CambridgeCanary

Ok, those who want him gone have plenty of threads to make their point so by all means laugh at us but please don''t bother posting. I want to see just how strong the support for sticking with our manager is. So, I hope that only yes votes will appear please. I know it''s not just me. Anyone else want to own up? Reasons optional. Abuse and derision very likely.

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]I think you have to look at the bigger picture, I haven''t got faith that Hughton is the man to keep us up and the results over the whole of 2013 have made me think like that.[/quote] But I think that is the point. Looking at the bigger picture, the case for sacking Hughton is limited. We are not threatened with relegation, we are building a Premier League infrastructure guided by him, we sell out our games, we have a good squad with some key players to come back from injury. Finally, given our resources, there is little to suggest that any sensible alternative could improve the situation. Hughton has flaws but so does every manager we could attract. Lambert did after all. The bigger picture suggests that there is little to gain and much to risk losing in sacking Hughton. What exercises posters is the smaller picture. The notion that nothing will improve for us and relegation looms (presumably the teams below us will improve). The notion that a different manager would do things differently. The failure to factor in the costs to the club of bringing in a manager like Lambert with no interest in anything beyond the first team. I understand the short termist view and the Hughton out view that results. Results and performances have been difficult to take. But, please don''t pretend that this is the bigger picture. The Board have to consider the bigger picture and that is why there has been no hint of any threat to Hughton''s position from that quarter.

I don''t think that this is a fair and accurate quote at all. I heard the interview last night and several times this morning. What Hughton said was that sometimes, at the bigger and better clubs we will lose and that is football. Does anyone dispute that there are bigger and better clubs than Norwich? Does anyone dispute that sometimes we will lose and lose heavily to these clubs? Hughton''s point is that we have to make it hard for this to happen and last night we made it easy. Again, does anybody dispute that? There are plenty of valid reasons to criticise Hughton without misquoting him.

I would not argue too ardently that we are not regressing at present. After the obvious point that we are still on the bend of the race and until the stagger evens out, our place is hard to ascertain. We now have only Chelsea and Manchester united to play away of the big teams. More relevantly, I suspect that we have regressed. Certainly we have against many of the top six. Our spending has improved the team and is a record for us but nothing compared to what other teams have spent. The gap between us and the top six has widened. I also feel that insufficient attention has been given to the new players having to adapt to the pace and pressure of the Prem. We wondered if several would make it when they were signed and now there is an expectation that they would play to capacity on day one. Only Fer did. the others are learning and/or catching up after delayed starts because of injury or other factors. If we are still regressing at the end of February then we will have a scrap on our hands. It could go either way. I think that we are regressing at the moment is neither surprising nor overly concerning.

Equally puzzling that so many posters have such unrealistic expectations of our place in the world as a team playing way above its resources, do not understand the realities of modern football with its increasing concentration on a few clubs able to use vast wealth to globalise the game and who lack the patience to allow a team to develop through setbacks and accept that players are learning at this level and will make mistakes. Puzzlement depends on your standpoint and your view from that place. We may well be in a relegation if this continues. You would not predict that we will be untouched by scares this season. But that is inevitable on most indicators. We have a team that cost less than single players on the bench at the top clubs. You get what you pay for by and large and even our bargains can compete with world class players every week.. We have to keep our nerve and continue to pick up points where we can. We will survive this season and will build year on year as teams like Stoke have done. There will be painful and embarrassing days. As Norwich we can''t avoid them. We are not rich enough. We are not good enough. As Norwich, we must never accept the painful and embarrassing days and we must bounce back better and stronger. This is a real test of the manager''s and the players'' characters. I have faith in both. But, it depends on your viewpoint.

It does make you wonder whether those dismissing our win as one over a poor championship side were underselling it? Palace are poor but they have been good enough to beat Hull and West Hamm so our win has more value than was being allowed for by many on Saturday.

I agree with much that is said. Lambert had nothing to gain and everything to lose by staying. He was never going to improve on his performance so his career needed a move upwards. I''ve always felt that the ill feeling results from mismanagement by lambert and presumably his advisors. He is not a gracious man but he could have made his parting a consensual event. All he needed to do was sit down with Lakey or Waghorn or even Dennis and say that he loved his time at Norwich, would always value his relationship with the fans but now he had a chance to further his career and move on. He would hope to enjoy coming back and to wish us well. We would have had a collective "ok. Fair enough. Thanks and good luck" moment. All the bile would have gone. I don''t blame Lambert for going. We always knew it would happen. I do blame him for the manner of his going and the avoidable way he left so much hostility behind him.

