CambridgeCanary

That is truly ridiculous. Whilst your analysis is correct and very influenced by hindsight, at the time Doncaster was constantly ridiculed on here for forgetting the ambition part. It was a running joke that gave Mello for example many wonderful posts. I agree it was so what unfair but to say it didn''t happen is just daft.

This thread has become bizarre. We used to laugh at the prudence with ambition mantra because the ambition side was missing. Now the club is showing the greatest ambition ever, the response is that we are wasting our time on players who won''t come to a pathetic club like this. There is obviously the same old, we are little Norwich attitude but beyond that I think there is a failure to appreciate the power of the Premier League and the attraction of being a part of it. Some top players will (and in our case already have) decide that being a first team regular for a lower club is better for their careers and profile than sitting on the bench at a top club. If you are a young , talented and ambitious player would you rather be Leroy Fer or Jack Rodwell?

I that you will find that if football results can be predicted with the accuracy that the Mail and some posters assert then, the point would have disappeared long ago. This Club has always lost games that it ought to have won and won games that seemed unwinnable. I didn''t see any predictions last season that we would beat both Manchester clubs and Arsenal but it happened. You can look at averages and likelihoods but you cannot predict scores. We will be stronger in the later stages of the season because we will have players back whom we have missed and the new players will be more settled at the club and in this league.

[quote user="Thorpe end canary"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]In addition to Hughton''s alleged contribution when assessing Holt''s performances last season, don''t forget that there is a strong second season syndrome for strikers in the Premiership. You can see the reasons for this given that defenders will study videos and work out how to stop them. It is not just Holt. There was Jelavic for example and Andy Carroll in his Liverpool Spell and this season we can see Michu, Benteke and Lambert all finding it impossible to replicate the form of their first season. Our own Morison too might come within this syndrome. I think part of the problem last season was Holt being targeted by defenders who knew how to play against him.[/quote] And you think Morrison had a good 1st season? I must have missed that. Hughton out[/quote] Pay more attention then!

In addition to Hughton''s alleged contribution when assessing Holt''s performances last season, don''t forget that there is a strong second season syndrome for strikers in the Premiership. You can see the reasons for this given that defenders will study videos and work out how to stop them. It is not just Holt. There was Jelavic for example and Andy Carroll in his Liverpool Spell and this season we can see Michu, Benteke and Lambert all finding it impossible to replicate the form of their first season. Our own Morison too might come within this syndrome. I think part of the problem last season was Holt being targeted by defenders who knew how to play against him.

The Times thinks all teams will get more than 31 points and that we will survive on 37. dectech.co.uk

[quote user="Canarygirl"]Gareth Thomas came out while still playing professional rugby, a footballer will do the same before long. About time too.[/quote] But that is the point. Rugby crowds do not indulge in the vile behaviour of tribal football fans. There is something very primal about football crowds. People behave in ways and say things at matches that they wouldn''t dream of any where else. Crowds can be vile and cruel in ways unmatched in any other part of our society. Football will always be the last bastion of prejudice.......sadly but inevitably.

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Well, OK. But it doesn''t really say any more than we knew already, does it ? It does not, with respect ,say that Wes will be staying. He''s not mentioned in the statement.Plenty of water to flow under the bridge in the ensuing 23 days......[/quote] Thanks for demonstrating why McNally does not make more public statements. What is the point?

Just to take this thread in a different direction, I''m really sorry that it has not worked out for Holt at Wigan. I hoped his move work give him a couple of seasons in the Champ to score goals and enjoy his football. He earnt an Indian summer. For those mocking him, I won''t labour the points that at times he singlehandedly took us up the leagues but will reflect that if he is struggling now that is partly due to the battering he took in a Norwich shirt. Like Hucks, he was kicked,elbowed and knocked around and that takes a toll on even a very fit strong man.

I''m still shocked by Matt Juler telling Ricky on Twitter to leave City and now this! When in God''s name did it become acceptable for fans of our club to advise players to leave when the Club not the player is not good enough? It''s outrageous and totally unacceptable.

Also forgotten how we were losing 2-1 at Arsenal and Hughton went for it. We lost 4-1 but had a go. Again, that dies t fit the prejudice profile does it.

