Canary02 IV

I''d go: Ruddy Martin, Barnett, Bennett, Garrido Tettey Johnson Howson Hoolahan Jackson Holt Johnson to pick up whoever is playing the Oscar role behind Torres, and Tettey and Howson given licence to bomb on when in possession. We may end up too narrow to create much but we''ll be solid and give them problems matching us up through the middle.

Holt is playing a very different role to that of seasons past. It''s an acknowledgement from Hughton that the system at Fulham didn''t work but it maintains the 4-5-1 aspect he was trying to adopt, just with Holt behind the striker rather than being the striker himself. The benefit of this is that Holt can win headers from "long" balls in areas that centre halves are not keen on being dragged into, and Jackson and the wide players can pick up the knock downs. A throwback to Sandor Kocsis and Nandor Hidegkuti and the great Hungarian team of the 50''s who used a deep targetman for that very purpose. Variations in recent years have come from Sheringham at Spurs and Man United, and Scowcroft at Ipswich (with varying success). The negatives are that most target men don''t have the ability to link play needed to excel in the role. Holt is aware and can pass well in the final third, but his mobility isn''t great, and he struggles to get in the box to win the towering goal bound headers we associate with him. I think he could develop into the role once he gets used to how to adjust his movement and make a greater influence on the game. It''s certainly worth giving him longer to try it out. The

I was one of the co-editors along with Jon. Y''Army won''t be making a return. It was great fun while it lasted but the time and hassle of writing and producing a fanzine on a regular basis means it''s a young mans game and neither myself or the other editor have got the time (or to be fair, the will), to get back into the game. Ironically I think there''s still a market for a fanzine, and despite all the online blogs and channels available to discuss City, people still like having a magazine in their hands. It''s lovely that every few months one of these questions turns up on a message board though, and that people remember Y''Army fondly because it gave us many great times.

The club have said repeatedly that they want to add another tier but they won''t do so until we''ve handled the debts and have enough financial confidence to fund the project. There''s clearly enough demand for extra seats. If we''re not sold out yet, we will be by kick off, and for a Sky game on a lunchtime, that''s not bad. If we had a further 3,500-5000 seats we may not sell out every time but we''d still get close and the extra income would be a shot in the arm to help compete financially at this level. It''s one of the few tangible ways for a club like ours to draw itself closer to clubs above us in the pecking order, and possibly even overtake one or two.

But the point is he didn''t really want venison. If he did he could have got venison at any point over the past few weeks.. I don''t have an issue with venison or even a ginsters pasty if that''s what was targeted. They may turn out to be exactly what Chris needs. The fact is that at the last second he was scrabbling around begging for scraps off friends that were in a convenient proximity rather than using the biggest shopping budget ever given to a chef to secure the choice cut he could have.

"I''m hungry" thinks Chris, and he decides what he really wants, no needs, is a steak. He''s been craving a steak all summer. He''s talked about steak. He''s tried getting by without steak. He see''s that everybody else has got steak. So finally, he makes his move to get a steak. He goes to the finest restaurants and realises that all the steaks there are too expensive. "That''s fine" thinks Chris, "I reckon I''m a good enough chef to cook a fine steak myself" and he goes to the supermarket. But all the steaks are gone. Everybody else has moved quicker than Chris. They could all see that to be strong you needed at least one or two steaks and they made sure they got theirs. The Most Impatient Man in The World had left it late, but he had managed to push hard enough to get his steak. Chris hadn''t. Chris was desperate. It was nearly bedtime and he was starving. Fortunately, as fate would have it, he happened to be at a petrol station. It was in fact a place he used to work, and so, because they knew him, and because he was obviously starving, they let him have a ginsters pasty. Chris really hoped this would tide him over because he knew the bellyachers could well be back to haunt him. The End?

I think this is why the club is making strides to get us into the elite academy system which allows us to bring in youngsters from all around the country and not just within 90 mins travelling time. Without this limitation we may stand a chance of bringing in the Eadie''s and Cureton''s of yesteryear and it will make youth development truly worthwhile again. As the law currently stands we have a third less catchment area than many clubs because that portion is in the north sea, and with a lower density of population than big cities like Birmingham and Liverpool/Manchester we''ve basically been trying to get rich by buying a lottery ticket. The chances of us finding a Premier League quality youngster are much reduced compared to many clubs and even to bring through the few that we have, the outlay has greatly outweighed the rewards. Only Green and Shackell in recent seasons have provided any real financial return (forgive my old memory if there''s any others we''ve sold on for anything greater than a nominal sum).

[quote user="stratton canary"]Dunston Hall will soon become a hostel for NCFC players, must be getting short of rooms now for ordinary punters(with money of course) [/quote] I stayed at Dunston Hall last night and was behind Michael Turner in the queue for orange juice at breakfast. As he wasn''t with a bloke with a badge that says "I''m new and my name''s Mohammed", I have concluded there is no truth to this rumour.

