Vazzza

[quote user="FLEMO "]Signing of a striker: Remembering this is our transitional year, clearing debts and putting the club into a solid and, honestly, fantastic financial position - why should of the board signed a new striker for big money in the window? See it from THEIR point, we still have the same strikers that saw us finish 12th last year... we have not lost any players, and have developed our creative options in midfield... why spend money? Personally, I think we should have developed our striker force, but from a business point of view (and that''s what''s most important this year) we still had the strikers that secured us a solid league positioning last year. ![/quote] I understand that is the way the board have looked at it. I just feel taking the angle of getting a big money signing, such as Berbatov, and breaking our wage structure on 1 player would have paid dividends. I think looking at the extra money next year, would have been wise to buy someone of Berbatov''s quality. There would have been the obvious isseus with this. But with a relegation release clause we could have easily got around the problem of having a big money player on the books IF we do go down. The next big issue is upsetting the balance of the team, but after a season of Berbatov scoring goals and us staying in the league, we could have started to introduce new contracts for others, keeping them happy with the extra millions Sky/BT are paying next year. I use Berbatov as an example here without having a clue if he''d have even been willing to pull on the yellow and green, but gives you an idea of the type of player i mean. I wouldn''t have been happy with doing the above with CMS or Rhodes as they aren''t proven, and therefore not worth the risk.

Apologies, just assumed your comment was aimed at the OP.

[quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="nutty nigel"] http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city-fc/norwich_city_boss_paul_lambert_liverpool_still_have_plenty_of_premier_league_class_1_1362537   And are Hughton''s comments about Rodgers and Liverpool any different than Lambert''s about Dalgliesh and Liverpool. In fact if you ask me Lambert went OTT lavishing praise on Dalgliesh.         [/quote] They''re different because Lambert had won some games and Hughton hasn''t. Until Hughton wins some games every little quote, action or selection will be seen in a negative light.  It doesn''t matter what you say to these people they will never get over the disappointment of losing. They will believe any old rubbish (have we had ''the managers lost the dressing room yet?) because thats the way they are, just be happy you''re not like them, it must be hell.     [/quote]   Read some of my posts before you bundle me in with "these people" please.

Maybe just after playing a team who are much stronger than us is a bad time to bring up this discussion. I''ll do some digging later when I''m home to see if I can find some of the quotes that make me feel the way I do. I just get that horrible feeling after every interview I hear/read that he undersells Norwich so much. I don''t know if this is just him trying to take off the pressure or perhaps it is just editing that makes it come off this way, not sure. I definitely remember him making comments about the better quality Fulham have at their disposal after our match at the cottage, and i''d say other than a few outstanding individuals, we are on par with them player for player.

[quote user="nutty nigel"] Where do you get the idea that Hughton thinks we''re little old Norwich? [/quote] I''m at work so don''t have time to pull quotes, but you only have to read/listen to any interview he''s given. He is always talking about the gulf in difference in quality of the players we have in comparison to our comptition. Even after the Fulham and West Ham games, where I believe we should be competing. Fair enough he''s not talking about the the fan base, ground or infastructure of the club, but he is referring to our playing staff as being uncomparable to other PL clubs. This is inflicting the "Little Old Norwich" mentality onto our players.

The way Hughton thinks we are "little old Norwich" I think is the reason for the entire problem. He talks about our players like they are lucky to be in the prem and we are worlds apart in skill from the rest of the league. That can only create negativity and make the players second guess their own ability. Seeing as we have a squad of players who up until recently were playing Champ or below quality (Bassong excluded) I don''t think they need to be hearing that. I guess thats what Lambert did, no matter if you came from Blue square conference, Kwik Fit or Leeds, he made you feel like you deserved to be playing in the lofty heights of the Premier League. This has even rubbed off on me. Last year I honestly thought we deserved our 12th place, maybe even top half, this year I feel like a championship fan in the making all over again. I believe we have a good squad, I believe we have a good manager, I don''t agree with that meaning things will automatically become good when some magical "click" happens. Sometimes in life some things are just not meant to work together, I hope i''m wrong, but maybe Hughton and the current squad are some of those things. If this is the case, Hughton may need more time to bring in players to suit his style, or we should be looking/have looked for a manager who could have carried on Lamberts work, not need to rebuild and start again. I agree we need to keep optimistic and stay behind the team and manager on match day, BUT, I''m not very confident things are suddenly going to become good. I don''t know the answers, I just know that Hughton has me feeling negative from the way he projects the team and the way he holds himself in interviews, add to this results not going our way and I''m down right depressed. How must the players be feeling! 

