Jump to content

chicken

Members
  • Content Count

    5,371
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by chicken

  1. I love stats. Mainly because without context they say absolutely nothing. The problem with Tettey is that if those around him are having an off day, he does very little for your side. Mainly because he isn''t a player that will create. He rarely looks to play long or complicated balls. He wins it and then normally off-loads it. The problem with this is that in sweeping attacks he can often slow it or fail to take advantage of a chink in the armour of the opposition defense. The one thing you said is right "he''s a defensive midfielder" - it doesn''t mean he shouldn''t have a greater rate of passing. I like Tettey, and when the team is on song, he allows others to attack and relax their defensive responsibilities. But I have noticed a couple of times that teams almost seek him out as the week link, press the ball back to him and put him under pressure. Anyway, like I say, he''s not the weak link as such, he''s just not going to help when those around him are not performing.
  2. Hoilett isn''t that old and still has plenty of potential. Surprised he didn''t push on after leaving Blackburn and that he is out of contract still at this point in the season. If we were not already well stocked in the wide areas I''d have suggested he''d be a decent back up option - arguably about as good as Jarvis, a good few years younger too.
  3. They mentioned him a lot on Radio Narrfolk. Seemed a lot of the good play did come through him. Got to be up for that Wes role when he can''t play. Erm. Son of a Pritch Hard man.
  4. More likely to be Laffs with Morris on the bench though.
  5. Boxing, especially in that division, certainly isnt what it was. Too much avoiding the real challenge and going for the money. Fury did it with the rematch. He knew he''d get more money than a loss to someone younger and fitter. Fury is not an athelete though. He''s a rough and ready fighter. Klitchko had picked his fights one too many times and came up against the very defenition of a wild card. I fear Fury is quite daft and is being miss-managed. I hope he does get back in the ring to prove either way. Although the way he carries on I hope someone can teach him a boxing lesson. Lennox Lewis would plaster him across the next weeks headlines.
  6. Thing that gets on my goat about Bournemouth is that they are cheats. Media darlings they are, and the media is ignoring their dirty side to suit their own agenda. Filthy cheats should been barred entry to the Prem. FFP rules mean absolutely nothing if all that they faced was a £7million fine. Disgusting, and the Telegraph had to dig to look for corruption?!!! Feel for Swansea but as already said, Bradley is hardly an unknown. We''ll see if it works and it will be interesting, he certainly brought the USA onwards with their development.
  7. I agree with Ricky. He reminds me of when we had Camp on loan. Good shot stopper but his stature and physique costs us at times. He is hesitant to come out of his 6yard box and I am uncomfortable every time he comes out to meet a cross. Mainly because without the height and physical presence he normally elects to punch it and it''s rarely convincing. He does leave a lot of airial duties to defenders as a result and there are defenitely times he is not communicating well enough with the defence. That said, it''s unlikely to change I imagine, and he''s part of a form team, so why change it?
  8. Grealish has the potential for two things. 1) Become a fantastic footballer. 2) Go completely off the rails and be non league before you can say whoops. Different positions. Grealish is a CM. Murphy''s are wide players. But I do agree, how is Ja not in there?
  9. It''s not really a sweetener though is it? It''s a bribe. I''ve said for years that I believe there is a lot of corruption in footy. When the FIFA stuff was blown open I said to people close to me that I thought it would go further an impact domestic footy as well. We''ve known that about continental football for a while. It was only a matter of time. Makes a mockery of all.sorts of rules really.
  10. [quote user="The young canary"]Jury is still out for me if I am honest. An easy start to the season we have had and we should really have more points on the board. Beat Newcastle away and I might start to believe more. Scum and Birmingham away were really low points No reason to sack but still a big question mark[/quote] Again, hindsight is brilliant. Anyone who is anyone though, never forgets how charged local derby''s are and how they can throw the form book out of the window. You never apply such logic as who is stronger on paper unless you are meeting in a cup and are leagues apart. And I still think people are being a tad high and mighty and guilty of thinking this league is a walk over. It''s not. There are more games, they come thick and fast for starters. A bad day at the office in the Prem is once a week. In this league it''s every 3-4 days. Brum is our only loss. Funny thing is, if we had lost to one of the other teams it sounds like you would have minded less? So of the league games we have played (Blackburn, Shef Weds, Nottingham Forrest, Ipscum, Brum, Brizzle Citeh, Cardiff and Wigan) - Shef Weds was one of the three teams in the play-offs not to get promoted finished 6th last season. Ipscum finished 5points off of them last season in 7th. Cardiff finished a point behind them in 8th. Birmingham finished 6 points behind them in 10th. Blackburn finished a place and goal difference better than Nottingham Forrest - 15th and 16th respectively. Brizzle finished in 18th, three points behind those two. Wigan were promoted as champions with our next opponents, Burton, promoted as close runners up. So in summary, of the 8 teams we have played, last season three were in or around the play-offs, one of which being our arch rivals. Another three were mid table, with Brizzle finishing further down the table and Wigan being newly promoted. Yes, we are yet to play Villa, Newcastle, Derby or Brighton - the only four teams that finished above Shef Weds, Cardiff and Ipscum (not including us) last season. But we have played the next best three. We''re not doing too badly, we are slowly picking up too which is a good sign.
