Marty

[quote]I am by no means in the Worthy out camp yet, however, i think he needs to start learning a little bit faster than what he already is! It took him 13 games to finally drop Gary Holt (but then brought ...[/quote] Phah, no i can''t see it! How is Shackell the solution to our defensive problems? wishful thinking I believe. As for Brennan in place of Drury, well maye he is better at going forward but he is not as good defensively.    

[quote]I am by no means in the Worthy out camp yet, however, i think he needs to start learning a little bit faster than what he already is! It took him 13 games to finally drop Gary Holt (but then brought ...[/quote] Phah, Er no I can''t see it! Brennan, better than Drury, doubt it, in fact he looks rather mediocre, maybe a little better than Drury going forward but a poorer defender. Shackell instead of Fleming, based on what? he is young and very inexperienced. I realise that you players need a chance but suggesting he is the solution to our defensive problems is wishful thinking.

I think it would nice in that Hucks would have a totally free role, roaming wherever he wants. Some people think Huckerby should be a striker but his best work is done running with the ball, so with the 5 man midfield it gives him the ability to pick the ball up deep and run with it without too much risk, afterall if he loses possession we still have a packed midfield.

I thought he looked OK, I think he was unlucky with some of the freekicks, on another day he''d win the freekicks, it usually evens out over the course of the game but unfortunately the ref never saw McBride leaning all over our defenders. 

[quote]Odd how people change their tune so suddenly. I''ll admit i''m one of the ones who is not a fan of Holts. I''ll also say that I wish him all the best with his injury and hopes he recovers soon, but... t...[/quote] No Alex, I have not changed my tune, please get your facts right before making such a comment. It seems odd to me that now Francis has a few goals to his name he is the best thing since sliced bread, don''t get me wrong I think he has a lot of potential, but surely a few weeks back people were critisizing him too? Francis is not the finished example, neither is Holt, however I think them two would have made a difference in a highly winable game where we had very little to show in midfield. I am also suprised at how little people are commenting on Bentley''s average displays, what we need is a good right winger to match our great left winger. I''d rather see Cooper still playing for us, he was a genuine good winger with lots of guts, something we are lacking.

Let''s face it many people have been wanting to see a change in the centre of the midfield and today we had one, let''s hope Francis and Holt recover pretty quickly, maybe people will lay off Holt a bit now and realise his worth. We had two so called passers in the midfield today and it didn''t serve us very well, what we could have done with today is a more physical midfield. Also, why don''t we play McVeigh on the right because Bentley is very mediocre? 

Well I must say I am pleased to see a lot of support for Gary, I too wish him a speedy and full recovery. I understand that people might be pleased to see other players get a go in the midfield slot that gary has made his own for years, but I think they should be a little more diplomatic in their comments. I hope whoever replaces Gary or Damien do a great job but let''s have a little respect for injured players. The guy may not be the best player on earth but her gives 100% every game and that''s worth something.   Yippee ! my ar*e Wizzard,  

c''mon, this guys is a wind-up merchant, you can tell a mile off. I can''t believe you lot are gracing him with sensible replies!

I would like to see Helveg get a go but the thing that worries me most is the right wing, Bentley was pretty poor, what is wrong with McVeigh?

I think he was adequate today without being great. Lets be honest the whole midfield wasn''t at the races in the first half, not just Holt like many of you will point out! Bentley was shocking and Mulryne fairly ineffective too.

I disagree and think this is a far too simplistic view. The whole of the midfield was poor in the first half, are you telling me Mulryne or Bentley were better than Holt in the first half? We were better in the second half because was normally are, this is not the first time we have improved after the break irrespective of Holt playing or not. I thought Brennan was very average too. Seems like the simple option is to blame Holt for a poor first half from the whole team (thats 11 players if you didn;t know!). Also, i think Mackenzie had the biggest influence on this game for Norwich, not Helveg.

I thought Bentley was so ineffective I''d rather see Henderson play on the right (awaiting Worthy Nigletons witty reply!)

I don''t think it was purely taking Holt off that changed the game, adding Mackenzie and removing Brennan helped. let''s also not forget we are always better in the second half.

