teams will retain possession of the footy and as everyone knows, you need the footy to win. AN takes all the credit for our better footballing style. I think because of this we will remain more consistent unlike earlier in the season. The only added factor really in this is nerves and a little bit of luck with injuries and ref decisions.[/quote]Yes, but you could say the same about all the teams currently in the top six. They all play good football and if you look at the possession, pass completion and other stats there is little difference between them.Given how even the contest is in those terms, you don''t mention the most important factor on which promotion now depends, mental strength. Which teams have the most belief , confidence and the greatest will to win? I''d put Watford and Bournemouth among the top three in that respect. When it comes to us, for me there''s still a question mark. We had a great opportunity on Wednesday night and failed to take it.

[quote user="Johnny Stump"]Kevin Baldwins alternative laws of football: A team that has been on a good run of either wins or defeats will see it come to an end against Norwich. I may be paraphrasing, but you get the gist.[/quote]Maybe we can have a sticky thread for these perennial truths about the club we support. Seems to me they are not well enough known nowadays!

Never mind wish lists, what matters is rules of thumb. The first one being:"If there''s a banana skin, City will slip on it"Given which, other teams'' results are more or less irrelevant.

So much for the idea that Becchio might feature tomorrow!Click here

Alex Neil was asked about him a couple of weeks ago. The reply was that he was still some way off full match fitness and there was the possibility of  jeopardising his recovery by too much involvement at Championship level. Neil said he didn''t anticipate Vadis playing much part until next season.

[quote user="Wes Hooly Fan"]On the whole Murphy has been very ineffective this season. Not bashing, but it''s the truth.[/quote]True. The Murphys knew that NA rated them; seem to have lost it a bit since AN has come in. That said, IMO Murphy should have come on rather than Morris on Wednesday. We played far too narrow and by 75 minutes it was evident we weren''t going to get through through the middle.

There must be a good chance he will be in the squad for Millwall. Long time since he was scoring for fun in the Championship though. He played for the Under-21s v Porto on Wednesday, scoring from the spot but failing to convert other chances including an earlier penalty.

Stop being sceptical, we are headed for the top; then it''s just a matter of whether we can stay there. We have Tom''s word for it.Time to believe.

Anyone spotted a missing steamroller?