I was quite hopeful for RVW tonight...

[NCFC198 2]

Lol anyone that still tthins rvw has a future at norwich is an idiot. The guy was a joke tonight. Any frailties he showed in his first season were amplified tonight.

Sadly hes a dud.

Anyone that hasn''t noticed that is not a fan because its clear to see

[NCFC198 2]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]No, he won''t get full support until he starts scoring, but "not full support" doesn''t mean being boo-ed. I wasn''t there tonight but I understand he was boo-ed. If so that''s a disgrace. Do these people think about the effect of their actions, and not just on RVW?[/quote]

Lol. The guys a joke

[NCFC198 2]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Rikki had a decent game which totally belied some of the venomous comments directed at him by some on this forum in recent times.

Whether or not his contribution was sufficient to justify his place in the squad at the expense of some of the other mouthwatering strikers recently touted on here remains in doubt.

Probably not.[/quote]

Again lol.

He did not have a decent game. He fucked a one on one, dived and slipped. That was his highlights from tonight. Hes done

[93vintage 16]

It would help if the lad had some decent service, I don''t think we''re really playing to his strengths. If we''d have lent him to the Hammers for the evening then he''d probably have scored a couple.I know that we were missing a couple of players, but our midfield need their attacking weaknesses coached out of them.

[morty 0]

I don''t want to spend yet another season desperately wishing that he will score, get the monkey off his back, and turn into the striker we all think we bought.

His average record, last season, in a league far weaker than the Premiership, doesn''t fill me with much confidence in his abilities.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

I thought it was particularly helpful those supporters that were laughing as soon as he as much touched the ball, complete with sarcastic ''C''mon Rickyyyyy''s!''. Embarrassing - IF confidence is his problem then many were not helping sadly.

[morty 0]

Agree Alex, this happens all too often. Ian Henderson was destroyed by some supporters, and some of the stick Whittaker took was embarrassing. Like you say, not sure why "supporters" think this helps anything.

[BroadstairsR 2,135]

Inadequates making themselves feel better by taking it out on what they perceive to be a weak link.

It''s a form of bullying and bullies often hunt in packs.

There is usually no other logical explanation for supporters booing their own because, from a footballing point of view, it undermines their expectations.

[Katie Borkins 1]

"Can''t polish a turd."

But you can wrap it up in our 3rd kit.

[lake district canary 4,530]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Inadequates making themselves feel better by taking it out on what they perceive to be a weak link.

It''s a form of bullying and bullies often hunt in packs.

There is usually no other logical explanation for supporters booing their own because, from a footballing point of view, it undermines their expectations.[/quote]

[Y]  People often feel they can do stuff in a group that they wouldn''t do normally because they are more anonymous and they think they can get away with it.   The effect of booing a player has been well discussed on here many times, but RVW has to rise above it - and I thought he did.  Still made the runs and put himself in good positions throughout the match.   When we start putting earlier crosses in, to match what he does, he might actually start scoring.  Booing though, helps no-one and in a friendly match and aimed at one of your own players, it is patently ridiculous.

[Van wink 2,994]

LDC " When we start putting earlier crosses in, to match what he does, he might actually start scoring. "

He had plenty of chances last night, we need to stop clutching at scores and accept he''s not good enough for City.

[lake district canary 4,530]

[quote user="Vanwink"]LDC " When we start putting earlier crosses in, to match what he does, he might actually start scoring. "

He had plenty of chances last night, we need to stop clutching at scores and accept he''s not good enough for City.[/quote]

He had three or four chances that I saw, wouldn''t call that "plenty".  There were however more occasions when he was in good positions where an accurate ball in would have seen him in.

[Van wink 2,994]

I don''t know the exact number LDC but it was at least four and there were some very good chances amongst them, they were all wasted.

How many do you think he would get in a PL game?

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

Ricky was Norwich''s best attacking player in the first half, but his confidence visibly left him after the one-on-one and he faded in the 2nd half.

Was impressed by his link up play and he showed good touches around the box, just every time he got into it things went wrong.

As others have said he won''t get that many chances in the Prem.

What was more worrying was how poor Hooper looked (as well as unfit), with Jerome currently injured Norwich are very reliant on Grabban unless anyone else is signed.

[NCFC198 2]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Vanwink"]LDC " When we start putting earlier crosses in, to match what he does, he might actually start scoring. "

He had plenty of chances last night, we need to stop clutching at scores and accept he''s not good enough for City.[/quote]

He had three or four chances that I saw, wouldn''t call that "plenty".  There were however more occasions when he was in good positions where an accurate ball in would have seen him in.

[/quote]

wow you people amaze me. The guy is useless. He won’t get three or four chances a premiership game, that is plenty of chances. Particularly when one is a one on one. The guy has lost it. It will never work out for him with us.

