Indy_Bones

It doesn''t matter how ''almost'' safe we are, until it''s a certainty, it''s the managers jobs to keep his focus on this - to the exclusion of all else.How many fans would care about us getting to the semi''s/final, even winning the cup - if we subsequently were relegated? You might laugh and write this off as unrealistic, but we''ve all seen in football how things can soon spiral from a couple of losses, to a huge losing streak, and we simply can''t afford to let this happen.It''s not blind faith that many fans have, but simply that some fans see the bigger picture, and whilst it could be argued that taking this stance is playing too safely and turning away a good opportunity, I''d rather not gamble when the potential prize isn''t significant enough to justify the risk.In regards to your article Frank, it''s well written and you''re right in saying we are a different side without Holt''s presence, but this in itself is somewhat worrying, as we can''t turn back into a team that needs a certain player to be on the pitch to perform and on this occasion I don''t think it was the lack of Holt playing, it was simply that we didn''t care enough about the cup to put the extra work in. Why risk first XI players when we have some massive league games coming up, just to gamble on winning a cup that''s main value is now the romance of winning it, rather than important financial gain and prestige?

Let''s be honest and say that we don''t have the biggest squad, so at least a few ''first XI'' players are likely to needed to play, and in some cases there was little choice, such as at CB where we''ve got both Whitbread and Ayala out, but if Lambert truly didn''t give a damn about the game, why bother putting most of the first team out as well?We could easily have fielded a team such as:SteerMartin, Ward, Barnett, DruryCrofts, FoxBennett, LappinWilbraham, VaughanThat would arguably have been showing he didn''t give a damn, despite half of those players being ''first XI'' players as well.We simply played badly with a lack of effort, using a formation that didn''t work against the way Leicester set up stall.Regardless of team selection, ticket prices don''t guarantee anything, so whilst I understand why fans who travelled were frustrated at what they saw, paying to watch doesn''t mean you''re entitled to us playing well. What it should however entitle you to is some passion and for me that''s the most frustrating thing about the match, not the team selection or tactics, simply the lack of passion.

This depends on what you define as an ''assist''.Being heavily involed in key buildup play but not playing the final ball before scoring means that officially it''s not an assist despite whatever went before it.If we just judge it on ''officially'' classed assists, then we have:Bennett - 5Johnson - 4Crofts! - 3Hoolahan - 3Fox - 2Surman - 1Pilks - 1Other notables include:Morison - 4Tierney - 3Holt - 3Barnett - 2All that aside, Pilks contribution has been far more than a single ''official'' assist, whereas despite his recent scoring form, Surman hasn''t ''officially'' done much else?Funny what stats can show.

I don''t know why some fans think that paying a set amount entitles them to a set standard of game.Whether we win 5-0, get hammered 7-1 or simply draw 0-0, the ticket price is the same despite the performance potentially being totally different in each of those examples - That''s just football.Your entry fee to watch doesn''t guarantee anything in regards to a result or performance.It was clear beforehand that PL didn''t value the game as much as the league and that some players would be rested, but he still put out a good side even if it wasn''t an arguable ''first XI'', and the reaction so far has been so OTT it''s unreal.

Frankly we were shit yesterday, and Morison''s poor performance didn''t help proceedings.But, you can understand the frustration of a striker, who instead of being given decent supply to feed from, is instead being given a deluge of mis-placed, over hit passes, often out to the wing instead of being given a more central option against second string defenders...The problem was that instead of trying to encourage his team-mates, he seemed to have a bit of a hissy fit and sulked instead, which only made things worse, and certainly doesn''t fit in with the team mentality PL has tried so hard to instill in our players, something which I''m sure contributed to the substitution choice which Morison clearly wasn''t happy with.He''s scored some vital goals for us so far, and one bad performance shouldn''t cause the sort of reaction it has in some fans, but that being said, if there genuinely is an issue behind the scenes that''s having this impact, then immediate action needs taking before it''s allowed to escalate and de-stablise the team as a whole.Instead of using Morison as a scapegoat for a terrible TEAM performance, we should instead be asking WTF happened OVERALL yesterday, as virtually no-one looked bothered, and we played some of the worst football we have since the days of Grant et al. I''m pretty sure that Lambert will have his finger on the pulse with this and I would expect a much better performance against Man Utd - with or without Morison in the side.

