AN on talksport- coming up.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

Have to say in his first 6 moths I was hailing Alex Neil as a footballing genius, I thought he was superb from his game at Bournemouth (though not officially managing that day)when his intervention got us 3 points when all seemed lost, he dragged us back into the play offs, and of course overcame the upstarts from down the road, and of course gave us Wembley and a day to remember, awesome.

Even started life in the premier league ok, unlucky against Palace, a great win away at Sunderland, but that defeat (6-2) at Newcastle killed something inside him, don''t think he has been the same since, over cautious at times, blaming players (more recently)and at times seems out of his depth.

He is here for the foreseeable future it seems, so I really hope they bring someone in to help him, maybe a Roy Hodgson ? yes its a cost, but if no compensation in replacing the manager, just might save a young British manager to the game, and turn his career around.

[Baywing 0]

[quote user="morty"]That was waaaay too long to read, but the bits I skip read were pretty good[;)][/quote]

So just like AN you are over confident in your own ability, have the only opinion that matters and are happy to attempt to belittle people to make yourself seem/feel far more important than you actually are !

Must be nice inside that little bubble of yours....enjoy your own company !

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Lakey''s first act as NCFC manager would be to reinvent Dorrans as a flying left winger and change Rudd''s name by deed poll to De Gea.[/quote]Funny how I''m sometimes accused of making threads about me, but then it''s ok for others to do it......And fyi, Dorrans is a very capable left sided midfielder and would be equal to the task as Johnson was two seasons ago and yes, Rudd will imo be our number one goalie at some stage. [:P]

[Hairy Canary 668]

You can''t judge a guy on one result, whether that''s good or bad. Whether he out managed Lambert this week or was being out managed by all and sundry during our losing run. Neither are fair ways of assessing him.

You judge a guy on the long term and most specifically whether he has been getting the best from the squad he has available. Are we improving. Is the squad better balanced etc.

We are massively under achieving, are slowly heading in the wrong direction and have been for a year or more. That''s plenty of time to conclude whether he is a good manager or not and a much fairer way of judging. IMO.

[hogesar 9,618]

Yeah, Dorrans would def get 15 goals from midfield on the left wing*

*he wouldn''t.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Baywing"][quote user="morty"]That was waaaay too long to read, but the bits I skip read were pretty good[;)][/quote]

So just like AN you are over confident in your own ability, have the only opinion that matters and are happy to attempt to belittle people to make yourself seem/feel far more important than you actually are !

Must be nice inside that little bubble of yours....enjoy your own company ![/quote]Woah, that escalated quickly.I complimented you on a good post.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

I read it baywing. It is a good post. It sums up where we are from the perspective of someone who has lost all faith in the manager. Ive got no problem with that. Once we lose faith in something it takes as long to win that faith back as it took to lose it. Its only the fickle who change their view for each result like a demented weather house.

I find it easier not to take a hard and fast opinion over something I can''t control. But that''s just me and I''m not suggesting others should be like it. For the remainder of this season Alex Neil will be one defeat away from the sack in many fans eyes. It happened with Worthy where five consecutive wins didn''t change hearts. If Alex turns these fans around it will be a great achievement. And if he does, and manages in the PL next season he will be one poor result away from "he''s not good enough at this level".

[Mickdundee 0]

[quote user="Baywing"][quote user="morty"]If any of you can show me your posts from when we were winning for fun last time in the Championship, or winning at Wembley, saying you didn''t rate Alex Neil, I shall happily commend you on your opinion.Alex Neil appeared to outmanage the Messiah this weekend, where does that fit in?In fact you could say, if you so wanted to, that Lambert''s poor substitutions cost them the game.But, of course, it was all about Wolves being poor, wasn''t it?[/quote]

Come now Morty we all know its subjective....

we all said he looks like a bright young fresh up coming manager....which at the time he did, likewise after relegation we all with hindsight thought he could have done with another season in the chumps to aid his education, but he apologised and promised to learn...we took him at his word and rallied NOW that will only last for so long before (and as has happened) people start to question what/when will the learning bear fruit ?