N''Zonzi was the player I was saying we should sign as far back as May so I''d be delighted with him. I know virtually nothing about Biglia but on reputation alone he sounds like he could be a really great coup.

[quote user="Thumbelina"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"][quote user="Thumbelina"]Please tell us, what does Zaha give us that we don''t already have, apart from the possibility of being an overpriced flop? I doubt very much whether Palace would let him go on the cheap. No better than what we already have here in my opinion.[/quote] I reckon Sunderland already signed him and he played for them yesterday. [/quote] Poor Sunderland, how much did they spend on him?I think Zaha would struggle to hold down a place in the first team at the Stadium of Light too. [/quote] Zaha won a penalty for Crystal Palace yesterday so unless he''s signed overnight I assume it''s a different player

Zaha does the unexpected, has pace and exceptionally quick feet and at his age he is only going to get better. However, I agree there may well be better value to be gained from abroad. Zaha has huge potential but is a boom or bust prospect. Snodgrass was omitted from the subs in error rather than design.

[quote user="Jimmy Bone - Superstar"]What about Snodgrass after one game?[/quote] Would have others ahead of him in terms of fitting the system outlined in the OP, but admittedly forgot about him when picking the subs!

[quote user="Thumbelina"]Are you serious? You can''t play Jackson, he is god damn awful, wasn''t on the bench yesterday and 99% of our fans wrote the guy off 18 months ago. If Jackson is the answer then we must be getting desperate, unless of the 99% were wrong of course?[/quote] Why do you think Jackson is awful, and why do you think he wouldn''t be an asset in a high pressing formation?

Thanks chaps. Agree that a new striker would give us a lift. Zaha of Palace would be my choice as he is pacy, dynamic and gives us something we don''t already have. Tierney is out as soon as Garrido is up to speed anyway. I wouldn''t destroy him by playing Lappin instead for one game ahead of Garrido taking over anyway (although that would e a temptation after y''day!)Right back worried me too but Hughton has already brought in Whittaker so I''d wait and see what he has to offer before looking elsewhere. Despite yesterday I don''t see Martin as a liability, just as a player we can easily upgrade on if we choose to.

Bennett picked up a knock in training. To give CH his dues with Pilks already carrying a knock and Wes not fit enough to start I can see the logic in him not starting yesterday whilst there was a question mark.

I think we need the manager to be aware of the strength of feeling regarding his tactics and that if he doesn''t make any effort to change it AND it fails again then he is in a world of trouble. If he makes positive changes and they don''t work, but we are at least trying different approaches then I''m happy to give him much more time. The worry is that thus far he has stubbornly stuck to this one negative tactic regardless of it''s lack of success.

Delia and MWJ admitted "Mea Culpa" over Gunn and since then McNally has been in charge of hiring managers.

QPR, coming off a 5-0 home defeat will be in the same psychological state as we are. Playing away their first instinct will be to tighten up defensively to allow themselves any chance of an improved performance. Our best method of attack will be to press them high up the pitch and harry them. Give their defenders no time on the ball, and make them make mistakes. Make them concede possession. Shatter their fragile confidence. The player who does this best for us is Simeon Jackson. Let him run them down for 65 minutes and exhaust himself, then bring on James Vaughan to complete the job. QPR have been playing one up front with Cisse and I don''t see them changing this following their result as they''ll want to shore up defensively and away from home they''ll see us as easy to hit on the break with Cisse''s pace as we were against Fulham. In the tactic I suggest with a high pressing game we would be vulnerable to this, but every tactic has a weakness and I would put this under the heading of acceptable risk when weighed against the positives of the tactics. I would replace Turner and Bennett with Ward and Barnett, not because one game makes either of the former terrible players, or even worse players than the latter pair, but it''s a quick way of removing the psychological scar of yesterday, and bringing in players who have performed for us successfully before. It also reinforces that it''s a squad game, that everyone has a role to play and a chance to play, and that if you have a bad game, someone else is always ready to step in and take your place. In midfield I''d play with a variation of the diamond. Howson at the base, Surman nominally on the left of the diamond when attacking, but when defending coming inside to help out Howson. On the right, Bennett, playing as a right sided midfielder rather than a flat out winger, and able to give Russell Martin defensive support. At the tip, Hoolahan, but with the proviso that when defending he needs to either help out Howson, or go to the left to allow Surman to do so, depending on the situation. Ruddy Martin, Barnett, Ward, Tierney Howson Bennett, Surman, Hoolahan Jackson, Holt Subs: Rudd, Lappin, Turner, Johnson, Pilkington, Morison, Vaughan. (Turner rather than Bennett on the bench to lessen the psychological blow a touch for a player who is dropped after his debutand reassure him he is still involved) The risk of this tactic would be the openness to counter attack and balls over the top. The benefits would be a fresh, familiar and untainted centre of defence, a midfield who are fluid and comfortable on the ball, who are able to interchange positions and tactics depending on the situation, and two up front with Simeon Jackson terrifying defenders that are already low on confidence. The other risk is that we are too open and light in the middle of the park, so there will be a lot of responsibility on Wes to work hard defensively, for he and Surman to work together in this respect, and for the midfield to remain narrow when not in possession. We can all point out what went wrong yesterday. This is my opinion on how to actually fix the problem before next week. I''ll put my tin hat on and wait to be ripped to shreds!