I think with the additions of the new players on the books we are much better equiped to play the wing backs system now. We have a natural WB in Garrido, and E. Bennett seems to have a good enough tackle to play there. Tetty can play a proper DM holding role, although BJ is a combative midfielder I still wouldn''t call him an out and out holding player, Fox has the distribution but not the tackling side of his game and Howson should really be playing further up the pitch IMO. I think we''d be much stronger in this system now than we were last year. Also I think it''ll fit the Hugton style better than it suited Lambert. I think the problem with Hughton is the playing staff don''t suit his managerial style. Maybe the Wing back system will be good for all??

Quite interesting seeing how our stats match up to last season, however both teams have had so many changes since then I''m not sure if comparisons can really be made. You are right however, we may have lined up with a 4-5-1 and got spanked all the same, so its impossible to say that was the right formation to use, just definitely wasn''t wrong like the 4-4-2! In the thread "Pick your team vs Liverpool" someone was looking at 3 CB''s and 2 wing backs, 2x DM''s and then an attacking 3 like the below.  GK:        X   CB:      XXX WB:   X       X DM:      XX W:     X       X ST:         X  I think there could be a lot to be said for this formations using the players we have. Garrido and E. Bennet for the WB positions.Any of Fox/Tetty/Bradley and Howson for the DM postions. Snoddy/Pilks/Wes/Butterfield in the advanced wing areas and Holt up front. I think using this, we will effectively have 5 at the back when we are under pressure, with 2 DM''s in front. This should be pretty solid against any team in the Prem, and there is plenty of pace for the WB''s to aid the attacking 3 when we do have the ball. If Howson is utalised in one of the 2 DM positions then he will also add a lot going forward. I think this will give us good natural width, and keep us solid in the middle of the park.  

CORRECTION: 90% of the fans and this message board (after a re-read I saw how that might be a bit confusing!)

I still can''t believe Hughton played a 4-4-2 with the players we had available on Saturday. Its like he blindly picks the tactics to what he wants to do on the day, regardless of the opposition or how they will shape up. Fulham really should have been 4-4-2, 90% of the fans and board knew it after the way pre-season had shaped up. Liverpool on Sat should have been 4-5-1, I think most of us knew it before a ball was kicked, why didn''t Hughton?   On appointment I was a big Hughton fan, the more I see of him the more I think he isn''t tactically sound, has no balls when it comes to making changes during the game, and interviews terribly. I think he shows far too much respect to any team we play, and talks us down far too much. Hell if I was playing for him he''d make me feel like a small fish in a very very big pond. I actually think its 99% down to the mentality he''s instilling in the team, he''s treating us like "Little old Norwich"

[quote user="lincoln canary"] It doesn''t matter what we do, we''re in for a hiding. It''s a case of damage limitation. We really need to shore up the centre of the park and get back to being solid. Pace is also essential, especially at full backs so my team would be,                   Ruddy E. Bennet  Bassong  R.Martin  Garrido                 Fox   Tettey     Howson   Hoolahan   Pilkington                     Holt [/quote] It has to be this system I think. This is the same system I would have picked against the Liverpool team. Against the bigger clubs where you expect to be defending a lot of the game, having the 6 defensive players must be the best option. When we do have the ball we still have creativity and quality in the front 4, and in Fox good distribution to link to them

[quote user="Thumbelina"]and now for something slightly different.                                                                                                                                 Ruddy                                          R. Martin       Barnett        R. Bennett E.Bennett                                                                                                         Garrido                                                 Tettey                    Butterfield                                                               Hoolahan                                                 Jackson                     Holt The above assumes that Bassong will not be fit, otherwise he would come in for Barnett.  Pilkington, Snodgrass/Surman, Tierney, Turner, Morison, Bunn and Fox. It''s only the Scousers at home so let''s go for it! [/quote]   I quite like this system, although I''d play different personel, with Bassong coming in for R.Martin if fit and Johnson for Butterfield. Think you''ve gone too light on the midfield. Definitely an interesting idea tho, maybe not one to experiment with against Liverpool!

