Canary On The Wire

Turner is consistent, but we appear to have ''Bassong de Wolverhampton''.....Captain Casual is indecisive and dallies too long on the ball, oh for the mercurial Bass of yesteryear

Irrespective of the various brigades, I have always been against mid-season sackings as while they can be masterstrokes they can equally be disastrous....I guess I am a bit non-committal and ''jam tomorrow'' on Hughton''s future.However, what I do know is this. Lately we have been on a decent run which Fulham have halted, but even as we did pick up two clean sheets on the road and a hard earned point v Swansea I still found myself asking the same old question.What the bloody hell is our plan?It seems like because we can''t create anything in the middle of the park due to Fer having to concentrate on defending too much in the absence of Tettey (therefore no decent through balls), we end up with Olsson or Whittaker hitting it to Elmander in the channels and attempting to pick up the second ball (that is when Redmond isn''t taking on the whole team and smashing it over the bar). As soon as Elmander went off yesterday I knew we were never getting anything from the game, we can''t work the ball into the box for Ricky and Hoops, and without the outlet of Johan we had no chance for real creativity....because we just don''t have a plan. Anyone want to tell me in terms of a strategic approach how Hughton is intending we score a goal other than ''lump it at Johan and hope for the best'' because I have genuinely no idea.With Worthy, Foley and Livermore I used to joke with those I sit with about ''three wise men and their cunning plan'' when things took a turn for the worse.... I have to say I feel the same about Hughton, Calderwood and Trollope.Shame, CH is a nice bloke.

No. Never.If you want to live in the past, there''s a club down the road

Always in Wetherspoons before the game mate, in a green away top from our first Prem season out by the river.Feel free to come see me. Obviously because I''m 19, I can''t spend a lot of my spare time studying football because I''m passionate about the game and develop a good understanding of it, as a by-product of which I do speak strongly with my opinion because I believe in it?No need to be aggressive, that in itself shows an immaturity that I would be ashamed of...at only 19.

I really don''t understand what some of our fans want.People seem surprised that Swansea had more possession than us, when they are one of the best sides in the league at keeping the ball with one of the highest (if not the highest) pass completion rate. Even when they were comfortably beaten 3-0 by Man City at the Etihad, who had more possession? You guessed it. Swansea. (54-46).The 4-4-2 that worked in fits and starts off the ball against West Brom really came into its own here, with us frustrating Swansea time and again as they attempted to break into our final third and limiting them to half chances- and when we broke forwards you always felt we would create a decent chance- and it showed, as for all Swansea''s possession we were a lot more incisive and created more chances. Hooper''s goal- just wow. Fantastic clean half volley, leaving Vorm with no chance. That''s the quality he possesses. I sit in the City Stand, have done since I was a four year old kid (making this my fifteenth year in the morgue....I''m not dead yet....I think) and the fans around me are absolute idiots. Honestly. Ironic cheers when Elmander won the ball, referring to him as a ''donkey that needs to be shot'' when he injured his wrist. Sure, he''s not the most sprightly of players, but he works so hard off the ball and has been responsible for bringing our forward players into the game on many an occasion, he provided the key pass to Hoolahan for Hooper''s Palace goal, and chested it down brilliantly for him to thump home emphatically today. Becchio is really no better than Johan and the way the ball fails to stick up the pitch when Becchio is on is very telling for me. He''s good in the air but not quite so dextrous with his chest/on the ground, something Elmander does very well.The more intelligent among you will be able to see that we had the better of the game today, and Swansea had goal-line clearances to thank for their hard earned away point as Turner and Bassong looked to put the game to bed as well as a Hooper shot which Vorm had to get down well to save. To create more chances than the opposition with far less ball (and those of you who think we could have more possession than Swansea are deluded, as no one usually does) shows Hughton went about this game in exactly the right way, and had Pilks/ Snoddy been fit, would not have had to replace the knackered Redmond with Murphy, who for all the hype just isn''t ready for Premier League football yet in my opinion. That, and the fact that Elmander was also shattered and was replaced like for like with Becchio who simply didn''t do as well on the day, is the unfortunate reality of the injury problems we have, without which I do believe we would have gone on to win the game.As I left the ground, one solitary geezer huffed and puffed his way out the door muttering ''a loada piddlun rubbish....Hoots out! Hoots out!''You''re not a Norwich City fan. Oh dear, oh dear.