  11. True. I do wish agents did their work on behalf of the players though, rather than to line their pockets. This is their breakthrough season. They need to nail down and perform regular first team footie now. Give it a season or two of that and then see what their options are. Too many decent English prospects have been ruined by making moves far too soon on bad advice. Rodwell, Sinclair, Wright-Philips, Phil Jones and Zaha etc.
  12. I think people think too much into the Premier League to be honest. It''s very easy to say after a game that "I would have done this or that" and than class him as naive on the choices we would have made. But our choices are only based upon the display we see that day really. The reality is, our squad was not good enough to stay in the premier league - especially not without the likes of Klose for the majority of the season. I do feel that some thought it was going to be easy and judged it on that background. The only thing that concerned me after last season was AN''s ability to turn around a loss of form. That''s really where we struggled last season - and some teams do after hitting a "wall" after promotion. Turning us around mentally over the summer and once back into the onslaught of the league was going to be key with the squad we have. People seem to forget that under Lambert we took some really big hidings and he didn''t appear to like to stick with the same side for very long, constantly trying to keep things fresh or just realising that some players couldn''t give their best performance every week. He also made some horrific tactical decisions at times, setting us up with 3 at the back in a game against quality opposition is just one I remember. Point is, no one is perfect.
  13. Sadly it would seem some have their heads buried in muck so much they can smell it as well as we can. So, day / 2 days after Josh scores a good goal against Everton suddenly the world and their dog want to sign them. Unlikely. Newspaper talk is all. You know they literally make stuff up to sell them.
  14. I''m not sure that Murphy''s goal was uncontested or unchallenged either. He skipped past two players, perhaps more easily than he should, but considering he was in the area, their reluctance to dive in was understandable. The thing that gets me though, is that he was actually traveling away from goal when he struck it. Technically, it was a pretty tough shot to pull off, let alone hit as well as that. The write up was nice, no cigar though, no one beats our Ricardo, he''s far more professional than to just plainly say "I won''t bother with the rest of the half" and more likely to insert some sort of analogy.
  15. I actually think we have a relatively balanced squad. Strikers - Jerome, Lafferty, Oliviera, Morris and Naismith if needed. Two players relatively(note relatively) proven at this level as leading men. Two players that can play number 10. And an up and coming youngster - almost ideal. Just lacking in the really proven beyond Jerome. As for why sign Pritchard - in a way, I think he was a bit of a panic buy. I suspect that someone may have been close to the door, or pushing for it and rather than lose a potentially great replacement to another team we jumped in and signed him. AN certainly suggested it at the time in interviews. Just goes to show - sometimes we do buy in before we sell others . . . . As it stands, wasn''t a bad idea. With Jarvis injured and Olsson and Brady both having injuries already this season. Cover has most certainly been welcome out wide. When you start looking at ages, it may also be another reason as to why we went for more depth out wide. Canos is 19, the Murphy''s are 21, Pritchard 23, Brady 24, Jarvis 30. Those are our wide players at the moment. So really, you have three players there that you can call experienced in Pritchard, Brady and Jarvis. The other three are still learning their trade - but are learning very quickly I would say.
  16. You are not looking at the bigger picture. It''s not about the Forrest game - it''s about a number of away games. I doubt very much thought goes into it particularly because it''s not like we are a team that has red/blue or any other more popular combination. We could probably go a whole season just wearing yellow. Anyway. The club needs to make money plus I should imagine any prospective sponsorship deal value will be based upon number of shirt sales - the more we sell, arguably the more exposure there is etc. Anyway, asking such questions is a tad daft considering our club colours . . . . . I mean it''s been that way for ages. Plus no one really cares that much. You are the first person I can remember in 30+ years to be bothered enough to ask about it. Or get upset.
  17. People are really asking about the contractual arrangements? It''ll most likely be the shirt sponsor I would think. Also, the club will have decided a minimum number of times the away shirt should be worn - to help sales etc. You know, it''s not like a Sunday League team where the away strip is your old home strip from around 5 seasons ago . . . .
  18. I still find it rather shocking that people are still referring to much of the content of Mick''s article as content or biased. It''s not. The facts are there in the annual reports. Unless that is you want to admit that you like conspiracies, tin foil and fear the lizard people from outer space''s 6th dimension in a parallel universe. I''m also shocked that people are saying that Mick effectively offered the club to someone. That is wildly out of context of what he has written. Talk about putting a spin on things.