I''m really looking forward to tomorrows game, as the OP said, 2 teams in the same boat at the moment, so should be good. Liverpool looked much better against Man Utd than they have for the rest of the season, and probably would have got the points if it wasn''t for the red card. So hopefully they won''t carry that over to our game. I think we''ll play a variation of 4-5-1/4-3-3 and really bombard the weakened Liverpool defence, if that finally turns into goals though, nobody knows. And if Bassong doesn''t make it, I think we''ll be conceeding! Definitely a good time to be playing Liverpool though IMO

I''d be a bit worried about Martin at CB for this one. I think his pace would let us down against the likes of Suarez.

If Bassong is fit, otherwise replace with Turner                         Ruddy R.Martin - Barnett - Bassong - Garrido                   Tetty - Howson           Snoddy  - Hools  -  Pilks/Bennet (whoever is fittest)                           Holt With 2x DM''s we can really let the 4 front men run riot. i went for howson over Johnson so when we do have the ball we have a bit more going forward, but maybe better having BJ in there.

[quote user="Robert Parsons"] I might respond to the rest when I have put it through Babel Fish [/quote] LOL   In all seriousness though. I''m with almost everyone else where I think it is a matter of time before everything comes good. However I''m not one for waiting for things to happen, could be miles adrift by then. How about a call up for Loza to see how he does, seems to be having a good run of late for the U21''s. And will remind the strikers they have to perform to play (although its not like they lack for trying at the moment)

[quote user="zemas tendon"]What it boils down too, is that some fans will fly from the other side of the world to see Man Utd, but cant be bothered on a wet cold night against Donny!! [/quote]   I go to the games on the day that I have enough money in the bank and time on my hands, doesn''t matter who the opposition is. However to say i''m not bothered about the standard of football when watching live, as long as its Norwich, would be lieing to myself. I want to see a good football match and get value for my money, otherwise I''d spend £6 every Saturday to watch Maidenhead Utd play Slough under 6 Morris dancers. I think I see where this discussion is going now. Its not the NCFC armchair fan that bothers people, its the "top 4 wannabes" that only put the effort in when a big club is in town. But even if this is the case, maybe they want to get value for money and want to see a good game when shelling out a lot of money for tickets and travel, and watching a "second string" NCFC side play against Donny isn''t that. If you know you are going to be able to afford 2 or 3 games in a season, you''d want them to be "big games", and a cup game against Tottenham is the ideal moment to watch a Norwich team take on a "big club" for much less money than normal.

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"] It is because some supporters believe that armchair fans'' opinions on the team are not valid as they don''t or only rarely go to games.  The supporters who think like this believe that armchair fans are like an underclass of City supporters and that by them themselves, by virtue of them probably having a season ticket makes them much more important, much more of a supporter and their opinions much, much more relevant, correct and important. [/quote]   And to a certain extent, i''d agree with them. Season ticket holders are going to know more about the games, do generate more money for the club and should probably have more of an input. BUT, I don''t think that makes armchair fans any less important, especially as it is normally personal curcumstances that make it impossible to watch the games.

Its funny you should say that GP. My post was a lot shorter, but thought I best explain why I consider myself an armchair fan, but still a "real fan" at the same time. Before you know it my post was the longest bit of text i''ve written in ages, simply because I was trying to explain why I am a NCFC fan, to other NCFC fans, quite crazy!

