Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lessingham Canary

Welcome back Snodgrass.......................

Recommended Posts

If we''d had just been relegated this year and could afford 30k pw+ wages then yes please! would be my answer

Totally out of our range now though. I doubt he''d go to any club in any division for less than 50k pw though so it''s out of the question.

I see him at Brighton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I''ve never really liked the look of him.

The close up images on my big tellybox after the West Ham 3-1 win (where he''d taken one on the nose) lived with me longer than I''d have liked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Needs to be a big fish in a small pond. Thinks hes far better than he actually is. Whilst saying that he is easily championship level but if we are trying to build a team id happily let him go back to leeds and moan for 90 minutes a week there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uurgh, its a no from me. I''m quite encouraged by the split in the opinion on here as well. Only in it for himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Captain Birdseye"]I assume following the same logic we would also want the wolf back as well[/quote]Don''t know about the same logic, but I''d happily have RvW back, as at least in a Farke team, he''d actually be passed the ball in the right areas, and not asked to play as a f**king target man instead!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RvW would be perfect if Farkes tactical plan is to not score any goals and gain points out of sympathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d take him back in a heartbeat but like others have mentioned wages would be an issue.

and I''m sure he wouldn''t want to be here next season if we dont get promoted - but a clause to get him out could benefit both sides if it were to pass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask any player from that time whether they''d rather play in a team with RVW or Snodgrass and they will all tell you Snodgrass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="Captain Birdseye"]I assume following the same logic we would also want the wolf back as well[/quote]Don''t know about the same logic, but I''d happily have RvW back, as at least in a Farke team, he''d actually be passed the ball in the right areas, and not asked to play as a f**king target man instead![/quote]Wow Indy, you wouldn''t have Snoddy who always gave 100%, was skillful with the ball at his feet, scored goals, won free kicks and scored from them and was sold at a profit. Yet you''d have the Wolf who didn''t do any of those things?For the second time today.......https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTYfETahoXqxjhlz6ljqR3LOBNs8dX54Z5XRBzJnLQOckLpV4Nrvw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GJP"]Ask any player from that time whether they''d rather play in a team with RVW or Snodgrass and they will all tell you Snodgrass.[/quote]Ah, you mean the players that were all pretty much playing in both their favoured position and favoured roles, compared to the lightweight, goal poacher striker who was asked to play as a target man and given almost zero supply from the aforementioned players...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lappinitup"]Wow Indy, you wouldn''t have Snoddy who always gave 100%, was skillful with the ball at his feet, scored goals, won free kicks and scored from them and was sold at a profit. Yet you''d have the Wolf who didn''t do any of those things?[/quote]Absolutely.I don''t agree with the 100% comment, and in fact think at times he was anti-team because of how selfish he was with the ball at this feet. He won free kicks because 90% of our play was funnelled through him and because he held onto the ball for long periods without doing anything useful, he''d often dive because he''d run out of ideas (which was usually after he''d run himself into a blind corner).He constantly moaned throughout games, had no idea how to cross for ANY of the strikers we played, and I''m still pi$$ed over the whole RvW penalty incident where Snoddy went against both RvW and Hughton to force his way into taking the pen, only for him to screw it up on top of his already shi**y behaviour.RvW was a victim of both Hughton''s approach to the game, and Snoddy''s desire to be the main man at the club, yet given good supply and the sort of approach that we''re only just starting to utilise under Farke, he could easily have hit double figures and helped us stay up, whereas Snoddy would still plodding down the right wing and trying to take the defender on for the 7th time in quick succession whilst half the team were in space and demanding the ball instead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RVW was also a victim of his own lack of ability. Not least the ability to adapt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indy, when you talk about Snodgrass being anti team etc, i must admit i didnt see that, i saw a player who was getting ever frutstrated with managers tactics and lack of support from players around him on the pitch, the amount of times the likes of Howson would stop as soon as they reached the half way line as if tyhey would get an electric shock if they crossed that line, and Snodgrass would be looking top lay a ball off to someone coming through on the non exoistent overlap. Funny how we all view it differnetly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Lessingham Canary"]Indy, when you talk about Snodgrass being anti team etc, i must admit i didnt see that, i saw a player who was getting ever frutstrated with managers tactics and lack of support from players around him on the pitch, the amount of times the likes of Howson would stop as soon as they reached the half way line as if tyhey would get an electric shock if they crossed that line, and Snodgrass would be looking top lay a ball off to someone coming through on the non exoistent overlap. Funny how we all view it differnetly[/quote]Quite. I''m not having a knock Indy but there is a world of difference between actually being there and watching on a TV screen. Most of the people who share your views rarely attend games (I understand your reasons) but TV cameras follow the ball whereas fans at the game can see the whole picture. And the vast majority of these people would prefer Snoddy any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Lessingham Canary"]Indy, when you talk about Snodgrass being anti team etc, i must admit i didnt see that, i saw a player who was getting ever frutstrated with managers tactics and lack of support from players around him on the pitch, the amount of times the likes of Howson would stop as soon as they reached the half way line as if tyhey would get an electric shock if they crossed that line, and Snodgrass would be looking top lay a ball off to someone coming through on the non exoistent overlap. Funny how we all view it differnetly[/quote]It certainly is.  I''ll freely admit that I didn''t get to many games, but those I went to and having seen every other one on line in it''s entirety, I would happily admit to screaming at Snodgrass match after match after match for running into dead ends or running out of options before falling over, or delaying a cross when people like Holt and RVW were in space only to be closed down because of the delays.  It was a dogs b*ll*x of a time and best forgotten - and Snodgrass''s contribution, which invariably led to him trying to be a one man team - was imo at the heart of it. His time at the club can be summed up as - run at the defence and score, run at the defence and fall over, run at the defence and delay the cross too long......... oh and the rest of the time complain bitterly about everything.  The rest of the team  maybe weren''t up to much either and Hughton''s tactics questionable, but Snodgrass unquestionably imo, was not playing enough of a team game. Yes, he scored, big deal, but through his attempts at dominating play, the rest of the team were restricted from scoring themselves.  People liked the fact he had his heart on his sleeve and tried hard - well that was never going to be enough.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn''t Snoddy Hull''s best player by far last season and integral to them having a decent start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We could''ve done with some of his fight last year. It''s a yes from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think your forgetting that your paupers. You couldn''t afford the fee let alone his wages!

