Shack Attack

[quote user="Gingerpele"]And one last question, do the Dutch National team play at all like Ajax? Have they ever been similar to Ajax in playing style? I''m fairly sure the answer is yes. Do England play like Man.C? I''m fairly sure the answer is no...[/quote]Is any of that down to the fact that Ajax have more Dutch players than Man City have English players though? There are plenty of different nationalities represented in the Ajax squad just as there are in the City squad. The reasons behind the Dutch style (if there is such a thing anymore?) are way more complicated than there being less foreign players in the Dutch league.

[quote user="Gingerpele"] And I''d hope our players who are asked about the game expect us to win... Not really anything surprising here.[/quote] Far too sensible Ginge. You should never take any notice of anything any player or manager says in any pre-match/post-match interview. They pretty much all hate them and have all been told exactly what to say. [quote user="lake district canary"] But isn''t that what Man City do- expect to win - because they''ve spent all that money?    That appears to be their problem this season - the expectation.     [/quote]The problem Man City have is not expectation but that their main rivals have improved in the close season whilst they have all but stood still. Despite all of that money they spent prior to the start of last season they still needed a last minute goal to win the Premier League ahead of two of the worst Chelsea* and Manchester United sides I have seen in a long while. I don''t think they ''expected'' to be able to do the same again but suspect that they are somewhat hamstrung by the impending FFP rules which have meant that they have not been able to keep up their policy of heavy spending.* Before anyone mentions it I know that this Chelsea side went on to become European champions. They were extremely lucky though.

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Surely they are today''s Wimbledon?[:^)]   I''m probably doing a diservice to Wimbledon there.  Not just in the football, but relative to their different era''s Wimbledon spent very little in keeping themselves in the top division. [/quote]The thing is Wimbledon sort of had no choice. Stoke have spent enough money so that they don''t have to play that way. I look at someone like Steven N''Zonzi and wonder how much better he would be in a team who played decent football. He''s no former hod carrier plucked from amateur football.I''d love to see Stoke relegated this season.

Clearly upset that they didn''t get the put in for that scrum in the second half [:D].A despicable ''football'' team who hopefully are in their last season in the top flight.

[quote user="Shack Attack"]Has Jackson ever played on the left of a front three before? I''m not taking the p*ss here as I genuinely don''t know. He doesn''t really convince me as a striker and I''m not sure he deserves a place in the team anywhere.[/quote]Reading that back it seems quite harsh on Jackson (especially as he scored last night). I probably should have said starting line up instead of team as I think he can be quite effective coming off the bench when his pace is handy against tiring legs.

Has Jackson ever played on the left of a front three before? I''m not taking the p*ss here as I genuinely don''t know. He doesn''t really convince me as a striker and I''m not sure he deserves a place in the team anywhere.One player stood out against Villa and he doesn''t make your team. Don''t really get that. Ruddy, Bassong, Tetty, Hoolahan and Holt should be the spine of our team. Strength, organisation and composure on the ball allied with a goalscoring threat. Bolt your pacy players around that spine and you won''t go far wrong in my opinion.

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Wiz"]Morison, Kane, and..............Hooli (gives the ball away far too often imo, cult figure now like Cody Mac)[/quote]Oh dear Wiz, I''m sure you only make posts like this to get a reaction.Would you honestly ship out our most creative player? Of course he gives the ball away more than most - he get''s the ball more than most and he holds the ball up more than most, brings others into play and switches the angle of attack more than most. Try looking at the good things he does rather than the few times he loses the ball and you will see a different player to the one you''re watching. I feel privileged every time I watch him play and it will be a sad day when time is called on his Norwich City career.[/quote]Spot on [Y][quote user="BroadstairsR"] Your point reminds me of my old boy, God rest. He had it in for Ian Crook on a continuous basis because he too lost the ball a lot. "It''s that Crook again." was his favoured mantra. Widely considered one of the best midfielders ever to wear the Yellow, Crook''s genius came with a price, like Hoolahan''s. It''s part of a package that I personally like to see unwrapped on a regular  basis.  [/quote] I''m glad you brought Ian Crook into this conversation. It makes me laugh when I see him regularly appear in the all time greatest sides that people pick because my memories of that era are that there were many voices like that of your Dad. People would regularly moan about Crook and how he ''only passed sideways'' or ''gave the ball away a lot''. He was always the scapegoat when we lost. Personally I think it is a cultural thing. We have a deep distrust of technical players in this country and prefer those who can tackle, run and win headers.

