Jump to content

Hughtons P45.2

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Hughtons P45.2

  1. Posted

    Second favourites..... "that means nothing as we''re not the favourites so we will be fine" :)

    Even when we were not fav 2nd fav etc we''ve been small odds for ages. But more importantly than what bookies think A LOT of fans who watch us at the ground viewing the whole of what''s going on can see it''s just not happening and we will know far more than a bookie will as they don''t watch us week in week out.

  2. Posted

    Lol vanwink... to put us down??? You mean they can see the blatantly obvious but you don''t want to hear that so we''re Much lesser fans than you and now we all hate the club. In reality tho every bloody one of us wants us to stay up just we can see on current form we WILL GO DOWN!! Now what''s going to change that?? Convince me please and another thing because the bookies have us at a higher price means naff all because if every favourite won then why would there be bookies to go with that the odds are pathetically small, but marginally better than a couple and how many go down??? All this aside the new goal scorer we signed in January should turn these chances into goals won''t he?? Oh we didn''t get one that''s strange as this "bad lucks" been going on a while hasn''t it??

  3. Posted

    Out of interest what happens to his bonus IF he''s been saying to all the others that coco needs to go for months yet they''ve overruled him continuously (I don''t think that''s the case tho genuinely if he wanted him gone he''s apparently astute I''m sure he could get them all on side) but I''m curious tho

  7. Posted

    He did well with Birmingham with limited resources, but Newcastle went from strength to strength when he left despite the uproar from magpies and the media and even other fans Including myself. Now tho I can see why they got rid and wish we had of a long long time ago. Yeah he''s nice but nice doesn''t get points and tbh him being so nice just makes him look more of a clown "yeah we lost but they were great, so we''re we, fans are nice from both sides referee was great even the person who spat on me was nice, also I''d like to thank my neighbour he''s been keeping my wife company while I''m away, infact I found his boxers under my bed they were purple and purples a nice colour" SERIOUSLY MAN UP COCO and start saying how it is pleaseeeeeee. Also I notice he''s Very NICE but not nice enough to walk from a job that he''s out of his depth doing without the pay for dismissal.

  9. Posted

    LDC- "In the last three games I''ve seen three very good performances at which we attacked and looked strong for the most part"

    Excellent how many points did we get again or is there a new rule now that a "great performance" is 4 points???

    So 3 games 1 point right some workings out 12 games left so that''s 4 groups of 3 so times by 1 (point) equals 4points will that be enough do you recon LDC???? ( course it will be you''ve said all season and last that it''s going to come good soon, well it will for you playing all the northern championship clubs next season, save you driving to far in the rain)

  10. Posted

    Wow how dare you o.p nobody''s allowed to criticise McNicey (apparently). The blokes a joke gives it the death before relegation but it doesn''t look that way to me.

    No A.M or even a forward in January when it was obvious to every man and his dog.

    What did he think (privately) after w.ham, fulhamX2, LUTON, man city (no show) seriously it''s pathetic.

    Also bailed from twitter at first sign of trouble. R McNasty LOL what a joke.

    Goes after 1x Micro brewer (canary promotion ale) and the lad who leaked the kit after his\marketing screw up!!

    He''s as big a joke as coco if not even bigger at least he''s just a clown, yet McNicey''s a bull pooping clown.

    If we go down I''ll wanna see what he calls "death before relegation" no doubt he''ll sack coco and think he''s a fans favourite even tho he''s as bloody responsible

  15. Posted

    On the contrary Zac, I believe people that are quite happy to persevere with coco are the ones taking the Michael also how little old norwich is just putting up with any old dross (as we''re a small club, limited funds so why aim high) that is the sort of things that people take the pee out of the club for. However other fans etc I couldn''t give a monkeys about BUT I find it astonishing that some of OUR OWN fans think that it''s all about to change "let''s just give him time, as we''re improving etc etc" I don''t think they realise what a precarious we''ve slumped to which would appear to be correct for the ''''bored'''' also as they didn''t adapt to the current situation in January when it was clear to most that things were not looking good. Then those around us strengthened and to be fair I would say it''s started to pay off for them all. So as they push on were left stationary with some STILL saying "time time give him time, it''s all going to be ok" time will tell AND I PROMISE I hope I''m wrong but I don''t see things rapidly improving anytime soon do you tho???

