Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
he

Clean sheet

Recommended Posts

[quote user="king canary"]@Ricardo

I don''t think that is true necessarily. Moruinho for instance plays very differently against the likes of Swansea that vs the likes of Chelsea.[/quote]There certainly has to be minor adjustment according to the quality of the opposition but in general the philosophy remains the same. Going a goal behind against any sort of quality leaves you with an uphill task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What concerns me is that it sounds like we''ve sat back against a Burton team that clearly came to defend deep and possibly nick a goal on the break at the most.  The fact that we kept a clean sheet with that approach doesn''t show a great deal. 

 

Saturday away against a team on a winning run is likely to be much more of a test and to be more revealing about the progress Farke is making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Its Character Forming"]

What concerns me is that it sounds like we''ve sat back against a Burton team that clearly came to defend deep and possibly nick a goal on the break at the most.  The fact that we kept a clean sheet with that approach doesn''t show a great deal. 

 

Saturday away against a team on a winning run is likely to be much more of a test and to be more revealing about the progress Farke is making.

[/quote]We didn''t sit back ICF. Patient build up may have been over done and the ball was certainly not moved quick enough in the first half. Some credit must also be given to Burton for effectively shutting us out but that is the usual approach that teams take after a tonking. Having said that, we were still guilty of some poor finishing. I agree that Saturday will be a truer test of whether defensive solidity has finally been achieved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course tactics are important in football. They are in any sport.

That it is vital for a coach to be tactically aware before and during any game is fundamental. Even the average pub team manager will have his tactical approach in mind even if it is only restricting the number of pints his team are allowed before a match.

That they can be over-considered to the point of detriment is also fairly clear to me (Chris Hughton?)

That tactics evolve into a ''philosophy'' is also logical, I suppose.

I cannot comment overmuch about Tuesday''s disaster as I haven''t watched one minute of that game. I can only rely on reports though and then comment superficially in the following way:-

(1) We were playing the league''s apparent punch bag at home.

(2) We started by employing two defensive mid-fielders, which might just be considered fair enough except that when it was proven to be an over elaboration changes were too late in coming. BUT, the philosophy remained as intact as the scoreline so we should therefore admire it, and forever looking to the future is boring and rarely works.

(3) It was no treat for the 24, 000+ when it should have been. This game should have been a show case victory to finally mark the arrival of Daniel Farke onto the scene that is English Championship football.

Instead the fan''s were treated to an inexplicable introverted approach, that nevertheless is supposed to be acceptable because it was philosophically correct.

This was the most disappointing result of the season so far for this glass three quarters full individual.

Now I have little footballing tactical nous and I most certainly don''t wish to have any either. My philosophical awareness only reveals it''s self after the third pint, and then it relates to matters of mortality rather than kicking that round thing about for ninety minutes.

My limited thinking suggests to me that good managers see the best set-up of the players available to them in their heads rather than on a tactical sports whiteboard and that even their in-game changes are brought about by instinct rather than by pre-conceived tactical nuance.

When Paul Lambert brought on three attacking players all at once and retrieved a point when he found his team two goals adrift and up against it against the Baggies he was being instinctive above all else. Nobody is supposed to make three substitutes at once though are they? Now Farke, like Neil, is beginning to acquaint making a substitution akin to pulling a tooth.

Mike Walker who took our team to it greatest heights ever was not a re-known tactician. He just had ''it'' at the right time.

I have the feeling that John Bond''s biggest tactical decision on a match-day morning was which suit to wear that day. He had ''it'' most of the time as well.

The Premier League is now constantly full of ''continental'' tacticians. Most of them seem to fail and their over-riding philosophical approach seems to be towards the millions they bank rather than the game it''s self. They come and they go with appalling consistency.

Daniel Farke? He thinks too much, such men are dangerous.

Keep it simple Daniel or we will likely see those red tail lights heading for Germany sooner rather than later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m also with Parma on this one.

Successful teams are built from the back and we have plenty of talent in forward positions to build on this basic fundamental. Yes the result the other night was frustrating but we had enough chances to win the game and then it would have been two wins ground out as we develop our game.

Saturday will be interesting. It might sound dull but I would take a 0-0 now because that would show we are getting there and it isn''t just against poor sides at home but teams with momentum.

We will definitely get better as this season goes on - will it be enough? Maybe to get in the play-offs but I''m all for supporting this period o transition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big O wrote:

"I''m also with Parma on this one."

Well Roy, I don''t know whether I am or not, tbh. but the ideal that "successful teams are built from the back" is as old as Jack Charlton''s reputation and that of Nigel''s father. It is hardly new.

The fact that we were "Running Scared" enough about facing lowly Burton on our own turf to set out to ''scrape a point'' is really quite a damning comment about our prospects for the season.

