Jump to content

Canary02 IV

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by Canary02 IV

  1. Sorry to be hysterical and ridiculous but just to point out that I did say I thought we needed more firepower in the original post. My point was that I don''t necessarily think that means Chris Hughton will agree. Given that Morison is one of the few players outside of the first eleven that Hughton looks to give game time to, I think it''s safe to assume he rates him, and with Moro and Holt already on board I don''t think it''s he given that people think it is that we will buy a big name striker.
  2. Agreed. I don''t necessarily disagree with Hughton''s formation as it does get results. I just wish he''d adapt when it isn''t working.
  3. The point about size and strength is a valid one, and it''s the reason why Fox doesn''t receive the game time he deserves. Unfortunately football seems to be going the way of other sports (particularly the U.S. Sports) which require almost every participant to be a giant with an enormous frame. When Hughton played Bennett instead of Garrido at West Ham, and when he has made or not made subs earlier in the season because of wanting to keep a bigger presence at set-pieces near the end of the game, it shows how the game is changing.
  4. Beefy - I agree with the majority of your post and the well-considered reasoning. The only part I disagree with is that I don''t think most people are annoyed with the actual result, but the manner in which we achieved it. I''d take nil-nil if we had really gone for it and been thwarted by a great goalkeeping performance and resolute defence. As it was, we had very few chances, Krul was barely called on and though we worked hard to win the ball, we then wasted almost every opportunity we got ourselves into through appalling delivery so all the defence had to do was put one defender on the near post for every cross or set piece and allow him to clear the inevitable poor ball. Sometimes these days happen, but the frustration comes not in the problem itself but the lack of an attempt at solving the problem by the manager. And the likelihood that the same players will be playing next game again and still playing in exactly the same way but will never be dropped because the manager fears change.
  5. [quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="Canary02 IV"]"Whatever you do, or attempt to do, be bold. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it". - Unknown. This for me sums up why Lambert would have got us the points today and why Hughton may never do so in the same situation.[/quote]This is the same Paul Lambert whose team lost at home to Southampton today?[/quote] You''re right. The result at Villa Park today means that everything about Paul Lambert is forever etched in failure. If only they''d won today he''d have been the greatest manager in the history of football, not the worst, as he obviously is now.
  6. As we''ve all come to realise, Hughton isn''t one to change his mind on tactics, regardless of the situation or personnel available. As such, I find it difficult to understand why people keep assuming we''re chasing strikers. Hughton will obviously persevere with only one up front and unless he''s going to replace his captain (which will cost an enormous amount if you''re looking at an upgrade on Holt) then I don''t see him bringing anyone in just to sit on the bench. It''s not like the strikers are missing shed loads of chances either, it''s that we''re not creating many and relying on set pieces to get goals. That''s not to say I don''t think we need extra firepower, as I definitely do, but Hughton''s set-up doesn''t make me think that a striker will be a priority for him.
  7. Unless he''s going to replace Holt as the starter there isn''t much point in bringing him in because we can and will only play with one striker at a time.
  8. "Whatever you do, or attempt to do, be bold. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it". - Unknown. This for me sums up why Lambert would have got us the points today and why Hughton may never do so in the same situation.
  9. People making critical comments about a poor performance isn''t really panicking though is it? The people making those comments aren''t necessarily negative supporters either, they just weren''t happy about some aspects today. And they''ve generally been able to express what those aspects are eloquently and with sound reasoning. Or you could paint yourself as Mr Positive and deride anyone who doesn''t agree with you as fickle and negative in order to attract more attention to your post.
  10. There are two ways to look at Tettey today. 1) His passing was dismal today, and extremely one-dimensional. It only seemed to go to the right or backwards. Attacking-wise he was a non-event. 2) Defensively I thought he was immaculate. Won tackles and 50/50''s that he had no right to and got us in the position to dictate the game had we had players who could do that.
  11. This is the real bug bear for me. Hughton has decided on his first XI and unless they''re injured they play regardless of form or performance. He will add in Martin, Howson and Moro if he feels the need to chuck a sub on so he as some time for them at least. But the rest of them may as well give up. Fox, Jacko and Benno were great at P''Boro and yet today Jacko gets dragged off after running himself ragged in a system that didn''t suit him or the other players around him, Benno gets a couple of minutes when it was too late to make a difference anyway, and Foxy gets left to watch a game that was crying out for someone who could dictate the tempo. The system is everything for Hughton, and it can''t be changed. It has to remain. When we''re winning that''s fine, when we''re not it''s a nightmare because we have no other gear to go into. Every match sees the same players play the same way, and nothing can change regardless of whether the situation calls for it. He''s the least flexible manager that I can remember us having.
