Jump to content
Petriix

Where are the goals supposed to come from?

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, hogesar said:

For what it's worth,  when Cantwell is back I would like to see us try 4-2-3-1 again. I think Hanley and Kabak are capable. I think Normann plus PLM could potentially hold as a two. 

I'm not sure if we will see it soon though. Ignoring Chelsea, if we perform in this formation in the same way against Leeds, defend well but actually take a chance or two I can't see anyone wanting to move away from this shape. Had we took our chances today this thread wouldn't even exist. At the moment, whilst I like @Petriix posts,  he's sort of blaming the tactical shape and formation for poor finishing with this thread.

I'd prefer to see Cantwell come into the side in place of McLean. It allows us to continue with the solid defensive shape that's working and by playing Cantwell in that position, similar to how Leicester used Maddison yesterday as a 3-4-1-2 in possession and a 5-3-2 out of it with Maddison dropping into midfield, we could hopefully have that extra attacking player when going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, komakino said:

I've met "Norwich Fans" who did not want us to go up and still want us to go down. I've met Norwich fans who did not renew their season tickets in the past when we went up and said they would renew again once back in the second tier. I'm in a job where I meet a lot of local people and therefore Norwich City fans and all too often there are those that do not want EPL football. I can understand preferring The Championship as a spectacle, but wanting the club you support not to go up/go down is beyond comprehension. 

Then again, should we be surprised? 

Delia has made her views on the EPL perfectly clear  - remember the infamous Times piece in 2016 - and my spouse worked at CR a few years back and it in her opinion there was not the desire for EPL football - maybe because it exposed their financial limitations? 

My view is is the 'Deliaisation' of the club has got a certain section of the fanbase - it's debatable how much - into her parochial nonsense and accepting second best all too often. This season looks like another brief flirtation with the EPL and back into the comfort zone of The Championship which will please some - they do exist - because I've met some of them. 

So that's why they have spent £60m on transfers then, so that they can guarantee demotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, horsefly said:

So that's why they have spent £60m on transfers then, so that they can guarantee demotion.

By the look of / non appearance of the the three 'record' signings, I would suggest the club are well on course to achieving said target!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horsefly said:

So that's why they have spent £60m on transfers then, so that they can guarantee demotion.

Apart the the fact they haven't spent that figure as our net spend is circa £20-25M - though I think Webber has largely wasted it - there may be some method in what your state. 

After the virtual zero spend of two seasons ago that got a lot of neutrals back ups - and commentators alike. Hence why we've had bad press so far this season. Had we had pulled the same stunt again with no results, then I could see a rule where clubs that are seen to be coming up for the money would be penalised in some capacity. Reduced or removed Parachute payments for example, so the club has to be seen to be making an effort.

When you have owners that morally don't like the EPL, but are happy to take its money every two or three years to keep them and the ultimately doomed self funding model in situ - it's an unholy alliance and an unsustainable one at that. 

We need owners that want and enjoy NCFC to be in the EPL as an established figure. We don't have that. Instead with have pathetic owners - not pathetic as people  - but pathetic in the position they hold in relation to the club and what is needed in 2021, though that hasn't fundamentally changed since the 90's. 

Edited by komakino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I'd prefer to see Cantwell come into the side in place of McLean. It allows us to continue with the solid defensive shape that's working and by playing Cantwell in that position, similar to how Leicester used Maddison yesterday as a 3-4-1-2 in possession and a 5-3-2 out of it with Maddison dropping into midfield, we could hopefully have that extra attacking player when going forward.

This is essentially my view as well. I was disappointed to see McLean on the team sheet yesterday, but I can't really comment on how it worked in practice as I didn't actually see yesterday's game.

Did have a cracking day watching Union St Gilloise come from 2-0 down with only 10 men at half time to winning 4-2. It weird given that Brighton have the same owner, I was simultaneously cheering on one of his side's whilst praying that his other team lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hogesar said:

We didnt play hoof ball at all. The stats back that up. We mixed it up more and tried to break the press with balls over the top for Sargent,  that generally worked,  but if people could stop making things up it'd be much easier to have a sensible debate.