  17. Posted

    Why thankyou Nutty Nigel, what a compliment when coming from such a pink''un superstar like yourself. Are you trying to beat Monty in the race to a million pink''un superstar posts (in which the players have to write the least amount of letters and never talk about the subject named in the thread title). Well its looking close for you both :)

  19. Posted

    [quote user="jb"]

    In my view (and it’s just my view), our football in the first half last night was something of a revelation, and unlike anything we’ve seen since Hughton took charge – a fluid 4-2-3-1 with attackers interchanging (see Snodgrass’ chance), the ball played quickly through the middle and box-to-box support from both Tettey and Johnson.  Far from the rigid, predictable wing play that we’ve become used to.  Things changed in the second half, though – Fer dropped further back and we reverted to the more typical 4-5-1/4-3-3, concentrating our attacks down the flanks.  I’ve been trying to work out the justification for the change, and have come up with the following reasoning:

    1)      our most likely attacking threat throughout the first half had been Redmond, so it makes sense to channel our attacks through him

    2)      having 3 deeper-lying midfielders allowed the full backs to become more involved in the West Ham half – they barely got forward in the first 45, but Olssen in particular was notably more positive in the second

    3)      perhaps the introduction of Boriello for Cole at half time signaled a change in approach from West Ham, playing shorter balls through the middle which could be covered by having Fer sitting a little deeper

     

    The thing is, West Ham’s approach didn’t really change at all (they just seemed to try and hit Downing with long balls rather than Cole), and our attacks became so predictable that West Ham snuffed out Redmond’s threat almost entirely by doubling up on him.  With Snodgrass, Redmond and Hooper (and to an extent Fer) all switching positions in the first half, the West Ham defence were far less able to concentrate on a single player.  Trying to get the full backs more involved is a positive move, but clearly the wrong one as it came at the expense of Fer’s (and Johnson’s) attacking remit.  We were doing fine with a new system in the first half, so why change things in the second?

     

    Hughton’s answer to all this was, rather than revert to the system that had served us well in the first 45, to withdraw the player most able to hurt West Ham (Redmond), and remove our most mobile forward (Hooper).  Rather than seeing a system which wasn’t working and fixing it (something that would’ve been simple to do as he’d already seen the solution working fine for 45 minutes!) he solidified our return to type and we created pretty much nothing.  Perhaps the change in personnel and the added option of hitting long balls to Elmander was intended to make us more solid and likely to get a point – what actually happened was that West Ham were handed the momentum at a time where we COULD have changed things and gone for the win, simply by reverting to the system used in the first half.  Of course, there are no guarentees (especially with our strikers’ form at the moment!) but the whole situation reeks of a lack of belief/courage from the man giving the instructions from the touch line.

     

    A lot has been said about last night’s substitutions, so sorry if this is re-treading old ground, but I wanted to try and understand Hughton’s mindset and intentions… I think I more-or-less do, and can only conclude that he’s lost belief not only in his players, but also in himself.  Whether or not a change would make any difference now is very debatable (and I don’t want to turn this into an in/out post), but I really believe that a fundamental change in mindset is essential to our chances of staying up.  There was good, positive football last night – but when push came to shove the manager retreated into his shell. 

     

    Ready to be shot down…

    JB

    [/quote]

    Jb which half do you think we should of reverted to, out of interest??? 100% agree tho. Totally bizarre. As usual tho a few came and pointed out why it was the correct substitutions (apparently). Was it unexpected??? Not really nothing comes as a shock now after the last 19 months really!

  21. Posted

    I agree also, that if one comes and does keep us up it would open more opportunities for them and they may even be kept on here. But if they''re only wanting part time work they may not want to and that''s the onnly reason I could see a world class temp manager being out of work anyway. But we''re screwed if we continue as we are doing 12games 50% loss rate and then the fact the last few games!! It doesn''t look good really
×
×
  • Create New...