Jump to content

A Gay Schoolboy

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by A Gay Schoolboy

  1. He''ll get back to scoring hatfuls like he has everywhere else in his career before Chris Hughton got hold of him.
  2. [quote user="Iwans Big Toe"]Sorry James, but this infuriates me! Are you unable to count to one? Is mathematics a particular weak point of yours? Let me help you. There is only ONE Real Madrid, ONE Manchester City and ONE Bayern Munich. Plural would only be acceptable if you were talking about your Murphy''s.[/quote][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=entup0bSYjw[/url]
  3. If we''re going for a Huddersfield midfielder I''d rather we signed the guy who''s name I''ve just forgotten, takes the corners and does a bit of passing and that you know the one
  4. We''ve known for a while that he wanted to leave because of Hughton''s awful tactics. He essentially said as much in an interview shortly after leaving.
  5. [quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Purple answers that point in his posting above.......[/quote]Costa Rica: never got to a semi finalChile: 1 semi final, in 1962Croatia: 1 semi final, in 1998Belgium: 1 semi final, in 1986Holland: 3 finals (1974, 1978, 2010). 2 semi finals (1998, 2014).England: 2 world wars, 1 world cup, 1 semi final.
  6. [quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]That proves that you can do anything with statistics, AGS. I think what most of us are interested in  is RECENT records...not trading on past glories. I think that there''s even an element of that with the Brazilians tbh.We also need to take Euro Championships/Copa America stats into account  too, and apart from Euro 96, we''ve been woeful at them too ![/quote]What time period is acceptable to you? Unless your answer is "in the last 2 months" I''m reasonably sure our record will be better than all the teams you mentioned except maybe Holland.
  7. [quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Unfortunately that little part of your idea comes a bit unstuck when you look at countries like Holland, Belgium and Croatia .And in S America,  Chile , Costa Rica etc.Much smaller populations than England, but far more successful national football team wise........[/quote]They aren''t though. None of those teams have won a world cup (let alone a world war) and in terms of overall world cup record ours is better than all of them.[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-25233859]All Time World Cup League Table[/url]
  8. Instead of emulating Germany we should go for Italy and just call up loads of random south americans and pretend they are English, or appoint a fascist leader and threaten refs and their familes to win a couple of world cups, or be like Spain and just systematically pump our players full of performance enhancing drugs.Those options seem easier than the German route.
  9. [quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]Forgive me for reposting: Oh TGMD, you are so right, but you don''t go far enough. Germany can be proud tonight regardless of the result. They have a system that prizes intelligence, system and education over our pathetic need for working class heroes with god-given gifts. We wait for them to be born, while they make them. Other countries recognise the value of tactics, structure, patterns of play and fluidity because the players and managers that they have are from all strata of society. I am afraid our most intelligent sportsmen play other sports, where a pathway exist from higher education. We have a working class structure, inordinate amounts of money and a commensurate unwillingness (and subsequently structural ability) to open the playing field. This is to the great detriment of our football and leaves us 50 years behind. Tactics do matter. Education does matter. Brighter people make better decisions more often. Streetwise urchins make wonderful Disney stories, but German education and coaching structures creates footballers, it doesn''t wait for them to be born.[/quote]You seem confused, class and intelligence aren''t the same thing hope this helps
  10. [quote user="Phillip J Fry"]More disciplined and better coached defenders means that you don''t get the mistakes that poachers thrive on anymore.[/quote]Someone should inform our defence about that
  11. I think its highly unlikely that we''ve appointed a 65 year old who''s been out of the game for years to be our long term footballing strategist.
  12. [quote user="PurpleCanary"]Because if anyone is going to do that, to provide long-term continuity, it is Joe Royle, the football consultant. As soon as that post was created (probably at Adams'' request), with Royle as the occupant (ditto), it was clear that was how the various responsibilities were being apportioned. With the technical director mainly involved in day to day matters.[/quote]If Royle was appointed at Adams behest, its unlikely he''ll still be in the job when Adams has gone.
  13. What happened to the idea that the technical director was going to impliment a ''Norwich way'', a style of football that would transcend the tenures of individual managers? There''s no mention of anything like that in the press release, or even of Martin having any input on signings and coaching beyond fitness work.
  14. Ricky Martin as technical director is very underwhelming. Once again the world has been scoured only to find the best candidate is coincidently already in Norfolk.
  15. I don''t think its fair to judge the performances of any striker playing in a Chris Hughton team tbh. Lets see how Hooper (and RVW) get on this season, whoever they may be playing for.
