Jump to content

westcoastcanary

Members
  • Content Count

    780
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by westcoastcanary

  1. Dorrans is not primarily a CM. He has mostly played at RM in his career so far, only secondarily at LM or CAM.
  2. Is there any evidence that the condition of the Carrow Road pitch is adversely affecting play this year as opposed to last? Is Bradley Johnson''s passing even worse this year than last? Actually no. Is Alex Tettey''s passing worse? No. Is Nathan Redmond''s shot accuracy worse? No. it''s actually better this year. I could go on.
  3. [quote user="Newton"]Westcoast have u noticed by now - most of the threads on this board are not based on cast iron information. Its all peoples views or opinions based on interpretations of scraps of information & comments from various medis sources [/quote] Reduced to tarring everyone with our own brush now are we?
  4. [quote user="Newton"] Anything that I post critizing the club no matter how mild - you pair instantly reject it - making claims based on thin air & an undying love of delia [/quote]Rubbish. I only joined the forum a month ago. Please quote any of my 17 or so posts which imply anything about my opinions of anyone on the club board. [quote user="Newton"]...The only information we have from either club is kept to an absolute minimum - it is left up to us the fans to form opinions based on the information we can glean from a range of sources [/quote]If you don''t have solid information it is usually better not to form any opinion and in particular not to keep regurgitating speculative opinion as if it were gospel truth. [quote user="Newton"] I dont know wether the pair of you realise but football does not work like that most transfer activity is done behind closed doors through agents. Few clubs make loud brash statements for fear of getting involved in breach of contract / compensation claims from players - but then do u 2 know different ?[/quote] Yes I do realise that perfectly well. Which is why I don''t keep jumping to conclusions from a position of ignorance.
  5. [quote user="Newton"]If WBA were not prepared to lose Dorrans without securing Olsson on Monday - why is he now being touted for a loan. You are also ignoring the fact that they dont want Dorrans they had signed a replacement earlier that evening - Fletcher from Man U [/quote] WHO is "touting" Dorrans for a loan"? To my knowledge WBA have said nothing about this. John Cross of the Mirror is not Dorrans'' agent is he? WHO exactly has said that WBA "don''t want Dorrans"? WBA certainly haven''t. Who says that Fletcher is seen as a replacement for Dorrans? Does signing Fletcher have to mean that Dorrans is "surplus to requirements"? Er, no. What you call "circumstantial evidence" is simply you reading between lines. [quote user="Newton"] ...... when Olsson said no -  if we had offored the £3/4M on Monday he would be training with the squad now as simple as that. We were not prepared to spend to that level - can be no other reason [/quote] You have absolutely no basis for saying either of those. There is a perfectly good explanation of why WBA might pull out when the Olsson move fell through, namely that they were only prepared to let Dorrans go in order to secure a left back. As regards what now happens, it could be that Dorrans actually fancies coming to Norwich. He is reported to have favoured us over Burnley. Given which, it may be that WBA decide to let him come on loan after all. Let''s all wait and see.
  6. [quote user="Newton"]Westcoast how much more circumstancial evidence do you want & no I have not got a tape recording of the actual telephone conversatiosn - why do you and many others still blindly come out with - the we got lots of cash tripe  Enough to cover our costs yes (this season) nothing spare after Adams summer bonaza  - the clearout starts in the summer when the parachute payments drop [/quote]Who has said "lots of cash"? Nobody. Did we have funds available for use in the January transfer window? Yes. That was stated by the club long before the change of manager.Regarding Dorrans, you are simply speculating about WBA''s reasons for agreeing to the swap deal. None of us know WBA''s thinking on this. It is perfectly possible that they were prepared to accept losing Dorrans to secure Olsson''s signature but not otherwise.
  7. There is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL that lack of funds played any part in the failure to get Dorrans'' signature on Monday. All the evidence points to WBA backing out when they were unable to sign Olsson.
  8. [quote user="Rich T The Biscuit"]Maybe so westcoastcanary but he''s certainly surplus to requirements now at WBA with them getting Fletcher in and he can''t go to a premier league team. Suspect it will have alerted other clubs though that he is not wanted so I''m sure others will be circling.[/quote]Dorrans being omitted from WBA''s official 25-man PL squad would confirm his being "surplus to requirements". Alternatively he may have been made available in the window purely because they needed to free up a squad place for an incoming left back. Has anyone seen the squad list? I doubt if John Cross had when he wrote his piece.
  9. All this based on a column-inch filler by John Cross in the Mirror in which he regurgitated the stuff about Olsson insisting on a release clause?
  10. For info, this season Dorrans has STARTED in 19 of the 23 PL games played by WBA; he was an unused sub for another game. He also started in one Cup game. That doesn''t look to me like a player who is obviously surplus to requirements. It again SUGGESTS to me that he is a valuable squad player who they were prepared to let go only to make room for someone coming in.