[quote user="lake district canary"]Having a target figure, especially when it is still only October (just!), is impossible to judge imo.    We just don''t know how the season will pan out.  It could be 35 or 40 or 45.    The only safe thing to think is that as that we should try to get as many points as we can.   37  points would be a disappointment, regardless of whether it is enough points or not.  [/quote] Agreed. Aiming for the bare minimum to avoid relegation is the exact opposite of how we have got from League One to a second season in the Premier League. We should be looking to win as many points as we can in the league and get as far as we can in the cups. We achieved what we did under Lambert because we were winners and we carried that desire to win over sucessive seasons. Aiming for the bare minimum completely goes against that.

You fail as a City fan for wasting a single second worrying about that insignificant club from the midlands. We are so much better than that.[;)]

You fail as a City fan for wasting a single second worrying about that insignificant club from the midlands. We are so much better than that.[;)]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Yeah but what about all those penalties that The Doc used to give away Shack[:^)] You can statattack as much as you like but us posters know best......  [:S][;)]  [/quote] I forgot about The Doc and penalties  to be fair. I think people used to include penalties and free kicks that they felt he should have given away to try and prove their point! The thing that amuses me is that if you want to criticise Wes (or The Doc or Grant Holt or anyone who plays for us) then you can probably find a couple of aspects of their game in which they could do better. As much as we love our club they are playing for NCFC for a reason. But instead people choose to fabricate nonsense to back up their own opinions and that should always be challenged as far as I am concerned.

Let''s nail the myth that Wes gives the ball away too much once and for all.- His pass success ratio is the highest at the club (88.6%) and is significantly higher than any other player who has made a similar number of passes.- The number of accurate crosses he produces per game (1.3) is second only to Snodgrass (2.0). Although to put this into context he has produced 8 accurate crosses out of 14 attampts compared to 16 from 47 for Snodgrass.- He makes more key passes per game than any other player. I am not 100% sure what consitutes a key pass to be honest but whatever it is Wes produces more than any other player.- He makes more successful dribbles per game (1.8) than any other player. Now none of that seems to point to a player who gives the ball away a lot. There are always two sides to every story though and in the interests of balance the negative aspects to his game is as follows.- He is dispossessed more ofen per game (2) than any other player. He has been dispossessed 12 times this season.- He turns over the ball to the opposition the the third highest amount per game (1.2). Grant Holt leads the way in turnovers with an average of 1.8 per game.In conclusion it seems that idea that he gives the ball away too much stems from the fact that he has been tackled 12 times and that he turns the ball over to the opposition slightly less than Grant Holt. What is perhaps interesting is to look at who leads the way in these particular wasteful aspects of Wes Hoolahan''s game throughout the league. If you look at the number of times dispossessed per game then you will see that the much vaunted James McClean (3.6) leads the way. Other notable names towards the top (bottom?) of the charts are Fernando Torres (3.1), Sergio Aguero and Shinji Kagawa (2.8), Carlos Tevez (2.6) and Juan Mata (2.4). I''m sure the Chesea message boards are full of people moaning about how wasteful Juan Mata is [:^)]. With an average of two times dispossessed per game Wes is at the same level as Wayne Rooney and Santi Carzola. One thing that all of these players have in common is that they regularly look to beat their man. In terms of turnovers he is less wasteful than Demba Ba (2.7 per game), Oscar (2.1), Gareth Bale (1.8) and Eden Hazard (1.6). I''m sorry that this post is a little ''stat heavy'' but the only way to banish tese vague feelings that some people have with certain players is with facts. Posters who have been around for a similar time than me will remember the annual Youseff Safri Ramadan thread where people would swear blind that he regularly missed games during this period. Eventually Pete posted the facts that proved this was not the case. It didn''t stop it all but sometimes on here myths do build until people start to believe they are facts. Hopefully this post will go some way towards ending one of the myths surrounding one of our most important players.