Massively deluded bunch you lot are...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those of you who do twitter will know that ReadNorwich is just a site that posts silly rumours or copy & paste rumours/stories from elsewhere.

He will be very amused that his fishing trip has landed him with 4 pages on here lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good points there Lakey. However, it''s these perceived weaknesses in players that you completely gloss over when talking about golden boy RvW. For all his weaknesses, Snodgrass contributed a hell of a lot more to Norwich City than van Wolfswinkel ever did, yet you bend over backwards to defend him. Is it maybe because however you try and paint it, RvW was a complete failure and you just don''t want to admit it, whereas Snodgrass was obviously not? Maybe a case of bruised ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Good points there Lakey. However, it''s these perceived weaknesses in players that you completely gloss over when talking about golden boy RvW. For all his weaknesses, Snodgrass contributed a hell of a lot more to Norwich City than van Wolfswinkel ever did, yet you bend over backwards to defend him. Is it maybe because however you try and paint it, RvW was a complete failure and you just don''t want to admit it, whereas Snodgrass was obviously not? Maybe a case of bruised ego.[/quote]RVW was a failure, but so was Snodgrass.  So was Fer. So was most of the rest of the team. That Snodgrass contributed to that failure is undeniable imo and his default positon of taking it all on himself was part of the problem.  Your interpretation of my views is up to you, but my position is that Snodgrass could have done better for the team and RVW would have done better had he been given better service. The penalty incident was classic Snodgrass. Although the designated player was ready to step up to the penalty, Snodgrass says "I''ll do it, I''m the one that matters". Fine if you can live up to that, but he couldn''t - and that was pretty much the story of the season.   Poor retention of the ball, when we did have the ball and were able to keep it - it was usually through Snodgrass and then it occasionally ended up in a Snodgrass goal, or more often time after time, in a dead end or a falling over or a very, very late cross.  RVW couldn''t make an impact, but with a bit more intelligent play from Snodgrass, he might have had a better chance of succeeding.  The only decent crosses I can remember in the first half of the season were from Martin. Not good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RVW vs Snodgrass? Haha! Thanks guys, I needed that right now >.<

I have to get in one little thing though, you criticise Snoddy for not being a team player, but RVW by nature is totally anti team, he''s there to do his own thing, not contribute defensively or to build up play just to trust him to be in the right place at the right time (which he rarely was) to finish off someone else''s good work (which he never did)

