Well? What do you want? Attack or defence?

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Funny that lots of people in this thread missed the point, eh?I guess we all just misunderstood you.Again.[/quote]I thought you had stopped this kind of nonsense posting.  Plenty of good responses on here.  Only two posters spoiled it.  Leopards never change their spots it seems. [/quote]Keep spouting pompous, inaccurate bilge and people will pick you up on it.If you just want folks to blindly agree with your opinions, then perhaps discussion forums aren''t for you.[/quote]

Are you really so sad you have to keep coming back to me with this obsessive nastiness?  Same as I said to bor.  Leave me alone then I won''t need to keep pointing out your unpleasantness.

[/quote]Nothing like making a drama, eh?Its a discussion forum, if someone makes a point I disagree with, or want to discuss, I shall reply to them. If their point is particularly badly informed, or daft, then I will likely mock them for it. The fact that you post more daftness than the average poster means you get more replies/ attention. But you already knew that, didn''t you? Did you notice me giving "Making plans" a bit of grief last night? I am an equal opportunities pi$$ taker, he didn''t cry about it though.Thats kinda how this whole thing works.

[lake district canary 4,531]

The problem for you is that you agree with what I said in the op -LDC - "Personally, I loved some of our attacking play and possession today - it''s what I want to see from our team."Morty - "As someone who spent nearly 11 hours, in total, on a coach yesterday I would expect at least a wee bit of entertainment."So why not just read posts with an open mind instead of your first call being persistently obnoxious towards me?  

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"]The problem for you is that you agree with what I said in the op -LDC - "Personally, I loved some of our attacking play and possession today - it''s what I want to see from our team."Morty - "As someone who spent nearly 11 hours, in total, on a coach yesterday I would expect at least a wee bit of entertainment."So why not just read posts with an open mind instead of your first call being persistently obnoxious towards me?  

[/quote]The whole premise that you have to choose either attack or defence, is just plain stupid.And, as I have previously said, its a thinly veiled "I told you so" about Hughton / be careful what you wish for, knowing full well you''ll get grief. Then you can whine when you get it. You''re either stupid, incredibly naive, or deliberately attention seeking, which is it?

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

Well one could argue that, except from the fact Morty, that you''ve omitted to mention that if you dish it, you should be man enough to take it.  [;)]

[morty 0]

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Well one could argue that, except from the fact Morty, that you''ve omitted to mention that if you dish it, you should be man enough to take it.  [;)][/quote]I''m plenty man enough fella, don''t you worry about that.[:)]

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]Well one could argue that, except from the fact Morty, that you''ve omitted to mention that if you dish it, you should be man enough to take it.  [;)][/quote]I''m plenty man enough fella, don''t you worry about that.[:)][/quote]LolOne love Peace[:)]

[morty 0]

Oh and if you can stop snuffling like a girl for a minute Lakey, have a read back through my opening post to you, and point out where I was obnoxious to you. Just for accuracy and stuff :-"The idea is to have both, depending as to what is required at any given time in the game, its called tactical awareness.The

point is that you can have it both ways, Alex Neil''s approach right now

is very similar to Lambert''s first season in the Premiership. He is

going to have to learn quickly. When we were 3-2 down there was no real

need for ridiculous pressing, it was the time to be patient, and use

your head, there was plenty left of the game.So, why exactly was

Wes coming on for Tettey a mistake, when we were chasing the game,

really don''t understand your logic here, in one breath you are praising

creative flair, then in the next saying it was a mistake? Do you think

it was one, or are you just saying it because Alex Neil said it was?

What change would you have made?"

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="lake district canary"]The problem for you is that you agree with what I said in the op -LDC - "Personally, I loved some of our attacking play and possession today - it''s what I want to see from our team."Morty - "As someone who spent nearly 11 hours, in total, on a coach yesterday I would expect at least a wee bit of entertainment."So why not just read posts with an open mind instead of your first call being persistently obnoxious towards me?   [/quote]The whole premise that you have to choose either attack or defence, is just plain stupid.And, as I have previously said, its a thinly veiled "I told you so" about Hughton / be careful what you wish for, knowing full well you''ll get grief. Then you can whine when you get it. You''re either stupid, incredibly naive, or deliberately attention seeking, which is it?[/quote]

I don''t whine.  I''m not stupid, naive or incredibly attention seeking. Its a football forum.  The thread was about football. If you cant reply without being viscious or unpleasant, then you are the one that needs to address his attitude. 

[morty 0]

So, have you read my reply to you yet, pointing out where I was vicious, unpleasant and obnoxious?

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

LDC, you still didn''t reply to Morty''s eloquent question there. It''s because either a) you wish to continue playing the victim card and generate some drama and attention or b) you just don''t the intelligence to give a decent reply.

I''m sure you''re a lovely chap but you don''t half chat s hit on this forum.

[lake district canary 4,531]

If we are talking "personality", I would rather discuss things with people who can be civil in their arguments, than waste time trying to talk sense into blatantly and serially unpleasant wind up merchants who are choosy as to who they suck up to and treat like mud those who don''t fit into their little world view.

