*****Official Match Thread v Rotherham*****

[Van wink 2,994]

10 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Four points, five points, Six points? Is there a new EFL rule on bonus points that only you know about?

Its bonus point and sin bins.......hold on 🏈, wrong game

[canarydan23 4,060]

8 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Four points, five points, Six points? Is there a new EFL rule on bonus points that only you know about?

I don't think they bothered putting the fact that winning 2-0, 3-0, 4-0 etc is better than winning 1-0. I guess they thought it was obvious enough so as not to need including.

Perhaps they were wrong.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

2 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Fine but had Rotherham equalised then you would have had to admit that Farke probably got it wrong? Fortunately they didn't and now you can give Farke praise for that, fair enough. 

I just find it strange that Farke makes comments in press conferences that Dowell needs time on the pitch to find his rythm, only not to give him a single minute today. Vrancic was treading water most of the 2nd half and in my opinion was playing awful. Seemed an obvious substitution to me, and I wasn't the only one.

Strange comment because they didn’t and imo never looked like doing so. Their best chance...the one that Aarons blocked?

I didn’t think Vrancic was too bad today, especially compared to other recent games (when he has been taken off early) and at 1-0 his creativity was needed and potentially more so had Rotherham somehow have scored.

My honest opinion as the game was going on..I couldn’t think of an obvious change to make. I disagreed with those saying we looked knackered, didn’t see that from anyone. Also at only 1-0 it was right to keep our best, most creative players on the pitch, and if they all felt ok then why not? Rotherham didn’t look like scoring so we were managing the game perfectly and therefore why risk a change to disrupt the flow? Dowell for Vrancic could have been made but wasn’t essential for our control on the game and we didn’t need to go chasing a second goal.

 

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Look at the table Pete, I guess Farke knows what he's doing eh?. I wanted earlier subs but we won son, end of.

The trouble is, it's not end of. I wanted subs and said so at the time. When the whistle went I was delighted we'd won and delighted by the league table.

But you get your oddballs who when the whistle goes clench their fists and say "get in, those strangers on the Internet who wanted subs are going to get it now, the idiots" and furiously type away at the keyboard. I'd have more respect for them if they said at the time that all will be well, but in reality they were probably equally as terrified watching us almost squander what should have been a much more straightforward 3 points.

I should just ignore their hindsight formed angst, granted, but I'm never that rational in the aftermath of a match.

[sgncfc 1,228]

I didn't notice anyone looking tired. Vrancic was still running quite well when he was subbed and was still involved. Pukki was defending one second and then missing a chance at the other the next, and that was in the 86th minute.

It was a tough game. Yes, we should have been streets ahead by half time, but we weren't, which meant that Rotherham came out with a specific game plan and we were ready for them. They barely had a kick in our area, and the one time it fell for them 3 players threw themselves into the block. Krul (again) had very little to do. Even in the second half we had several decent chances - better chances than they had all game.

We are actually quite good at single goal victories it seems, plus 6 clean sheets in the last 9 games which would have been 7 without Gianni's suicide pass against Stoke. 

I'm not sure what there is to criticise - seriously, you're moaning about a lack of substitutions? Have a word with yourselves.

 

[Herman 9,767]

Norwich City lose.

Norwich City win.

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

1 minute ago, sgncfc said:

I didn't notice anyone looking tired. Vrancic was still running quite well when he was subbed and was still involved. Pukki was defending one second and then missing a chance at the other the next, and that was in the 86th minute.

It was a tough game. Yes, we should have been streets ahead by half time, but we weren't, which meant that Rotherham came out with a specific game plan and we were ready for them. They barely had a kick in our area, and the one time it fell for them 3 players threw themselves into the block. Krul (again) had very little to do. Even in the second half we had several decent chances - better chances than they had all game.

We are actually quite good at single goal victories it seems, plus 6 clean sheets in the last 9 games which would have been 7 without Gianni's suicide pass against Stoke. 

I'm not sure what there is to criticise - seriously, you're moaning about a lack of substitutions? Have a word with yourselves.

 

Good post and a good point that I don’t think is mentioned enough is how much better defensively we are this season compared to 2 years ago.

Its tempered the attack slightly but we’re still winning games and clear top of the league. Arguably the team is much better balanced this time out. Less entertaining maybe, but equally if not more effective. Good preparation if we are to get promoted

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

The trouble is, it's not end of. I wanted subs and said so at the time. When the whistle went I was delighted we'd won and delighted by the league table.

But you get your oddballs who when the whistle goes clench their fists and say "get in, those strangers on the Internet who wanted subs are going to get it now, the idiots" and furiously type away at the keyboard. I'd have more respect for them if they said at the time that all will be well, but in reality they were probably equally as terrified watching us almost squander what should have been a much more straightforward 3 points.

I should just ignore their hindsight formed angst, granted, but I'm never that rational in the aftermath of a match.

I know what you're saying, but if we had made subs and lost then what would you say?

Its all about the result, if we lose and keep losing Farke loses his job, in the alternative he gets his bonus. There will always be those that want to score points off other posters, but most people on here, ( with one  particular noteable exception ) are pretty decent.

 

[Downloads 35]

Defence was great, i admit i was a bit concerned with Zimmerman on, but he was really solid. Glad he got some time under his belt as his last game wasn't great. Will only do good things for his confidence

Edited February 20, 2021 by Downloads

[Van wink 2,994]

1 minute ago, Downloads said:

Defence was great, i admit i was a bit concerned with Zimmerman on, but he was really solid. Glad he got some time under his belt as his last game wasn't great. Will only do good things for his confidence

I just want him to be like he used to be, needs the game time and the confidence, Im a big fan and plased to see him complete 90 mins dispite further attempts to wipe him out.

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, Van wink said:

I know what you're saying, but if we had made subs and lost then what would you say?

Its all about the result, if we lose and keep losing Farke loses his job, in the alternative he gets his bonus. There will always be those that want to score points off other posters, but most people on here, ( with one  particular noteable exception ) are pretty decent.

 

As I said it at the time, I'd have to take the flak. I can't say "get Dowell, Onel and Sorenson on for Vrancic, Todd and McLean", see that happen, lose the game and then moan.

And for the record, I don't necessarily think those three were bad, just that the team needed fresh legs. Rotherham needed fresh legs, got them, and improved. I thought, and still think, the same thing would have happened to us.

[Van wink 2,994]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

As I said it at the time, I'd have to take the flak. I can't say "get Dowell, Onel and Sorenson on for Vrancic, Todd and McLean", see that happen, lose the game and then moan.

And for the record, I don't necessarily think those three were bad, just that the team needed fresh legs. Rotherham needed fresh legs, got them, and improved. I thought, and still think, the same thing would have happened to us.

He will have his reasons, he knows he players a hell of a lot better than we do.

[Capt. Pants 4,234]

11 minutes ago, Herman said:

Norwich City lose.

Norwich City win.

To be fair during the match comments were fair and reasonable and in the context of the game. People were just commenting on the match - strange I know for a matchday thread!

Only after the final whistle has gone do some want to call out others for their opinions.

Pointless having a matchday thread unless you can comment on what you actually see!

[BigFish 1,987]

18 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

I don't think they bothered putting the fact that winning 2-0, 3-0, 4-0 etc is better than winning 1-0. I guess they thought it was obvious enough so as not to need including.

Perhaps they were wrong.

The thing is that Farke was getting stick for his so called game management. That is all about sitting it out on 1-0, keeping your system and shape intact, rather than chasing a second or third with the risk that the disruption to your own style outways the benefit. Farke got it bang on, the result proves it. If we had conceded it would be fair to say he made the wrong choice. We will never know whether it would have been more comfortable with changes, but we do know we would only have got the same points or fewer. I am with those who really couldn't see how subbing would be an improvement.

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, Van wink said:

He will have his reasons, he knows he players a hell of a lot better than we do.

That's true of all coaches. Doesn't make them infallible.

[Samwam27 527]

Great hard earned win, and great weekend for results. My only concern is someone highlighted we've got 7 games in 21 in what already is a gruelling season. Today we;ve had 11 players playing 90mins, which Farke tends to stick with majority of every game.

We're going great guns but I hope the players don't get burned out, and with subs getting so little game time, it's hard for the periphery players to "get their rhythm" as Farke said in interviews  

[king canary 7,607]

58 minutes ago, Ian said:

No problem with disagreement, and I don't have to resort to insults to get my point across.

What I do have is a problem with fans who seem to think someone like Farke doesn't know the basics of football management, like game management and making substitutions and proclaim it in such an arrogant and condescending manner.

As you say, it's a discussion forum and you are free to make whatever criticisms you like. Equally, I believe that makes me able to call such people out whenever I think it is appropriate. Or do you think you are free to say whatever you like without people responding?

If you think that makes me a "berk" then I think that perhaps you are the one who doesn't understand the concept of discussion within a forum.

You called me arrogant so you can get off your high horse about insults to start with.

The whole 'oh you clearly think you know better than the manager' response is fundamentally anti debate. It shuts it down. Because none of us (apart from maybe Parma) know more than Farke, nor did we know more than Roeder, Grant or Gunn yet I'm sure you weren't reacting this way to any critique of them. By your criteria none of us can ever comment on anything.

So if you disagree, fine, disagree. But don't hide behind this **** and claim I'm trying to stop you from having an opinion. 'DUH MANAGA NOS MORE DAN YOOOO' isn't an opinion.

Edited February 20, 2021 by king canary

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, BigFish said:

The thing is that Farke was getting stick for his so called game management. That is all about sitting it out on 1-0, keeping your system and shape intact, rather than chasing a second or third with the risk that the disruption to your own style outways the benefit. Farke got it bang on, the result proves it. If we had conceded it would be fair to say he made the wrong choice. We will never know whether it would have been more comfortable with changes, but we do know we would only have got the same points or fewer. I am with those who really couldn't see how subbing would be an improvement.

Stick is harsh. The worst I saw was "bizarre game management". All I said was I agreed with the bizarre judgement and said I think without changes we risk throwing it away and that Rotherham having made 4 then all 5 changes before we made one was behind their marked improvement second half.

But even that riled some. Bizarre.

[king canary 7,607]

3 minutes ago, BigFish said:

The thing is that Farke was getting stick for his so called game management. That is all about sitting it out on 1-0, keeping your system and shape intact, rather than chasing a second or third with the risk that the disruption to your own style outways the benefit. Farke got it bang on, the result proves it. If we had conceded it would be fair to say he made the wrong choice. We will never know whether it would have been more comfortable with changes, but we do know we would only have got the same points or fewer. I am with those who really couldn't see how subbing would be an improvement.

Personally I thought there was space behind Rotherham that could have been exploited by bringing Onel on for Cantwell or Vrancic. Similarly a fresh midfielder next to Skipp might have stopped us giving away so many fouls (although based on this ref maybe not). All hypothetical. 

I do dispute though that the results proves it was correct. If we struggle on Tuesday and look leggy me or canaryDan could claim our opinion is justified. Sometimes it isn't just about the game today but also the next game and the game after  especially in a season like this.

[king canary 7,607]

3 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Stick is harsh. The worst I saw was "bizarre game management". All I said was I agreed with the bizarre judgement and said I think without changes we risk throwing it away and that Rotherham having made 4 then all 5 changes before we made one was behind their marked improvement second half.

But even that riled some. Bizarre.

Exactly. Some on here react to any remote criticism of Farke like a 10 year old who's just been told his dad isn't perfect.

I have given Farke an awful lot of credit this season, it doesn't mean he's perfect and above any critique.

[Downloads 35]

9 minutes ago, king canary said:

You called me arrogant so you can get off your high horse about insults to start with.

The whole 'oh you clearly think you know better than the manager' response is fundamentally anti debate. It shuts it down. Because none of us (apart from maybe Parma) know more than Farke, nor did we know more than Roeder, Grant or Gunn yet I'm sure you weren't reacting this way to any critique of them. By your criteria none of us can ever comment on anything.

So if you disagree, fine, disagree. But don't hide behind this **** and claim I'm trying to stop you from having an opinion. 'DUH MANAGA NOS MORE DAN YOOOO' isn't an opinion.

Exactly. It makes me want to post less if i can't have an opinion on the match day thread without being called negative afterwards. I like the opinions during a game, i didn't think they were negative, just stressed out fans who were watching a sub-par second half performance. All part of the fun, that should be the end of it.

Edited February 20, 2021 by Downloads

[king canary 7,607]

1 minute ago, Downloads said:

Exactly. It makes me want to post less if i can't have an opinion on the match day post without being called negative afterwards. I like the opinions during a game, i didn't think they were negative, just stressed out fans who were watching a sub-par second half performance. All part of the fun, that should be the end of it.

Same. But some people see anything other than cheerleading as heresy.

Negative after a loss? Pantwetter, didn't hear you making these points when we were winning?

Critical after a win? Just looking for a stick to beat the club with.

Not keen on a new signing? Why are you writing him off before he's kicked a ball?

Negative on a new signings after 12 months of underperformance? Well I don't remember you being unhappy when we signed him!

On and on and on...

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, king canary said:

Exactly. Some on here react to any remote criticism of Farke like a 10 year old who's just been told his dad isn't perfect.

I have given Farke an awful lot of credit this season, it doesn't mean he's perfect and above any critique.

Overused word today, but it's bizarre. I've never liked a manager more than I like Farke, I think he's the best coach we've had since I started going to Carra Rud in 92.

I'll still think he makes mistakes. Even in games we win.

[Ian 1,129]

18 minutes ago, king canary said:

You called me arrogant so you can get off your high horse about insults to start with.

The whole 'oh you clearly think you know better than the manager' response is fundamentally anti debate. It shuts it down. Because none of us (apart from maybe Parma) know more than Farke, nor did we know more than Roeder, Grant or Gunn yet I'm sure you weren't reacting this way to any critique of them. By your criteria none of us can ever comment on anything.

So if you disagree, fine, disagree. But don't hide behind this **** and claim I'm trying to stop you from having an opinion. 'DUH MANAGA NOS MORE DAN YOOOO' isn't an opinion.

Your post was quite literally "you have a quality bench full of talent, use it", presumably aimed at Farke who is the guy who has done (and is doing) the business for me. I am very sorry if you find it offensive, but in my opinion that is the very definition of arrogance and I expressed my view accordingly.

As for your nonsense about shutting down debate or not having an opinion, I expressed the complete opposite. I don't recall once saying to you that you, or indeed anybody, that they shouldn't have an argument or opinion over football - indeed that is the entire point of supporting a club and being on a forum.

It seems that you've taken umbrage to me pointing out I don't agree with your opinion, when looking at the evidence as I see it. All the other straw-man nonsense about me saying you can't have an opinion or shouldn't post is just that - a weak attempt to try and deflect away from the fact that it appears YOU are the one who doesn't like me commenting and disagreeing with your opinion. Is that called projection? I'm sure someone much cleverer than me (like Canary Dan) will be able to confirm.

 

Edited February 20, 2021 by Ian

[horsefly 4,300]

49 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

I just find it strange that Farke makes comments in press conferences that Dowell needs time on the pitch to find his rythm, only not to give him a single minute today.

He gave him some time in the Millwall match and Dowell made a dreadful pass that nearly gifted them a goal. I like Dowell and hope he gets some game time soon, but today seemed a clear case of Farke not wanting to upset the balance of the team when they didn't look like conceding (how many chances did Rotherham have in the last 15 minutes?). I have more faith in Farke's judgement than I do in any of the posters on here, myself included.

[Van wink 2,994]

16 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

That's true of all coaches. Doesn't make them infallible.

Yeh, but when they are top of the league with a record of success it takes somebody with an impressive personal record to make credible critisism.

[Ian 1,129]

 

12 minutes ago, Downloads said:

Exactly. It makes me want to post less if i can't have an opinion on the match day thread without being called negative afterwards. I like the opinions during a game, i didn't think they were negative, just stressed out fans who were watching a sub-par second half performance. All part of the fun, that should be the end of it.

Very interesting. Just a thought though; could it be that the ridiculous over-reactions and the attitude of "how dare you question my opinion, I'm just a stressed out fan" could be putting off other quite reasonable people from having a post on here?

It's pretty simple, if you put something on here (a public forum) that other people think is a bit silly, I really don't get why you would be so precious about people pointing that out. Personal abuse obviously crosses the line, but as you say, disagreements and debate are all part of it and I don't get why people think they are exempt from criticism just because they cite freedom of speech and it being their "opinion".
 

[Downloads 35]

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Your post was quite literally "you have a quality bench full of talent, use it", presumably aimed at Farke who is the guy who has done (and is doing) the business for me. I am very sorry if you find it offensive, but in my opinion that is the very definition of arrogance and I expressed my view accordingly.

As for your nonsense about shutting down debate or not having an opinion, I expressed the complete opposite. I don't recall once saying to you that you, or indeed anybody, that they shouldn't have an argument or opinion over football - indeed that is the entire point of supporting a club and being on a forum.

It seems that you've taken umbrage to me pointing out I don't agree with your opinion, when looking at the evidence as I see it. All the other straw-man nonsense about me saying you can't have an opinion or shouldn't post is just that - a straw-man argument trying to deflect away from the fact that it appears YOU are the one who doesn't like me commenting and disagreeing with your opinion. Is that called projection? I'm sure someone much cleverer than me (like Canary Dan) will be able to confirm.

 

Wrong. That is not the definition of arrogance. 

 

Arrogant - Having an exaggerated sense of one's own importance.

He was just having an opinion. So now you see why someone can take offence.

 

The 'negative people' are commenting on the football, the 'positive people' are commenting negatively about other posters. Almost like an oxymoron that.

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Yeh, but when they are top of the league with a record of success it takes somebody with an impressive personal record to make credible critisism.

So no criticism is credible then, according to that logic. We'd still be top if we lose on Tuesday with Skipp in goal and Hanley on the left-wing. You wouldn't need a tenure as English manager to criticise that.

[canarydan23 4,060]

10 minutes ago, Ian said:

Your post was quite literally "you have a quality bench full of talent, use it", presumably aimed at Farke who is the guy who has done (and is doing) the business for me. I am very sorry if you find it offensive, but in my opinion that is the very definition of arrogance and I expressed my view accordingly.

As for your nonsense about shutting down debate or not having an opinion, I expressed the complete opposite. I don't recall once saying to you that you, or indeed anybody, that they shouldn't have an argument or opinion over football - indeed that is the entire point of supporting a club and being on a forum.

It seems that you've taken umbrage to me pointing out I don't agree with your opinion, when looking at the evidence as I see it. All the other straw-man nonsense about me saying you can't have an opinion or shouldn't post is just that - a weak attempt to try and deflect away from the fact that it appears YOU are the one who doesn't like me commenting and disagreeing with your opinion. Is that called projection? I'm sure someone much cleverer than me (like Canary Dan) will be able to confirm.

 

No. It's not called projection.

Happy to help.