  19. The fitness thing. I think Butler made the statement on Radio Narfolk and it seemed to cause a lot of people to sort of go - oh yeah. It''s not overly rocket science for me. When at the very precise and well oiled end of professional football, I would say small things can make quite a difference. So lets look at the back four. Pinto and Olsson - both have been out injured relatively recently. Martin - this is his fourth game in two weeks after injury (I think?), Klose too is probably still playing a little catch up. Midfield - Ja Murphy, played his socks off and gave it everything. Problem is, that whilst that is sublime, sometimes you have to make things a little easier on yourself and let the ball do the work. As Ricky said, a couple of occasions he took it on himself when playing a ball would have arguably led to a better chance and used a lot less energy. Rather than burning himself out. Kept fighting and stuff like this is to be expected of such a youngster. Tettey - I think we all knew from the last championship season that he will struggle to play a lot of games in close succession. Dorrans - just back from injury. Howson - played every game so far. Jerome has been out injured. Hoolahan - as Tettey. So in many ways, when you take into account that 6 of our starting 11 have recently been out with injuries and perhaps lacking that little bit of fitness, match sharpness that usually goes along with it - that''s before you consider the likes of Pitchard who himself is returning from injury to come off the bench. It is somewhat understandable that on one of the most humid and warm nights that they are likely to play in - that some of those lads were feeling it a bit. I would be more concerned if these little injuries continue to occur and that the lack of energy towards the end of games continues. The comparison with Lambert teams are null and void in some ways. The players he had then were not as good as the players we have now. When you are a more limited team you try and do one of two things in most cases - park the bus, defense first like the likes of Stoke, Bolton and Blackburn of days gone by - or you get your chaps to get through a lot of running and literally try to outrun opposition teams in terms of work rate. I think those teams had a crazy stat about scoring goals late on in games . . . . .
  20. Yes yes yes, good work Vince. Never seen so many contradictions in one statement. Even Farage would be proud. And zzzzzzzz. I tell you what''s poor - the quality of the constant droaning has gone markedly down hill. God bless Wiz, I used to have my battles with him, but god at least he was colourful. Even bloomin Smudger. Bring back the days of imaginative hue rather than this dull, boring beige BS we keep getting served up by supposed fans who seem to have forgotten that we are meant to celebrate wins no matter how they come. It''s like spoiled brats complaining about their holiday to Disney Land isn''t good enough because they expected more chocolate and milkshakes than they could wrap their tiny greedy hands around. I shall just write to all of the clubs in the Champs and tell them to be a darn sight better than the lot we have played so far, because it is mightily disappointing that only one team has been good enough to put us to the sword, and they clearly didn''t do that well enough either. We are not entertained and wont be until or boys are given a jolly good kicking just so that Mr. V. At the back of the upper N&P can be right on one of the two times a day as per his quota. Someone really aught to get him a battery for that. Or perhaps just a new watch.
  21. I''m really confused by the idea that we play a defender ahead of another because of his ability to win more headers. Especially when you look at who has been playing center back when we have conceded headed goals or from swung in corners recently. Basically - when we have had Bennett and Klose at CB. Whilst I like Bennett, he really isn''t the future and he really isn''t the player so many believed he would become. Don''t get me wrong, he is a decent player. But I think his positioning can be a bit suspect at times, something I feel Martin is better at IMHO.
  22. This is all utterly laughable. I mean if you don''t agree with Mick has said then say why. "Because he is close to the club." Doesn''t disprove anything he has said, it may suggest that he has an opionion but it doesn''t prevent the facts he presents from being true. As Nutty and Purple have already said - these imaginary investors they have rebuffed - if a formal offer had been made it would more or less had to have been made public due to informing shareholders. That''s not happened. More or less everything else he talks about can be referenced by archant articles reporting information at the time or the clubs annual financial report. It baffles me that in these days of technology and ease of access to such documents that people refuse to reference them and insist on holding to an opinion without any weight to it. And are prepared to insult oothers for providing supporting evidence. No wonder our country is going to pot, politics and opinions based upon the out-shouting/insulting someone like the Daily Mail rather than people actually asking what the facts are to make an informed decision seems to be something of the past.
  23. [quote user="can u sit down please"]Fernandes was indeed interested but you cannot buy what isn''t for sale. Been some more interest recently . But the door is firmly shut.[/quote] Go on then, I''ll bite, interest from who?
  24. [quote user="PurpleCanary"]Much of that has been well-known and discussed here, such as the necessity of paying back the debt. And the misleading profit we made by being relegated. Equally so, because it has been patiently explained here recently, the context Dennis usefully gives that puts our transfer spending in a better light than some posters can bring themselves to acknowledge.Linking the sacking of Ewan Chester specifically to signing van Wolfswinkel is new, at least to me. And what seems to have been a constant changing of the guard in terms of scouting/recruitmenting (am I the only poster who doesn''t know what the difference is?) is instructive, in a worrying way. Perhaps things have finally settled.However the David Sullivan story is not a revelation. I certainly remember that quote about Sullivan not wanting (and this was before the final dualling of the A11) to have to drive up to Norwich twice a week.And much of the detail Dennis gives of Cullum''s proposal, such as the £20m being a mirage and the overall plan being dangerous rubbish, was covered (admittedly not by the EDP...) years ago. And Dennis is, strictly speaking, wrong on one point. Cullum never made a firm bid. If he had done the club would have had to inform shareholders straight away. In effect he outlined an informal proposal. Twice. [/quote] I seem to remember that he met with Delia and MWJ - so perhaps that whilst the offer was not formal, it was discussed? I do remember you pulling it apart though, and a lot of people on here ending up rather insulted by Cullum''s offer as it didn''t add up.
×
×
  • Create New...