Branston,There are players that you just know are quality when you watch them - even if their current form/performances aren''t top class.Torres is a prime example, we all know the guy is a world class striker, and if you watch some of his more recent games for Chelsea, goals aside he''s done virtually everything else right and it''s just not happening for him. Now take away all the hype and previous transfers etc and you''ll see a player with all the right attributes but who''s not showing the form to accompany them at the minute, and who until recently was sat on the bench for most games.To me there''s a similar thing with Pacheco, you can see the quality in his touches and technique, his finishing is good as well, yet despite this he''s also not having a good run and is stuck on the bench at Rayo.Players like this have massive potential, and most of the time you just need the right manager to unlock it, and who''s better than PL to do this? Hell, if PL was in charge at Chelsea, I expect Torres would have been much better this year as I think AVB is part of the problem there.I just see this as a potentially brilliant signing for a very good price, and if it didn''t work out, we wouldn''t have spent £50mil to find out we were wrong...

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Indy_Bones"] Even the signing of Rhodes, who some saw as being expensive for a relatively unproven youngster was proved excellent, [/quote] Any idea what Huddersfield were rumoured to have paid for Rhodes? Ta. [/quote]I believe it was meant to be around to £750 - £1mil mark, transfer market have it listed as £880k:http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/huddersfield-town/transfers/verein_1110_2009.html

In the last 3 seasons, they''ve been at most 6 points off auto promotion, they''re 4 off at the minute, and were 5 off last season.So in each case, just 2 wins instead of losses would have got them promoted.In leagues like league one where there tend to be less ''standout'' teams, this sort of consistency shows good management and a certain degree of bad luck, as we all know that there can easily be 2-3 games a season you feel have been lost due to the ref or similar and maybe his luck hasn''t fallen right.Even the signing of Rhodes, who some saw as being expensive for a relatively unproven youngster was proved excellent, as was signing Pilks from Stockport for very little money. Clark has proven he has an eye for young talent, but also the man management skills across the board.Don''t want to sound like his biggest fan, but I hate to see a quality young manager being dealt with like this, when the same old shower keep getting jobs they''ve often proven to be either totally inept at, or simply there for a fat paycheck. Who''s next to replace Clark - Eriksson? Souness? Roeder???Total joke, and shows that Hoyle is better suited to organising birthday cards instead of contracts...

There are surely just 3 key factors here:1) Do we want to sign the guy?2) Does he want to come to us instead of going to Atletico/Staying at Liverpool etc?3) Are we willing to pay the price Liverpool are asking compared to what Atletico may have already agreed in principle?Assuming 1 and 2 are positive, then it''ll just come down to legal wrangling over price, where I''m sure McNally would be able to get a good deal.It''s all somewhat academic however until we know that Lambo is interested, otherwise it''s pointless conjecture about option contracts etc. Guess we''ll only really know in the summer.

As if we needed any more evidence that football has indeed gone mad, then this is it.A manager who has transformed the club over the last 3 years, has them currently sat in 4th with only 3 losses out of 30 and apparently they think they can do better...Seriously, who the f**k makes a decision like that???Yet another clueless executive who can write what they know about football on the leg of a pubic louse.Really hope he goes to a bigger and better club who then proceed to knock the s**t out of Huddersfield in the cup...

He''s been given virtually no chance at Vallecano, with only 8 apps as sub (and no starts), and just over 200 mins of football since his loan move.On the back of this sort of showing I just can''t see Dalglish ever giving him a first team chance and is more likely to look to cash in this summer for a fair price, which is when I feel we should get him in.He showed promise during his short spell here and at this level a good squad can be critical so even if he''s not first choice, it improves our options. He''s also shown that he really enjoyed his time here and would like to come back, and now with Ayala here, that would make things even easier.Go on Lambo, slide in with a cheeky bid and resuce the guy from his current straits :)

Is that praise of McCarthy, or an indictment of their other managers though NN?I personally think Turner was a better manager than Mick and possibly better than Cullis as he didn''t have the team that Cullis did, and as we know, back to back promotions are an impressive acheivement. (That''s not to dismiss Cullis'' incredible 58-60 seasons)There''s also a lot to be said for the work Dave Jones did, and maybe if Hoddle hadn''t lost the plot with faith healers etc he''d have arguably done a better job.But considering that Mick was the 17th manager after Cullis, being in the top 2-3 since then is pretty good, but they have had some shit in there as well, with Tommy Docherty probably being the worst manager they''ve ever had from a results perspective (I don''t count McGarry here as he was a temp manager after Docherty''s departure).I think if most Wolves fans were honest, they''d like to see a return of better quality football, rather than a bunch of players who are talented at removing chunks from the opposition, and that does make the appointment more difficult...