[quote user="Rock The Boat"]It''s difficult for these threads not to become personal slanging fests because the underlying arguement really isn''t about the team or the manager but more about the expectations of some posters. We''re in 14th position and a fair way into the season. What''s not to like about it. We''re not a rubbish team. We''re an inconsistent team, and a lot of that inconsistency seems to be down to self-belief. The manager can only do so much but once the players have crossed over the touchline then it''s up to them. But the expectations of many posters outrun the reality. 14th and winning isn''t good enough. But they don''t seem to be able to say what it is they want. Last season, we had a run of poor performances but still managed to pick up enough points for us to always be around 13-14th until the 3rd game from the end. Last season''s Hughton bashing was because of dire performances, even though Hughton fufilled his brief. This season we''ve improved performances with better players, even if inconsistently, but the Hughton outers change their tune. Now they tell us it''s all about results. And when we win against palace it''s flip-flop time and it''s the manner of the win that upsets them, Oh children of Wiz! Actually, I blame TV for this. Not televised football, but the hundreds of reality TV shows where contestants get booted off if they fail to perform well in that particular week, regardless of how good they''ve been in the past. TV has created a viewing audience that has the attention-span of around 45 minutes. So one bad result and everybody wants Hughton''s blood. One good result and we''re back on the fence. There''s no context, no big picture. It''s just I want to be entertained and I want it now. I want a big red button on my tv remote control to vote Hughton out because I wasn''t entertained. Sure everybody wants to see us win well with fine football on display, but if you watch football for entertainment alone as many seem to, then maybe you''d be better off spending the weekend at your local garden centre.[/quote] I''ve been struggling with this issue and approached it from the effect of social media and the narrowing of language. Everything is either brilliant or rubbish with little nuance in between. your point takes the argument from a different direction and your analysis is accurate and perceptive. Thank you.

Point proven. Thank you. Debate, such as it is, over.

Your opinion Hazza. I disagree. Your argument is that Elmamder might not be a more complete striker because Becchio has had fewer starts. I like Becchio and have seen him play a number of times for Leeds. He didn''t start his career at Norwich you know. Then again, perhaps you''ve been too busy playing football to notice. Elmander contributes a lot more to the team as he demonstrated yesterday

I have found it very curious that before the match there plentiful posts claiming that new manager plus the thrill of winning at Hull meant we were in real trouble playing a resurgent Palace. We would be lucky to draw. Now we have beaten them, Palace are suddenly and unanimously a relegation bound pants team. Oh the joy of hindsight. Oh the fickleness of those who just want Hughton to fail!

So, Elmander won a corner in the first minute, hit the bar with an acrobatic flick, laid the ball to Wes for the goal, chased everything, won some headers, harassed defenders and supported Hooper or, to put it another way, did nothing!!! Becchio did fine but to put him before Elmander after yeasterday in just perverse. I think we saw yesterday what the coaching staff have seen all season which is that whilst Becchio is a fine player and has plenty to offer, he is up against a more complete player in Elmander.

[quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"]Awful performance yesterday. 2nd half in particular we were absolutely dire. Palace are a poor poor side and will go down bottom of the league and we scraped a 1-0 win. Of course the Hughton apologists will think everything is alright and walk around with a smug look on their face as if they were and still are right all along. But we all know we face two away losses and two more abject away performances. How much longer do we have to endure this? I dont enjoy matches anymore, the 2nd half yesterday was terrible and Palace could have easily won had Bassongs slice gone in and Jerome not missed a sitter. But its the manner of our performance, so flat and uninspiring.[/quote] If I was you Bootsie I''d get down the bookies and have a bet on that certainty about Palace finishing bottom. The arrogance of you and others like you is astounding. Palace''s 2 previous games were a win at Hull and a 0-0 draw with Everton. They are not the results of a team which will, certainly finish bottom. Two consecutive premier clean sheets are unusual for such nailed on bottom teams. You invite abuse by looking for a fight with who you call Hughton apologists and I expect those very same people have a wide smile reading your post and imagining you banging away on the keyboard with a face like a slapped arse. Even Glovey''s flying around the board today trying to cover his options. Maybe he''s not quite as arrogant as you... [/quote] Any chance you could just contribute your opinion instead of just hurling abuse? And apparently im a the arrogant one.[/quote] Excuse me Bootsie? Where have I just hurled abuse? I was replying to your post about Palace being certain to finish bottom and how the Hughton apologists would be walking around with a smug face. If you didn''t want those opinions debated then why post them? One man''s abuse is another''s reasonable post it would seem... [/quote] Excuse me, Nigel. I count being called arrogant as abuse. But of course you chose to omit that part in your reply didnt you.[/quote] I would say that your whole opening post was one of arrogance in an abusive manner and if you can''t debate in that manner then perhaps you should tone down your posts to what would be acceptable in the replies. [/quote] Oh do give it a rest Nigel and get off your high horse your making yourself look silly. How on earth is my original post arrogant and abusive? Its people like you that ruin this board, you cant just debate a point can you, you have to start calling people arrogant and saying there abusive. Utter rubbish.[/quote] If you regard being called arrogant as abuse then you must be being abused on a very regular basis. Looking at this and your spats with Tilly, you really are a cry baby. If you can''t take it, don''t dish it out.