  12. Proper friend of a cousin of Delia''s stuff so feel free to mock, distrust and ridicule. Bloke I know says his friend is an ex associate director. He told him that neither Butterfield or Snodgrass were actually Hughton''s chosen signings and that Lambert had them both on his transfer target list before he left. McNally had already prepared the groundwork for both deals and another for a centre half. Hughton was presented with the option of vetoing the deals or following through. He vetoed the centre half (presumably in favour of getting Bassong and Turner) but followed through with Butterfield and Snodgrass, because he liked both players anyway. Now he''s happy enough with Snodgrass but doesn''t see much of a future for Butterfield so may let him leave permanently in January depending on if he brings anyone in. Apparently he likes him but doesn''t think he adds anything that we don''t already have in Howson in particular. McNally is fine with this and Hughton has a free pass on Butterfield not working out because he was signed before Hughton had time to evaluate the squad and he''ll still get his money back on any transfer. Might be bullocks but sounded plausible so thought I''d pass it on. First one to call "obvious binner is obvious" gets to wear my secret blue scarf.
  13. Huddlestone is another David Fox. Great passer but not mobile or physically dominant so struggles to hold a place in a modern premiership midfield. I think we''d be silly to take him. Bridcutt is good but not sure whether he''s quite Premiership class (although to be fair I wondered the same about Johnno and Howson when they joined). I''ve not seen enough of Kayal to base a proper opinion but £5m is a huge amount for us. I''d be expecting borderline world class for that.
  14. That John O''Neil was a total waste of money ;-) Similarly (and seriously) Dejan Stefanovic was a huge signing, and due to injury never became the player we hoped he would. Great for the games he did play though. In terms of being a let down on ability, Darren Beckford was frustrating after we chased him for so long and he turned out to be only average. Mike Sheron just never fitted in. Ditto Mark Rivers. Thomas Helveg, David Bentley and Matthias Jonsson were all thought to be far better players Han they ever showed at CR.
  15. Dear lord, this has turned into a genuine debate with nobody insulting anyone or hijacking the thread for their own personal hobbyhorses... Someone call the forum police, it must be a mistake. I don''t think any of our squad are bad players and all can still play a role if needed. I think the biggest success of Lambert was keeping a squad of players involved and competing for places, whereas we''re veering into the territory of having players who can play badly and still be picked every week. If I was Elliott Bennett or Surman right now I''d be assuming that I don''t have much of a future here because if he guy in front of me isn''t playing well but still starts ahead of me regardless then the manager really mustn''t rate me. Some of the most divisive times I''ve seen at CR have been when managers have sacred cows in the team who they pick no matter what. Sutch, Gary Holt, Andy Hughes, Carl Robinson were all guaranteed games no matter how badly they played and the fans turned. I don''t want us to get to that stage. There has to be a meritocracy, and to my mind it would be better to take under performing players out for a game or two and rotate the squad. I''m not talking wholesale changes, but just enough to remind everyone that if you don''t perform you don''t keep the shirt just because we drew the last game instead of losing it, especially if we could have easily won it had we had better performances from one or two players. CH is undoubtedly working on ways to be more effective in the final third and hopefully he''ll be as successful there as he has in tightening us up.
  16. I don''t have a problem with the system itself. It works extremely well away from home and at CR against the big teams who look to dominate us. I do think we will see the downside of it against teams like Sunderland when we''re at home and expected to force the tempo. My problem is that we now seem to be locked into one system, and one set of players who fit that system and we have to lose before we''re allowed to consider changes. For me, such rigidity breeds fear. We need plan B''s and C''s so we don''t go into our shells when things go wrong and we have to adapt, and we needto keep more of the squad involved. I think CH will persist with the formation and team as is, and you certainly can''t blame him. I''d just prefer us to be braver and set up to win games, rather than setting up in a wholly predictable manner that doesn''t keep the opposition manager guessing. We need to pick up wins from easier home games to stay up and I''m not sure we''re set up to do that currently.