Some of us realised early on (myself Brum away sowed the seed of doubt, the Brighton shocker and QPR team selection sealed the deal) others have slowly but surely lost faith. What must be accepted is that now there is a large majority that dont believe he is at present the man to take us forward.

Nothing to say with time or a change of club he couldnt go on to be a good/great manager....have we got or are we prepared to stick with him over a prolonged spell 3 or 4 seasons to see ? Or do we need the lucrative promised land to progress as a club ?

As for the weekends match taken in isolation it would appear AN was the shrewder of the two !

HOWEVER I consider myself capable of much deeper interpretation than that of face value.

The facts PL went for it after halftime trailing by a single goal as we know is his style....did it work ?

Yes they levelled and looked to be in the ascendancy....

However fate conspired against him..... and Wes did what we all know Wes can and produced some magic!

Now here''s the question....IF Martin hadnt departed for Swansea a day earlier would Wes have been on the pitch, would Ollson have been LB, Brady Left Mid and Wes on the bench ?

Of course we will never know but looking at AN record I fancy ''he got lucky'' with team selection on the day !

Yes Wolves were poor on the day, we werent much better with the ball in the air or being given away cheaply on a regular basis in the first half !

BUT here is the real gem....72mins gone Wolves down to 10 men with their LB in goal, and PL choosing to play 3 at the back and go for it !

Why then did our manager continue with his Plan A....and continue to try and play out from the back, soak up pressure and insist on the usual slow methodical build up and lots of sideways passing ?

Even when the changes came they were like for like...

Yes we eventually got another goal after we managed our first shot in the final 18 minutes ! Job done !

I agree there was some merit in replacing/protecting Wes and Cam given more games approaching and injuries/suspensions taking a toll

But surely there was a case for pace and height in the box with crosses coming into the penalty area from all parts of the pitch as quickly and ferociously as possible.

Worry the inexperienced keeper give him something to do, find the weak point and exploit it !

Instead we got more of the same from AN....with an edgy crowd sweating on tender hooks for the final 20 minutes !

The Carra was like a fooking morgue Saturday afternoon,

guess I;m not the only one in need of a trip to the pub to make things look sweeter ;)[/quote]

Agree with this especially the pub bit, but not Wes doing anything particularly magical about getting a soft penalty he basically was kneeling down by the time there was contact, theirs wasn''t any better crazes me when people do it us or them but that''s the modern game I spose

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

Terrible manager, as I have been saying so for a heck of a long time now!!!

[Mr Cholmondley Warner 0]

With the squad we have we should be ripping us this league he is a first class bell end as is Moxey

The sooner they are both gone as well as Delia the better

[Mr Apples 1,317]

Did AN give any update on what he was doing to solve the on-going Scampi crisis?

Apples

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Tetteys Jig"]Same happened with Hughton at us. he was and still is a good manager but he lost his way with us and wasn''t backed to bring in a striker in that Jan window when it was clear the money he spent on strikers in summer had flopped.[/quote]Just WTF???Hughton identified both strikers himself, then completely misplayed them and now you think we should have let him spend even more when he didn''t have a clue what to do with the quality he already had????Last season Hooper had a nearly 1 in 2 goal ratio, with a 1 in 3 so far this season, and RvW is also managing a 1 in 2 ratio this season. We have to temper this with the understanding that Hooper''s goals are at Champs level (which is where we are now) and RvW is back in Holland which isn''t exactly top level football, but both have shown what they are capable of when used correctly and both could have done so much more for us if Hughton hadn''t insisted on playing them in completely the wrong way.I find this ongoing defence of Hughton''s massive failings at our club to be bizarre, that isn''t to say that he didn''t perform well at Newc/Brum or that he''s doing badly at Brighton, but his 2nd season with us was beyond dire, and blaming the board for not funding another striker for him to misuse is totally out of order, when it''s clear that the fault lay with the manager and nobody else for our constant failings in any sort of attacking manner...