Football takes all kinds and that, but preferring RVW to Snodgrass? Okay man. Good one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]For all his weaknesses, Snodgrass contributed a hell of a lot more to Norwich City than van Wolfswinkel ever did, yet you bend over backwards to defend him. Is it maybe because however you try and paint it, RvW was a complete failure and you just don''t want to admit it, whereas Snodgrass was obviously not? Maybe a case of bruised ego.[/quote]I can''t speak for LDC, but certainly in my case it''s nothing to do with ego, and simply that I don''t see it the same way as some other fans do.You say Snoddy contributed more, but in truth what was RvW meant to do with the shockingly poor supply we gave him whilst being asked to perform a role that pretty much any of the posters on here would know was never going to suit the player? You wouldn''t have asked Bellamy to be a target man, or Eadie, or Robins etc, etc, yet when RvW is asked to do it, all we got were snide comments about how he should adapt to the requirements, rather than admitting that it was ridiculous signing a goal poacher and expecting an Andy Carroll type performance from them!Also, the vast majority of our play was through Snodgrass, yet compared to other players given that much of the ball, his return was pretty weak. Remember the side that came up under Lambert? Remember Pilks playing on the opposing wing and seeing a lot less of the ball than Snoddy did (and having just signed from a League 1 club and having been injured previously to boot), yet he scored more, was more accurate with his passing (81% vs 76%) and in particular his crossing was far more composed and where it needed to be than Snoddy ever was, yet Pilks is often met with apathy on the forums whilst Snoddy who was given more to work with yet did less with it is somehow lauded despite his failings???I honestly don''t care how often, or how long I belabour the point, but RvW was setup to fail by Hughton, the problem was compounded by Snoddy (and some of the other midfielders to be fair), and RvW was made a scapegoat in the process. Ask a fishmonger to fillet a fish and they''ll do it no problem, ask them to lay a brick wall and chances are that it isn''t staying up for long (if at all), yet when we told a goal poacher to not poach goals, but to be a strong, hold-up style target man, the blame was placed on the player for failing to do a great job (despite it not being, and never will be their role), rather than the clown who caused the issue in the first place!If you had a goalkeeper conceding 10 goals a match you''d argue that he''s not a good player, but what if we then pointed out that he was in a team playing a 0-0-10 formation and he had absolutely no cover or support whatsoever, is it then the fault of the keeper, or in fact the fault of the team/manager for letting that situation occur constantly?RvW was making some great runs in the early games before his injury - they were ignored, he still kept trying to make them on his return - they were ignored again, eventually he lost confidence, which combined with the pi$$ poor supply and being told to play a stupid role, meant he was next to useless in many games - but not because he was a bad player, but rather  because the circumstances surrounding him, made it almost impossible to succeed. Hell, even Grant Holt who was great at holding up the ball and using his strength, found his goal tally halved under Hughton - and that''s a player that actually COULD play the target man role ffs, never mind a lightweight striker more suited to putting a final touch on a ball than he is jostling with some of the massively built CB''s in the prem!The stats around RvW don''t lie, his goal return was terrible for us, and in relation to his transfer fee was even worse, yet I don''t (and never will) blame the player for this, I squarely blame Hughton, and also feel that other players in the team let the guy down by giving him nothing he could work with (although if they were following Hughton''s guidelines, can we fault them too much in the process?), and that if instead we''d have played a more dynamic game - which didn''t involve giving the ball to Snoddy so he could slow the game down to a snail''s pace every chance we got, and instead worked on letting players like Wes pick RvW''s runs out, we''d have seen a VERY different player, and a VERY different goal return.It''s just so wrong to put all the blame on RvW, when he was in fact a victim of bad management and shocking tactics, rather than a bad player, it really is that simple for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Laying the blame at Snodgrass'' door for RvW''s pathetic season is ridiculous[/quote]So are you saying that you genuinely think that the supply provided to RvW was frequent and of a good standard to boot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hoola Han Solo"]Do all our other failings that season get a free pass then? Pretty sure we had more midfielders than Snodgrass.[/quote]And I''m pretty sure that NONE of them had the ball as much as Snoddy did per game, nor did they monopolise the ball as much as he did when in possession either.The key point being that a striker (unless they are a world class ''complete'' striker) needs good supply to perform well, and that supply should also be based around the strengths of the striker rather than their weaknesses. You wouldn''t constantly sling high balls in for players like Owen or Zola to challenge, similarly, you wouldn''t play balls behind for a pacey striker to run onto if that striker was Heskey or Crouch, and yet almost none of the limited supply RvW received was anything like what he wanted or would have thrived on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...