The issue I have with it, is when opposing fans are getting home tickets instead of home fans.We all know about the allocation furore, a decision that wasn''t made by the club as such, but since it has been made, the opposing fans should just suck it up and deal with it.Yes it''s probably infuriating for them, and yes you could argue it''s unfair, but that''s the hand that''s been dealt, so either live with it or leave the game, don''t try to sly in via home tickets.Any sort of trouble erupts and these fans will have justified the decision made by the safety committe (or whatever they''re called), and it''s likely to have an impact on future games as well, possibly not just with us, but other teams as well...

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Huge respect to the guy and he walked away with his head held high. Three seasons in the Prem for Wolves probably makes him their best manager for 30 years. It seems a bit strange to make that change now. The only way it would make sense would be if he''d lost the dressing room and I doubt that''s the case. It could well backfire on them. Blackburn sticking with Keane could be the difference. [/quote]Forgive the comparison, but this has a hint of the Worthy situation about it.A good manager who had done well for the club, but appeared to be losing control who was at risk of being kept too long?Mick had done very well to get Wolves up and keep them there, but compare the quality of football they played from when they went up to what they''re playing now. Neither was like watching Barca, but the football in the last season and a half has been terrible and often overly physical, and that''s with supposedly better players that cost good money.It seems like the classic money syndrome has reared it''s head again, whereby a good manager who''s previously done well on a tight budget, loses the plot completely when given money to spend, and often pays over the odds for average players or players who don''t fit the style of football the rest of the team is playing.A new manager gives a fresh outlook and assessment of the playing assets available which the outgoing manager may have lost focus of.I also think that Morgan going into the changing rooms completely undermined McCarthy''s position, and it makes you wonder if this choice was already on the cards at that point, as if the owner can''t seem to trust the manager to sort the players out, you know there''s a storm coming. If Morgan had have been Abramovic, we''d have all said that Villas-Boas was screwed, so it''s not a shock to me that this decision was taken, especially after the shit performance against West Brom.Hopefully Mick will bounce back quickly into a job at CCC/Prem level, there''s a few clubs out there that would benefit from him, the likes of Leeds especially...

Hahaha.Shame that anyone under 30 won''t have heard of half the shows (Star Trek aside), and I only watched Blake''s Seven after my parents friends bought the full set on Video!

Oz,All other points aside for the time being, you have to think about the logistical nightmare this could cause - especially for smaller clubs. Imagine a club like Plymouth having to play Inverness away.  You''re talking about a 650 mile journey (1300 mile roundtrip), which on a bus would take over 11 hours or even more depending on traffic.This means that they''d have to either depart at stupid o''clock in the morning, or travel to Inverness the day before, stay overnight, then face that awful return trip which wouldn''t get them home until early Sunday morning, or they have to stay another night, just to get back at a sensible time on Sunday evening.Most small clubs can''t afford to be staying overnight everywhere or getting internal flights, and also consider what this would do to away support at the same time. Can''t see many fans being willing to make 11 hour journeys and give up their whole weekend to support their club (assuming they can afford the fuel etc), not to mention that midweek games would probably lead to virtually no away support making the matches even more of a joke.It''s one of those ideas that doesn''t look bad on paper initially, but when you start to go into it further, it''s a disaster waiting to happen.

[quote user="Mister Chops"]I want three quarters of Little Mix to sit on my face, but that doesn''t mean it''ll happen.[/quote]Considering the utter shit that comes out of their mouths, that makes you a very brave man indeed...

Eric,I think he''s referring to the apostrophe after Pickles, as it wouldn''t let me quote you with it in the other day.Not exactly a hardship to simply remove it from the quote however...