[quote]I''m p***ed off now, does this mean Holt will have another 200 game run without being dropped? We have other options, lets use them. We play Holt, we lose, last week we dropped Holt and won. I''m not ...[/quote] Alex, can I remind you that there are 11 players in a team! if it was that simple we all be football managers. I feel if we lose Holt will be used as a scapegoat yet again

Phah, any chance of saying something constructive?

[quote]How about this: ------------ Green ----------- Edworthy Fleming Charlton Drury Bentley Mulryne Jonson Hucks ------ Mckenzie Sven ---- I think we need to have power and height in the middle...[/quote] magic eyes, I don''t understand, where is the height and power is in your midfield formation? I would imagine holt is as tall as Jonson and Mulryne is not tall or powerful? 

[quote]As is usually the case, the reality is somewhere inbetween the two sides here. There''s no question that St Andrew''s is a very nasty place to go, and not just the ground. Those of you who have ever fil...[/quote] a1canary, I wasn''t aware that Steve Bruce was so ungracious, I never really liked the guy and i hope we give him something to moan about on Saturday night.

I think it''s a fine balancing act as well a bit of a gamble and I think the people on the board are in a better position than me to make their judgements.

[quote]Please enlighten me. how is calling someone a jock anymore racist than calling someone a geordie, scouser etc. this ism/phobic debate is descending into farce (with extremes on both sides). seems t...[/quote] how do you become a trappist monk because I like the way they brew their beer?

[quote]As far as I can see, having come on here to show support for Holty, the only person I''ve got a person with is you and your racism. Because one Scottish guy "insisted" you call him Jock, that makes it...[/quote] To stick up for Charlies dad I was under the impression that "Jock" was not the most offensive word in the world and was quite commonly used as friendly banter, a little like "Aussies" calling Brits "Poms", which doesn''t offend me. Maybe I am wrong. I also think it depends on the context in which it is said. The same applies for "Taff", like Mark Bowens nickname, and a fairly common nickname for someone Welsh, thats not really racist is it?  same for "Paddy" I would imagine

[quote]You lot are so over reacting...[/quote] Phah, sorry pal but maybe in your world you can expect some hate mail but not (in my opinion) in the more civilised world. No-one who gives 100% week in week out deserves that. If you think it is so normal would you be prepared to post your address here? no? i thought not. Stop being so primitive and sticking up for morons who post this vile stuff, unless of course you do so yourself?

[quote]On the forum: Gary Holt isn''t good enough. He needs to be dropped. Letter to Holt: Your not good enough for the Premiership. You should be dropped. Don''t tell me the letter had anything more...[/quote] phah, sound likes you know a lot about Holts mail.....!!!!!   Even if it did say what you said it might then it''s counter productive, however I would pressume it might be a little more personal and this is not acceptible.

NCFC should not be a 1 trick pony, we have other good players and they should get a chance. Our squad should be big enough to give some player a little rest, this will almost certainly improve their games too. Don''t miss quote me I think Hucks is a legend but giving him 20-30 mins as a sub might really bring the best out of him whilst keeping his batteries charged and giving others a good run out too. Actually there was one thing confusing me recently, why did Worthington fail to play any subs on Saturday, especially since Mulryne was dead on his feet? maybe it was lack of confidence after the Charlton Substitutions which didn''t work too well. I firmly believe you should give the subs a decent work out.

[quote]We cant drop the best striker (nay player) at the club - dropping hux in place of Jonson, McVeigh,leon or sven would show that we think as much about work rate as Worthy does. Return him to his right...[/quote] Zipper, I always think Huckeby is a better winger than a striker, he likes to run with the ball at people, and that creates problems with the defensive qualities of the midfield. I think he is far less effective up front.

I aggree, this will be controversial but I think it might do him some good and he will be a great weapon to bring on for 20-25 mins at the end. It also allows us to be a bit more solid in the middle. I think it would be nice to give Mcveigh a real chance on the left to show us what he can do again, afterall isn''t he the clubs top scorer?