[morty 0]

So have you read my reply to you yet, pointing out where I was obnoxious and unpleasant?

[Jacko 0]

I''ve got to agree with Morty here I''m afraid LDC.

The whole point of a football forum, is that your opinions are there to be critically analysed and debated. For instance, I''m intrigued by some of Parma''s points although I don''t agree with them. He''s replied to me constructively and that''s how a forum works.

If you want people just blindly agree with you then there is literally no point in contributing on here.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Cambridge Yellow"]I''If you want people just blindly agree with you then there is literally no point in contributing on here.[/quote]

I''m sorry Cambridge, that isn''t the point.  I don''t mind people disagreeing.  What I mind is people who follow you around the forum twisting things, trying to undermine everything you write in some kind of vendetta because somehow your face doesn''t fit.  It''s surreptitious and it''s harraasment and in the past it has been abusive and I''m frankly fed up with it.  It was persistent in the past and had recently stopped but it has started up again.  It is targeted and unpleasant to be at the end of it - if you are not the target you might not really notice it, but believe  me, I notice it and today I''ve complained to the moderators about it.  I''ve tried answering him back. That didn''t work.  I''ve tried ignoring him, that doesn''t work.  Nowadays I just try to reason with him - but that doesn''t work either.  It is cyber bullying - and plenty of others have noticed it.  One or two of his friends have commented on it - but it still goes on.   As I say, it is surreptitious, devioius and subtle - but it is there - and plenty of people see through it. 

This thread is perfectly reasonable and someone else started a similar thread (after I did), but didn''t have any nonsense on it.

[morty 0]

Lakey, I shall post my reply to you again, where am I being obnoxious and unpleasant?"The idea is to have both, depending as to what is required at any given time in the game, its called tactical awareness.The

point is that you can have it both ways, Alex Neil''s approach right now

is very similar to Lambert''s first season in the Premiership. He is

going to have to learn quickly. When we were 3-2 down there was no real

need for ridiculous pressing, it was the time to be patient, and use

your head, there was plenty left of the game.So, why exactly was

Wes coming on for Tettey a mistake, when we were chasing the game,

really don''t understand your logic here, in one breath you are praising

creative flair, then in the next saying it was a mistake? Do you think

it was one, or are you just saying it because Alex Neil said it was?

What change would you have made?"

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"]Lakey, I shall post my reply to you again, where am I being obnoxious and unpleasant?"The idea is to have both, depending as to what is required at any given time in the game, its called tactical awareness.The

point is that you can have it both ways, Alex Neil''s approach right now

is very similar to Lambert''s first season in the Premiership. He is

going to have to learn quickly. When we were 3-2 down there was no real

need for ridiculous pressing, it was the time to be patient, and use

your head, there was plenty left of the game.So, why exactly was

Wes coming on for Tettey a mistake, when we were chasing the game,

really don''t understand your logic here, in one breath you are praising

creative flair, then in the next saying it was a mistake? Do you think

it was one, or are you just saying it because Alex Neil said it was?

What change would you have made?"

[/quote]

Morty (earlier this thread) "Keep spouting pompous, inaccurate bilge and people will pick you up on it.If you just want folks to blindly agree with your opinions, then perhaps discussion forums aren''t for you."In the context of a reasonable thread this is neither civil or accurate.   In your second sentence post that I want people to agree with everything - yet that is far from the truth. It is one of countless similar posts you write about me all over this board that amount to a campaign of  harrassment.

On the Tettey issue, it is pretty much my understanding that you can still be very attacking but keep a defensive midfielder in place.  Against a pacy attack, I for one was a little surprised Tettey was going off - it seemed counter intuitive to me to take off your quickest midfielder.  And no it wasn''t hindsight.

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Lakey, I shall post my reply to you again, where am I being obnoxious and unpleasant?"The idea is to have both, depending as to what is required at any given time in the game, its called tactical awareness.The

point is that you can have it both ways, Alex Neil''s approach right now

is very similar to Lambert''s first season in the Premiership. He is

going to have to learn quickly. When we were 3-2 down there was no real

need for ridiculous pressing, it was the time to be patient, and use

your head, there was plenty left of the game.So, why exactly was

Wes coming on for Tettey a mistake, when we were chasing the game,

really don''t understand your logic here, in one breath you are praising

creative flair, then in the next saying it was a mistake? Do you think

it was one, or are you just saying it because Alex Neil said it was?

What change would you have made?"

[/quote]

Morty (earlier this thread) "Keep spouting pompous, inaccurate bilge and people will pick you up on it.If you just want folks to blindly agree with your opinions, then perhaps discussion forums aren''t for you."In the context of a reasonable thread this is neither civil or accurate.   In your second sentence post that I want people to agree with everything - yet that is far from the truth. It is one of countless similar posts you write about me all over this board that amount to a campaign of  harrassment.

On the Tettey issue, it is pretty much my understanding that you can still be very attacking but keep a defensive midfielder in place.  Against a pacy attack, I for one was a little surprised Tettey was going off - it seemed counter intuitive to me to take off your quickest midfielder.  And no it wasn''t hindsight.

[/quote]See, you can reply in a civil manner when you try. Even if it did take you six pages.Works both ways fella.