Is this because people are not happy that people claim to be a fan, but do not generate the club money? I''ve seen a lot of posts with people belittling people for being an armchair fan. I would class myself as an armchair fan, only getting to about 5-10 games a season. This is mainly due to the fact I live a 4 hour drive from Norwich, am a 27 year old living off medicore wages, trying to balance bills, rent and all those other fun things (Not to mention having a girlfriend who is between jobs, and has been struggling to find full-time work). I still buy Norwich memorabilia, replica shirts (am only missing 4 shirts to have every home and away since sponsorship began) and tickets as often as I can. I still come on message boards to discuss the team as much as possible, watch as many games on TV/Internet as I can... I''ve supported Norwich since I was old enough to make my own decisions in life and have met players from many different teams. My nickname is Safri after only taking Norwich shirts with his name on back on holiday once, and the name stuck. But, according to a lot of posters, as i don''t live in Norwich and go to every game, this makes me less of a fan??? In my opinion, having armchair fans is a good thing. As long as they sing their support for Norwich, raising club awareness and occasionally buying a ticket or shirt etc raises extra money for the club. We would only be worse off without these fans, in my eyes I can''t see any negatives. I can understand it must be frustrating for people who go to 99% of the games, and then can''t get a ticket to a big match, but surely if you''re a season ticket holder, that won''t be a problem. And if you are worried about people buying tickets for a game such as our Cup game against Tottenham, surely the season ticket holders still get the option to buy first. The armchair fan will buy a general release ticket, which would have been an empty seat anyway... I really don''t understand why armchair fans aggrevate people so much, other than when they try and make rediculous statements they have no idea can be true, without watching the matches live regularly. If you could let me know why armchair fans wind you up so much it will be great!

Ok ok, you know what I mean [:$]

IMO, its a combination of both. I don''t think we really have the players to fully utalise Holt as a "Number 9" without playing a 4-5-1 formation. If we want to stay with 2 up front, I can''t see a partnership with Holt that is going to get the right supply and movement. Although to be fair, I know very little of Kane and it could be he is the answer, he certainly appears to have the build and touch to become the link man between the midfield and Holt.   Holt dropping back to supply Jackson isn''t going to work as Jackson isn''t hitting the back of the net (doing everything else very well). I think Holts link up play is immense, just need another Holt for him to supply!   Personally I can''t see Holt getting any where near the same amount of goals he did as last year, unless the system does change, or a new strike partner with good link up skills (i.e. a Berbatov-esque player)

[quote user="BroadstairsR"] http://epaper.thetimes.co.uk/epaper/viewer.aspx   This might work Pete, but I doubt it. [/quote]   Just askes for log-in details before accessing the article for me. I''ll see if its on google news and relink if I can find it.

other than the fact the OP picked a rediculous thread title, I think he has a point.   I can''t believe people are happy to "wait till mid-october" before we start seeing performances. Apply this thought to any other player and it would not be acceptable. Imagine if Ruddy needed the first 2 months of the season to prepare! I think people are just telling themselves this to justify the love we all have for him. He needs to turn up, and soon. Lets face it, he is our strike force. Agreed we aren''t playing him as a "number 9" at the moment, and that is where he is at his best. We basically don''t have the personel to play our best striker to his main strength, and unfortunately we only have Hughtons transfer dealings to blame for this (Although he has achieved what he set out to do, and sured up the defence nicely). I''m almost thinking giving the 4-5-1 another try might be best, this way we can utalise Holt as a striker and get Hoolahan on the pitch (we all know Holt is at his best when Hools is supporting him). Shame the only evidence of that system is a 5-0 defeat. Otherwise I''m at a loss as we need Holt in the box. As we''ve seen from the last 3 games, we are making plenty of chances but have nobody to put them away.  

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] Wes should have come on, but I haven''t seen a sensible suggestion yet for who should have been taken off in his place. [/quote] I think by the 75th minute Howson was not really in the game and was looking very leggy. I probably would have opted for Fox over Hoolahan, just as he is a bit more sturdy going backwards, but would have also been much more effective with the long ball tactic we had adopted by that point in the game.   I want Hools in the team, but at the moment, I can''t really see a way of using him effectively. As we all know, you need him at the tip of a diamond, and under Hughton I can''t see us playing that shape. So unless we go back to 1 up front, with Hools, Pilks and Snoddy just behind, I can''t see him getting much playing time.