Seriously - WTF were they thinking of even coming in for Holt when they had this a mere few weeks away???Not only is it ridiculous from a business perspective, but it''s verging on immoral to potentially bring a player in knowing full well what''s likely to happen on the financial front just a few weeks later and the potential consqeuences of this. You wouldn''t believe how annoyed I am about this behaviour from Rangers, shocking really.No wonder they''re in financial trouble if this sort of thinking has been prelavent over the past few seasons...

[quote user="lincoln canary"]He may be too old for a prolonged England career but he''s in his prime for this summers euro''s. The England team should be picked on the basis of from players. Grant Holt has been red hot at times this season. I have no doubt he could produce in the Euro''s this year. Rooney and co would love having Holt around.[/quote]Spot on thinking LC, he clearly offers more at the moment than virtually any other striker available, and what he does offer is an option that England just don''t really have.It doesn''t matter if he''s not good enough for the next WC, but taking a good form player like Holt to the Euro''s makes perfect sense.Much more sense in fact that half the dead wood we''re likely to be taking...

About time he went as well, don''t think I''ve seen such poor football on a regular basis from a prem team since Derby...They spent close to 40 million on players over the past few seasons, yet they still look like a squad full of very average players (championship average in some cases), with a few decent first team players thrown in (namely Fletcher, Hennessey, O''Hara and Jarvis).Doyle on the wing was another crazy move by Mick, as was the constant defence of "Hack ''em down Henry" every few weeks...Whoever takes over that side, has a hell of a job on their hands...

[quote user="GJP"]First goal an awful backpass from Otsemobor but don''t you think the ''keeper could have done a bit better there? He came out in to no man''s land and then completely missed the ball. Just because someone infront of you has made a mistake doesn''t mean you''re not at fault if you don''t rectify it when you''ve got the chance to.  Second goal he''s let a very tame shot along the floor, placed centrally, to get away from his body. Never should have happened. Awful. Third goal he''s let a cross from a deep enough angle come into HIS 6 yard box at around chest height. Could have been defended better but could have been claimed by the ''keeper. Fourth goal is a nicely struck freekick from David Fox but it''s fairly central. It certainly isn''t near a corner or into the side netting. He reacts late and doesn''t have the reach to keep it out. John Ruddy would save that all day long, no problem. As should any goalkeeper. Fifth goal he''s totally misjudged the flight of a long throw from Marc Tierney. He''s started to come off his line and that has cost him big style, the ball is flicked on and he''s back peddling as it gets headed in over his head. Sixth goal is a decent strike from the guy, we''ll let him off that one. Seventh goal he once again comes needlessly off his line when he''s got a defender coming across to cover, leaving the goal wide open for the cut back. So yeah, looking at it objectively, regardless of the dire performance of the other 10 players on the pitch with him, he could have done a lot better with most of the goals. I really cannot see how you could think otherwise. If you''re not sure watch the highlights back while reading my comments and see if I''ve said anything that isn''t true.[/quote] What a horribly unfair, and IMHO - incorrect reading of the goals. Goal 1 - Otsemobor''s fault all the way, could Theo have done better? Maybe, although there was also the risk of potentially clattering the striker leading to a pen, but to blame the keeper in that situation, after that pass is pretty unfair. Goal 2 - Doherty with his usual poor defending first lets the run happen, then doesn''t shield very well which lead to the shot being taken. Fair point however being that Theo didn''t deal with it well and it was an easy tap-in. Certainly has to take a large chunk of the blame there, although Doherty should have been much better before this. Goal 3 - Shoddy defending in the box with NO-ONE clearing it, leading to Platt''s second. Again, the keeper could maybe have claimed this, but there''s 3-4 defenders in there that did jack all to clear it before they scored with a decent finish. Goal 4 - It''s a good free kick from Fox which I think Theo saw later than expected, but he was still caught out despite it''s relatively central position. Again, fair to post blame here. Goal 5 - 2 defenders again do jack all before the header goes past Theo, and whilst he should have stayed more on his line, the ball should have been cut out and the striker blocked before the header was even made. This is poor defending and not the keepers fault. Goal 6 - I agree with you here, it''s a good strike and not the keepers fault at all. Goal 7 - He didn''t come out totally needlessly, Vernon had skinned the defender and was directly through, if Doherty had got there in time, then the same simple ball across would still be made, and then it comes down to how well the striker places it and what Theo does to stop it. This again was down to bad defending, and whilst the better choice was probably to stay on his line but watching the angle, the chances were they''d have scored anyway due to the non-existent covering of the striker in the middle. So whilst I can happily agree that there were mistakes made by the keeper on a few occasions, the majority of it was down to god awful defending beforehand IMO, something we saw happen regularly in the days of Doherty et al, regardless of who was in the net. Theoklitos was a convenient scapegoat for our overall dogshit performance. As for those comments made regarding him in reserve games - that has to be a joke right? Since when did performances in the reserves dictate a players ability? You can be world class or total crap in the reserves and it''s not taken seriously the majority of the time, as it''s purely there to keep players fit overall and bring injured players back to match fitness. It''s not even vaguely competitive compared to league play, and if a keeper struggles with our first team infront of him, why you think he''ll be better with our second string is beyond me??? We had a guy who''d moved halfway round the world to play in a different league which was much quicker than he was used to, and people expected him to adjust instantly, and be the next Schmeichel overnight...unbelievable. Bear in mind as well that this guy was checked out by Crook and Gunn who both felt he was a good choice, and in Crook''s case, he''d seen more of the guy than virtually anyone over here so was ideally placed to give a fair and professional opinion. Yet based on 1 league match and a few reserve outings, the average Norwich fan suddenly thinks they know more about the player... Anyway, this debate was done to death 2 years ago, and opinions aren''t likely to have changed since then, and whilst I respect everyone has their own opinion, it frustrates me when damning indictments are handed out based on virtually no evidence. The guy has a bad game and he''s suddenly the worst keeper ever, who isn''t even good enough to play non-league...FFS what a load of...

