Highland Canary

Interesting to reflect on what was in minds last year. Quite a few high scores draws predicted, a few with Norwich nicking it be the odd goal, and some heavy defeats. Let me apologise to those posters who don''t like prediction threads - just don''t engage! I''m going 1-4 with Holt''s renaissance continuing!

I thought Hughton was an excellent appointment. He was my first choice. Listening to Bowkett and McNally at the fans'' forum, in my opinion, Hughton will still be our manager even if we are bottom at Christmas and finish 20th. That being the case Hughton should invest in a striker with pace as many of us warned/discussed before the start of the season. Personally, I think it will be too late. I don''t think our current situation is entirely Hughton''s fault: under Lambert our results dropped towards the end of last season as teams found us out; our rapid rise from league one implied we had the weakest squads of the three promoted teams last year; we''ve invested in a large group of players over the close season, but Bassong excepted, there is not a step change in improvement in quality as compared to what was already here; the PL is stronger this season albeit I expect Southampton and Reading to struggle this season etc . What I''ve found difficult to understand at points this season are some of the tactics, team selections, substitutions, loans out and signings we''ve made. So where does it leave us? In my opinion, the similarities to 2005 are considerable - not being able to buy a win - investing in a new striker in 2005 in January but it being too late (not sure how many Ashtons are around today) but in a better financial position as we attempt to regroup under Hughton in the championship.

Although this has been explored on other threads, I do wonder if Bowkett''s key strategic objective of remaining in the PL is consistent with a ''mutual'' or ''community'' run club as McNally described us at the recent fans'' forum. Personally, I''m not convinced.

I haven''t seem any evidence - home or away - that this is not the case. Debate on forums by its nature will be both positive and negative and all the more healthy for that.

I don''t expect Hughton to be sacked even if we finish 20th.

I wasn''t wishing to imply that all the other clubs have benefactors. However it could be argued that a team such as Fulham - with a smaller support than us - are now established in the PL. Other PL teams such as QPR and to a lesser extent Reading and Southampton - certainly our competitors - have significant financial backing. If these teams manage to survive the first couple of seasons in the PL they will overtake us in the future. Such teams will be competing with teams like Fulham for players - they can afford payroll costs we will be unable to support - not Norwich. We can only dream of bringing players like Berbatov to Carrow Road.

It''s interesting that TFA reintroduces the debate surrounding the merits/demerits of our current/former owner. Imo neither of these owners are/would have been able to meet what Bowkett set as the club''s key - only - strategic objective of remaining in the PL for ''62 million reasons'' at the recent fans'' forum. At a fundamental level, the efficacy of an ownership structure which does not include a rich benefactor given the financial imperatives of the PL will almost certainly fail. In other words relegation will follow this season or, if not this, soon thereafter. Perhaps a more appropriate strategic objective with the current ownership structure is financial (and footballing) viability in the championship.

I hope terraces are never reintroduced. The last time I stood at the football (excluding standing at away games which is obviously only one person per seat) was at West Ham in the quarter finals of the FA Cup - the only time I''ve feared for my own safety at a football match. Safety has be the number one and only consideration at sporting stadia notwithstanding the loss of atmosphere this has brought to football grounds post-Hillsborough.

Let''s hope he is safe. Wouldn''t want Coyle moving down the road...

You''re correct LDC. The most we can aspire to - assuming no external capital investment - is to be a yo-yo club. Let''s hope that following relegation we make a better fist of it than in 2006.

[quote user="Thirsty Lizard"] All it really goes to prove of course is that football tends to be cyclical and you have good times and bad times and as supporters the most sensible thing you can do is to get used to it.[/quote] I think this is absolutely correct. There was considerable discussion before the start of the season that we''d be OK be virtue of finishing 12th the previous year. Hopefully, we are now in a position to form more realistic judgments.

Park the bus. Failing that: Ruddy E Bennett - R Martin - Bassong - Garrido Tettey - Fox Pilkington - Hoolahan - Snodgrass Holt   Any views as to playing Jackson as one of the three behind Holt?    

