Hucks v Redders

[Lessingham Canary 99]

AJ makes some great points, Hucks was the finished article when he arrived here (having had some big moves), he did do so many amazing things (will never forget his goal at MK Dons or at home to Cardiff) but his partnership with Drury gave him much more freedom than most players of his type would ever see.

Even at his later stages of his career Hucks reguralarly stayed behind after training and worked on his upper body strength so defenders struggled to knock him off the ball, you cant coach or even demand that.

Redmond has shown bundles of promise, and has some terrific skills, maybe he suffers when the team suffers, and his age, temperament and confidence suffer when the team are struggling ? something that never seemed to effect Hucks, but remember Hucks was a seasoned pro and could make himself heard when needed, Nathan is not that man..... yet, anyway.

[AJ 1,221]

Agree with your last point there. Hucks was in many ways a leader with plenty of experience and class that people and fellow pros respected and looked up to. Redmond is very much a youngest who has all that to learn yet.

[AJ 1,221]

If anything that entire team had so many natural leaders with Hux, Roberts, Drury, Malkay, Fleming, Holt. So many people to potential pick as captains. If the chips were down there was certainly plenty of people to look to in that squad!

[Chip20 69]

Some good points/observations made above. I would add that Hucks didn''t get as much criticism for his defensive frailties because he was a big fish in a small pond. He joined us from the Premier League when we were in the Championship (and had been there a fair while) so he stood out like a sore thumb. He was a cut above the players around him. Redmond, on the other hand, joined us from a Championship club while we were already in the Premier League. He joined a group of players that had been built up over two years of Premier League income. The difference in class, if there even is one, is therefore not as noticeable.

Throughout most of his time with us, Hucks was terrorising Championship defences (did he look as consistently effective in the season he spent with us in the top flight)? Redmond has spent the majority of his time with us to date competing at the top level against a different class of defence. It is therefore harder for him to stand out in the way Hucks did.

Finally, if somebody with more time on their hands than me cares to read through the threads pertaining to the 2004-05 season I suspect they may well find some criticism of Hucks'' defensive attributes there as well. People are more critical when we are losing regularly than when we are winning more frequently.

[westcoastcanary 0]

[quote user="AJ"]Lets remember that Hux arrived here a finished article in his prime, whereas Redmond is still very young with lots to learn.

But I also second the notion that Adam Drury was massively underrated with Hux in front of him. Drury had to be one of the best left backs in England throughout most of his NCFC career - rarely missed a tackle and covered so much defensive ground with Hux in front of him.

Sometimes it is not always about an individual but about small partnerships across the pitch. Hux and Drury had a good partnership that also led to close friendship off the pitch as well. It is hard to compare Martin and Redmond to Hux and Drury because the dynamic is different.[/quote] SOMETIMES it is not always about an individual but about small partnerships across the pitch???? It''s ALWAYS about partnerships isn''t it, wherever on the pitch you''re talking about?

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Hucks was a massive coup for us when riding a massive wave to promotion. That helped his stock massively. In the years that followed, he allegedly turned down big offers to try help us get back up etc. and stuck around the area adding to his cult status. He also had a knack for scoring more than Redmond.

On to Redmond, signed as a hot prospect who chose us over Everton, part of that nearly great and then we got Elmander window under Hughton and his rawness showed despite impressing somewhat. It doesn''t help his cause that we got relegated in his first season.

I think most of us, fans and non fans of Redmond are still slightly frustrated with him because he has bags of promise with comparable attributes to the likes of Sterling who incidentally shares similar weaknesses to Redmond.

What you have to remember is that he''s still young. Hucks was much older and more established with probably more ability overall but at his prime. Redmond still has years to develop and all things being well, he''ll go on to surpass Hucks ability but he''s certainly not there yet.

For me, he''s still a vital part of our side and all but one of his seasons with us has been in the premiership (small fish in a big pond) where it''s hard for flair players to shine. Hucks had all but one of his seasons in the Championship where we were a big fish in a smaller pond and had plenty of attacking football and possession for Hucks to work his magic. Redmond doesn''t help his stock by having his better spells at the start of seasons usually with a dip in the middle as common with young players. People have short memories, he was our best player in the first 10 games and our best player in the championship before Neil came in and he had his dip between Jan and April while AN chose stability over flair.

I really hope whatever happens this season we keep hold of him as I feel there''s a hell of a player not far from fruition.

Who here thinks Hucks in his prime would make a massive difference to our season?

[GJP 79]

Hucks would get in any Norwich team. Different class.

Redmond isn''t at that level but he''s still good enough for us.

[Yellowbeagle 0]

Bit unfair to compre IMO. One was a player in his late 20''s the other is still a kid. I bet a Hucks of 21 would have been an equally frustrating player. I remember the strachan comment about sometimes he looked like a world beater other times he looked like a carpet beater.

A fairer comparison would be with Eadie, I agree Redmond now needs to step up but lets also remember that Redmond bar one season is trying to apply his talents to premier league football

[morty 0]

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"]Bit unfair to compre IMO. One was a player in his late 20''s the other is still a kid. I bet a Hucks of 21 would have been an equally frustrating player. I remember the strachan comment about sometimes he looked like a world beater other times he looked like a carpet beater.

A fairer comparison would be with Eadie, I agree Redmond now needs to step up but lets also remember that Redmond bar one season is trying to apply his talents to premier league football[/quote][Y][Y][Y]

[norfolkngood 1,087]

redmond I doubt will fully reach potential after speaking with some coaches from colney we shouldn''t be to hard on the boy !!