[quote user="Alan BowCLUCK"]Not too many teams who wear magnolia though. [/quote]There was the infamous Liverpool ''ecru'' coloured kit...that was fairly close to magnolia!Back OT however, and I know exactly where a lot of people are coming from. At times I feel like the only Norwich supporter anywhere near Rotherham (met 1 other fan in all my time here), so that makes it even more difficult for my son when he''s surrounded by the usual ''big club'' suspects, as well as the locals like Sheff Utd/Wed, Rotherham, Leeds etc.But there isn''t another club like Norwich in the league, there''s some undefinable quality there that draws you in and keeps you held, regardless of results or league position, which combined with the great community around the club makes it unbeatable IMHO.Forget 75,000 seater stadiums, Oligarchs and glory-hunting - THIS IS NORWICH!

The fact is that he was condemned and dismissed on the back of a single bad game.He wasn''t at fault for all the goals, I saw it as maybe 3, 4 at a stretch, which obviously isn''t good, but it was his first game here with a defence that were like the red sea that day and we were terrible as a team.After that result he never got another chance to show it was just one of those shocking performances that almost every player has now and then in their career.Quite what happened with the ''missed bus'' saga I can''t imagine, but that was probably the final nail in the coffin for Theo.I still maintain that he was a far better keeper than the majority of fans gave him credit for, but it''s all academic now and I''m just glad that he''s managed to re-settle well back home and regain his form.

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]No! No, no, no, no, no!  I had to endure the horrors of Zico''s Japan, I couldn''t bare for England to be forced to go through that also. He certainly isn''t a manager to bring through young players either.[/quote] The ''horrors'' of Japan under Zico??? You mean despite having virtually no coaching experience but managing to take a crap team with virtually no internationally recognised talents and getting them to play better football, whilst winning the Asian Cup, qualifying for the World Cup in convincing fashion and beating some well respected international teams along the way??? How about his role in Fenerbache''s massive improvements during his tenure including the league title, turkish cup and Champs League performance? Or winning the title again in his first year at Bunyodkor? Or turning a failing Olympiakos around???????? It''s a testament to his ability that many of these teams including Japan, did perform to the level they did, and if instead of giving the guy a squad of very limited ability players, we gave him the England role, we''d easily see the benefit. As for bringing young players through, perhaps you could illustrate where exactly he''s proven deficient in doing this - which players did he leave out despite their clear talent?