Grant Holt is a Monster

It was the other Caldwell!   Lincs Canary - I''m not running Wigan down in any way, but when I look at that team, I don''t see a side that would have blitzed the Championship last season. As such I''m not afraid and I don''t think that PL or the players will be either. Rodallega will be a handful and if you let Moses and Lopez run at you then you could be in trouble but I trust the coaching staff to have drilled the defence on this already. The midfielders are strong, especially going forward, but then so are ours. And I don''t see their defence being any more comfortable than those we faced last year when Grant Holt starts breathing down their necks.   Respect is due, certainly. But fear? Not in my book.

While everyone''s playing guess the City team to face Wigan I thought I''d take a quick look at how our opponents will line up. The likelihood is that they''ll play similarly to Swansea (unsurprisingly because Martinez initiated the style when he was boss of Swansea).   The most likely starting 11 is: Al Habsi Boyce Caldwell Lopez Figueroa Diame McCarthy Watson Moses Gomez Rodallega With subs from : Kirkland, Stam, Jones, Thomas, Di Santo, Sammon, McCarthur and Dicko.   Not a huge amount to be scared of IMO but there''ll be a lot of movement forward from midfield. May be the kind of formation that persuades PL to go with two holding midfielders instead of the diamond?

He''s actually in the Billiard Room, with the lead pipe....

The News of the World would have loved this. "City fans believe Lambert spends nights with Skinhead."

As expected - Johnson at 4, Morison 5, Vaughan 8, Pilkington 12, Bennett at 17, Adeyemi moved to 27, Tierney at 23, De Laet 24, Naughton 25.   No numbers allocated to Smith, Hughes, McNamee, McDonald, Johnson or Tudor Jones.

I take your point but I think the best thing going for Wigan (possibly the only thing) is that they have a half-decent manager. I think they''re more dangerous with him armed with £10m to spend than with N''Zogbia who is a talented but tempramental figure. Wigan''s dressing room spirit just improved greatly and they''re £10m richer into the bargain. The plus is that without N''Zogbia they now lack a cutting edge, but I think Martinez, with his array of contacts across Europe, will find a suitable replacement. You make a good point however that this may well be a foreign player who may not neccesarily adjust first game.

Vaughan for me. He reminds me of Mark Robins in style. A good omen.

Never underestimate the Wizard, Coelho.

Good work Chunky. I did a little LOL at that...

It has got all the classic hallmarks of a "That''s it, I''m stomping off and never coming back" hasn''t it? He''s surely got enough attention from the thread to give him a vicarious bit of tentage by now so the stomp and bullying cries must be next...

Vaughan and Pilkington are old friends anyway and knew each other well before they came to Norwich. Given that they''re all probably staying together at Dunston Hall whilst they''re house-hunting it''s natural for them to pal up. I wouldn''t think it''s a big issue. We''ve had previous influxes of players together and it hasn''t hurt the spirit yet.

[quote user="Bite The Dog"][quote user="Grant Holt is a Monster"]On paper I can see the starting line up being a 4-2-3-1 with Vaughan, Martin and Jackson playing behind Holt as focal point, which I think could well be how we end up playing in many games this season.[/quote]So no Hoolahan? Bennett? Pilkington (when fit)? Not to mention our other, less attacking, midfielders (whovever remains). Instead, you would be happy to see us play with 4 out and out strikers? Against some of the best teams in the world, let alone the country. And people wonder why this clubs fans have the ''dumb, country, farming folk'' reputation![/quote] You''re going to have to help me out here, because obviously I don''t have your slick city intellect and sophisticated understanding that us hayseeds couldn''t possibly aspire to, but how the thundering twatweasel did you extrapolate that pile of cr*p from my post? Lambert played a team with four strikers. I suggested a formation that might accomodate such a selection and given that these games are a prelude to the forthcoming season I presumed that Lambert was testing different players in these positions. However, you, with your unparalleled wisdom and sophistry managed to come up with the theory that the 11 players who started this match were my ideal line up for every game City play in the Premier League. Well thankfully you''re spot on. I do indeed believe that we don''t need the likes of "that there Huuuleyhan" or Pilkington, Bennett etc. In fact I''m so sure that I may take them round the back of my barn and dispose of them with my pitchfork so superfluous are they to any plans. While we''re there I''ll take out Russell Martin, Andrew Surman, David Fox and anybody else who wasn''t in the 11 that started tonight as well, because that''s obviously what I meant. Or were you perhaps just projecting your own intellectual inadequacies on someone else? Just a thought...

