Howson is now!

That's an interesting one Pete because as it stands, it looks like it's only Tettey, Krul, Vrancic, and Stiepermann that currently expire at the end of next season. I personally would be happy with renegotiating an extra year on two of those as it stands. However, I think the bigger gamble lies in the fact that Pukki, Hernandez, Zimmerman all expire the next year. Do you gamble on thinking they can do the business and get an extension in now (also reward for promotion if/when it happens), or they show they can cut it and it becomes much more expensive to negotiate extensions?

Has anybody else listened to this Podcast? It''s fantastic! I listened to the first one last year, they''ve only done 7 so far but this week''s guest was Gunny and it''s just brilliant and really interesting to get insight into the world of Norwich. If any of the presenters are members on here then 10 out of 10 boys. Really enjoyed Gunn this week and hilarious to hear that Angus got scared of the wind and was calling for his Dad in the night. Hahaha. Strongly recommend any Norwich fans that love their podcasts to search for Along Come Norwich on whatever you use to listen to Podcasts. If you need any fan guests of someone that knows bugger all, give me a shout 😀

GK - Fraser Forster RB - Ian Culverhouse CB - Malky Mackay CB - Ian Butterworth LB - Adam Drury RM - Ruel Fox CM - Ian Crook CM - Jonny Howson LM - Darren Eadie ST - Grant Holt ST - Chris Sutton

[quote user="Baldyboy"]Were you there Lakey? I was and the problem is clearly the slow build up, the opposition get the ball forward so much quicker! It’s the same every home game, we have concentrated on sorting out the defence but now we need to sort out the attack, we are set up to counter attack which away from home is fine but at home it’s not, it doesn’t help either when Farke changes the attacking three behind Jerome every game[/quote] That''s not the point he made though Baldy. He made the point that our first couple of attacks against Derby were very quick and then we weren''t able to replicate that. Which is what happened on Saturday. Those first 5 - 10 minutes were brilliant. The rest not so much and the issue behind that as someone pointed out is it''s incredibly difficult to either maintain that level of attack, or be able to switch incredibly quickly from our possession play to direct attack without better players.

You''re absolutely right GJP that there are a lot of players at the age of 22 who are much better/ more developed than both Murphys. The issue I have is that these players are not the norm. I often liken the Murphys to Redmond in that I actually felt that we as a club stunted Nathan Redmond''s development by expecting too much from him. Our style of play also didn''t compliment his development. I remember saying at the time that we didn''t have the time, or quality of players around him to allow him to develop his skills and that if he went to a mid table Prem team I thought he would thrive. Look at his record already? He''s scored almost the same amount of goals, (11 for us and 7 for Southampton) in almost a third of the appearances. He is not expected to win games by himself as he''s not the best player in the team, and he is able to get things wrong as he has the quality around him. I fear that if we continue to lean too heavily on a player who isn''t as developed as others his age, we''re going to see the same thing again. Too high expectations on someone who is still learning their trade and we''ll damage them. I just think he needs some guidance to enable his own realisation that it''s not down to him, and he needs to contribute to the team overall. The rest will come with experience.

[quote user="GJP"]He''s 22 and he''ll be 23 before this season is out. He ain''t a kid.[/quote] Yeah, I made all my best decisions when I was 22, never got any of them wrong, never made any mistakes, and was fully competent at my job! You don''t need to be awkward just for the sake of it. The inference is a lack of experience and a lot of development to happen, not that he''s 8 years old.

[quote user="Jim Smith"] I wonder if he will play Wes for the home game tomorrow and save Maddison for Boro away next week where we may need the extra running and energy.[/quote] Hard to argue with that rationale.

"The concern before the season was about having enough recognised forwards. We need goals. But do we ? If we don''t concede at one end then we need hust the one goal to achieve the 3 points. Not saying this is the approach to take, but to keep the opposition out it does require a fair bit of counter acting them, rather than simply playing the ''best'' 11 available." I think you''ve probably hit the nail on the head of what this season is going to be. We can''t afford the Gung Ho "we''re going to score more than you" approach as we just don''t have the components to do that effectively. What we do have is a defensive 7 (including Keeper)that are getting better and stronger by the game who are looking to keep the ball, dictate play, and penetrate when best suited. This leaves us with 4 potential game changers in (usually) Oliviera, Murphy, Maddison, A.N. Other, to hopefully contribute enough goals to take the points. Vrancic is a conundrum for me at the moment LDC as whilst he had a very good game recently, it was all too recently that many were complaining about how little he offered. I think he''s working his way into the team and as you say, it''s a good issue to have considering how doom and gloom everything was a few weeks ago.

The biggest problem with this is we''re not willing to embrace technology fully yet as a sport. As it stands you''re not allowed to show any replays that may be contentious. Can''t remember whether it''s because they fear it will incite the 80s Hooligans in the crowd, or the fact that it could undermine our otherwise infallible referees when it highlights how wrong they are a lot of the time. So whilst it could be used for live football, we''re not really far enough away from the action to not be able to see so it will continue to be used for advertising. Until we get to a position where decisions are confirmed or changed by video replays, it will only ever be used for goal replays. Would love it to show the crowd when a decision was incorrect exactly like they do on TV but heavens forbid they rile up the crowd.

Where do you draw the line on advertising though? Can''t advertise gambling companies because it''s bad. Can''t advertise cigarette companies because they''re bad. You can advertise alcohol companies though, despite it quite probably being the cause (I''m not a statistician so making a sweeping statement here) of more deaths, more domestic violence, more violent behaviour, and more crime overall than the others put together. But don''t put it on the kiddies shirts because it might promote them to drink. I can''t help but feel it''s a futile exercise to try and tell people what they can and can''t advertise in an attempt to try and tell people what they can and can''t buy or do with their lives. If you want to try and protect people, focus your attentions on supporting those with issues, and making it much more accessible to get help, not trying to stop companies advertising their poisons. There are millions of people that gamble and it''s not an issue, there are millions of people that can have a drink without becoming addicted. Having a LeoVegas sponsor hasn''t made me gamble any more, I haven''t opened an account, I just don''t like it because the logo looks like a child''s design. I don''t see why anybody should be able to tell a football club what they can and can''t be sponsored by when you can have billboards for anything. I''d love to go back to a time where you didn''t have a shirt sponsor but that''s never going to happen. If they let people have sponsors, who are they to dictate what they want to sponsor?

Yeah, FarkeLife was simply: "All the Germans, so many Germans, and they all go hand in hand, hand in hand through their Farkelife... FARKELIFE!" One I heard that was hilarious but probably won''t catch on was to the tune of Bon Jovi - Bad Medicine: "Our love is for James Maddison! James Maddison''s what we need! Check it out we''ve got James Maddison! Scores the goals that Norwich need!"

Hahaha. I wish my surname started with a YouTube. I''d be rich. Starts with a simple Y.

My surname starts with a YouTube and had mine two weeks now so definitely call the club. Gutted cos the new ones look cr@p

Aviva will still be the shirt sponsor next year.

There were "ironic cheers" quite a few times when Ruddy kicked and it stayed in, cleared three men etc. I know they''re professionals and their paid handsomely, but how is that actually going to help someone who is having a poor game? (I actually don''t think overall he had a poor game, just his kicking)