Jump to content

Canary On The Wire

Members
  • Content Count

    424
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Canary On The Wire

  1. City1st, while some debates are more credible than others, Jordan Rhodes to Norwich is not exactly pie-in-the-sky stuff. No reason not to debate it. Hypothetical situations such as Hoolahan to Villa and Malky as our manager weren''t unrealistic scenarios, given that Lambert is a fan of Wes'' and he had allegedly spoken ill of the current setup at Carrow Road. In the case of Malky as our potential manager, we had a managerial vacancy, Malky is a successful manager at the level we are soon to be competing in and also an ex-player at the Club who would garner great initial PR. By all means criticise the debate of ludicrous rumours, but loosen your great Iron Fist over the rest of the forum will you? It''s bloody tedious.
  2. No one could deny he''d be a good signing and a forward with a structural style of play who would work as a lynchpin in a system with pacy wingers (probably a 4-3-3) The point is if Blackburn want £14m for him we''ll need to shop cleverer, so bad move in that sense.
  3. My point isn''t that Royle won''t be useful or even that I don''t understand what he''s here to do because I do LDC. My point is McNally said there would be a four-seat management board, himself, Adams, the Technical Director, and a Director of Recruitment- I initially thought Royle had been added to this, deviating from the plan as outlined by McNally As Adams has apparently said Royle as Football Consultant is a member of the backroom staff and not on the management board itself. That''s odd given his experience.
  4. City1st I''m not entirely sure what your point is if you even have one. We have a four-seat management board as outlined by McNally, soon to be completed by a Technical Director and a Director of Recruitment. Joe Royle does not fit into this blueprint. Working out where he fits in the jigsaw of our club''s brave new dawn is of interest to those who are not passionate casuals. Given the amount of ''guff'' prevalent on this board, I think you''re wasting your time here. I don''t expect a reply.
  5. Adams most recent interview re: Royle has him down as backroom staff, suggesting no deviation from the structure as he isn''t officially on the management board. Curious that they wouldn''t put someone of Royle''s stature on that Board though.
  6. Fair enough. Final picking of brains: McNally never mentioned Royle''s role at all: The Canaries are hoping to name their chosen candidate in the role next week, with the technical director to be part of a new FOUR-SEAT football board. “In terms of the structure, we have got a football management board in place now that I will chair,” said City chief executive David McNally. “The manager is on that board alongside a head of recruitment responsible for identifying players, and then a technical director – who I stress is not a director of football. Which would be McNally, Adams, Director of Recruitment, and the Technical Director (which he said would look after sports science aspects etc) So why have they deviated from the original structure?
  7. This is a very ill thought out opinion. Did you have any idea what Holt brought to the club in a coaching capacity previously? Did you do any research into his role or even care at the time? What do you know about Royle''s attitude to and knowledge of football? People like yourself with such opinions just take the name with a shallow assessment of character, and decide we''re doomed. Come on. Why not actually think about it?
  8. If you''re right, then it works. If the transfer plans work, and the right players fit the template we should have a successful system and a good season. I think this ''football consultant'' thing from left field threw my understanding of how it works. (Didn''t Parma post the full circle thing after Royle''s appointment though?) Thanks for allaying my fears.
  9. Purple: If what you say is true it makes more sense. Though if Royle is to be a DoF (calling him football consultant deflects attention away from some of the bad PR associated with the term) and if Parma Ham is right about the wheel coming full circle.... This suggests someone previously employed by the club. Did we have someone in that role before (dealing with the sports science side) who could be set to return?? To the poster posting about Malky and Zola, my post doesn''t ''fall down'' as I''m not arguing they were approached. If they weren''t, then all the better, as the Board''s thinking looks less confused. I want Adams to have been the only candidate which may in fact have been the case. If it was it places a lot of faith in him though, as his tactics and coaching need to be able to carry through the club philosophy- which would explain Royle''s presence if they are working to an agreed blueprint.
  10. For those saying Royle is the TD (taken from the City Confirm Coaching Team article on the official site) "The Club plan to announce the new technical director shortly and are currently interviewing a number of candidates for the position of director of recruitment." Read more at http://www.canaries.co.uk/news/article/city-confirm-coaching-team-1593403.aspx#eI06Zzk3qbSdby9J.99
  11. There''ll still be a technical director. Not the same thing as football consultant. That''s exactly my point though. There seems to be confused thinking about the roles, and we don''t know if they can work together. If the ''Norwich Way'' (urgh) includes the play style then the manager''s tactics need to adhere to the playing style being taught throughout the club or else the end product suffers. So either the club knew who the TD would be when they appointed Adams or else it seems like a shot in the dark.