[westcoastcanary 0]

@Indy_Bones"I find this ongoing defence of Hughton''s massive failings at our club to

be bizarre, that isn''t to say that he didn''t perform well at Newc/Brum

or that he''s doing badly at Brighton, but his 2nd season with us was

beyond dire, and blaming the board for not funding another striker for

him to misuse is totally out of order, when it''s clear that the fault

lay with the manager and nobody else for our constant failings in any

sort of attacking manner..."You don''t mention Hughton''s first season, when he kept us up and we finished 11th. However, it''s the bit I''ve highlighted that I want to comment on. It seems patently obvious to me that the performances we saw in Hughton''s 2nd season (and many in the second half of his first season as well) resulted from his recognising that the brief he had been given by the board to make us into a club capable of surviving in the EPL, required a change of approach from (and I''m exaggerating here somewhat to make my point) a Lambert-inherited prioritising of attacking-at-all-costs on the one hand, to the prioritisation of defensive solidity, becoming a hard team to score against, on the other. IMO this change of approach was absolutely necessary and completely justified (the statistical evidence is overwhelming, and if you aren''t interested in stats just listening to any top manager talking about the prime importance of solid defence should be enough to convince, not to mention the fate of teams who neglect this received wisdom).Fast forward a couple of seasons to our return to the EPL under Neil and, surprise, surprise, we see pretty much the same pattern -- except that in this case AN himself had to learn the lesson the hard way. People rightly point to Newcastle (A) as the turning point, but in fact the writing was on the wall even in our first game against Palace when slick attacking play brought us 2 goals and inability to defend cost us 2 points; exactly the same at West Ham (A) in the first half of which we put on a display of slick attacking football that had Bilic on his knees and the pundits purring but ended up with us dropping 2 points. Since that Newcastle game Neil has been trying to achieve exactly the transformation that defeated Hughton, to mould a team that is defensively solid without castrating it''s attacking threat. So far he has been equally unsuccessful. People keep saying AN is not getting the best out of this squad; they said exactly that about Hughton. But the aim is not "the best" from the squad; it''s achieving the balance between defense and attack that every truly successful team requires. You can have a team playing at its best but consistently dropping points and ending up relegated.

[king canary 7,580]

I can''t really see what your point is there Westcoast - that both Hughton and Neil have been trying to make us more solid defensively? If that is the case then both failed pretty miserably.

[Indy_Bones 441]

We conceded more and scored less whilst under Hughton''s ''solid'' defensive approach was used, not to mention we looked utterly toothless in the process AND we had games where with the subs chosen he was playing for a LOSS despite being 1/2-0 down!!!I fully appreciate that the vast majority of top teams combine a strong defence with a potent attacking threat, but even our previous success back in the early 90''s saw us with a negative goal difference, but getting the results needed to finish THIRD, so it''s not that cut and dry.Hughton''s approach didn''t fit the players we had, and he chose that approach AFTER already agreeing to sign RvW, and also signed Hooper despite again knowing the fact he was going to be playing a lone target man most of the time, so the fault HAS to be laid squarely at Hughton''s feet for this, nobody forced him to mis-use our strikers or sign players that wouldn''t fit the system and tactical change he wanted to implement...

[westcoastcanary 0]

[quote user="king canary"]I can''t really see what your point is there Westcoast - that both Hughton and Neil have been trying to make us more solid defensively? If that is the case then both failed pretty miserably.[/quote]Indeed, but my point is that the answer may not be as simple as "somebody else would have done/would do better". IMO the board made a big mistake in sacking Hughton; it looks though as if they have at least learned that lesson and are going to continue backing Neil. But if I had to choose between Hughton and Neil, myself I''d rather have still had Hughton.

[king canary 7,580]

Yeah I can''t get on board with that Westcoast. 28 goals in a season having spent our biggest transfer budget of all time is nothing short of a disgrace. I don''t really get how Neil also failing to get our defence sorted means he should stay. Plenty of other managers have built solid defenses with much less in the way of resources.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="westcoastcanary"]@Indy_Bones"I find this ongoing defence of Hughton''s massive failings at our club to