This thing about his movement and positioning is a bit of a myth. I could run and stand in space and then blame the quality of the other ten players.

Stop now.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,734]

Come on everyone, stop insulting your own and everyone elses intelligence.

I''m sure we''ve all been watching football long enough to recognise a good striker from one that isn''t ....put aside the price that we paid for him, Ricky Van Wolfswinkel is NOT a good striker, we''ve seen more than enough of him now to see that, we srill don''t even not what his perceived strengths are ,if any?

Alex Neil will presumably play a lone striker again this season, and that requires a stature and physique of a striker thatn RVW is never going to possess.

The guy is taking up valuable wages that could be better used elsewhere, I wouldnt even have him in my 25 man squad, and would soon rather see Lafferty up front than him, at least he''d let the defenders know he was there.

[tricky974 61]

It does not look like RVW is going anywhere at this moment in time and obviously from how he has played over the last two seasons we can see why, but under a new manager and a different style of playing you never know as the original poster put he was hopeful tonight, but that said one game will not change the circumstances for Ricky he will need a few good performances to even come close to the player we all hoped that he could be when we signed him, if selected by the manager for any games in this forth coming season or any friendlies then getting on his back will not help at all, i understand that saying he should rise above it but thats something that it easy to say but he personnally may find difficult to do.

 

Any of our players thats puts on a Norwich shirt to play i will support fully throughout the length of the match, after that i may vent on here but not during the game.

[Paul Spector 0]

I actually thought he had an alright game. Yes, he missed a couple of chances but all strikers are guilty of that at times. His movement and link-up play was very good, and looked much improved on the player that we last saw.

It is clear he is struggling for confidence in front of goal, but he didn''t shy away from the ball and was involved in everything positive we created last night. It is almost like he just needs one to ricochet in off his shin to get the monkey off his back.

On the other hand, I thought Hooper looked poor again last night. He looked unfit and a way off the pace.

At the end of the day, the best judge will be Alex Neil and his coaching staff that see Ricky play every day. If they think he deserves selection then I respect that decision and will support him 100%.

Those that boo and mock the lad are frankly embarrassing themselves - a confident £8m striker back would be a huge boost to our survival chances - he needs our support, not to be ridiculed.

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="Vanwink"]I don''t know the exact number LDC but it was at least four and there were some very good chances amongst them, they were all wasted. How many do you think he would get in a PL game?[/quote]

 

I think the same complaint was made against Grabban at the weekend & jerome last season, as well as historically to a wide number of strikers both at city and other clubs including the likes of andy cole & michael owen.  Strikers miss chances and defender make goal conceeding mistakes.

 

Hooper finishes well,  yet his performance last night was more underwhelming that RvWs.

 

Basically all our strikers have "issues"  none of those are going to be reduced by ridicule at games or on line.

 

It seems the club are looking to address it by bringing in a better - that has to be good news. 

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

Strange, me and the majority of the people around me thought Hooper played pretty well – good first touch and link play, also playing a bit deeper suits him. Playing behind a big striker would work quite well, as he can link the play in the AMC position, then arrive from deeper to use his good finishing skills (best natural finisher at the club IMO). Definitely looked like he''s added some weight over the summer again, though, which is concerning. With the right number nine, he could be a useful AMC/number 10 this season – however, I don''t think any of our strikers would be the natural complement to his skill set. Whether it''s him, Wes or someone else playing behind, we definitely lack that genuine mobile target man who will keep us possession in the final third. We won''t have as much opportunity to play through midfield in the Prem, so we need someone the ball will stick to when we have to knock it long. Jerome is the nearest we''ve got, but he won''t win many headers against centre backs and his goalscoring record in the top flight is pretty average.In summary, we blatantly need a target man.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

Promoted teams who try to play long ball usually get relegated. Swansea, Leicester, Southampton have all gone for an attacking game, generally keeping the ball on the ground.

Buying a big lump of a striker and knocking long balls to him usually leads to conceding possession and facing another attack from the opposing team. Even Pulis is gradually moving away from hoof ball.

[Van wink 2,994]

ZippersLeftFoot wrote the following post at 29/07/2015 10:56 AM:

Vanwink wrote:

I don''t know the exact number LDC but it was at least four and there were some very good chances amongst them, they were all wasted. How many do you think he would get in a PL game?

I think the same complaint was made against Grabban at the weekend & jerome last season, as well as historically to a wide number of strikers both at city and other clubs including the likes of andy cole & michael owen. Strikers miss chances and defender make goal conceeding mistakes.

Hooper finishes well, yet his performance last night was more underwhelming that RvWs.

Basically all our strikers have "issues" none of those are going to be reduced by ridicule at games or on line.

It seems the club are looking to address it by bringing in a better - that has to be good news.

