danielsroundabout

A number of posters here are suggesting Alex Neil should use the window to buy a captain. That''s a new one on me in football. I''ve known it to happen in county cricket but in football, isn''t it always the case that you assemble your team/squad and then appoint the best-suited (I don''t mean dressed) as captain?

I don''t see the need to condemn the OP and others as being negative or dampening a joyous weekend. Simply provoking debate on how folks see the structure sorting itself out under Alex Neil is something many fans have been discussing. With Holt, Phelan, his guy from Hamilton and McNally mentioning that Adams''s next position could be with the first team, it''s obvious that some sort of cull will be necessary.

No city-till-I-die, that''s what he had (in the plural).

Looking at the new manager, what he is saying and how he comes over, has re-kindled the excitement around NCFC. To attach today''s result to his influence would be wrong - he''s had no time with the players but I am sure that the general buzz surrounding his arrival would have given everybody a much needed lift. He is abkle to demonstrate years of leadership as a captain, coach and for the past couple of years as a successful manager. None of which was remotely applicable to the outgoing man. This takes me to the subject which has been discussed in detail by the fans - who is making the decisions on these appointment issues. For me, the person(s) appointing Gunn and Adams could not be the same person(s) who sought out and appointed Lambert and Neil. The qualities evident in the latter two and the potential that it gave them when appointed, was completely and utterly missing as far as the other two were concerned. Where does Hughton stand in terms of suitability at the time he was recruited? Well I would say he was not at all bad. Granted, we persevered with him for far too long but on the basis of his track record when first appointed, not a bad decision. So my hunch, from somebody with not the slightest clue as to what goes on in the corridors of power at Carrow Road, is that the two Scots were identified and appointed by McNally and the two ex-players were the choice of the majority shareholders. The only thing that gives me any doubts that this is the case was the way in his first interview after introducing Neil to the press, McNally really went overboard on the wonderful qualities of Adams and the importance of getting him back in some role. He even mentioned that he could again be involved around the first team in some capacity. And I was giving McNally credit for the good decisions coming out of the club!

How people can be critical of this appointment when most of them applauded and expressed excitement at the appointment(s) of Adams, beggars belief. Granted, the new man does not have the benefit of those commentary years, sitting beside dear old Roy Waller and Chris Goreham. But by this early age, he has demonstrated an ability to put together and organise a team that has become successful. Every appointment is a gamble, there are no guarantees but this time, unlike the last, I feel there are factors which should generate optimism.

Regardless of what success or failure is experienced by the next manager, it will not alter the correctness of the decision to change. And yet even now, there are individuals who would have persevered with Adams for longer. Many are making noises long the lines of what a great bloke he is for falling on his sword. It doesn''t strike me as being likely that he fell. I am thinking that he was pushed and that the future arrangement for continued employment is simply a device to avoid paying up the remainder of a three-year contract. I don''t think the supporters should be too liberal with their plaudits, after all, he has done nothing much other than hung around just about long enough to destroy our promotion chances.

Its a pity the board or should I say owners are not as quick to concede that they have got it wrong, as the posters on here. We follow the Gunn appointment with the Adams joke. We delay the removal of Hughton to the point where the replacement has no price and then, less than a year later, delay the appointment of a proper manager long enough to eliminate first season success. Well done gain Mr. McNally - give that man a bonus.

Creative midfielder, you must have hit the bottle the moment the final whistle blew. We have already wasted half a season on Adams, taking us from nailed-on certs for auto promotion to also ran status, doubting our ability to even get a shot at a play-off place. Now, you suggest something even more outrageous than his original appointment - giving him three years to build a new youth-based team. What on earth do you see in him that suggests we should waste further time on the guy? And this real Norwich talk confirms the conclusion I was coming to regarding your views. It is the originally large but now, rapidly diminishing numbers who bought into the Adams brainwave, who think there is mileage in this former player thing. Putting together a good team with a style of play that is successful is not the preserve solely of ex Norwich players - Bryan Gunn will confirm that for you.

