Clean sheet

[The gut 0]

Haha ahead of myself.

I guess one mans ahead of himself is another mans not got a clue.

Hogey, think about it. Burton defending well???? We had six defenders, the other outfield players were clearly under attacking restrictions, clearly. How much did we really test their defending? They must have been so relieved that we did not put them under more pressure.

[nutty nigel 7,527]

So it''s only me prepared to share credentials then Broady. Imagine this was the 19th hole and you demanded someone bought a round. Surely you''d be obliged to stand your round too? In fact really as the instigator you should get them in first.

[hogesar 9,657]

[quote user="The gut"]Haha ahead of myself.

I guess one mans ahead of himself is another mans not got a clue.

Hogey, think about it. Burton defending well???? We had six defenders, the other outfield players were clearly under attacking restrictions, clearly. How much did we really test their defending? They must have been so relieved that we did not put them under more pressure.[/quote]

I agree in principal. But at the same time if we started to over-commit, considering our pourous defence which we''re only in the early stages of sorting, we may have ended up conceding. Or, it may have opened up the game a bit and we''d have scored a couple on the counter. All I''m saying is it''s not as black and white as you''re painting it.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="The gut"]Whether you were at the Burton game Lakey might be irrevelent to your argument but it is of the utmost importance to mine. I refuse to debate a game with someone who did not see it. [/quote]

But the debate isn''t about one match, it''s about the wider principle of improving the defence over a series of matches. You are focussing with what you saw at the Burton match to the exclusion of anything else that might be going on - such as developing good defensive habits with a consistemt approach over a period of time.  From what I saw of the Birmingham match and the Burton match - and I saw all of both - that hard work and focus on defence in those two matches was directly related to the strength and resilience that was seen at Bramall Lane. So you didn''t like what happened at the Burton match - I didn''t either, on the night - but in retrospect I can see the benefit of sticking with a new system if it is going to be one that is going to help us out if the defensive mire we''ve been in for two seasons, if not more.  Surely you can see that the result on Saturday was as a direct result of the approach of the last two matches?

[The gut 0]

Hahaha that is the differences of opinions. I''m only on one because in my eyes that is one of if not the most black and white games I have ever seen. By the way, I do recognise why we set up that way (although I don''t agree), I even understand why he didn''t change it at half time (although I think he should) however I will never understand or accept that he was right to never change it. Recocognising the defensive frailties I am not and nor have I done, advocated over committing to attack. You''re a cheeky bunch.

[The gut 0]

That''s a reply to Hogesar btw.

My reply to your post Lakey is what a lot of Ball ox ;-)

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="The gut"]That''s a reply to Hogesar btw.

My reply to your post Lakey is what a lot of Ball ox ;-)[/quote]Whatever, but it was pretty special after the match at Bramall Lane - the togetherness between players and fans was a joy to behold - and that whole scenario might not have happened had Farke not stuck to his guns with the system. We might have won against Burton changing the system - and then lost against SU changing it back again, so perpetuating the away problem - but what actually happened was better (imo). The players now know they can win in the toughest of circumstances away from home and that knowledge will be invaluable during the season.

[The gut 0]

And if me aging aunty had dangly bits between her legs she''d have been me uncle. Just another lot of old Ball ox

[lake district canary 4,531]

If you want to change things you have to start somewhere, gutty.  The Birmingham match was that start and changing it for Burton would have been wrong.  Three matches with  a better system - no goals conceded.  Result.   I await your next cry of "ball ox" with zero anticipation [H] 

[The gut 0]

Exactly!!!!!

If you want to change something start somewhere not just leave it. I sense that people just want to argue a point, or perhaps argue for a point. My argument is we should have had 3 points against Burton. No doubt. Absolutely no doubt. People might publicly spout the positives but anyone involved at our club would know that Tuesday was a failure. No one would be so foolish as to suggest it was part of a cunning plan to not get beat at Sheffield. Look I''ve not drawn any comparisons to Sheffield because I was not there and my view would not be the complete picture. I won''t argue the toss with someone who was better placed to have an opinion. For all you know Lakey we could have changed it at half time v Burton and grew so much in confidence that we went on to smash the blades 5 nil. Let''s not get silly. When Farke set up against brum he was not seriously thinking about the formation for Sheffield.