I agree with you about Saturday. How the mighty have fallen though?

Also agree that we will get better. Talk of relegation being sublime nonsense, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Big O wrote:

"I''m also with Parma on this one."

Well Roy, I don''t know whether I am or not, tbh. but the ideal that "successful teams are built from the back" is as old as Jack Charlton''s reputation and that of Nigel''s father. It is hardly new.

The fact that we were "Running Scared" enough about facing lowly Burton on our own turf to set out to ''scrape a point'' is really quite a damning comment about our prospects for the season.

I agree with you about Saturday. How the mighty have fallen though?

Also agree that we will get better. Talk of relegation being sublime nonsense, imo.[/quote]Running scared and setting out to scrape a point is not an interpretation that I would put on the game and certainly wasn''t the one I watched. A disappointing result yes, but I''ve seen dozens of those before and will no doubt see more if I live long enough but I see no cause to disparage an attempt to correct a long term glaring fault in the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was tongue in cheek Mr. R.

Have another Peroni.

Why is it a "long term glaring fault in the team" though.

That is the question. Burton kept a clean sheet as well after all and those second raters down the road with three centre backs out injured have also kept a clean sheet recently as well.

Is this an affliction common only to our team to the extent that drastic defensive measures against the mighty Burton at Carrow Road are necessary?

You will know more than me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It has certainly been a debilitating feature of our play in recent seasons and one that put paid to any quick return to the big time. When I pointed it out before last Xmas many said it didn''t matter because we were scoring plenty. We were already then on a course to concede seventy goals, laughable to think we could score enough to overcome that deficit and of course we didn''t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I love how people see things different, but there are times when outlooks will just always be different, because of personality/character/tactical traits.

I understand what he, Parma, Ricardo and those with similar views are saying but I just cannot agree.

I can agree with setting up the way he did, I personally would not want him to, but I could agree with it for obvious reasons. Having a brand of football is also understandable but I will never agree that it should not have changed during the match. A major requirement of a successful manager or team is the ability to sense when it is right to make changes. Now when a team is refusing to attack and you have stationed 6 defenders in your own half and the remaining 4 players have obviously been instructed not to venture forward too quick or to advance all at once and you are not getting success you have to be able to adjust accordingly to get the extra 2 points that are so easily and readily available.

I keep hearing that Burton did a good job of parking the bus. They did not. They left it on a slope and we didn''t even give it a nudge to test if they had applied the handbrake. We didn''t pull the handle to check if the door was locked. The key was probably in the ignition with the window open, not only did we not reach inside we did not even have a look. It is not a great tactical decision to not risk someone to check the bus out, in fact is negligent. If you do not attempt to pick up two of the easiest points you will ever see laying around you will not get the points you need to survive.

We did score enough to get promoted last year. It was conceding and the defeats away from home that was the main problem.

Tuesday night was an awful example of any type of football, and should not be excused in any shape of form.

Some memories are short. We tolerated boring football with Hughton for a short period of time, we would not tolerate it indefinitely. The atmosphere around the ground as the game wore on and outside at the final whistle tells the story. Tuesday night was one massive failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is a fabulous phrase in German:

''Kommst du uber den hunt, kommst du uber den schwanz''

Which translates as '' ..if you can jump over the dog, you can jump over his tail as well while you''re about it buh''

It means that if you are going to do something, do it thoroughly and completely regardless of short-term difficulties.

To this effect I would expect - and be thoroughly disappointed if it were not the case - that Farke continues with his policy of ensuring that we are extremely disciplined structurally in defence. For now at any other cost.

Whilst Burton was not the ideal game to follow such a model, Sheffield United away is.

The longer term objective of eliminating the mental and structural defensive deficiencies so inherent to Norwich was out of kilter with the immediate aims of Tuesday, but in synch with the situation on Saturday.

If Farke changes from this approach on Saturday - due to negative public feedback - I will consider that a weak decision, regardless of the subsequent result on Saturday. Conversely I will be greatly encouraged if the solidity and structural intention remains steadfast.

''Kommst du uber den hind, kommst du uber den schwanz'' indeed.