We deserve a proper manager not a pretend one who hopes to become one in the years ahead. His capability and performance are both inferior to the guy he replaced and his task is simpler than Hughton''s. I am certainly not advocating a return to Hughton but do note that he was almost succeeding (in escaping the drop) in the toughest of leagues, with a squad which was not up to it. Adams on the other hand, is failing to succeed in a vastly inferior league, with a squad generally considered to be the best in the division and with cash available to further strengthen. I tend to agree with those who think we are stuck with Adams for some time yet but still think the supporters should not go silent on the subject. The penny eventually dropped as far as Hughton was concerned, albeit when it was too late. So why leave the board alone, why let them drift aground again, just as they did twelve months ago? A new appointment of a candidate with some experience and a track record showing some success will give no guarantees but will increase our chances. The appointment of Adams was a mindless action from the very start. A few diehard followers latched on to it as an astute piece of insight from the board and a few of them still pretend it to be the case. They will catch up with reality eventually but I am concerned that a growing number of critics of the past year are becoming resigned to the fact that nothing will be done. Even the EDP are printing stats which indicate that we have reached our quota of allowable defeats for the season already, if we hope to gain automatic promotion that is. Well done Neil. Their figures, looking at previous year stats of the two automatic promotions, concentrate on the target everybody said we had to reach. A target which was generally thought to be achievable with the resources at our disposal. Play-off places were and are considered too much of a risk, only a 25% chance even when you''ve reached them. So just a couple of actions needed for the new year Mr. McNally. Get a competent guy in place to give our team some direction and if you are feeling public spirited, follow the lead of the Network Rail guy who cocked-up over Christmas by refusing to accept your ill-deserved bonus.

If he was of a mind to take on a promotion challenge, it would have been before we had frittered away enough points to all but rule out the automatic route.

Cantiaci Canary summarises the whole appointment debacle perfectly (page 2 of this thread). That certain sections thought it a good idea is proof that you will never get total support for any candidate but that is no reason to dip out and make a joke appointment. Samwam27 has hit on the very word I have been looking for to describe his (and my) feelings on hearing the Adams confirmation. He was "dumbfounded."

He''s only been in the job for half a season but I am tired of the inane comments he keeps trotting out. This one he keeps playing after each reversal - "it simply was not good enough". Followed by more great insight, comparing our play today with the performance against Millwall. As others have said, we''ve been there before on various levels and learnt nothing on any of them. From repeating the mistake they had made with appointing Gunn to failing to axe Adams, just as they did with Hughton. There''s one thing I find difficult to understand when reading comments from those who support this perseverance route with Adams. The same people regularly state that we have the best players, the best squad in the championship. But they seem unable to question why performances are not reflecting this. As unsavoury as it is to do so, look down the A140 and see what is being achieved there with a team of free transfers. Could it be that somebody is experienced at getting the best out of them?

Time right for him to go? Well there''s no wrong time for it, just like there was no right time to appoint him. The "we support any decision brigade" frequently tell us how we can beat any team in the division on our day. Well it''s a pity the matches are not scheduled on one of our days more often. Deludedly, they cite performance in the second half of previous seasons where teams have started badly and turned it round on the run-in. But they seem to ignore the fact that these other performances were from teams with a manager.

LDC wrote: Definitely not. I''ve said before about the pyramid or Christmas tree formation which imo is a solid way to play. Not much different to 433 really, except that the two wide men cutting in and out from the wings behind a striker is a good ploy. Don''t mock it until you''ve tried it. After all, the formation was advertised yesterday as 4222.......... Its a Christmas tree alright, just needs a fairy to top it off. Adams I suggest.

Rudd Whittaker Cuellar Miquel Garrido Tettey O''Neill Ollson Redmond Murphy Lafferty Desperate times call for desperate measures but that suggestion from LDC can''t be serious, can it? Two central defenders who can''t be trusted to start, even in times of dire necessity and not even by the clown who signed them. Whittaker has been tried, tested and found to be wanting at right back. Ollson in mid-field, really? And no place for the likes of Howson, Hooper and Jerome. I hope the suggestion was posted as a wind-up, in which case I have fallen for it.