I''m sure he would not want aimless balls hit either ;-).

I''ve been playing a fair and reasonable game with you, when I did not need to, now it''s time for you to go and play somewhere else.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Of course people are arguing a point - that''s what the message board is for.  For the argument in this thread, it has all been about getting a formula that works - getting a good defensive mindset as well as getting the right formation.  Having worked something out over the international break and using players that stayed behind, that set up has been laid out, tried and seen to work. So you stick with something that works and you build on it. Yes, we should have won all three points against Burton, but it was not the formation that was the issue - it was the quality of the finishing that was at fault.  I will go and play elsewhere, as you put it and I''ll continue to hope that we keep the same formation against Bristol City, defend like crazy and keep another clean sheet. Then if the strikers are up to it, they will finish any chances they get and give us the three points.  It may not be pretty to watch at the moment, but as the system gells and the players get confidence from it, as they surely must from the last three games, the football is bound to flow better.

[BroadstairsR 2,157]

2So it''s only me prepared to share credentials then Broady. Imagine this was the 19th hole and you demanded someone bought a round. Surely you''d be obliged to stand your round too? In fact really as the instigator you should get them in first. "

Sorry for the belated reply I needed to sleep it off.

I have had the unfortunate experience of getting two holes in one in the last twelve months or so ... same hole.

each time. An eight iron. one over the eight it seemas.

i say unfortunate because such achievements demands that two bottles of whisky have to be put on the bar by the

[Dicky 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel)"]7 points from the last 9, baring in mind the clubs we''ve played, is the least we should expect. And lets be honest we did the absolute bare minimum to achieve those 7 points.

Lets not get carried away celebrating such achievement. Its a little tin pot. Lets get 7 from the next 3 to make up for the dreadful start pre-international break, then some level of praise is rightfully due.

Why do you even bother to pretend that you are a Norwich Fan? Miserable git.

[BroadstairsR 2,157]

Cont.

player who manages it.

I cannot touch the stuff myself so I have the displeasure of witnessing others getting drunk at my expense.

Signed,

Lunchtime O''Booze.

(Preferably in the Old German Beerhouse on Suk. eleven0

[canarydan23 4,060]

"Btw I would bet ny millions that I am younger than you."

If you did that, you''d have to let people know who you are and somehow I suspect you''d have difficulty with that. You''ve got more than a whiff of keyboard warriorness about you.

[BroadstairsR 2,157]

If you did that, you''d have to let people know who you are and somehow I suspect you''d have difficulty with that. You''ve got more than a whiff of keyboard warriorness about you.

"Warriorness?"

Such a need to hurl insults that you make up words now then.

"Warriorness?"

No school taught you that word surely.

[canarydan23 4,060]

Warriorness is patently not a word in the English dictionary but was selected deliberately and sufficed to make the point I intended. And I note you''re not objecting to the implied accusation.

But if you want to go down that route, what on earth do you think credecy means? A made up word? Or are you just trying to operate above your vocabulary level and winding up looking a bit silly?

[BroadstairsR 2,157]

Still peddling insults I note.

One after the other.

Look up "geekiness" whilst you seem to be so upset.

I selected that word deliberately, btw.

One of those who constantly has to resort to insults when something is not to your liking.y

Is there such a thing as "vocabulary level?"

Please explain. Preferably without more insults.``````

[canarydan23 4,060]

"Is there such a thing as "vocabulary level?"

Yes. Is that simple enough? Does it have enough credency (am I using it right?!) for you?

[Coq au vin 0]

Stop! Can''t you both PM each other your sweet nothings?!

[BroadstairsR 2,157]

Thin skinned then.

Hurling insults seems to be your only talent.

Well meant advise: Insulting others only exposes your limitations.

I now intend following Morgan''s well intended advise.