Parma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The gut wrote: 
"Now when a team is refusing to attack and you have stationed 6 defenders in your own half and the remaining 4 players have obviously been instructed not to venture forward too quick or to advance all at once and you are not getting success you have to be able to adjust accordingly to get the extra 2 points that are so easily and readily available.  ............. Memories are short."
Indeed, memories are short, including apparently your own, conveniently forgetting how often in the recent past those "extra 2 points that are so easily and readily available" actually, turned out to be no points at all. 
Clough is no fool; he, and every other coach/manager in the league, knows what Parma keeps stressing, that there is no magic wand for easily "eliminating the mental and structural defensive deficiencies so inherent to Norwich", especially to a Norwich egged on by the sort of arrogance, whether in the dressing room or on the terraces, that expects the Championship''s Burtons and Millwalls to fold in the face of yellow and green superiority.
Burton were not "refusing to attack"; they were waiting for us to fall into the trap that snared us so often over recent seasons, of over-committing in attack and leaving our CBs unprotected against a simple to execute, swift counter. Someone on another thread commented that, once again, an experienced Championship manager had out-thought our latest new-to-the-Championship import from a lower league. On the contrary, DF wasn''t out-thought and Clough ended the night with only one point instead of the three he and his team thought they might leave with. In addition to which, that one point was courtesy of our poor finishing, not the tactics or approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nothing wrong with my memory in this respect ...... please remind me of a game when we got beat in similar circumstances at this level, at home. Nonsense.

I am completely amazed by your post westie, in essence you are saying Danny out thought clough and restricted his team to only a point by a masterly tactical decision of sticking to his plan of 6 defenders against cloughs cunning of having no intention of risking any attacks. That cloughie would reveal genius and attack should we risk going down to only 5 defenders. Overcommitting FFS.

People can spin the tactics anyway they like for Tuesday night, that was one of the most dire performances I have ever witnessed from any team.

I am not underestimating the likes of Burton, my opinion is based on having respect for them but recognising when the opportunity arose to beat them.

I can only hazard a guess that you were not at the game and have not played or been involved in much competitive football. I accept work in progress but that was awful decision making and there is no disguising that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@The gut"Nothing wrong with my memory in this respect ...... please remind me of a game when we got beat in similar circumstances at this level, at home. Nonsense."Sat 22nd October 2016:  Norwich 0:1 Preston"I am completely amazed by your post westie, in essence you are saying Danny out thought clough ……"No, what I said was that Clough didn''t out think Farke, as someone said on another thread. "….. and restricted his team to only a point by a masterly tactical decision of sticking to his plan of 6 defenders against cloughs cunning of having no intention of risking any attacks. That cloughie would reveal genius and attack should we risk going down to only 5 defenders. Overcommitting FFS."I didn''t say anything about "a masterly tactical decision", and the rest of that sentence is simply your reading of my post. What I said was that Farke correctly focussed on what he clearly sees as the immediate priority, turning us into a team which can actually defend properly; not just occasionally when reminded of the need, but routinely, every game, irrespective of the opponent or whether home or away. Nowhere did I say that DF set out simply to "restrict [Burton] to only one point"; he clearly set out to win the game and, with just one instance of better finishing, that would have been the outcome. "I can only hazard a guess that you were not at the game and have not played or been involved in much competitive football." Whatever guesses you hazard about me are irrelevant. It would matter not one jot if my post was written by the proverbial monkeys randomly pressing keyboards. The only thing that matters is the content of the post, irrespective of its aetiology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our definitions of recent past in football terms are quite different Westie. I wouldn''t say my memory was short, I could remember that clearly. I would say that was a long time ago. You had to go back nearly 11 months to find an example, once in a whole season. Ok, reluctantly accepting that as an example, what was the difference, we gained a point more, but Tuesday night was 2 points lost. There is no other way of looking at it. It did not warrant 6 effing defenders when the away team showed virtually no attacking intent whatsoever.

I guess we won''t agree no matter how much we debate this but in my mind there is no way that Farke clearly set out to win that game. He set out not to get beat and to hope to win. When it was apparent (as if there was ever gonna be any doubt) that clough set out to hang on as long as possible to a point and was also not even going to risk nicking a win Farke still chose not to go for the win, maintaining his not concede tactic. In my opinion that was completely the wrong decision.

I have varying football discussions with people who attend games, and who play, coach and manage at different levels. I can very much assure you that it makes one hell of a difference to the relevance of the post. It usually gives an indication that some of the keyboard monkeys on here really do not have much of a clue what they are talking about. It is the views of someone who did not go that matter not one jot to me. It is the views of people who have not played that matter not much jot to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parma, the defensive connection could, should and probably would have remained had at least one defensive player been sacrificed. That is as clear as anything. There is no certainty, but there was no certainty in holding back either.

The process could and can be changed. Part of the process is to be able to change. An extra 2 points, the easiest 2 points you could possibly imagine were waiting to be picked up.

I think it''s great that we have 3 clean sheets on the bounce but there is no credit at all for anyone connected to NCFC in real terms for the clean sheet v Burton. They were not even properly interested in a conventional breakaway counter attack. Burton were more responsible for our clean sheet than we were. By the same token we did not stretch, squeeze or test their defence anywhere near, nowhere near our capabilities. We were more responsible for their clean sheet than they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Burton was the pawn sacrificed on the defensive altar of Sheffield away, the lancing of the endemic defensive boil and the mindset and resolve of the players into the future.