  11. [quote user="pete"]This post and all the replies are what is wrong with this message board. An original post that claims to be correct and replies claiming the OP is misguided. The truth maybe that the Board are trying to keep the club debt free which seems to be Boards be all and end all. To keep the club debt free for all time is a pipe dream unless all ambition to improve has been conceded. It is possible that is what Delia et al are trying to achieve i.e. stagnation.[/quote]DM has stated time and again that the club aims to live within its means, i.e money spent has to be earned. This does not mean the club will never contemplate taking on debt. For example, there is a long term aim to significantly enlarge ground capacity. That could not be done without taking on debt. The stated policy implies only that the cost of any debt taken on (repayments and interest payments) has to be affordable out of income.As far as the "debate" on this thread goes, nobody has produced a shred of evidence that the Dorrans transfer fell through because our board wouldn''t pay the  price. Such evidence as there is suggests rather that WBA pulled out of letting Dorrans go when they failed to land Olsson. MAYBE the reason was that they were looking at Dorrans going as the least damaging way of making financial room for a left back (originally from Swansea but when they couldn''t get him, Olsson.)
  12. [quote user="Adycakes"]Appears to be left footed.... or at least can use his left! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM7gsF_bYZc (ignore the awful commentary)[/quote]According to transfermkt he is two footed, primarily right midfield, secondarily left midfield or central attacking midfield.
  13. [quote user="Mr Jenkins"]LDC "The problem with this is that as soon as you tell people they are having a negative effect, they turn round and say fans don''t have any influence over events" They may say that but I would love to see a genuine reasoned argument to support that view.[/quote]The idea that home fan reaction has little or no influence on what happens on the pitch is certainly not a view held by managers of away teams or ex-players and ex-managers commentating on games. You can be sure that the manager of every team coming to Carrow Road takes notice of the fact that the home support can easily be silenced and almost as easily made to turn on their own players.
  14. [quote user="BroadstairsR"][quote user="westcoastcanary"][quote user="Indy"]Be careful what you wish for......good OP but some on here saying we don''t need negative fans are wrong. Without the 10 or so thousand who vented their frustration last week the ground would be full of smiling people and green n yellow seats! [/quote]17,000 fully supportive and vocal fans would be just the ticket on Saturday. Empty seats don''t boo, hurl abuse or moan.[/quote]Now you are getting carried away westcoast. I can''t agree with that. Our consistent support is one of the great strengths of this Club, moaners or not. I suspect you were tongue in cheek there?[/quote]No, I wasn''t tongue in cheek, I meant it. I agree that income from ticket sales is important, and the ideal is a full ground supporting the club financially and the team on the field. But as many others have said, fans need to do what is best for the club, not add to its problems. Right now nobody needs negativity from the stands.
  15. [quote user="Darth Catbeard"] I think AN has seen this and is trying to establish a more balanced play style that we might have to suffer a few pragmatic, grinding borefests before it starts to click[/quote]Agreed. But this is exactly what Hughton tried to do with pretty much the same players. The evidence is that the current squad don''t seem able to combine defensive solidity with attack, or transition effectively from one to the other. Where we need both; we get one or the other.
  16. [quote user="Indy"]Be careful what you wish for......good OP but some on here saying we don''t need negative fans are wrong. Without the 10 or so thousand who vented their frustration last week the ground would be full of smiling people and green n yellow seats! [/quote]17,000 fully supportive and vocal fans would be just the ticket on Saturday. Empty seats don''t boo, hurl abuse or moan.
  17. [quote user="Highland Canary"] But, make no mistake, the opportunity to establish the club in the PL was squandered. Let''s hope it''s not our ''silverware'' which follows.[/quote]It is next to impossible to "establish" a club in the Premier League unless most of the groundwork has already been done in the Championship or below. The idea that anyone could have "established" us in the Premier League last season is just wishful thinking. Worst of all it gives people a rod with which to beat the back of anyone now tasked to do what has always been necessary, which is to start building a properly equipped squad. You survive in the PL if you have a PL-quality squad which you can strengthen season on season by adding at most one or two players. Hughton did not have that luxury, nor would anyone brought in to replace him. As for selling the "silverware", who exactly is a proven Premier League player and irreplaceable in this current squad? Ruddy, Bassong?
  18. Yes, Hughton should never have been sacked. Lambert built nothing but an over-achieving team, leaving Hughton to try to do in the Premier League what normally gets done while building steadily in the Championship. Keeping us up for a second year on resources limited by having to pay off the external debt at the end of the club''s second season in the Premier League was a fantastic achievement. Hughton was doing exactly what the Board appointed him to do, and sacking him was a disgrace. He was sacked even though the Board had previously accepted that dropping back into the Championship was almost inevitable given the club''s situation. The decision clearly demonstrated the foolishness of giving in to fan pressure. I hope the Board have learned their lesson and this time fully back their man.