  17. We don''t need to fear change so much. Fear is a huge weakness for teams like us in this league. We''re not on this run solely because of the formation. We''re on this run because we have good players who have adapted to the managers style of play now. Hughton is capable of fielding teams that play in different formations and be equally effective. Our players are capable of playing in different formations and being equally effective. In the same way that losing a game now won''t make 4-2-3-1 ineffective for ever, neither will changing the formation mean that we lose everything we''ve built up during the run. I don''t believe in tinkering or change for change sake, but to my mind (and I don''t think I''m in the minority) Pilks and Snoddy aren''t in form and we have other good players available in the squad ad champing at the bit for a chance to play. They don''t necessarily fit into the current system in the way the other two do, but what''s the alternative? Keep playing out of form players every game until we do lose just because our alternatives are less suited system wise? We need to be brave. We are better than we give ourselves credit for. We should not fear change but embrace it. The more systems we can adapt to and play with confidence, the more tactical ammunition CH has on every match day.
  18. I didn''t think Johnson was a no-show. Not his best game but he put in a shift and didn''t do a lot wrong. Bassong is a hell of a player. He''s a level above the majority of the squad. With Tettey, Hoolahan and Holt alongside him in the spine we have some real quality.
  19. For me, we could take Pilks and Snoddy out of the team and not lose anything from putting in the other options we have available. Other than the goal Pilks got against Utd and Snoddy''s bobbler tonight neither has done anything that great recently. We would need to tweak the system perhaps but the manager has to be brave enough to do that and have the confidence in the players that they are capable of playing like that. For me, I''d go with the diamond. Bring Fox back, let Johnno and Tettey push up and squeeze the opposition a little, and let the full backs join in more. Have Wes at the point and put Jacko up with Holty. What you lack in width you gain in the whole team being twenty yards further up the field and more capable of pressuring the opposition where it hurts.
  20. Very few people in football or on the terraces believe that Clattenburg said anything racist. Chelsea''s players have proved themselves to be liars and cheats in their private lives at the very least and it''s only natural that it can be assumed they wouldn''t hesitate to do the same to gain an advantage elsewhere as well, regardless of the harm it could do to a mans career. They are, after all, only interested in their own feelings.
  21. When we signed Bradley Johnson I wasn''t overly enthusiastic. I thought he was the fat bloke that was the weakest link in Leeds midfield, wasn''t good on the ball and who would fizz in 30 yarders, most of which went well over. After a few games I thought he was a little better than I had previously thought but that the initial assessment wasn''t too far wide of the mark. This season he has looked a lot better, and I thought yesterday he really came of age. His passing was good, his work rate immense, his tackling crisp and effective, and the way he took responsibility for blocking Crouch at set pieces and driving the midfield was exceptional. I thought he showed real leadership and command. It was the first time I''d really thought that he looked like an all-round Premiership midfielder and not just a Championship player trying his hardest to get by on his merits. Well done Johnno, nice to see a player reaping the benefits of what has obviously been a lot of hard work on the training pitch.
  22. While I agree in principle LDC, the question has to be how long do we give him. Arsenal result shouldn''t change things but then we''re back to winnable games but with a squad devoid of confidence. That''s going to be a huge challenge and may well decide the situation.
  23. Agree Aggy. Hughton is an experienced coach and manager and not everything he has done has been bad. We have been outclassed by Liverpool and Chelsea but many teams will be and other than the Fulham debacle we''ve been close to winning games. Equally he HAS to start winning games. I thought the team looked remarkably spirited to begin with today but as soon as that third goal went in the fight went out of them. The longer we go without winning the more difficult it will be to pull the players confidence back up. Statistically very few managers that follow a really successful predecessor go on to do well (I can only think of Paisley off the top of my head) and it may be that Hughton has had he odds against him from the start. I still think he needs more of a shot but there has to be a limit to our patience. In the Premier League you don''t have time to waste.
  24. Agree with most of that. Great game by Holty. Don''t think Howson played as badly as many seemed to think or that Tettey was quite as good as has been said. Chelsea''s movement on and off the ball was the difference today and we simply couldn''t live with them.
  25. Good thread. Turner has been a good player at Premier League level before, and will probably be so again. However at the moment he has had a start to his Norwich career of almost Theoklitian proportions and his confidence is lower than a snakes a#se in a bomb crater. He looks like creating a chance for the opposition whenever he is near the ball. He needs to regain confidence before he gets near the team again as nerves like that are catching. One theory I have is that he''s suffered from not having a partner who is comfortable on the ball alongside him. Bassong is the only CB we have any more that is. Previously we had Ward, Whitbread and Ayala who could all play it out from the back and provide a safety net for those partners like Barnett or Turner who are uncomfortable in possession. I think our best bet is to loan Turner out in January and let him regain his confidence at someone else''s expense. Ward can come back onto the squad list as a better option at this stage.
  • Create New...