None of this is to be confused with what tactics might have best employed to score a goal against Burton. This was not a point that was ever made.

The explanation for the approach was that it was part of an embryonic establishment of a wider, more long-term addressing of systemic defensive weaknesses that had - and had continued - to repeatedly cripple Norwich.

The evidence clearly indicates the intention.

Parma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Get over yourself.

The tripe you spout gets more and more ridiculous by the week.

You have become a laughing stock.

Please explain your credecy for spouting your nonsense.

Have you ever run a football team?

I have, albeit limited. You clearly have nbot.

You sir are a fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Burton was the pawn sacrificed on the defensive altar of Sheffield away, the lancing of the endemic defensive boil and the mindset and resolve of the players into the future"

P.S.

What shite is anybody supposed to swallow that nonsense?

Explain your self-important self before you infest this credible forum with your conceited intensely long-winded rubbish.

You seem so much up your own backside that you fill thes

pages constantrly now.

I repeat. What are your credentials?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Parma is right here. I didn''t like the lack of positivity against Burton and it''s a bit of a shame we didn''t go for it more or we would have had 9 points from these three games BUT I think he is trying to I still good defensive habits and a responsible mindset in the players and we arguably reaped the rewards from that in Saturday where everyone knew and did their jobs properly and despite coming under quite a lot of territorial pressure we looked rock solid. Now that we have a settled and confident defensive 5 or 6 I hope he can gradually add that bit of extra creativity going forward because if he can then we will do very well indeed.

Martin not playing has been a massive help as has having Klose back and the DM pairing but as much as anything it''s been mindset and the team keeping their shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BroadstairsR"]Explain your self-important self before you infest this credible forum with your conceited intensely long-winded rubbish.

You seem so much up your own backside that you fill these

pages constantly now.

I repeat. What are your credentials?[/quote]Broadstairs - who the f**k are you to demand answers and presentation of evidence of any other posters ''credentials''???I don''t understand why Parma has started to come in for a load of $hit recently, but it''s pathetic and needs to stop.If you don''t like what Parma has to offer, then just ignore his posts - instead of slinging the abuse and demanding information like some omnipotent, forum overlord....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It''s been pretty well established that Parma is genuine, Broady.  Personally, I like his use of the English language and his footballing points shine through it.  He is eloquent and creative with the language and even if you don''t like it, there is no need to call him out about it. Often people for who English isn''t their first language have a different aproach to it than us anglo-saxons - vive la difference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BroadstairsR"]"Burton was the pawn sacrificed on the defensive altar of Sheffield away, the lancing of the endemic defensive boil and the mindset and resolve of the players into the future"

P.S.

What shite is anybody supposed to swallow that nonsense?

Explain your self-important self before you infest this credible forum with your conceited intensely long-winded rubbish.

You seem so much up your own backside that you fill thes

pages constantrly now.

I repeat. What are your credentials?[/quote]
Had you read Parma''s previous posts etc you''d know his credentials far outweigh your drunken ramblings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parma Ham''s gone mouldy wrote the following post at 18/09/2017 8:07 AM:

Burton was the pawn sacrificed on the defensive altar of Sheffield away, the lancing of the endemic defensive boil and the mindset and resolve of the players into the future.

Nope, not on your nelly, my nelly or anyone else''s nelly. Farke would obviously be aware of the risk and was scared to take it. I guess because he thought that we were likely to score one anyway. His weak gamble lost. I very much doubt that the Buton tactic had any connection to how the game at Sheffield would be played.

Logically it would not follow that you sacrifice a home win as a tactic to give yourself a better chance of not getting beat away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know the Burton game was poor, but it ony needed one goal from us to have changed that game altogether for the better - and we had two clearcut chances that should have been put away. We didn''t score and a bit like the way Sheffield Utd started to play towards the end of the match on Saturday - the efforts became more and more frantic - and less effective.............and Burton were no pushovers as also proved on Saturday, beating Fulham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Broadstairs - who the f**k are you to demand answers and presentation of evidence of any other posters ''credentials''???"

Just a devil''s advocate who clearly got under your extremely thin skin.

Less of the blaspheming old thing you just expose your lack of class.

Parma speaks as much nonsense as sense.

Clearly you you swallow it all.

Refrain from abuse it''s a football forum not a street corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Had you read Parma''s previous posts etc you''d know his credentials far outweigh your drunken ramblings.

Well I did manage to read quite a bit, but they were rather extended.

I just wish any number of our previous managers (Hughton, Adams, Neil) were endowed with such incite.

Perhaps then we wouldn''t be wallowing in our current mid table mediocrity.

It''s all so easy really.

Hic.

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...