Assuming you meant balls of steel then I would say there is no better way to demonstrate ownership of those than to stay calm, quiet and dignified in a world full of noise and shrill panic.

As far as I can see, no one has yet considered that Lambert bought Howson in January 2012. He was injured but when he was gut Lambert played him..... In place of a Fox. Even Lambert who clearly valued and rated Fox thought Howson was the better player.

This is a rerun of the Holt arguments last season. As then, Wes is worth more to us than the cash. Like an old car, we know what he can do and a similar value model is full of risk

[quote user="YellowNets1901"]But, Cambridge, when your run of fixtures is: Sunderland (bottom of league), Fulham (bottom 3), United (decent but struggling), Palace (bottom 4, just promoted) surely you could be forgiven for expecting to get maybe 6 points from those games, perhaps 7 if you''re lucky. I really don''t think that''s too much to ask. 2 points from those games wasn''t good enough, a very poor return.[/quote] Forgiven? Of course but let''s be real Sunderland v Norwich for example comes up on the Fink Tank at dectech.co.uk as 44.8% home win 26.3draw and28.9 away win. The away win was possible and the draw was creditable. It is the expectation of a awin that I am disputing because we were statistically underdogs. Just for balance, us v Fulham is 42.8% home win

Calderwood never cut it as a manager is undoubtedly true but how is it relevant? It keeps being said that he and Trollope are failed managers. If they were our manager then that would be cause for concern but they are not. There are plenty of coaches who''ve failed as managers. Clue there. That''s why they are coaches. I failed to cut it as a footballer. That has had no impact on my employment in my life. It is what one does not what one has failed at which is important.

[quote user="im spartacus"]whatever way you paint it up they are never there for cup games, i couldn''t care less if they go or not but the OP isn''t saying anything that isn''t true [/quote] Quite right. I don''t really care but for the fact that we are constantly having the Snakepit pushed down our throats as the top fans on here, McVeigh and Butler and even the idiot who introduces OTBC at the start. Posters from the Snakepit sneer at the rest of us for our alleged passivity. It does lead to the legitimate question as to why, if they are so much the best of us, is it usually half full for cup matches?

I think that there is more than a touch of yellow tinted glasses there 1901. Much as I would prefer it to otherwise, the hard truth is that the only match of these that we were favourites to win was Fulham. To suggest that we had the other games and gave them away is wishful thinking. We could have won three more and another time might have done but it would have been as underdogs. I think it is this over expectation that leads so many posters to be dissatisfied with what were very good and useful draws at Sunderland and Palace.

[quote user="Nexus_Canary"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"] That''s the point isn''t it? Even if the fan of the year who doesn''t go to games anymore has quoted MWJ correctly, it does not follow that MWJ is being critical. As was pointed out, the fair weather fan of the year is mind reading. Perhaps MWJ thinks the same as me that it would be nice to have more attacking football for a change but very risky and not very practical. If I think that without having a multimillion fortune riding on the success of the season then, it''s perfectly possible he feels the same. The assumption even on the quote that this is critical of Hughton is a stretch. It is far from the only possible interpretation but the only one that suits the agenda of the leaker.[/quote]Fair weather ?!I know Matt and have done for some 15 years, he would be to polite to say so I however am not.You sir are a tw@t.[/quote] Very true but notwithstanding, you don''t turn your back on your team when things are not going as well as you would like. If you do, especially after you''ve been awarded an accolade for your support then the least you can expect is your commitment being questioned. Anyway, it was a cheap but irrelevant remark and if I have offended you then that is regrettable. The point is that a comment by MWJ was spun into a criticism of Hughton without much foundation other than wishful thinking by someone who seems to have a pathological dislike of Hughton.

[quote user="Thorpe end canary"]To be honest he is only saying what everyone else is saying the difference being he can do something about it![/quote] That''s the point isn''t it? Even if the fan of the year who doesn''t go to games anymore has quoted MWJ correctly, it does not follow that MWJ is being critical. As was pointed out, the fair weather fan of the year is mind reading. Perhaps MWJ thinks the same as me that it would be nice to have more attacking football for a change but very risky and not very practical. If I think that without having a multimillion fortune riding on the success of the season then, it''s perfectly possible he feels the same. The assumption even on the quote that this is critical of Hughton is a stretch. It is far from the only possible interpretation but the only one that suits the agenda of the leaker.