[Crispy 4]

Redders took games by the scruff of the neck and dragged us threw at the end of last season... maybe 3 games. Huckerby did it for years.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

Hucks was a single-minded maverick; confident in his own ability, focussed, driven & hugely self-motivated. Redmond comes across as quite the opposite...

[nutty nigel 7,535]

[quote user="Graham Paddons Beard"]

Eadies Left, Hucks Right, Iwans Heed, Holts Laugh!"]Two words - ADAM DRURY Solid as a rock for so many years and could mark a man and got ball almost everytime he went to ground. Our current captain doesn''t have the say defensive qualities!

 

Two more words...Gary Holt. Ask Hucks. He will tell you that Three Lungs was his cover.

[/quote]

 

Yes Beardo!! I''ve said this many times on here and I thought I was the only one who''d noticed. I well remember one particular instance against, I think Blackburn in the PL, where  it looked like we''d concede before Three Lungs was suddenly in the left back position covering. I was thinking "WTF did he come from". But Holty had like a 6th sense and that''s another point. Not covering defensively isn''t often laziness. It''s more often not being very good at defending.

 

[quote user="Jacko"]Surely the fairest comparison is to look at what 21

year old Nathan Redmond and 21 year old Darren Huckerby have achieved in their

careers by the same stage? Huckerby had moved from Lincoln City to Newcastle,

where he didn''t play. He then went to Millwall on loan for a bit and did ok.

Before signing for Coventry where he had a modest season playing up front (5

goals in 25 games). One could argue that Redmond has actually achieved more in

professional football at this stage. Huckerby was a wonderful player for this

club. But also arrived pretty much at his physical and mental peak. Redmond has

arrived very much in the infancy of his career still. Can Redmond be as good at

his peak as Huckerby was? That will be an incredibly tough ask. But I think

comparisons, whilst inevitable due to their style, are slightly unfair at this

stage.[/quote]

 

 

Bury''s on fire today!!

 

This is so relevant. Huckerby was better as he got older and gained more

upper body strength. But he worked hard for that and that''s what Redders has to

do. And maybe is doing.

 

[Nexus_Canary 1,016]

This is like comparing a Sports car to a skateboard.Hucks had it all, Redmond totally over rated and only shadowed by Wes in the ranks of frustraiting.

[GJP 79]

How is Redmond overrated?

Prople are always finding fault with him and saying he doesn''t perform.

[hogesar 9,673]

Eh?

The main difference is people forget Redmonds age. Wasn''t huckerby 25/26 when he joined us?

This redmond bashing is an absolute fucking joke and we are going to end up losing our better more exciting players if our fans don''t learn to have a little bit of patience.

The way our fans are acting are as if we need 11 Andy Hughes. Then as soon as we end up with that we''ll all be desperate for some flair and pace and excitement from young English players like redmond.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

It''s quite frustrating to see someone with pace to burn who refuses to use it! Bit like tootling around in a Ferrari never exceeding 30mph. Might as well have a Citroen 2CV...

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Norfolk Mustard "]It''s quite frustrating to see someone with pace to burn who refuses to use it! Bit like tootling around in a Ferrari never exceeding 30mph. Might as well have a Citroen 2CV...[/quote]If you are going to relate Ferraris and 2CV''s to footballers you need to mention that - a) Ferraris are way too expensive, you''re unable to use them to their full

potential any of the time, they make everyone and look and say "what a

poser" and are generally impractical.  b) 2CVs, however,  are almost totally reliable, easy to work on, have good road holding (you can take roundabouts flat out in a 2CV [;)] ) and actually once they are driven foot down and build up momentum, have a decent performance.....you just need to know how to use them.  And they don''t cost a lot. [Y]

[Gainer the Gopher 0]

.....and they lose 100% of the races against Ferraris.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Gainer the Gopher"].....and they lose 100% of the races against Ferraris.[/quote]

Ever heard of the tortoise and the hare?  Anyhow, the premier league is a marathon not a sprint.  2CVs never break down, are not complicated, have no expensive components and are a joy to own. You can leave them virtually anywhere unlocked and they will not be touched and even if they are, a couple of spanners and a screwdriver and you can replace virtually anything on it.  They will work in unfavourable conditions, unlike expensive sports car that will struggle when the surface gets even slightly rough.  And you can carry five people in them with ease with room in the back for your dog and some luggage.  With the room peeled back, it is an open top sunshine car.  Cheap to own, cheap to buy (relative to a Ferrari) and rarely lets you down.   No wonder building a team on lower league players is ultimately more satisfying for a club like ours - 2CVs rather than expensive overated sports cars - you generally get value for money, honesty and no nonsense.Why do people buy Ferraris?  Because money is no object (Man Citehs of this world).  Why would people buy 2CVs?  Because they are pound for pound better value. Unfortunately, 2CVs are pretty much obsolete these days, but give me a decent all round capable vehicle any day over some ponced up ridiculously expensive sports car.  Today''s 2CV equivalent?   Hard to say, maybe a decent all wheel drive economical small car - the Fiat Panda 4x4 is excellent.  Those Italians.....know how to make cars [;)]. And if you offered me a Ferrari or a Fiat Panda on a plate - living where I do, the Fiat would be first choice anyday.  You buy what is practical and will do the job.  Anyhow, Hucks was no Ferrari - more a Ford Escort RS Cosworth.  Redders?  Still a prototype in development. 

[morty 0]

Or maybe it was just a really sh1t analogy?

[AJ 1,221]

Reminds me of when it came out that Holt actually WAS driving around in an old banger (Peugeot 307).

If anybody is interested he now drives an Audi A7.

That transition to the Premier League with us changed his life just a tad...