Getting back to the thread, the OP is right about how football has changed. However, you have to put it in context. Life has changed since 1972. So has society. There are many things we could do then that we cannot do now and vice versa. It is a fact if the modern world that we can talk on a phone with pictures virtually anywhere in the world. We have more computing power in our pockets than was ever dreamed possible. Individuals can communicate directly to the world using blogs or twitter. We have nano science and shop assistants who call you "Mate" if they speak at all. It is naive to think football would not change. The game has mutated hugely. The game of John Bond or Mike Walker is not the game today. Just as many have so much greater opportunity today than when we were kids, so football clubs have so much less than when we were kids. A club like City will always perform at the edge of its ability just to be in the Premier League. Mid table equals excellence. Unless we are bought by a billionaire, anything more will be a freak anomaly if it ever happens. I do not enjoy or relish this but to ignore the nature of the world we live in and dream of Europe and despise a manager who kept us in this a League is unrealism of the highest kind.

It''s Character Forming" said "I didn''t think Worthy was treated unfairly myself. When we were promoted, it was tame and you never really felt we were going to survive. He then got a full year in the Champ when we never looked like competing for promotion, it was early in the following season with no signs of improvement that he was sacked. We can debate resources available until the cows come home but there was just no sign of the team competing for promotion back into the Prem." I agree with this. Far from being badly treated Worthy got 18 months more employment with City than his performance deserved.

And still no one addresses the central issue of why Hughton would not play Becchio if he thought he would add something to the team. It would be self defeating not to play anyone who could turn things round. Do you really think Hughton is that stupid or that he would cut off his nose to spite his face like this?

The logic of this thread is that Hughton has his job hanging by a thread with the fans turning and results making his task ever more difficult but that he chooses not to play someone who could change things. That is so daft as to not bear scrutiny. If Hughton thought for one moment that Becchio would improve things and thereby help keep him in a good job, then he would play him. I am perplexed. I was telling family and friends we should sign Becchio for a year before we did. I like the player. But, to suggest Hughton would wreck his own career by not playing him is ridiculous. Hughton is not playing him because he does not consider him to be up to it.

I think also that there is a general trend in society which affects discussions on here. We live in age of soundbite, twitter, text and instant opinion. That has changed the way people relate to each in very profound ways. One is that language has polarised. Nuance has gone. Nothing is ok, acceptable or good in parts any more. Everything is either brilliant or rubbish. We converse in single sentences and often single words. So language and meaning diminishes as instant meaning becomes all. It is easier to say rubbish than engage in a detailed examination of the good and bad elements of the situation.. One person says Garrido is "great" and another says he is pants. One actually means, "not bad but I''m not a fan". The other that he thinks he''s good but we could improve at that position. Their opinions are not hugely far apart but the way those opinions are expressed is. A lot of the time it is the language not the issue which divides posters. The same tendency shows in personal comments. "Idiot" is easier than, "I cannot understand how you reached that view, please justify your reasoning". Unfortunately, it is also more offensive and more polarising. Hence the bitterness so prevalent here.

You might be right but since Phelan has never managed a league club, neither you nor I can possibly know whether he would be better than Hughton or not.

[quote user="Wiz"][quote user="The Sensational Zak Cartman"]So you hold an honest belief that the people in charge of the club have failed to look at a fixture list for the 2013-2014 season and have forgotten that we play every team twice or did you make it up? [/quote] The running order..............stop being thick. [/quote] So, you apparently believe that our CEO and our manager who are both paid hundreds of thousands of pounds to do their jobs have not studied the fixture list in the same detail as us fans???? And you call someone else "thick"??? Dear God above.

Plus of course, Olsson likes to get as far forward as he can literally going to the byline and is the best crosser of the ball (using his outside foot) that we have had in years. But as you say, all attacks with Redmond on the right. Why lets facts get in the way of a good moan?

Especially when you factor in his hatred for Fry. It is all very consistent.

[quote user="snake-eyes"]You make your own luck. You have to buy a ticket to win![/quote] Buying a ticket just gives you a chance. Lambert bought and won against WBA and good for him. Hughton bought and lost when he changed Tettey for Hoolahan against Arsenal. No difference in action. Only in outcome. The chance that succeeds is brave and praised. That which fails is reckless and ignored or attacked.

[quote user="Making Plans"][quote user="CambridgeCanary"]Even if all that is true Making Plans, unless we are going to replace Hughton with Lambert, the only response is......so what? [/quote]Well firstly, it is all true and just about everyone knows it. Secondly I''m not advocating that we replace Hughton with Lambert because that is very unlikely to happen. However, there are plenty of other capable managers out there who would be better than Hughton (if only on the basis that they couldn''t be any worse) and would love to manage Norwich City. [/quote] In which case let us compare Hughton with those managers and consider which would serve City better. There is a point to that. Comparing Lambert to Hughton does not take that important debate any further and is a silly distraction. Except that it does show what really matters to many posters which is that Hughton is not Lambert. Until we can accept that and bury the argument, we are not going to move forward.

It is very easy to back whoever is our manager when you are a fan of the Club through thick and thin and you believe that people come and go but the Club is always there for us and our children.