After his chillingly accurate 4-0 home win prediction for West Bromwich Albion last time out, Wiz is sure to be spot on again with his prediction of a 2-0 Swansea win on Sunday. Get your free bets on it lads!For the record, while the prediction of old Wiz holds no logic and aims only to provoke, the thinking man will note the number of goals that usually occurs in Norwich v Swansea, the fact that we are something of a bogey team of theirs and the fact that we are unbeaten in three at home, and go for a prediction that looks something likeNorwich 3-2 SwanseaHooper, Fer, Bassong                             Bony, Hernandez

"On a matchday I wasn''t enjoying the way we were playing - we were set up more defensively." - Grant Holt (who didn''t use your buzzword negative as far as I am aware) I would argue that a more defensive setup is not necessarily more negative. In the same way a more attacking setup is not necessarily positive,would you say that route one football is ''positive football''? I wouldn''t.We pass the ball well and move dynamically through midfield through the movement of Fer and Howson, as well as breaking runs from the likes of Redmond and Olsson. You see plenty of support for the attacks from Olsson, and Redmond is never shy in getting forward, Howson is always bursting to get on the ball and run and Fer is no stranger to being in forward areas- his goals and assists speak for themselves.People will point at goals scored and say ''look, negative'' but I don''t see that as the case. We are a positive side moving through the middle of the park, for definite. Where we fall down is in linking with the frontman. Hughton doesn''t seem to know how to get the best out of his strikers, but his recent move to support Hooper with wide midfielders coming narrow is commendable and has borne fruit. Just because Hughton has been unsuccessful in linking properly with RvW and latterly Hooper does not make his approach ''negative''. It makes it unsuccessful attacking football.

This idea of Hughton playing ''negative football'' is a complete and hilarious myth. We are a passing, progressive team. The problem is that by and large his approaches haven''t worked in the final third as of yet (although pushing wingers narrow to support Hooper has brought some joy of late).By all means criticise Hughton for playing unsuccessful attacking football...as that is what we have done on many occasions this season.But Hughton does not set his teams up to play negative football. This is a myth propagated by fans who need a pseudo-knowledgeable way of saying ''I don''t like our manager. I never have, and I never will.''If that''s your viewpoint, fair enough. But have the balls to say it rather than making up this ''negative football'' stuff. Thanks.

I would argue at least in Olsson''s case that his poor performance can be excused due to Fer playing on his wing. Fer, as brilliant as he is, was desperate to come narrow and influence the play- and that left Olsson 2 on 1 down the west Brom right for most of the game- and there''s not a full back in the world who comes out of 90 minutes of 2 v 1 looking good. I don''t believe it was worth playing Fer on the wing as his goal and assist came from central positions- I think we''d have had a slightly more comfortable ride had our left flank consisted of Garrido with Olsson LW. However, there is an argument that had we done that, with Hooper excelling in feeding off Elmander, Fer would have had to sit deep and been less available in forward areas to protect Howson.

These are facts.

Would make more sense for it to be ''he''s everywhere''

What with Hootun spending millions more than the teams around us and the fact we already had a Premier League quality squad I was sure we''d be in for at least a Europa League finish this year. We''re just a midtable outfit and it isn''t good enough for one of the country''s top 40 biggest clubs. Failing to  trouble United in the Cup is fine, it''s just the cup- but to play an average Chelsea under Mourinho, an Arsenal side with only one good striker, and a Man City side we confidently beat away last season just is not good enough. We need to get rid of Clueless now.

...and I can only assume the Environment Agency have Bassong and Bennett at the back

1-1, and I''m disappointed to hear Hughton''s out, it must be an anterior cruciate ability to understand football

Well, he''d lay the foundations reasonably well, but he''d have no real idea how to put the bricks on in the right order

I just can''t fathom the point of having a Category One academy if the players coming through are going to be learning Houghton''s negative football, it will hamper their development and ruin their careers. I can see Neil Addams having a serious fight with him at some point, it''s not good enough.

Wouldn''t touch Brucie with a barge pole. He has a wonderful relationship with Dr Allam and is the happiest and most content he has ever been at Hull. Plus they''re solid defensively even if they are typically goalshy and will be absolutely fine. Hughes is not a bad shout, mind you- though the Stoke board don''t strike me as trigger happy.

Watching Liverpool today was all too reminiscent of our struggle to provide RvW with the support he definitely needs. Without his Daniel Sturridge to link the play, Luis Suarez was an absolute pussycat. Sure, Liverpool had plenty of the ball (As will they against us) but the wingmen could not push high enough to plug the gap between the midfield and Suarez. This is because with no one to hold the ball up in the way Sturridge does, Liverpool were unable to bring Moses and Sterling into play. In much the same way, with no Elmander, Hooper/RvW do not get any real support from Snodgrass/Redmond/Pilkington because there is no willing focal point in the attack. Teams like Arsenal get away with this tactical model because Giroud is a decent finisher with good movement, but phenomenal hold up play- which does not facilitate a need for two up front. Teams like ourselves and Liverpool (dare I compare us) need someone supporting their Suarez/RvW/Hooper...or else no matter how much ball they get they will create precious little. I have long been an advocate of two up front, but never the RvW + Hooper combo some fans long for. This is because neither of those players have enough ability in terms of the target man- both need someone to feed off. I am convinced that playing Howson behind a front two of RvW and Elmander would be the answer to our goalscoring frailty. Howson could burst onto any ball won by Elmander and either feed it out wide to a winger/overlapping full back to cut back to another forward or have a shot himself. The only problem is that we would negate Fer''s strengths by forcing him to sit deep- we could get away with him pushing up if we had a sweeper keeper like Lloris, but Ruddy will never be that type of keeper. Against Liverpool, we must forget this talk of Hoolahan being a luxury and play him again as a narrow left winger  with Hooper and Elmander up front with Howson and Fer in central midfield.  This means Olsson must get forward and create overloads to link up with Wes (as I''d rather Martin sat back a bit as he isn''t quick enough to get back quickly enough, and if we play Redmond on the right he will need a bit more defensive support than Wes who is more experienced in terms of defensive positioning and tracking back). Do this, and Olsson and Redmond should get a lot of crossing opportunities through either overlapping Wes or Redmond''s own ability to get to the byline. Elmander can win those headers, Hooper can feed off him- and we can get a shock result away at Anfield with Elmander the key man- our Swedish sort of seriously slower Sturridge.

Southampton''s pressing game will be easily undone after the turn of the year as fatigue sets in. Do not be surprised to see them floating around in mid-table mediocrity come the end of the season. Also, why is ''used-to-be-a-defender'' in inverted commas, when he quite definitely was a full-back? Southampton have spent more money on building a better squad than us. I fully expect them to do better than us, as Lambert made a Championship squad look very good indeed (all credit to the man)- and the money Hughton has spent he has spent in order to keep us competitive and get our squad to mid-table Premier League level.Towards the end of Lambert''s tenure there was every evidence that his squad had most definitely been found out. Irrespective of the whys and wherefores- he didn''t stay and disprove that. Hughton then papered over the cracks in the next year to keep us up, and this year has built a squad with the ability to be midtable. That''s where it will be.

What? No one said anything about Archant paying you a dime Wiz old boy......Only you said that.....ah, the old guilt complex routine.

Ah, the old upset the apple cart routine

Paul Lambert didn''t press top teams for 90 minutes any more than Chris Hughton does.I respect the fact you''ve been in the know at Carrow Road for a number of years CUSDP, but that is extremely naive to think you can play a team with the quality of the top teams in this league and press them the whole game. Pressing leaves the midfield empty because it forces the central midfielders up onto and over the halfway line while the wingers are already committed to chasing the ball down. You want to give Mesut Ozil, Eden Hazard, Wayne Rooney, Sergio Aguero et al that kind of space be my guest.....I''ll see you in the Championship mate

I have made my mind up on Hughton but it hinges on my belief that he is at least good enough to keep us up. For me, as I do believe this- changing manager is always a lottery and one of three things will happen: we''ll get a manager who will send us down, we''ll get a manager who will keep the ship steady but won''t pull up trees, or we''ll get a manager who will progress us into ...a team who can actually score from open play. I think that lottery is too big a risk to take so i''d give Hughton this season- but if we finish 16th or 17th or thereabouts by virtue of the teams below us being more sh1te- I would be convinced that he will never progress us and we should definitely get rid in the close season. Mid-season, I am very against it.Of course, those who want rid will by and large believe his stewardship will send us down this year, so there''ll be no winning those fans over with this argument.I just feel that getting to the close season, trusting in Hughton to keep us up (as I believe he will) will allow us time in the close-season if we still haven''t progressed to scout Europe thoroughly for a Thomas Tuchel or a Paco Jemez.... (would love either of those).

Go on then Wiz, justify it:Here''s a tie breaker for you:Fraser Forster is a better goalkeeper than John Ruddy because:__________Didn''t think so mate.Personally I find it very difficult to judge Forster due to the poor quality of opposition he is against, and furthermore the fact that his defence will be massively superior to the strikers they face and I imagine without looking at the stats he faces fewer chances and an easier quality of chance to save than Ruddy. So I wouldn''t like to call it. But to say Forster is better than Ruddy is completely unfounded.

nah mate it''s a conspiracyit used to be houghton with two o''s to signify his penchant for a hard earned 0-0 drawbut it''s said that in the wake of heavy criticism and pressure from fans he changed it to appease them