Criticising him puts you at risk of being accused of having an agenda on this forum. What depths he has to take us to before he is unloaded remains to be seen. Unfortunately, point of no return is looking to be the case. The Barclay were chanting his name in the first half but there was no apparent mention of the word out. What was that all about? A bit like the AGM where 300 fawning simpletons could not muster a single question aimed at highlighting the atrociousness of the decision to appoint him in the first place.

For me, Ricardo''s excellent coverage of events at the AGM served to dispel doubts I had about the comprehensiveness of Archant''s reporting. Without Ricardo''s report, I would not have believed that not one of the 300 or so attendees was prepared to put the directors under the spotlight on the subject of appointing Hughton''s successor. Its all very well for them to repeat their apology for the mistakes in the timing of the sacking of Hughton but nothing is said about the calamitous appointment of Adams. Nor is there any public recognition of the current sleepwalking as they seem to be repeating the errors that occurred a year ago. Most people I speak to at the matches or generally through the week, feel broadly the same on the Adams subject and yet, not one person at the AGM saw fit to mention it. Was this because Adams was quite literally the elephant in the room?

Why is it so necessary for the initial responders to the OP to dissect his every word and question the fairly normal conclusions he drew from his brief encounter? My guess is it''s because disparaging references were made about Adams, whose deluded supporters feel he should never be criticised. Why else would they rear up against an exiled Canary?

The words Promotion and Adams should not feature on the same page, let alone in the same phrase. Anybody who kept an eye on him and Holt on Saturday would have seen the traumatised faces of a couple who had absolutely zero to offer their team on the pitch. The one occasion they did appear to be communicating was when a Brighton player was receiving treatment. Four or five of the team went to the dug-out for a drink and our comedians kept two of them talking well after play had re-started. I was criticised on one thread for referring to Adams as a fraud and yes, I know he is a really genuine guy. But the point I was trying to make is that he knows, everybody knows he is hopelessly unsuited to his current role and the supporters are being cheated in not having capable management in place for such a critical season. Whilst he must have struggled to believe that he had been offered the position, he was obviously not going to say no to it. And now, he will not walk away for personal financial reasons but McNally & Co really must admit their shambolic decision and move him on.

Yankeecanary should concern himself not with trivial points of grammar in the OP but concentrate on the point being made. Namely that replacing Hughton with Adams was always a disastrous decision, from the frying pan to the fire.

Holtcantshoot makes the point that we all see the game differently and I agree that is true. Having said that, I can''t for the life of me see how the first Brighton goal can be pinned on Ruddy. He''s not enjoying his best spell of form at present but don''t add to his woes unfairly.

Adams is trying to save face in his interviews by claiming that it was his decision to appoint Phelan. He then goes on to mention time after time, the amount of experience he will bring with him. If he realises the importance of experience in these matters, why the hell does he think he can function with none whatsoever? Those deluded individuals who think they are real supporters simply because they blindly back each and every decision really do need to look at themselves. Our decision-makers (or lack of) have made a total hash 2014 every step of the way and even now they continue to sleep walk just as they did this time last year. And there is an element on here who can see no wrong in the running of the club. Incredible.

I bet the graph wasn''t heading as dramatically south as it is today.

This season there is absolutely no excuse for carrying on with Adams. Last season, there was always a side to the argument that Hughton had something of a track record and would come good in time. Obviously, Adams has no such record so why should we think he will turn things round? Watching him recently and especially today, clueless was the only word that came to mind.

That we are still in touch is down to the start we had. A purple patch, a honeymoon period for Adams, call it what you will but the facts are that we have settled down into a prolonged period of highly mediocre football and unless the trend is quickly reversed, it will be too late. Our very best chance of a Prem. return will have been wilfully wasted.