Carlo Ancellotti. A fine manager with a personal dignity which would reflect well on the club

I agree with Parma. The constant references to the football being sure are so overstated as to have become ridiculous. In the modern age language has become about extremes. Everything is either brilliant or rubbish. Managers and players are brilliant or useless. We have lost the ability to describe or even think in shades. But life is mainly set in shades. Our football is neither brilliant nor rubbish all the time though it has been poor on occasions. Mostly it varies between good and adequate. Certainly it was adequate at Palace because we scored a good goal and drew. I get told Hughton is too negative as if that were self evident yet most of the time neither I nor the other person knows what that means. I guess it means more negative than necessary but how do we decide how negative us necessary? We play a deliberate counter attacking game. We would rather draw than lose and sometimes Hughton chooses not to risk a draw to get a win. I doubt this occurs as often as alleged and you have only to consider the two recent away games. We tried to win at the end against both Sunderland and Palace but not recklessly so. The justification is in the league table. If we had taken more risks we could have two points less with Palace and Sunderland each having two points more. The table would then look very different. It is not perfect. At times it is not good enough. However, Hughton is on the right track trying to get us to play an effective and what can be an exciting form of football. That is as much as he can do and seeing that is pribably the reason that the Board has faith in him.

[quote user="City 2nd"]Morty - yes I am, and you think we are being run professionally. Yeah really professionally with the second most inept manager that I recall in the history of our club, and the incompetent fool that is McNally continuing to let him. That marriage will end in tears very soon.[/quote] Second most inept manager? Who is the first? Gunn Grant Hamilton Deehan Megson Or someone else?

[quote user="KeelansGlove"]Morty as I said several pages ago, I expect the board (or members of it) to say SOMETHING. Do you really think it is valid to suggest that a forum or AGM is a valid platform to address the support as a whole when a couple of hundred people from a crowd of 25,000+ If they are happy with how things are going and fully support the manager then say so and say it LOUDLY so that every body knows we are stuck with him and stop wasting time pleading for sanity.[/quote] The point has been made already but if the Board comment on the criticisms of Hughton then they give those criticisms some validity. Why in earth would the Board publicly say that it supports Hughton when the inevitable result would be a media and internet debates as to whether it was right to do so or not? Anything the Board says will draw attention to Hughton and increase the pressure on him. Hardly the best way to support him. On a more general point, we live in an age of comment. Our Prime Minister seems happy to comment on nothing whether his legitimate concern or not. The media expects statements from every party in every story. When I told journalists that my client would not be commenting further on a story in which he was the central player, they were genuinely shocked. In a world of noise, some quiet is very welcome.

[quote user="John"]The past 6 games were an unlikely stretch of matches that were not only winnable on our part, but often pitted us as favourites. It''s not something we''re likely to experience during the course of the season, and considering our conspicuously unfavourable run towards the end, the onus is on us during these kind of periods to gain a decent tally of points.The fact that our point per game ratio has been 1:1 (spread out over the seasons leading us to 38 points) at this time is barely grasping survival form, making me very concerned. If one considers the likely prospect that this is perhaps our easiest run of 6 games for the season, we need to be doing far better than we are, seeing that we''re also likely to lapse back into our early season form during the tail end of the season.1 Win in 6 games such as those we''ve played, including 2 losses (and no wins) at home, is immensely worrying, and unlike some i can''t honestly say that we''re assured the minimum of survival under Hughton. Moreover i''d suggest relegation is a far more likely prospect on the basis of the available evidence.Considering the freakishly awful form that preceded this poor run, i find little redemption in Hughton''s record for this season. As a result i''m inclined to wanting him out, and providing the board have done their job and have a precautionary plan for life without Hughton, it seems the obvious less risky route to go down for the rational (yet admittedly less informed) observer.[/quote] Which of the last six were we favourites to win? Fulham is the only one where we were statistically favoured to win.