Whilst I would still like a couple more players in, I don''t think we would need ridiculously expensive signings, or for extra funds to be released outside that which we already have the budget in place for. The players we have are more than capable of competing at this level as it is. What we need is a management team that can recognise when their tactic isn''t working and change it to something which will and which the players we have can work within comfortably. Hughton should be given time to prove that he can do this, but if he stubbornly clings to a failing tactic and fatalistic approach, a "Little Old Norwich" mentality that says we can only hope to cling on against more established sides then he is not the man for us.

4-5-1/4-4-1-1 is a perfectly workable formation but you have to allow the midfielders the flexibility to join in with the attacks and provide options for the man in possession. Our midfield appeared to have been ordered to park their collective bus a few yards in front of the defence and stay put and leave Holty to nick one if he could. And when Moro came on, the midfield tactics remained the same. Just an extra body standing 20 yards further forward than the one it replaced, but with everyone else doing the same thing that already wasn''t working.

Whilst I agree that the tactics, or lack thereof, were the majority cause of today''s result rather than the players, I have no problem with Jas''s tone and attack on the players. They need to be very aware that they don''t get a pass on this one. No pat on the back or "You tried your best". We are not happy and they need to realise this.

The formation is very different to what we played last season. 4-4-1-1 last season with, for arguments sake, Hoolahan off Holt, operated with a far more mobile and flexible midfield supporting them. And if it became clear that we were being picked off by the opposition for playing too high a line, we were adaptable enough to drop that line back ad for the midfield to adjust as well. Today our tactics were totally unadaptable and unfit for purpose.

We know we have good players. All hyperbole of the day aside, these players proved themselves last season. So we have a situation where good players have played appallingly, where before they played at least adequately. The difference is obviously in the management the coaches and the tactics. We played an extremely cautious 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 hybrid formation which not one of our players seemed comfortable operating in. This is the same system that the coaching staff have been implementing for all of pre-season, and which the players have looked equally uncomfortable with throughout that time. The system is one that CH and his team have decided to be suitable for us to meet our requirements of staying in this division. Unfortunately this requires shoehorning our players into the formation rather than utilising the good players we have in positions that they are comfortable with. If the result today proves anything, it''s that the system is yet to work and the players are yet to show any understanding of it, or any positive reaction to the last few weeks of training and coaching. This isn''t a knee-jerk criticism based on one game but it''s something that we have all feared since the pre-season games began. CH is now at a very difficult crossroads. He can persevere with his Plan A or change tactics. The problem is that he''s played the same system in every match since he arrived here. There has been no experimenting with a Plan B. There appears to be no Plan B. Even today the response to the half time score was just to replace the bloke playing off the striker with a striker but keep everyone else as they were. I hate comparing CH to PL but for me PL''s biggest positive as a manager was that when one of his ideas wasn''t working, he acknowledged this and changed it quickly. No ego issues. I tried something, I was wrong, I''ll try and fix it with one of the other options that the players are comfortable with. CH is his own man, but he needs to display similar honesty and humility here. He needs to be brave and change what''s clearly not working and not right for us. In the same way he has to be brave and believe in the players. We are one of the lesser lights of this division and there are a few games that we will need to go into with an eye on damage limitation more than pressing for the win. But we can''t play that way in every game. And Fulham should not be one of the teams that we have to look to "hang on" against for 90 mins, which is what CH intimated was his hope for us today. They were made to look better than they were today because we were poor. They deserve respect but not undue reverence. If we play like we''re weak and scared we will become prey in this division and we have a young team that if taught to play in a negative, timid, victim mindset will become the epitome of that mindset. CH has to be brave, change his tactics, and his negativity. We need a manager who wants the challenge of winning matches at the highest level. Not a nice guy who is a bit scared of the big boys and just pleased if the little club he has can show up and not look too bad. If he isn''t brave then we have a Managing Director who isn''t afraid to make brave decisions.

This obviously presents a further problem though as Bunn would count towards the 25 man squad limit whereas Rudd and Steer wouldn''t.

Youssef Safri.