Paul Moy wrote: If they''re off form we should try to beat them. I''m not saying we should expect to win, but to lose 5-2 to Liverpool was poor and we could have attacked Newcastle more and who knows but we may have got something. QPR was a poor result and so was West Ham. If you don''t try to win you don''t win. I don''t expect to beat Arsenal but please let''s give their defenders something to think about. This is the analysis that I would share. I think we should have 6 points after our games - to get close to 40 points - so only 3 more than we currently have. The point is the tactics we''re employing, team choice etc don''t give me any confidence that we''ll beat Stoke or Reading - games that we need at least 4 points from. Discount Aresenal and Villa.

[quote user="thenorthstand"]H Arsenal Lose A Villa Lose H Stoke Draw A Reading Draw H Man Utd Lose A Everton Lose A Southampton Lose H Sunderland Lose A Swansea Lose H Wigan Draw Hope I''m wrong :/ Might sneak a win somewhere but dont see where it''s coming...[/quote] I think we''ll beat Wigan:-)

[quote user="lake district canary"]Taking into account all the fixtures and assuming we would need to be over 20 points over the first half of the season - how about this scenario. Arsenal H                0A Villa   A               0Stoke H                  3Reading A               1MU     H                 0Everton   A              0Southampton A        3Sunderland   H         3Swansea       A         1Wigan           H         3W. Brom      A          1Chelsea         H         0  [/quote] Sorry LDC - agree Reading and Wigan but I think we''ll get a point against Stoke, lose to Soton, a point against Sunderland, lose to Swansea and West Brom. That makes 9 points at the end of these sequence of games.        

If Villa really are that poor much credit will be due to Lambert and Culverhouse for keeping them in the PL. I think at Villa Park we may find out quite how poor they are. Btw how come we only seem to have lower tier tickets this season rather than upper and lower like last - is our support down or has the away support section at VP been reconfigured?

Will be interesting where the game ends up but I agree Southampton are playing the type of pressing football we managed last season. Again, similar to us last season, Southampton look to have superior quality up front than they do in defence.

It''s what we hope for but it''s not necessarily expected. With a stronger PL, the loss of manager and either unwillingness or inability (I''m not sure which) to strengthen our forward options, we were always likely to struggle this season.

Unlike many posters on here I''m only in my 40th year of watching City. I''m not losing interest either. However, the pre-Sky days when teams like us could compete - near enough - with the top teams have gone. In many ways that makes the PL much less of a spectacle than used to be. I can understand the attractiveness of Championship football - matches are even and they come round frequently - replay that league with the same teams and you''ll probably get a radically different outcome. So would relegation be a disaster from a supporters''s perspective probably not but from a business perspective it undoubtedly is. So I''m not losing interest. I believe the quality our our squad compared to those around us is being exposed. This reflects inter aliia our rise from league one, the rapid change in the squad and the loss of Lambert. I blame no one. I would question the efficacy of McNally''s concept of ''mutual'' ownership if the key strategic objective is survival in the PL. In the medium term I''m of the view that a benefactor is needed to survive in the PL. But from a footballing viewer''s perspective watching competitive matches is more fun than being thumped every week.

Martin is undoubtedly a better CH than RB. He played well there last season whereas he was terrorised in the games he played at RB.

Poor not abject yesterday. I guess for Hughton he needs to stop us leaking 3+ against both Arsenal and Villa. I honestly can''t see us beating Stoke - I think a draw most likely. Reading - they''ll be under pressure as well so that might go either way. My best guess 2 more points before December''s games.

It was obvious from the Fans Forum that Hughton has the full backing of Bowkett and McNally. The compensation to Hughton and team on dismissal would use any money that might have been available in January. We were poor again today but equally Chelsea are several classes above us. So it''s stick with the manager time and hope that there are three other woeful teams in the PL. We''ll lose to both Arsenal and Villa - so we have to hope that we can manage a win against either Stoke or Reading.  

Holt was the stand out player today. I don''t think Howson had such a poor game as suggested by some.

It was great to see Holt back. If we''ve learnt anything from the last three seasons Holt is the player that has to perform for us to have any chance of staying up.

The score line didn''t flatter Chelsea who were camped in our penalty area for much of the second half without really building on their half time score. It was somewhat worrying that Barnett looked so uncomfortable today. Our CH options are beginning to look thinner and thinner. Personally I think Martin is better at CH. Maybe EB at right back. Quite concerning whatever.