  12. So allegedly we go out in pursuit of a manager and approach those with apparently radically different ideals. If Malky and Zola, for example, were both actual candidates, one has a very regimented philosophy, the other very fluid. This doesn''t fit with McNally saying the manager would be signed up to adhere to a club philosophy if we were already chasing managers with radically different philosophies. It also appears to make no sense that we have Adams in place who we know likes fast counter-attacking football where the squad suits it, and have appointed Joe Royle to advise on a club philosophy that can''t have been put in place yet as we don''t yet have a technical director to oversee it. By the time our setup is complete we''ll have Adams, Robson, Royle, Holt, McNally AND the Technical Director all micromanaging the football side. If it works, it could be excellent. But it just seems like there''s too many cooks...and that''s not counting Delia! Someone explain how the pieces fit to form a cohesive team? If Robson, Holt and Adams coach, if Royle is just an advisor to Adams why hire him? It seems like confused thinking with what the Board saying it wants to do colliding with what it appears to be doing. I want to be wrong and until proven otherwise as a supporter I give my full backing to the appointments.
  13. Non-question. If the setup is right, he scores goals. Doesn''t matter what the ethos of the squad is or what they''ve done before. That''s not how football works.
  14. This particular ''Newton'' alias will disappear along with many other pointless trolls who don''t understand football when it is widely realised that in the context of the Championship we''re actually going to have a good season. If you think no transfer activity in May puts us at a disadvantage, you don''t understand how football works. Therefore, I struggle to debate against that.
  15. Broadstairs is right. One last payday for Lambert in a comfortable backup position to give them the option of a target man which they currently lack.
  16. If we''re going to play fast counter attacking football to get the best out of Adams'' protege Josh Murphy/ Redmond / Bennett et al...then a 4-3-3 is coming a mile off and both RVW and Hooper should be sold- and yes, the likes of Chris Wood brought in. But if Becchio wants to stay and play under Adams (no idea on his views on that) then we already have the ideal man to lead the line in a 4-3-3, a target man with decent feet. Think a sh*t Olivier Giroud
  17. Someone take the keyboards away from the passionate casuals Nothing to spend? Bloody hell. That said, I don''t care if we don''t buy anyone. We don''t necessarily need to. We need to offload three or four top earners who don''t want to be here, replace them with youth players who want to play first team football, and get a simple, counter-attacking system....say a 4-3-3 with focus on creating overloads on the flanks when we get forwards, and allow the talented players we possess to play with freedom. Certainly in the context of the Championship, we already have a very strong squad.
  18. Furthermore re: the ideas that a) you need a ''no 10'' to play a 4-5-1b) that a 4-5-1 necessarily contains a ''no 10'' or c) that it is a basic notation of space, not the way in which players were requested to operate within that space which dictated our failure. Take your pick as to which one is more hilarious, as they''re all pretty funny.
  19. Is he? I highly doubt it. How do you justify that? Gnabry would destroy the Championship. He''ll be used regularly by Arsenal next season or if they sign well on loan at a Prem team max. Chalobah is a more viable shout on loan (I didn''t realise you meant on loan initially) But with Shaw about to sign for United, and the fact I see no evidence for Olsson being better than Buttner, I think you really have overstated his ability.
  20. Hahahaha. First Chalobah and Gnabry at Norwich, now Martin Olsson at left-back for Man United.... Do you live in the real world mate?
  21. Quick, let''s scapegoat that Pilkington for expressing sly irritation that he hasn''t featured in the first team when fit of late.
  22. Anticipating the play is more in terms of tracking runners than making interceptions. I would attribute his interception making to his strong work in closing down more than any actual skill in anticipation
  23. I agree with what you say about stats not telling the whole story but what is this utter b0ll0x about Johnson''s consistency? I think he commits far too many fouls, is poor in terms of anticipating the play, is too easy to dribble past, gives the ball away too often. He is however good in the air, makes interceptions often ...and very committed and determined, which helps when we are closing down against better teams. He doesn''t anticipate the next pass from the opposition very well. He is also crucially inconsistent, as shown by his very wavering overall match rating (which yes, are based on stats)...but what they do show is that he fails to adhere to what is expected of him in two of every three games (5.8 vs 7.5 out of 10) across our final ten prem games. He''s likeable because of his endeavours...but he just isn''t very good at football.
  24. Phahahahahaha Gnabry and Chalobah I think this Jimmy Smith lives in Football Manager land
×
×
  • Create New...