Are you a Timelord Duncan?[;)]

[quote user="lake district canary"]  For all his skill, Hoolahan still gets caught out too often.  Head down trying desperately to keep the ball when he should just move it on.  [/quote]Nonsense. Hoolahan has the highest pass success percentage of any Norwich player this season. You don''t get that if you play with your head down. Try again [:P]

I never really understand the criticism of Wes and it makes even less sense after the game today. Man of the match on Sky and you would have great difficulty putting forward a case to disagree with that. Negative reviews of his game usually seem to centre around him giving the ball away too much which is absolute bullsh*t or his lack of consistency which misses the point that if he was more consistent he would not be playing for us. He is without doubt my favourite current player and it is great to see him playing in his best position now as a Number 10. Does anyone really think that we would be better off playing another out and out striker such as Jackson or Morison alongside Grant Holt? Our most underrated player in my opinion. What a curious OP from ''Mr Positive'' [:^)]

Read Grant Holt''s comments in his interview in The Guardian today. He says it would be ''an absolute disgrace'' if Norwich fans were to boo Paul Lambert.

There has been so much written about the departure of Lambert which seems to have no basis in fact that it is difficult to know what to believe. My feeling (and if the LMA are backing him against us I would be even more confident that this was the case) is that he had a clause in his contract which allowed him to speak to other clubs and when he asked to speak to Villa we refused. This is presumably where the talk of him claiming constructive dismissal comes from as if we broke the terms of our contract with him then technically he did not resign. I also suspect that he might be due some kind of bonus were it proved he did not resign (is this what Bowkett is claiming that Lambert is suing us for? The concept of ''loyalty bonuses'' is fairly laughable in football but they do exist and operate in this way. There was talk of Carlos Tevez receiving a loyalty bonus from Manchester City last season as he had never handed in a transfer request!) which is why we are obviously keen on insisting that he did.Ultimately none of us really know what happened (my guess above is just that) and we won''t know until the tribunal at the start of next year. But if Lambert has the backing of the LMA it does suggest that we might be in a bit of trouble.

I''d go with Wes but Tettey and Bassong were also excellent.