On paper I can see the starting line up being a 4-2-3-1 with Vaughan, Martin and Jackson playing behind Holt as focal point, which I think could well be how we end up playing in many games this season.

I like both Ruddy and Forster. I would be happy with either as our starting goalkeeper. I do think it''s essential that we bring in an experienced back up/challenger for the position because Rudd and Steer are too young and I wouldn''t want a repeat of the Bryan Gunn/Andy Marshall situation that contributed towards our relegation a few years back. Ruddy started nervously but grew in confidence throughout the season and by the end I felt he was rock solid. My worry with him is temprament. If he makes a cock up or series of cock-ups in the big league will his confidence stand up to it? I''d wager that it probably would, but I wouldn''t put my mortgage on it. Forster is a more confident character, and seems more at ease with yelling at his defense, bouncing back from mistakes and taking charge in the box. He has not played at the same level as Ruddy did last season however. Playing for Celtic is all well and good, but apart from 4 or so Old Firm games a year, the rest is more akin to playing a L1 or L2 attack every week (and even Rangers I would only class as decent Championship standard). I do like him though and can certainly see him as being a potential England keeper in the coming years. Therefore I understand why people think we should snap him up whilst he''s available and would probably come to City. Equally it would be harsh on John Ruddy though. My general feeling is that PL will try and bring Fraser Forster in based on the fact that he spent all last summer pursuing him on loan and only opted for John Ruddy as a second choice when he couldn''t get FF when he wanted him.

SDP, Purple, Bethnal - Thanks for responses. Queries answered and good points made. Little - I''m not suggesting they make things up but there seems to be a total apathy and even the "easy" stories, i.e. training pics, which they used to do they now aren''t and are simply rehashing stories found in the national press instead. I wondered whether this was a result of Stephan Phillips'' connection but the gents above have answered my question there.   So, from all accounts it seems that Archant are split so far from the club that it''s better to get your NCFC news elsewhere, which is sad because I''ve always seen the two as being part of the same football experience.  

Apologies, the use of the word "cosy" has given this a false tint.   What I''m really driving at is that Archant is totally off point with anything at Carrow Rd at the moment. Just a few minutes ago the headline on the Pink Un changed to the story about Zak Whitbread''s contract which they have no knowledge of but which Sky reported yesterday. It''s hardly big news and the sort of thing you''d expect the local press to pick up on ahead of the major networks (rather than transfers which because they involve 2 clubs from different regions are usually picked up on by the big boys first). Archant have based the whole piece on the fact that Sky have mentioned it. No work by them at all. Same as why there are no pics of training, no effort made by Archant.   I suggested cosy because if the director (apologies cannot remember his name) also works for Archant it seems odd for there to be such a schism, and the most obvious reason for Archant''s lack of effort is that it''s deliberate and partly influenced by the clubs wishes.

Archant are putting very little effort into covering City these days. Whilst they''ll recycle one of the redtops transfer tips as a back page to get us to buy a copy, they''re writing very little if anything themselves. The players have been back in training for a fortnight and we haven''t seen a single picture of this whereas other PL clubs have clips of training on Sky Sports News. Are our pre-season workouts so top secret that the club won''t let Archant photographers in, or are they just not bothering to send anyone?   I know the club won''t comment on transfers and I understand and respect that, but since Archant got someone appointed to the board of NCFC the coverage has become progressively more anaemic, sanitized and geared around secrecy at all costs. With less than a month to go before the season starts they won''t even announce squad numbers so the kids can get players names and numbers on their new shirts.   If Archant are in bed with the club to this extent are they even relevant as a reporting tool? You get far more insight from other online sources than what should be the closest one to the club.

