Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Noseybonk

Members
  • Content Count

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. Noseybonk

    Holt to Palace !

    In my opinion, selling Holt this season is comparable to Worthy releasing Malky in 2004.

    Both captains, big characters in the dressing room and always give 100%.

    It''s not just about what happens on the pitch.

    It would be a massive, massive error.

  2. Noseybonk

    Norwich fans not from Norwich?

    Born in Crawley. Lived on the Isle of Wight since the age of 5.

    All my relatives on my fathers side come from Norwich going back many generations.

    It does make my infrequent visits to Carrow Road more special.

  3. Noseybonk

    Hughton Out

    [quote user="N city til I die"]I would give Chris H a lot more time, he has only played a 4-4-2 without Bennett and Pilkington due to injury, who scored about 8 goals was it last season? and bennett had a very good run in at the end of last season. He has not played Wes in the team either, Wes will play very well in a diamond I''m sure. Kane out Bassong out, they are big blows no doubt about that. Its not like CH is out of ideas already he has not had the whole team to work with just yet, lets give him time and see what tactics and changes he will make to the team and then we can judge him.[/quote]

     

     

    But he clearly stated in the interview after the match that he didn''t start with Wes because he wanted to start with two up front.

    This suggests that he either hasn''t watched videos of our last three seasons or he has no intention of ever playing the diamond. A formation that has worked brilliantly for us in the past and one that our squad is suited to and clearly prefers.

    Very worrying, but too soon to press the panic button.

  4. Noseybonk

    WARNING - This is a negative post

    In the interview after the game, when asked why Wes didn''t start, Hughton stated that he wanted to play with two upfront.

    This is alarming, as it suggests that Hughton has no intention of playing the formation that suits the players best, the diamond midfield, which allows Wes to fit in to a system with two strikers ahead of him.

    Did Hughton really watch videos of us over the last three seasons? That statement suggests not.

    This, along with his one dimensional, like for like substitutions, is what worries me most about Hughton.

    Continuity is the reason I wanted Culverhouse to be offered the job (whether he would have accepted it is another matter), and nothing I have seen this season has changed my mind.

  5. Noseybonk

    Many people will not want to hear this

    Unbelievable.
  6. Noseybonk

    The "who do we want as manager" thread

    Culverhouse or Hughton
  7. Noseybonk

    Ian Culverhouse

    Of the three examples you gave, Deehan was hamstrung by the financial nightmare of the Chase era, as was Megson, who has subsequently proven himself as a manager. Only Grant backs up your point.

    However, you fail to mention that all our most successful managers, bar Lambert, were promoted from within. Brown, Stringer, Walker and Worthington.

    In my opinion, if Culverhouse wants it, give it to him.

  8. Noseybonk

    Our Relegation Clock....

    ...appears to have been removed.

    Perhaps they should replace it with an Ipswich one?

     

     

  9. Noseybonk

    Poor

    Don''t worry.

    Old Trafford on Saturday
  10. Noseybonk

    Tamas accepts charge...

    Great. So now three other teams, quite possibly our relegation rivals, get to play West Brom a man light.

    So we''re being shafted again.

    I''m still seething.
  11. Noseybonk

    Victimisation

    [quote user="Power Hamster"][quote user="Tumbleweed"]

    I am very sceptical that there is even something subconscious. However it is absolutely clear to me that the refs we have seen are verging on the incompetent.

    The Wigan pen involved minimal contact, the Stoke was probably not even a foul and was outside the box and we got the double whammy of a red card, against Chelsea the pen was pretty clear but the red card wasn''t as Ramires was already on the way down and the ball was running way off line.

    Today was a case in point. Olson was wrestling our folks to the ground all day long, including in the box. There was more contact in each of those individual challenges than Morison''s. The elbow on Vaughan was a disgrace and I''m glad he reacted so strongly at the end. How can 3 officials not see something like that yet give the one at the other end? What is almost as bad is that then TV pundits say Olson''s tackles are "clever defending", yet then state that Morison is "clumsy"!

    The only element of  consistency is the poor decision making. The PL may have some of the best players but the refereeing standards are shockingly low, and arguably worse than we have seen in either the Champ or Lge 1.

    [/quote]Am I the only person who thinks that, if Ramirez was "already on the way down" then it shouldn''t even have been a penalty, and certainly not a sending off? If he was already going down then Ruddy didn''t bring him down, so it isn''t even a foul! The fact that there was contact between the players does not constitute a foul - if it did there would be 20 penalties in every match. Any player who "goes down too easily" in the box is basically cheating, and should be cautioned. No need for a change in the rules, as it is already covered by the unsporting conduct rule. It just needs to be enforcedproperly.[:@][/quote]

    I totally agree with this.

    I yell at the tv every time a pundit says something like "There was contact so he had every right to go down" or even worse "he was entitled to go down".

    Motson and Shearer are the worse. They need reminding football is still a contact sport (although not for much longer, if they had their way).

    It''s called cheating and needs to be treated as such.

  12. Noseybonk

    Victimisation

    The worrying fact is that what constitutes a penalty against Norwich is completely different to what constitutes a penalty for Norwich.

    This puts us at a massive disadvantage over the course of a season.

    Now I don''t believe it''s corruption or even victimisation. But I do believe that in the back of their minds, the referees are aware there will be very little flak should Norwich lose due to one of their contentious decisions, even at CR.

    It happened in 04-05 and it''s happening now.

    Personally, I don''t think a call to the referee''s association bringing it to their attention could do any harm.
  13. Noseybonk

    MOTD2!!

    Ruined it by saying Stoke deserved a point in his summing up.
  14. I will personally come round to their house and shit in their kettle.

    A cliche spouted by big club loving tv pundits.

    It''s utter rubbish.

    There will be plenty more decisions like that during the next 8 months.
×