[morty 0]

Also, picking up on your other point, disagreeing with your ( usually pretty badly formed) football opinions constitutes harassment now does it?You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?

[morty 0]

Anyway, getting away from this nonsense and getting back on topic....Interesting story on the homepage, Russel Martin claiming it wasn''t naivety, but the players not carrying out the managers instructions?Makes you wonder just what those instructions were, and sounds like fingers are more being pointed at players, rather than tactics.Next weeks teamsheet should be interesting.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

[quote user="morty"]Also, picking up on your other point, disagreeing with your ( usually pretty badly formed) football opinions constitutes harassment now does it?You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?[/quote]

To be fair Morty, whilst not harrassment saying someone''s opinions are "bilge" or even "usually pretty badly formed" is not really "discussion" either. Just say you don;t agree and outline why (which I know you''ve done in other posts). I don;t agree with the black and white nature of much of LDC''s opening post (although do agree the Tettey stuff) and in the Hughton days his posts were often so unflinchingly optimistic I wondered if he was trolling but its just clear many of us on here have different outlooks on life and the game.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Jim Smith"][quote user="morty"]Also, picking up on your other point, disagreeing with your ( usually pretty badly formed) football opinions constitutes harassment now does it?You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?[/quote]

To be fair Morty, whilst not harrassment saying someone''s opinions are "bilge" or even "usually pretty badly formed" is not really "discussion" either. Just say you don;t agree and outline why (which I know you''ve done in other posts). I don;t agree with the black and white nature of much of LDC''s opening post (although do agree the Tettey stuff) and in the Hughton days his posts were often so unflinchingly optimistic I wondered if he was trolling but its just clear many of us on here have different outlooks on life and the game.[/quote]I shall retract "bilge" but I won''t be moved on "usually pretty badly formed".

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="morty"]Also, picking up on your other point, disagreeing with your ( usually pretty badly formed) football opinions constitutes harassment now does it?You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?[/quote]

Quite a few people have commented on your harrassing attitude towards me over the last few months and it''s got precious little to do with footballing opinions - more to do with your overall attitude to me in particular and one or two others as well (certain respectable posters, not trolls).  As for this sentence "You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?"  well, imo, my concept is that you talk about football civilly to all posters on an NCFC board unless they are blatant trolls.  Your civility appears only to stretch as far as the people you want to curry favour with......

[morty 0]

[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="morty"]Also, picking up on your other point, disagreeing with your ( usually pretty badly formed) football opinions constitutes harassment now does it?You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?[/quote]

Quite a few people have commented on your harrassing attitude towards me over the last few months and it''s got precious little to do with footballing opinions - more to do with your overall attitude to me in particular and one or two others as well (certain respectable posters, not trolls).  As for this sentence "You really aren''t getting the hang of the discussion forum concept, are you?"  well, imo, my concept is that you talk about football civilly to all posters on an NCFC board unless they are blatant trolls.  Your civility appears only to stretch as far as the people you want to curry favour with......

[/quote]Ooh good, a conspiracy theory, I love one.Who are these people I want to curry favour with then, you should name them, to illustrate your point.

[Pete Raven 276]

Please stay on topic and try to discuss Norwich City with less insults and a little more maturity please. You two don''t get along but don''t let that ruin threads. Many thanks.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk Pete"]Please stay on topic and try to discuss Norwich City with less insults and a little more maturity please. You two don''t get along but don''t let that ruin threads. Many thanks.[/quote]No problemo[Y]

[Jacko 0]

Going off piste slightly, this reminds of a few seasons ago when someone tried to argue that there was inner circle on this message board (the pinkun illuminati almost). I was also intrigued as to who the inner circle purportedly were?

[morty 0]

[quote user="Cambridge Yellow"]Going off piste slightly, this reminds of a few seasons ago when someone tried to argue that there was inner circle on this message board (the pinkun illuminati almost). I was also intrigued as to who the inner circle purportedly were?[/quote]It was a group of us, who have been here since the beginning, who stepped out from behind the keyboard and became friends. And got grief for it lol. I can''t tell you who it included, unless you give me the funny handshake.

[Jacko 0]

Why I am thinking of that Simpsons episode of the stonecutters now?

[morty 0]

[quote user="Cambridge Yellow"]Why I am thinking of that Simpsons episode of the stonecutters now?[/quote]Thats EXACTLY what its like[;)]

[Tumbleweed 106]

Don''t want to get in the middle of a good old fashioned playground fight, but here''s my tuppence.

With Tettey on we looked c**p in defence, conceded 3 goals but created chances at the other end.

With Tettey off we looked c**p in defence, conceded 3 goals but created chances at the other end.

Not sure it made a huge amount of difference really.

The problem, as Zipper put it, was rather more generic than that. Rarely have I read Zipper more erudite and forceful than his condemnation of the players last Sunday.

Bottom line is that the failure to remediate a blatantly obvious lack of quality in defence is now costing us serious points and confidence. When you add a tendency to play like a reckless 5 a side team in an 11 a side PL game you then get walloped by the bottom team who were by their manager''s own admission virtually in crisis.