  16. [quote user="Donkey dangler"]We need midfield players who can play and perform their defensive duties.  Unfortunately Surman is limited when it comes to the defensive side of the game.[/quote]Its weird to me that people are willing to accept limited players if their limitations are in the passing and attacking side of the game, but not if they are defensively limited.We saw in the last two seasons what a team made entirely out of defensive players with limited passing abilities looks like and its not something I ever want to see repeated.
  17. [quote user="GJP"]If we have Fer, Howson, Surman and Tettey (plus Johnson and maybe Hoolahan) how many better midfields are there going to be in the league?[/quote]Fer won''t be playing Norwich come the start of the season and it remains to be seen if Surman and Hoolahan are going to be reintegrated into the squad, if they are great, we''re sorted, I am unconvinced that they will be. The other 3 are terminally incapable of passing forwards to a yellow shirt. [quote]How many players are out there that can "play incisive through balls with regularity"? And how many of them would come to Norwich?[/quote] There are loads, dotted around the myriad of countries in the world that aren''t obsessed with big lads who get stuck in and run around a lot. The ones that would come to Norwich are the ones currently paid less than we can offer. If you want a name I think we should be going all out to get Lansbury back. [quote]Just a change of approach would make a difference, I think. Hughton''s fear of being caught out at the back and insistence on sticking to a rigid shape played a big part in stifling our attacking play - more so than the actual personnel involved.[/quote] Agreed, but no amount of tactical change is going to turn Johnson and Tettey into playmakers.
  18. I''m somewhat worried that all this focus on strikers is missing the point. Barring departures we''ve got enough firepower now, we need to be spending whats left of our budget on at least one player who can actually play incisive through balls with regularity. We''ll get nowhere if we rely on the stodgy midfield trio of Hughton favourites.
  19. imo we should be putting all our effort into getting Lansbury back
  20. I have no idea if he''s good or not these days but signing him disappoints me a bit because it makes it that much more unlikely that we''ll sign Rhodes.
  21. The biggest thing that has undone Spain is the arrest and trial of Dr Fuentes.
  22.  [quote user="T"]This message board just proves the studies that those with the least knowledge and awareness are the most critical. Its a football message board for punters with absolutely no professional experience, training and qualifications. Those who have actually have some experience and awareness realise they are absolutely in no position to criticise those that have far more capability. Unfortunately the majority have neither the knowledge or awareness to realise their lack of ability to assess the situation. Knowledge and awareness teaches you humility. Sadly there is very little on here as this message board tonight demonstrates. No doubt I will get more abuse from some but I live in hope that there are some who will reflect that they don''t have sufficient skills and success in their life to ever run a football club and therefore are not in a position to criticise those that do. This message board has a culture of unconscious incompetence.[/quote]You''d be wise to apply the findings of the Dunning-Kruger effect to yourself, particularly with regards to your knowledge of statistics. Loving the irony of you of all people calling for people to be humble.
  23. Zola was a better option because he took a team to third and the playoff final in the league we are in. Saying Adams must have qualities that impressed the board is meaningless, it would apply to anyone they gave the job to, and in the past has applied to Hamilton, Grant, Roeder, Gunn, and Hughton.I think at present the jigsaw is incomplete, all the noises were that we are trying to build something, a Norwich way, like Swansea did. We''ll have to see who the director of football is before we see the full picture.
  24. I''m a fan of Adams, I''m backing him fully and there are definite positives in him being appointed. However it does seem to be an unneccessary risk when you look at the other managers currently out of work. Imo Lennon, Malky, Sherwood, and even Zola would have been safer bets to get us out of this division first time of asking, and they can''t all get the West Brom job. Its fairly likely that at least 2 of them will be managing our rivals next season, and I really would not want to be our board if Adams is a bust and they succeed elsewhere.All this hysteria isn''t really about Adams, its about a decision being made which harks back to past mistakes that we all hoped the board had got over in the McNally era.
  25. [quote user="Long drives home"]I am not sure if the board will ever gain trust again after this if it gies wrong. We could be heading back to the chase out days looking at opinion on here.[/quote]Yep, the board have set themselves up for a fall. If Malky, Lennon, Sherwood or Zola had been appointed and failed, they and their team would get the blame. If Adams fails, its the board that will get the vitriol, especially if those afformentioned managers end up at clubs in a worse situation than ours and outperform us.They need a hell of an appointment as the director of football to salvage opinion.
  • Create New...