  19. The fans don''t appoint the manager, or buy, sell or coach players; but they can make a big difference by being supportive or otherwise. I don''t get the idea that paying your ticket money year after year automatically makes you "one of the best fans in the world". Who wants 25000 grumblers and moaners? Or 25000 people producing the atmosphere of a morgue?
  20. Yes, good straight talking, directed at the fans as well as the players.
  21. [quote user="Indy"]Agreed Miggins but for initial appointment at this level we all said Who......I bet most of the players also went ....WHO''s Alex Neil! I don''t doubt he might in time be very good but not sure after Hughton & Adams the tollerence of the fans will allow him time! If I see another 90 minutes of hoofball like that it will be too much for me![/quote]If fans hound a third manager in succession out of Carrow Road, they will end up causing a lot of more damage to the club. There is far less quality in our squad than people will admit; the relegated players haven''t adjusted mentally; and the newcomers, Jerome apart, have added little. From what he said before this last game, Neil has already diagnosed the problems. His brief is to get us at least into the playoffs, which he will struggle to do with his current resources. How any fans can think that getting on the team''s and manager''s back will  help the situation is beyond me. Some proper support from the stands throughout a game, on the other hand, very likely would.The best City performance on Saturday was put in by Olsson, playing for a move to Swansea. The lack of interest in any other of our players (apart maybe from Redmond) tells its own story. IMO the table as it stands has us about where we should expect to be, and where we will probably also be at the end of the season.
  22. There''ll be no lack of positivity if the team do what Martin says they need to do (and did last time in the same situation). It''s in the team''s hands to convince the doubters and dispel concerns about the mentality of some in the squad.
  23. I agree with much of what smooth says. According to Paul Scholes (writing in the Independent), Phelan had a huge influence at Man U, but not as a coach. "People don’t realise just how important Mike was at United. He took so much of the day-to-day pressure off Sir Alex by making sure players’ commitments to sponsors never affected match-day preparation and got everything to run smoothly and on time.Mike was always the first port of call when you had a problem. I went to see him first when I wanted to come out of retirement in 2012. He knew the character of the players so well – who needed some consoling words, and who needed a kick up the arse. Mike would watch training every day and was always absorbing information about performance, fitness and mood. He had a great eye for detail and was liked and respected by the players and the manager. I have no doubt he will make a great manager himself one day." So the role he filled at United was rather unusual, a cross between assistant manager and analyst (performance and player well-being). This to me explains why Phelan didn''t behave like a coach, staying in his seat in the dugout and disappearing at the end of games. The experience and expertise he brought was of a different kind from that of a traditional coach and I can see the logic of bringing him in as support for Neil Adams. But, from what I''ve read about McAvoy, he will provide exactly that kind of support to Alex Neil, the difference being of course in their range of experience. The question I have is how the City players will view Phelan''s departure. According to Scholes, Phelan "was liked and respected by the (Man Utd) players". If he had already made himself liked and respected by the City players, his departure could add further to the destabilising effect as far as the squad is concerned.
  24. Nobody knows what style of football Alex Neil is committed to. All we know is what style of football enabled him to take Hamilton Accies into the Scottish Prem, and to third in that league (at the present time), with the (limited) resources at his disposal. Why ASSUME he hasn''t the intelligence and football nous to adjust to the demands of the club he works for, the league he is in, and the quality of the players available to him? To condemn him at this point in time as playing "a dated kick and rush game supplemented with token passing to make it look more modern" is surely jumping to a quite unjustified conclusion.
  25. With respect, I think this misunderstands the role of the Football Executive Board at Carrow Road. The board was set up to relieve the manager (NA or anyone else) of duties which divert his attention from managing the team. There is a lot of football-related work, such as organising the scouting network, the physio and sports science depts, arranging club tours and so on which, while football related, is over and above the job of managing the players and team. Of course the work of the FEB impacts on the manager''s job, which is why the manager is a member of the FEB. But the Carrow Road setup is NOT the continental model of Director of Football/Head Coach that appears to have been in place at WBA and is said to be in place at Liverpool. Alex Neil has declared that, since he carries the can for failure on the pitch, he wants the final say in who plays for the club and so on. I''m sure he doesn''t mean that e.g. he wants the decision as to whether the club can afford to buy a particular player to be his alone. And I''m equally sure the FEB has no responsibility for picking the team on a Saturday. The whole point of the FEB is to unburden the manager of peripheral tasks and let him concentrate on the primary ones of managing the playing staff and teams.
×
×
  • Create New...