He is inconsistent, which he probably knows himself is his biggest downfall, but as a game-changer coming off the bench he has been massive for us before. In terms of the squad that the OP has put together, I think he will be the extra midfielder in the 25 that has been allowed for. I think Lambert has decided upon De Laet as the 4th centre back by all accounts so I don''t think there''ll be another added. The player in the "back line" Lambert alluded to will likely be a keeper imo. I also can''t see Wilbraham being part of it now we have Morison. I think Wilbraham will join the "Probable departures" list that the OP posted and any that are left at the end of August from him, Hughes, OTJ, Smith etc will go into the final 25. Cody will be dangled to bring some cash in because he''ll struggle to break into the team, but if nobody meets the price I expect him to be in the 25, and think he''s a more likely member of that than Wilbraham.

[quote user="GJP"] I think McNamee is a decent player.   More often than not he gave us a different dimension on the pitch, he committed defenders and got decent balls into the box.   But people will probably only remember the tough game he had against Leyton Orient where they doubled up on him and he very rarely had any help in beating his markers.   Although he''s unlikely to be a regular starter for us this season (and he may want to go elsewhere to get some games) I don''t think he''ll be a player Lambert is in a hurry to get rid of. [/quote] Totally agree GJP. Having watched the DVD of last season I was reminded of just how involved he was in creating chances when he played, particularly at the start of the season. Some people seem determined to run him down, but he''s a good player who has understood that for tactical reasons he won''t always get a game and he''s kept his head down and never given Lambert any trouble and waited for his chances. I have a lot of time for McNamee.

In terms of a Hoolahan replacement if one were needed it might be that Pilkington or Bennett could fill the role. Certainly there wasn''t anyone from last seasons squad who was up to it but both of these seem to have the tactical and technical flexibility. Having seen the Bennett clips on You Tube, having someone playing just behind the strikers who can hammer the ball as soon as he gets a glimpse of the target might be a different, yet effective approach to the position. We know he can set up chances as well.

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I feel the ''diamond'' City play is more fluid than many people think. It can easily switch into a 4-2-3-1 by Crofts dropping back to help Fox and one of the strikers dropping deeper. Similarly, it can become more attacking as a 4-4-2 either by MF players spreading wider or FBs playing as wing-backs to widen play. IMO, this is the flexibility PL is looking for and the reason he is developing so many options.[/quote] Totally agree.

I think some people get hung up on the fact that because we have a surplus of strikers including two new ones, that means we must play with at least two up front but the 4-2-3-1 option allows for one of the usual strikers to simply play a bit deeper. It may even be that Holty takes the deeper role and a striker with speed such as Jackson takes the role on the defenders shoulder. This is especially effective if you have a team that plays a high line because if Holty can flick a header on then Jackson could be away.

De Laet is a left back or left sided centre half who can also fill in at right back or left midfield if needed. Morison and Vaughan are strikers, plain and simple. Bennett and Pilkington are both utility forwards in the style of Ashley Young, Christiano Ronaldo etc who can play effectively in any attacking role. Johnson is a central midfielder. Think Andrew Crofts but left-footed.   The likelihood is that whilst we will play the diamond this season we will also use other systems with the most likely being a 4-2-3-1 with Fox and either Crofts or Johnson protecting the defence and allowing three players to break behind Grant Holt. You can pin one of those down as Wes with the other two being the wider roles. Lambert will then use either attacking midfielders like Bennett, Surman and Pilkington or strikers like Jackson and Vaughan to play in these roles, with him using different options dependant on the opposition.

"But ''asss lacker ambishun Neulll. They wotter foight toof n nayull for him. This is what Darncaster and Deaalyur would do. Little Old Huddersfield etc etc etc"...

"Come and have a look at the Mall, Thomas... That will answer all you need to know about Norwich"