be bizarre, that isn''t to say that he didn''t perform well at Newc/Brum

or that he''s doing badly at Brighton, but his 2nd season with us was

beyond dire, and blaming the board for not funding another striker for

him to misuse is totally out of order, when it''s clear that the fault

lay with the manager and nobody else for our constant failings in any

sort of attacking manner..."You don''t mention Hughton''s first season, when he kept us up and we finished 11th. However, it''s the bit I''ve highlighted that I want to comment on. It seems patently obvious to me that the performances we saw in Hughton''s 2nd season (and many in the second half of his first season as well) resulted from his recognising that the brief he had been given by the board to make us into a club capable of surviving in the EPL, required a change of approach from (and I''m exaggerating here somewhat to make my point) a Lambert-inherited prioritising of attacking-at-all-costs on the one hand, to the prioritisation of defensive solidity, becoming a hard team to score against, on the other. IMO this change of approach was absolutely necessary and completely justified (the statistical evidence is overwhelming, and if you aren''t interested in stats just listening to any top manager talking about the prime importance of solid defence should be enough to convince, not to mention the fate of teams who neglect this received wisdom).Fast forward a couple of seasons to our return to the EPL under Neil and, surprise, surprise, we see pretty much the same pattern -- except that in this case AN himself had to learn the lesson the hard way. People rightly point to Newcastle (A) as the turning point, but in fact the writing was on the wall even in our first game against Palace when slick attacking play brought us 2 goals and inability to defend cost us 2 points; exactly the same at West Ham (A) in the first half of which we put on a display of slick attacking football that had Bilic on his knees and the pundits purring but ended up with us dropping 2 points. Since that Newcastle game Neil has been trying to achieve exactly the transformation that defeated Hughton, to mould a team that is defensively solid without castrating it''s attacking threat. So far he has been equally unsuccessful. People keep saying AN is not getting the best out of this squad; they said exactly that about Hughton. But the aim is not "the best" from the squad; it''s achieving the balance between defense and attack that every truly successful team requires. You can have a team playing at its best but consistently dropping points and ending up relegated.

[/quote]The problem was not that Hughton tried to make us more defensively solid in that second season. That was in theory a good idea. Unfortunately it got combined with Hughton''s natural caution as a manager when faced with difficult league circumstances, so that if we went behind he would not alter that ultra-defensive approach. His belief was that it was better at 0-0 or1-0 down to carry playing in that fashion and hope to go ahead or equalise, rather than push for a winner or an equaliser and risk conceding/conceding again. What that didn''t factor in was that we were limp in attack and far from watertight in defence, so it was a fatal combination. We either drew games we needed to win, or didn''t get back into games from a goal down, or just conceded again to put the result beyond doubt.Since you mention statistics, they bear that out. In that season we only came from behind to get a result three times, and all at home. A couple of draws, and beating West Ham after he had picked the wrong starting formation, and we were very lucky to be only one down at half-time. Their goalie gave away a stupid penalty and we went on to win 3-1 (cue Wizzy''s thread about beating West Ham getting us relegated). Away from home we never came from behind to get so much as a draw. And you could see in the body language of the players, when we went behind, that they knew that was that.And Hughton carried on in the same fashion in his first season at Brighton, who were in relegation trouble. I don''t have my research to hand but from memory Brighton did not once, home or away, come from behind to get even a draw, let alone a win. Since then, with money spent on the squad, he seems to have become a bit more adventurous, but then it is the Championship rather than the Premier League.

[hogesar 9,618]

Excellent post Purple.

One slight problem though. Why are you "Purple" Canary yet always post in blue? It''s not right.

[Barclay seats 4849 the 3rd 0]

I came to read this thread with 4 pages looking like good debate ,,

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

I just agree with Morty these days 👬🌈 its Morty in the red ( he won''t wear any thing blue )

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="hogesar"]Excellent post Purple.

One slight problem though. Why are you "Purple" Canary yet always post in blue? It''s not right.[/quote]You mean that''s not purple? Seriously, my posts are not always the shortest, and that dark blue (which is a contrast to the black of whatever previous post I might be quoting) reads more easily than paragraph after paragraph of (literally) purple prose. I usually save that colour for the PUPS thread.

[westcoastcanary 0]

@Purple CanaryBrighton 2015-16    GF 72 (equal highest in the league) , GA  42,  GD +30Brighton 2016-17    GF 42,  GA 18), GD +24Are you seriously suggesting that these stats support your view of "a naturally cautious manager" who, having spent a bit of money, is "being somewhat more adventurous"? Don''t they rather suggest a manager who, since taking over in December 2014, has built a team embodying his belief in prioritising sound defence, and having done so is now able to produce the type of football to which he has always aspired (more accurately reflected not just at Brighton but also at Newcastle and (under huge financial and other constraints) at Birmingham rather than at Norwich)?

