breaker 0 Posted February 2, 2006 I know this has been discussed before but not for some time - are the problems we are having around the midfield as a result of trying to shoehorn Hux in first?At the moment he does not seem to be providing much in the way of genuine midfield play (probably not surprising as he is not a genuine midfield player) which is therefore not helping the team. Normally this might be accepted if he was providing service to the strikers and looking an attacking force himself. However, he appears to be becoming less and less effective as an attacking midfielder and with no similar player wide right it leaves the central two (whichever combination you pick) very exposed.I would like to see McVeigh as the left sided midfielder (his best season goals-wise was mainly from this position remember) and Louis-Jean (when eventually fit) on the right.Darren would probably not agree!Discuss. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AP16 0 Posted February 2, 2006 I wouldn''t agree either. I''d blame it on the shoddy signings inMidfield. We looked semi-solid with Youssef in there, but Hughes....ohmy dear lord....what actually is he? Surely he''s a plumber by trade orsomething, not a footballer!? I think the problem lies in just nothaving the quality there, for god''s sake, Etuhu, Jarrett andHughes....to be fair, you wouldn''t win the third division with those inmidfield. I think the balance just isn''t there at present, personally,i''d favour Huckerby, Safri, Rehman, McVeigh. With those three you havetwo wingers, on the left you have ridiculous flair and pace, on theright, McVeigh defo has the footballing brain and attacking ability,Safri....well, need I say anything? That bloke is worth three playersalone, and Rehman, by the sounds of it, hopefully is pretty solid. Thatleaves you with Earnshaw and Johansson up frontHowever, I would agree that Huckerby is pretty lazy when it comes todefensive duties. I think it has to be remembered though that he hasbeen played as a striker for most of his career, not a winger. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salopian 1 Posted February 2, 2006 The problem will not go away.The inclusion of Hux does rather determine the shape of the team. If you play him as a striker, then when he wanders to the left the other striker is left isolated and without support. If you play him as a wide left player, then the midfield is unbalanced and the left fullback has little cover. We have "solved" this problem by playing 4-3-3, but this tends to leave us narrow in the midfield, with little cover for either fullback and worst of all overrrun by sheer numbers, as our present midfielders struggle to cope.Solutions:1) Play 4-3-3, knowing that if he is on form Hux will create scoring opportunities, but we shall probably concede goals. This will succeed, as it it did in the promotion season because we had a rock-like defence.2) Play 4-4-2, with Hux wide left,which has a similar result.3) Heresy! Drop Hux when we need to be tighter in defence.I have to admit that while I am a great admirer of Hux, his low-grade infection has reduced his potency in attack, and unless he is really at his best he does cause problems for us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Misery Guts 0 Posted February 2, 2006 well Breaker , it is beyond me why we disbanded our very succesful championship winning formation of having GKLB CB CB RB CM CM RMHuckerby CF CF In the good old days when we had Holt and Francis in the middle we had enough energy and commitment in the engine room to cover for Huckerby bombing forward , Hughes is a "here, there, everywhere" sort of player but lacks the quality of his predecessors . I think that if I was Norwich manager I would have 3 at the back ,a flat four in midfield , two strikers and just give Huckerby a liscense to rampage over the pitch . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Priest 0 Posted February 2, 2006 [quote user="breaker"]I know this has been discussed before but not for some time - are the problems we are having around the midfield as a result of trying to shoehorn Hux in first? At the moment he does not seem to be providing much in the way of genuine midfield play (probably not surprising as he is not a genuine midfield player) which is therefore not helping the team. Normally this might be accepted if he was providing service to the strikers and looking an attacking force himself. However, he appears to be becoming less and less effective as an attacking midfielder and with no similar player wide right it leaves the central two (whichever combination you pick) very exposed. I would like to see McVeigh as the left sided midfielder (his best season goals-wise was mainly from this position remember) and Louis-Jean (when eventually fit) on the right. Darren would probably not agree! Discuss.