Harleston Canary

Mel Henderson is one of the most objectionable journalists I have ever come across. I had the misfortune to live South of the border a few years ago and took extreme displeasure in the drivel he wrote in the Ipswich Evening Star. Basically he spent the whole time slagging off Norwich (and not just the football team). If for whatever reason I wanted to get angry, I''d turn to a Mel Henderson article.

http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2011/04/norwich-citys-remarkable-transformation.html If you''ve got some time on your hands and are interested in a really well-written article about City''s recent turnaround, this is worth a read. Makes you realise the difficult financial back-ground to our recent on-pitch revival. OTBC

Well said. Let''s not forget Holt was signed by Gunn, so a little nod to the big man there. I have to say though that it''s probably down to Lambert''s man management skills and installing him as captain, that has led to his performances over the last two seasons.

Agree 100%. You have identified one of the key things that separates Lambert''s team from previous city squads, most obviously Roeder''s. Rather than sign players with a ''reputation'', but nothing to prove, he goes for hungry lower league players and manages them well. Seeing the coverage on Sky last night got me thinking about Dion again - one of the few recent pre-Lambert players to be consistently good for us. He was picked up as an out of contract ''has been(?)'' at the time and went on to be the cornerstone of our team. There are many similarities between our squad and the one that Blackpool were promoted with last year. Did anyone really rate Charlie Adam or Gary Taylor-Fletcher before last year? Whatever happens from now on - well done Lambert on your signings and your policy of giving people who want it a real chance to prove themselves.

Was yesterday''s penalty shout the first example of a ref not giving us a decision because he doesn''t trust Holt?  I wasn''t at the game, but saw the TV highlights and it looked pretty clear cut to me...

Been thinking about this and my initial reaction was ''this is getting embarrassing'' with Holt falling over at the slightest sneeze and players being sent off as a result. But, on deeper reflection I have no problem with it - as Warnock acknowledged, many other players do it and it''s been going on for ages. My concern was that ref''s will get wise and start not giving Holt decisions where there is any doubt. However, an important consideration is what it does to the thinking of his markers - any doubt, or worries that ''he''s going to go down if I touch him'' gives Holt the immediate upper hand, and when you''re talking about a goal-scoring opportunity that can be crucial. I remember Andy Johnson gaining a similar reputation at Palace (different type of player I know), and it definitely didn''t do him or his team any harm. OTBC

As mentioned by others, the real warning for any such plans can be found at the bottom of the A140. They mistakenly expanded Portman Road when their existing ground was over-flowing with glory-hunters as they had one good season in the Premier League. The glory-hunters are long gone, and if I remember correctly they couldn''t even sell-out for the derby last year. At the risk of being shot-down, they have a very similar size fan-base (with less loyalty, granted). A bigger stadium with swathes of empty seats is not the same as a slightly smaller one, full to bursting. The problem for us is that if you expand and remove the need for such large numbers of season-ticket holders (because they can buy game-by-game), this then causes cash-flow/budgeting problems for the club because they are less sure about their income season to season. This also, paradoxically, makes it less likely to be able to secure/finance any future borrowings because the ''security'' of some of the 19,000 season ticketholders and their funds is lost. People may disagree, but I think we''d struggle to sell out a stadium much bigger than 28-29,000 capacity. An expansion to this size is not economically viable and would risk empty seats (albeit only 3-4000) for some of the less desirable games. Raising ticket prices would have to be part of any financing package for an extension, and this would have the effect of reducing demand as well. It all points to keeping a moderately-sized stadium that''s full every week. Let''s face it, if you plan ahead it''s quite easy for members and casual supporters to get to watch games during the year. OTBC. Let''s have a win tonight, especially if it leads to Bob Mills having a whinge about us next time he''s on Fighting Talk.

What a difference a few months makes. I, like many others have spent recent deadline days praying for exciting signings, to no avail... For once I actually got my wish - a nice quiet day with no exits from our talented squad. One of the more satisfying ends to a transfer window, I must say. Onwards friends!

[quote user="Nuff Said"]I seem to remember us singing "You''re just a small town near Derby" to Forest, and probably the other way round too, so I don''t think we can complain too much. [/quote] At least this makes geographical sense - how can anywhere be a small town IN Ipswich?  Oh dear.  And as somewhere else said, it''s not even ''near'' either.

Last games of the season when we have the ability to decide our own fate...

Andy D''urso

I was watching the game Saturday and me and my mate said the same thing. The problem, as mentioned by others is that it is the best formation for the players we have. The thing that worries me, as illustrated by the Leeds and Swindon game, is that we dominate possession for long periods with no cutting edge - the benefits of the system become its weakness. At the risk of being shot down - what has Wes done for us recently? Yes, he gets lots of the ball, yes he ''looks dangerous'', but all our recent goals have come from full-backs breaking forwards or early balls into the box from wide positions. What really concerns me is that we are left exposed defensively in wide positions - fortunately something Swindon could not exploit. Maybe it''s the best of a bad job, and maybe it''s good enough to deal with the best that League 1 has to offer..?

[quote user="canaryfan68"]Lambert is not another Roeder, he is more like Martin o''Neil who selects his players on how they play and not how they could play. Reputations seem to count for very little and rightly so. Hoolahan looks like he can''t be bothered when he takes the pitch,and Doherty has never been a great defender just a great club person. I think Lambert is a breath of fresh air and is taking the club in the right direction. I don''t believe that every Business owner gets on well with all their employees so why should it be any different with a manager and his players who are overpaid with inflated egos?[/quote] Exactly what I was going to say - Hoolahan has not played enough good names in a Norwich shirt to warrant the adulation he receives from some quarters.  Lambert plays it as he sees it, and you have to remember that even this early on, time is of the essence - we have to be picking up regularly.  To do this you need players who deliver consistently.  If that reduces the ''flair'' element of the team in the short-term, so be it. 

That paper is the devil''s bog roll.  ''Free'' is too expensive if you ask me.

[quote user="suffolk canary"] Great post, wholeheartedly agree.  I can''t see it either.  I think it smacks of a certain level of ignorance to make the suggestions you quote.  Leicester played ''football'' and got out last season.  League One teams are in their position because in most cases they are made up of players who are capable of playing third tier football. The only thing I might add is the level of protection (not) given to so-called ''flair'' players by referees.  That could have a limiting effect on certain players, but I can''t support that with evidence. [/quote] To clarify: ''ignorance'' on the part of others - not you in your post. Re-read my comment and it is a bit ambiguous.  Sorry.