[king canary 7,580]

So why did we end up with...

Gf- 28

GA- 62

GD- - 34

Despite spending £14m on strikers?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="king canary"]So why did we end up with...

Gf- 28

GA- 62

GD- - 34

Despite spending £14m on strikers?[/quote]

Don''t start me.  The players as a group were not up to the standard required to be able to carry out Hughton''s style of playing.  He bought strikers, yes, but through poor play they never got enough chances.  So blame the strikers - yes, up to a point. Blame the defence - yes up to a point.  Blame the midfield?  Yes - definitely. Johnson playing in centre midfied for a large part of the season due to injuries to Howson, Fer and Tettey at different points. Wes - not often at his best. Snodgrass....well you all know what I thought of him.   So a bad season from the players as a group. Some bright spots, but generally - as was the case last season - the club was not able to compete due to the relative lack of resources.  Lots of money spent, but miniscule compared to what other clubs could do.  Hughton got the blame - rightly in some ways as he was ultimately responsible - but the players imo were not up to it.  Not their fault, not all Hughton''s fault either (imo).  In fact no fault really - because the club has limited resources. You can blame the managers up to a point of course, but if we had kept Hughton he would have turned it round in the championship. The same with AN.  Came up against similar problems defensively as Hughton in the PL - and that has spilled over into this season.  Given time he will turn it round as imo Hughton would have done if he had been given time.     If you throw away managers too soon, you will never know what they could have achieved if they have time to build.  Get the right man in and stick with him through thick and thin and you will see a club progress.   It is of course a moot point whether AN is that man. I think he is, but then I know nothing.  I like him. I respect the way he talks and listens in interviews and his honesty - and I like his cv - two protions to a top flight division.  And I like that the players are still performing for him. Room for improvement, of course......but lets see how he does.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Chris Hughton had lost Carrow Road and the atmosphere against West Brom was toxic and nasty. We may have gone down regardless but a more unified fan base was needed and CH''s sacking provided that.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Chris Hughton had lost Carrow Road and the atmosphere against West Brom was toxic and nasty. We may have gone down regardless but a more unified fan base was needed and CH''s sacking provided that.[/quote]I don''t agree.  That the atmosphere was toxic I don''t doubt, but as we have seen with AN, once you stick with someone and they show signs of turning it round,  any toxicity starts to disappear.   Unfortunately for Hughton, the pressure had become too great on the players, him and more importantly the board. I said at the time I thought the board should have stayed strong despite the toxicity.  They buckled and I think they are determined not to buckle this time as they think they have found their long term manager.  I''m 100% certain they wanted Hughton to be that man - now they are trying again and imo even more determined to make AN the man to take us forwards over the next few years. 

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

And sometimes you have to accept a manager is failing and is maybe not the right fit. Baseless optimism that a manager can turn a team''s fortunes around would surely mean we would never have sacked Worthy, Roeder and Gunn amongst others.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

Worthy is the classic example. Because of his past achievements Delia, Michael and the board retained him well past his sell by date and his execution in front of the Sky cameras was cruel and not deserving of him. If Alex Neil doesn''t achieve the minimum objective of a top six finish, then he should be sacked. If we''re serious about promotion in the next year or so we cannot hold onto a naive view that eventually the manager will get it right - we might be waiting for years.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]And sometimes you have to accept a manager is failing and is maybe not the right fit. Baseless optimism that a manager can turn a team''s fortunes around would surely mean we would never have sacked Worthy, Roeder and Gunn amongst others.[/quote]

Worthy was sacked - and that didn''t go well.  Roeder was just a disaster - but had promising start, nevertheless. Gunn......well, we were lucky Lambert was available.  If he hadn''t been, then Gunn would still have had Wes and Holt in his line ups and didn''t Gunn win his second game that season 4-0?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Good point Hoola. But I think being proactive would mean changing the manager when there is someone better to come in rather than changing the manager and hope some one better will turn up.