[/quote]Sacrilage!Play him behind the front two in a free role, surely with all the defensive midfielders worthy has bought this has to be his plan.That or not play him and remove our most significant attacking threat Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0 Posted February 2, 2006 [quote user="Safri15"]I wouldn''t agree either. I''d blame it on the shoddy signings in Midfield. We looked semi-solid with Youssef in there, but Hughes....oh my dear lord....what actually is he? Surely he''s a plumber by trade or something, not a footballer!? I think the problem lies in just not having the quality there, for god''s sake, Etuhu, Jarrett and Hughes....to be fair, you wouldn''t win the third division with those in midfield. I think the balance just isn''t there at present, personally, i''d favour Huckerby, Safri, Rehman, McVeigh. With those three you have two wingers, on the left you have ridiculous flair and pace, on the right, McVeigh defo has the footballing brain and attacking ability, Safri....well, need I say anything? That bloke is worth three players alone, and Rehman, by the sounds of it, hopefully is pretty solid. That leaves you with Earnshaw and Johansson up frontHowever, I would agree that Huckerby is pretty lazy when it comes to defensive duties. I think it has to be remembered though that he has been played as a striker for most of his career, not a winger. [/quote]I agree mate. A fully fit drury can handle himself with the 3 man midfield, Colin and Charlton really struggle without the assistance Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 261 Posted February 2, 2006 Love the name misery! The reason why we have moved away from the champs system is that all the managers know that there will be acres of space behind hux and so attack that side very hard, stretching the rest of the midfield and defence, leaving holes left right and centre. This impact is lower when Safri is playing who seems expert at covering that area defensively.A proper 4-4-2 needs real wide midfielders - the club simply does not have them - hux is a converted striker and wlys talents are also attacking play, being a striker, so neither do the defensive part well on the left and we all know that wide right has been a problem area for 4/5 years only ever partially solved with jonson and cooper/harper.So that riles 442 out. 433 we have tried this year but only successful when the midfield 3 were capable players; with safri, robinson & 1 or perhaps it will be successful again with Johansson, Earnie & Hux up front? However that would seem to limit the effectiveness of earnie. With an over stocked central midfield pool why not go 5 across the middle with WLY the man sitting centrally ahead of a deep lying 4 (protecting the back line) and linking a pacy front two. With a back 3 would this work? Doc Shacks RehmanHughes Drury Robinson Safri WLY Johannson Earnie Alternatively we may as well go the whole hog and go with the current tactics and go 5-1-0-4Colin Doc Rehman Shacks Drury Safri Johansson Earnie WLY Hux Either the 4 flair players of Hux.WLY,Johannson and Earnie are unlikely to start the game together. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sheded 0 Posted February 2, 2006 I actually believe that Hucks should be rested for a while ! he`s been the ever present king pin of the team ever since he came here , and this virus he has is symptomatic of a lowering of his immune system ? I reckon Nigel should send him , and his family , on a fortnights holiday in some tropical spot ..... with orders to forget football , and just relax , its what `ole bighead would do ! fact is ..... he often took the whole TEAM out to some hot spot , and they all got p*ssed up together ! now that is what I call bonding , LOL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0 Posted February 2, 2006 One thing is very clear the management don''t know what the answer is either! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
breaker 0 Posted February 2, 2006 I agree Sheded, the old style team bonding seems to have all but disappeared but there are times when nothing else will do. It would probably do Hucks good to have a rest (after beating Ipswich naturally!).I''m glad there has been good discussion on this post rather than lots of pro/anti-Hucks rants and I have not been slaughtered too much!I suppose the real answer is that a confident, winning team will play well whatever the system or players used as Reading proved on Tuesday night.I still think Huckerby is a jewel in the squad and that there is nothing more exciting than seeing him take on defenders at full tilt - it''s just that he ain''t really done that for a while. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rudolph Hucker 0 Posted February 2, 2006 Done to death.Cremated like one of Rant''s thread themes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites