John

Considering it''s a home fixture, and the best oppertunity presented to us in recent weeks to gain a valuable win, i''d certainly approve of that line-up and formation. My only concern would be Snodgrass dropping a little too central as a result. As we know from Lamberts reign, the diamond we employ with Hoolahan at the tip allows for very limited width.Otherwise if it were to be 4-5-1, it almost seems inuitive that Fox would replace Tettey, and swap Snodgrass to the left wing with Bennett operating on the right. It''s been a fair while since i''ve seen a player look so uncomfortably out of position as i have with Bennett stuck out on the left.The skeptic in me unfortunately suspects neither will be the case, ie. Howson in place of Tettey, Bennett out on the left in a disjointed and ill concieved 4-5-1 line-up and formation.

Mister Chops - Soaring over the heads of wide-eyed Pink''un posters since September 2006.

Luckily QPR, Newcastle, Aston Villa, Wigan, Reading and quite possibly Southampton as well, look to be on course for a fall of sorts.Should we pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, reorganise appropriately, and manage to start some good form within the next 3 games or so we''ll look in much better condition relative to the group of relegation candidates we find ourselves in.

If we were to lose tomorrow, 5 losses in 6 is certainly form worthy of concern. However, one thing i have always valued since the beginning of the Lambert/McNally incumbent is our defiant reflex of focus and determination against adversity. Unlike previous regimes, the club is palpably uncomfortable when enduring failure, and tends not to let the air of it stagnate our form. They approach it as boxers in a ring, beaten up, sometimes heavily, but never do they let the bruises or wounds cloud their vision of victory, nor their ambition.I trust that if we do go down, it will not be with a whimper. It is possible, should this form continue for a little too long, that the strength of the tides may overwhelm us for now. But i trust the spirit for success will remain, for as long as the likes of Holt, Hoolahan, Ruddy, Johnson, Martin and others inhabit this club, those that know the face of mediocrity too well to meet it again. We may face exile, adrift, for a time, but while the fortitude and tenacity of these few men last, we won''t lose sight of shore.We''re lucky enough to profit from this attitude, and i hope we never lose sight of its value while we earn the millions that Premier League football brings.

As it appears to be April, with Ruddy now seemingly written off for the season, I think we need a new keeper to compete with Bunn. Off the top of my head, Craig Gordon possibly? On a deal until the end of the season, with an oppertunity to revitalise a once promising career. As badly awry as his career gone, last chance saloon could elicit the elements that once made him subject to Britain''s highest goalkeeping transfer fee.Hindsight ever the bane of ones life, to think i, along with so many others, questioned Hughton when he brought in Bunn; as much as i think Jed Steer could compete at this level.

At the age of 23 Austin has scored 20 goals in 23 Championship league games. At the age of 20 Hooper had scored 24 league goals in the Championship in 45 league games, and his record since has hardly diminished. Grahams best record at that level remains 24 goals in 45 games at the age of 25; and his prior record to that is particularly unspectacular - indeed incomparable to either Hooper of Austin.There are other variables to factor in, but in this brief observation of statistics suffice to say the potential is there to far exceed Graham''s current level of ability in either case.I have no time for the Premier League tag that seems to secure quality beyond all reckoning, and condemn those outside of it to little or no significance in comparison. I was one of the only ones on this board to back Holt in a Premier League emvironment when we were both in League One and the Championship - as such it is of little surprise, frustrating as it may be, to see the same mindset persist.Nevertheless, were one to consider the circumstances relative to our situation, Graham is for the time being the preferable purchase of the 3, were any one of them within our grasp.

While i''d agree with people suggesting an extra 1 or 2 million for Austin or Hooper could provide us with substantial more quality in the long term, we''d be wise to pay heed to the immediate benefits of Graham.Accustomed to a similar system of play, with a proven goalscoring record in the same league, while just about to hit his peak. Graham background fits the demands we''d wish of such a candidate to fulfill.It''s a fair bit of money, but arguably more so than either Hooper or Austin, it goes a long way to securing our survival.Although i may be guilty of the same suppositions, in a game of chance, that haunt many a presumptuous short-sighted fan - if it is to be the difference, such an investment in the short term for Graham (even if it may mean us paying a bit over the odds) may pay dividends in the long term.

Today, as any other recently, has done Lambert no favours.Just as much as Hughton, neither is Lambert perfect, both possess as many flaws and aptitudes as one another. Both can be as frustrating as they are impressive.But a few things Lambert did know is how to make a substitution, execute play in the final third, and motivate and calculate the last role of the dice.Hughtons deficiencies in these areas, although by no means terminal to his forseeable employment, are exasperating for a Norwich fan familiar with these same situations under the expertise and guidance of Lambert.

So frustrating seeing heavy mishit passes going astray, crosses, set pieces and whatnot ever failing to beat the first man time and time again, and the general quality of distribution in the final third altogether unrelentingly abysmal... And still no Fox. After the odd dozen lead hammered passes from Tettey, one starts to wonder what could have been done were it Fox''s feet behind the ball? And if today doesn''t serve as a desperate cry for the proficient passing of Fox, on what account would he ever start a game under Hughton?By no means is it definitively so, but one would assume Fox''s distribution would have stuck out like a sore thumb today. Never did i think i''d see the day in the Premier League where the passing of Bradley Johnson''s passing would stand head and shoulders above all other competitors on the Carrow Road pitch.

It brings me no pleasure to utter it, but as far as names and reputations go, this would seem to me to be the weakest team we''ve fielded in the league since the earlier half of last season.

Oh god...

Tettey are Johnson seem to be regressing a bit. Really feel its time we involved Fox.

When it comes to the mainstays in the team, i saw little to coomplain about. Tettey made a couple of lacklustre passes that but us under pressure, and Garrido should have done better in competing with Lukaku for the header on the second goal. But when it came to the movement and passing of the team we generally seemed just no less assured than at any time during this unbeaten run.However it was simply a day where the deputisers were just a little short of the mark. The presence of Bunn was left wanting in his area, and Morison, try as he might, could not fit into the system at any one point during the whole game. He''d be best utilised in a direct and quick 4-4-2 formation, with the responsibility of making the most of aerial balls in the box. Involving him in the intracies of our pass and move, patient system, exploits almost every aspect of his weaknesses going forward.Failure to amend that specifically throughout the entire game severely limited our ability to cause a threat to West Brom in open play. This problem festered, and ultimately showed in the last 20 minutes; whereby it was all too easy to exhaust our suffocated attacks.Nonetheless, with the return of Holt, and then Ruddy, i''m confident we''ll be able to give a better account of ourselves than we did today.

Morison''s play in the first 20 minutes or so showed how much we missed Holt. On 6 or 7 different occasions he was either caught out on the ball, or lost out in competition for it. He has very megre tenacity in comparison with Holt when there is congested play. Nothing seems to ''stick'' like it does with Grant, to the point that play became very unambitious. There was concentrated passing in our own half after we realised every ball played towards the striker would come back against us under the control of a player in blue and white.Some neat play in the final third redeemed him a little, but its becoming more and more obvious that Morison isn''t suited to our current system of play, with his failure to retain the ball and stray away from the midfield; especially from Hoolahan, who is his direct supplier of the ball. As a result Hoolahans trying oppertunist balls that don''t quite pay off, and is having to dribble past god knows how many West Brom players to find a Norwich player in order to escape the pressure.I''d go so far as to bring on Kane for the second half. We simply can''t rely on Morison showing a spark of class once out of every 10 attempts on trying to control the ball, we need to affirm ourselves in the game and not let ourselves get suffocated off the ball in the final third all the time. Morison''s style of play and type of positioning simply won''t us allow to have that in West Brom''s half.Even if he isn''t firing on all cylinders, Holt needs to get back fit soon.

If we can manage a point per game average in these kind of fixtures, we''ll have been non too shabby.

3 Games in 1 week. Fatigued. Regardless of how the victory came about, we acquired it with resolve. 8 League games, and 9 overall, undefeated.Anyone with the nerve to complain is very daringly tempting fate. 

[quote user="Mister Chops"] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)]  [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)] [<:o)][/quote]I know, right?

Gus Poyet maybe? Or have we already changed our minds on Hughton now we''ve doubled our tally of club goals for the season?Poyet has actually built something at Brighton. Unlike Hughton, his success has burgeoned from playing as the underdog, and has acquired a decent offensive record and a remarkable defensive record during his tenure there. The organisation of his teams is impeccable, and prompts a pleasing and effective system of football.His continental football and working in the market (Vicente, Calderon, Bruno, Bridcutt, and Crofts amongst others bought as free agents, now amongst the best in their respective positions in the Championship, amonst other cheap purchases including Buckley, Barnes and Bennett) is exceptional, arguably better than that of Lamberts. And his scouting system expands beyond the British Isles; and more than that, he utilises it (very few Strihavka''s and Maric''s).He''s arguably been more successful than Lambert, having started there with small foundations in comparison to those that Lambert stumbled upon at Carrow Road in League One, with a Championship set yp. Obviously now Brighton have a massive stadium, and an owner growing more and more willing to invest large amounts of cash; but Poyet is certainly making the most of that backing, with Brighton atop the Championship pedestal.Or we could just go for Redknapp? #standardlol [^o)]

[quote user="the1englishman"][quote user="Carra Rud"][quote user="the1englishman"]Oh jesus, i cant wait for for Chris Hughtons after match interview about how fantastic liverpool are and blah blah blah. If i hear one dickhead try to deffend for Chris Hughton after this i will scream ![/quote]haha I''m sure they will be here in droves later.[/quote] With luck i will be out getting rat arsed by then. Two 5 nill drubbings in 6 matches is all we need to know, and just now seeing the cnut rodgers smilling along with the officials is just rubbing it in.[/quote]You know tehnically... Meh whatever, at least the sentiment is shared.

Loan out Ayala and Vaughan, and bring in Turner and Kane. Dare i say it would appear someone''s not doing their job properly.

Dare i say it with bated breath... ''Clingan''..... Oh $hit.

 

Roeder, whilst guilty of purchasing some awful players (his loan policy whereby he seemed convinced garnering a player on loan from the Premier League meant we had acquired someone of Premier League standard was strikingly naive), had an intriguing focus on technical talent that we''d been crying for during Grants tenure, and lost during Gunn''s. Sometimes with varying degrees of success (Hoolahan, Bell, Clingan, Kennedy, Taylor, Gow, Evans, Grounds, Bertrand, Lupoli, Lita), sometimes not so (Bell, Rigters, Sibierski, Velasco, Leijer, Omozusi, Mooney, Henry). He was also never, during a year and a half spell, never guilty of dropping us in the relegation zone, only ever getting us out of it.Regardless of his rather unfortunate cold nature, and the way he dealt with the Huckerby situation (one for which i will never forgive him, and further despise him for), persistence with the loan market, and occasional insistence to play Darel Russell up front, his managerial abilities surpassed many of those we have succumbed to over the past decade or so.Gunn had no idea. Straight out, and if anyone is responsible for Holt it was Deehan. He is THE absolute worst manager. His conviction that he could have emulated Lambert in the season of his departure left a sickening feeling when his time here was ridden with nothing but failure. He''s responsible for the lowest position this club had fallen in the league for half a century and our worst ''home'' defeat in our history to the rivals we can quite rightly look down upon in a competitive sense; all in two consecutive competitive games. Not to mention the remarkable losing sequence i doubt even Grant could have sufferred, let alone Roeder, prior to relegation. Of course Hoolahan''s injury played a part in that (to think some could accuse Roeder of relegation, when indeed he could concievably of saved us in consecutive seasons were it not for a niggling injury), but there is no excuse for 5 losses in the 6 final games of the season when you''re teatering so close to relegation. One needs to be held accountable for that kind of form.

[quote user="Gingerpele"]Doesn''t mean that at all, you could interpret it to mean that. There is clearly benefits from a more relaxed approach, the players are more at ease, feel less pressure and can perform better because of that. It could work the opposite way, but so could a strict approach, the players might not like that and not perform as well because they are under too much pressure.[/quote]This team seemed to respond pretty well to that pressure.

1. Gus Poyet2. Ian Culverhouse3. Alan Curbishley4. Karl Robinson... Can''t say that of those mentioned, that anyone else appeals to me in the slightest; a lot of these frequently mentioned names have me worried, and thankfully expect this board to have very little influence in the process of the appointment of a new manager at the club.