[quote user="Gingerpele"] Did the Premiership, and Sky ruin international football? (this is a serious question, for the ''older'' posters. Being a young''un I don''t actually remember the good old days, and I may just be over exaggerating the importance of international football form before my time.)[/quote]I''m not sure if I qualify as an ''older'' poster but I think that the blame for marginalisation of international football can probably be placed in (at least) four areas.1. Familiarity - Back in ''the good old days'' the World Cup was probably the only time your average football fan got the chance to watch the best players in the world. Take Diego Maradona and Lionel Messi as examples. If you grew up in the 1980s the only time you got to see Maradona was either in a World Cup or if an English team drew his club side in Europe (and even then you might only see highlights of the match). Whereas today you can watch pretty much every minute of every game that Messi plays. That familiarity means that watching him in a World Cup match doesn''t have the same mystique and people see it as just another match. By the time Brazil 2014 comes around everybody will know everything there is to know about Neymar. Twenty years ago English kids might have read a brief article in Shoot or Match. It''s not just the great players either. You wouldn''t get a story like Cameroon in 1990 anymore because half of the players would probably be playing for big European teams and we would have seen them play plenty of times before.2. Lack of different styles - As players the world over gravitate to the big European leagues there has been a homogenisation of tactics which makes many games (especially in month long tournament with games every day) feel very similar. Players from South America come over to Europe a lot earlier these days and they lose a little bit of their traditional style in order to fit in. Also if you go back to the era prior to the break up of the Soviet Union you would have had varying styles within the club sides of that state and also other countries within Eastern Europe. Nowadays the whole of Europe plays a pretty similar game with the obvious exception of Spain. But they''re boring apparently [;)]3. Money - You mention the Premier League but it is the Champions League that is the real culprit here. The riches on offer for participation in this tournament have allowed the participants to hoover up the best talent from around the world and create teams which are stronger than their national sides. Do we honestly think any country would stand a chance of beating Barcelona or Real Madrid? If you are already watching the best teams in the world where is the need to watch international football? The World Cup used to be the pinnacle of a players career and the best chance they had to play against the best in the world. Now they get to do that every couple of weeks with their club sides.4. The influence of clubs - TV money from the Premier League and Champions League has allowed clubs to pay players larger and larger salaries and with that comes a desire to protact their assets. The biggest clubs in the country routinely withdraw their players from friendlies for the most minor injury or do deals with the coach so that their star names only play one half. This lack of time with players makes it difficult to prepare an international side in a fluid and progressive manner and means that many coaches prefer to make their team difficult to beat and favour reactive football. This in turn means that international football is less entertaining. The last great international tournament was Euro 2000 (I know this is subjective but I am not alone in this view) which was probably before the influence of the major clubs had been bolstered by the Champions League. I don''t think that this is a coincidence.A lot of people don''t seem to care about how international football has been marginalised but many of my fondest footballing memories are from international games. I think there is still a place for international football within the modern game but it is clear that there needs to be some kind of reform to get the clubs (and their fans) on side.

[quote user="Rustyboy"] If English fans behaved like this we would be banned for years. FIFA you are a joke![/quote]As much as I expect any response from FIFA/UEFA to be pathetic the idea that they would treat English fans any differently is a nonsense. English football fans make FIFA/UEFA an absolute fortune as they always travel to major tournaments in large numbers and spend plenty on overpriced officially sponsered cooking lager. There is absolutely no way Platini or Blatter would put that in jeopardy and the idea that FIFA/UEFA are anti-English never seems to stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

[quote user="Wiz"][quote user="TCCANARY"] Chris Hughton is a good manager, you just have to have an open mind.   [/quote]   His CV is average at best TC..................we deserve better. [/quote]Whoooooooosssssssshhhhhhhh.That was way too subtle TC.[:D]

[quote user="First Wazzock"] I think it was mentioned on the tele box tonight that they have been fined £16000 before... What a joke. [/quote]Good job none of their players exposed any underwear to reveal the name of a well known bookmaker. Then they would have been in real trouble [:|]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/euro-2012/9339202/Nicklas-Bendtners-80000-fine-for-sponsored-underwear-exposes-Uefas-skewed-priorities.html

Make that 3-0.

Canada are 2-0 down after 30 minutes [:(]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]  A fine would be insufficient.....charges need to be brought - and if those in the international football hierarchy don''t come down ruthlessly on those instigators and perpertrators, then they don''t deserve to hold the responsibility or position on which they sit.......and should lose their jobs.   [/quote]Agreed. What do you think the chances are of any real action being taken against the Serbian FA though? There seems to be a distinct lack of leadership affecting the governing bodies of all manner of sports at the moment and UEFA (this has nothing to do with Blatter) are no different. If banning Serbia has the potential to cost UEFA money then the whole thing will be swept under the carpet. I''ve been reading plenty about Lance Armstrong and the UCI over the last week and that proves just what you can get away with if you are valuable enough to your sport. Serbia aren''t such a big name in football but UEFA won''t want to upset them if there is the potential to make money there in the future. A few thousand quid fine and a slap on the wrist and that will be it.