I hope the remark regarding ridicule was not directed at me Zipper, none of our players ever deserve that.

And yes all strikers miss chances, but those that are any good make up for it by taking some as well.

Therein lies the difference!

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Promoted teams who try to play long ball usually get relegated. Swansea, Leicester, Southampton have all gone for an attacking game, generally keeping the ball on the ground.

Buying a big lump of a striker and knocking long balls to him usually leads to conceding possession and facing another attack from the opposing team. Even Pulis is gradually moving away from hoof ball.[/quote]I''m not saying we should try to play long ball, Bethnal, far from it – I''m just saying we should have a player in our squad who is capable of competing and winning balls in the air for those situations where we have to just get rid. I don''t think Neil''s tactics are quite as brazen as Swansea''s – overplaying in your defensive third is not part of our style. We only really used one tactic under Neil last season – attacking full backs, mobile centre backs who can cover wide, a DM who can drop in and cover CB, and a generally quite narrow midfield rotating around one up top – and we will need to be more versatile to account for the increased quality of opposition. If we play that same system against the top clubs we may well get murdered. Having a big, mobile, agile striker not only gives us an outlet for the increased number of times we''ll end up playing long balls out of necessity rather than tactical intent, but also gives us an additional presence in the box when we''re on the front foot.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

[quote user="Feedthewolf"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Promoted teams who try to play long ball usually get relegated. Swansea, Leicester, Southampton have all gone for an attacking game, generally keeping the ball on the ground.

Buying a big lump of a striker and knocking long balls to him usually leads to conceding possession and facing another attack from the opposing team. Even Pulis is gradually moving away from hoof ball.[/quote]I''m not saying we should try to play long ball, Bethnal, far from it – I''m just saying we should have a player in our squad who is capable of competing and winning balls in the air for those situations where we have to just get rid. I don''t think Neil''s tactics are quite as brazen as Swansea''s – overplaying in your defensive third is not part of our style. We only really used one tactic under Neil last season – attacking full backs, mobile centre backs who can cover wide, a DM who can drop in and cover CB, and a generally quite narrow midfield rotating around one up top – and we will need to be more versatile to account for the increased quality of opposition. If we play that same system against the top clubs we may well get murdered. Having a big, mobile, agile striker not only gives us an outlet for the increased number of times we''ll end up playing long balls out of necessity rather than tactical intent, but also gives us an additional presence in the box when we''re on the front foot.[/quote]Addendum – I don''t mean break the bank for a £10m+ target man who will be expecting to start every game, but rather to have someone who can rotate with the other strikers (with Lafferty and either RVW or Hooper leaving). I wouldn''t actually be averse to Lafferty playing that role, but his discipline and lack of game time in his preferred position is a worry.

[ellis206 0]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]Promoted teams who try to play long ball usually get relegated. Swansea, Leicester, Southampton have all gone for an attacking game, generally keeping the ball on the ground. Buying a big lump of a striker and knocking long balls to him usually leads to conceding possession and facing another attack from the opposing team. Even Pulis is gradually moving away from hoof ball.[/quote]

 

Really? I can only think of one long ball team that went straight back down and that was Watford under Boothroyd years ago.

 

Hoofball certainly worked for Stoke, Bolton and West Ham (both under Allardyce) but I''m struggling to think of another team who went down.

 

Last season QPR, Burnley and Hull all went down, none of them are renowned for being a hoof team. Burnely credited for being a decent footballing team if anything

[hogesar 9,608]

Baring in mind i''m one of his bigger critics, I didn''t think he had that bad a game. Certainly first half his movement and touch were more akin to when we first signed him than the latter parts of that dreadful season.

Despite this, everyone''s excuse for RvW, up until this point, was that we never created for him. Well he had more chances than he''s likely to get in any Premier League game last night, and still didn''t score.

So, overall, not good enough.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

QPR and Burnley both tried 81 long balls per game, the joint highest of any teams in the Premier League. They tried 283 short passes per game each, the joint 18th lowest.

People don''t think of them as classic long ball teams a la Big Sam or early Pulis - but they would try the back to front ball regularly as they didn''t have the ability to create in any other way.

Burnley were credited with being a decent football team, but that was mainly built on their reputation whilst in the Championship.

[Syteanric 1]

too many chances missed, too many opportunities given...

he''ll be gone before the end of the window.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

If we could move on from the fruitless triumph of hope over experience, I see Odjidja Ofoe played the whole game. Any thoughts on his performance?

[OnTheBall 0]

He was poor. Sorry. There''s a good player in there but his confidence seems shot and unfortunately that''s quite a key attribute, especially in the Prem. You could see the crowd were behind him and would have loved him to get a goal but it just wasn''t happening. A move would probably be best - he''ll be a good player for someone but unfortunately it won''t be us.