What exactly am I making up? I was at the game yesterday and we played a very direct style which is the complete opposite of the possession based football that Farke has favoured in every other season he’s been in charge. We had 35% possession. At home. Sensible debate means you listen to other people’s option and don’t just dismiss them because it’s not what you want to hear. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, horsefly said:

Any one of the 3 clear cut chances taken yesterday and we would have won, that's where the victory would have come from. Frankly you do yourself no favours by claiming, "And we need to win games like these to stay in the EPL, though that will not be of interest to some of our fanbase and our hapless majority shareholders". It's fine to disagree about the tactics being employed to achieve success, but to suggest that there is anyone at the club or among the fanbase who is not "interested" in achieving success is palpable nonsense and unnecessarily insulting.

If any of their chances had been scored we would have lost! If ifs and buts were candy and nuts…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

What exactly am I making up? I was at the game yesterday and we played a very direct style which is the complete opposite of the possession based football that Farke has favoured in every other season he’s been in charge. We had 35% possession. At home. Sensible debate means you listen to other people’s option and don’t just dismiss them because it’s not what you want to hear. 

We surrendered possession but we didnt play hoof ball. Ill listen to sensible debate but when the short pass / long pass percentages are very similar to the opposition i.e Brighton,  who equally didn't play hoofball, I'm not sure your point stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I'd prefer to see Cantwell come into the side in place of McLean. It allows us to continue with the solid defensive shape that's working and by playing Cantwell in that position, similar to how Leicester used Maddison yesterday as a 3-4-1-2 in possession and a 5-3-2 out of it with Maddison dropping into midfield, we could hopefully have that extra attacking player when going forward.

Yeah I wouldn't be unhappy with that. We would have to adjust slightly though, McLean had to regularly cover defensively for Giannoulis being caught very high up the pitch (deliberate tactics im sure) and I wouldn't fancy Cantwell regularly defending one on one in the left back position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

If any of their chances had been scored we would have lost! If ifs and buts were candy and nuts…

If any of our chances would have been scored we would have won...and repeat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hogesar said:

For what it's worth,  when Cantwell is back I would like to see us try 4-2-3-1 again. I think Hanley and Kabak are capable. I think Normann plus PLM could potentially hold as a two. 

I'm not sure if we will see it soon though. Ignoring Chelsea, if we perform in this formation in the same way against Leeds, defend well but actually take a chance or two I can't see anyone wanting to move away from this shape. Had we took our chances today this thread wouldn't even exist. At the moment, whilst I like @Petriix posts,  he's sort of blaming the tactical shape and formation for poor finishing with this thread.

I'm out of likes, but 👍

In a way, the fact that we had those chances to miss yesterday is beside the point. Pukki didn't exactly miss a sitter, he had a couple of half-chances which he might have taken. Sargent really should have had two goals, simply from the positions he received the ball in.

But let's look at where those chances came from: a blunder by the goalkeeper and a swift counter when they gave us the ball.

Maybe that's the genuine answer to my original question. Our plan is to sit deep, press well and wait for a mistake to gift us an opening. 

It begs the question of why we signed the players we did when there's no place in the team for them. The transfer window is looking worse and worse as time goes on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

If any of their chances had been scored we would have lost! If ifs and buts were candy and nuts…

All very true of course (as is always the case with counterfactual statements). The point I was addressing, however, was the claim that it was impossible to see where the goals are going to come from playing the present strategy. I defy anyone to say in all honesty that there were not 3 very clear cut chances to score yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, komakino said:

Apart the the fact they haven't spent that figure as our net spend is circa £20-25M - though I think Webber has largely wasted it - there may be some method in what your state. 

After the virtual zero spend of two seasons ago that got a lot of neutrals back ups - and commentators alike. Hence why we've had bad press so far this season. Had we had pulled the same stunt again with no results, then I could see a rule where clubs that are seen to be coming up for the money would be penalised in some capacity. Reduced or removed Parachute payments for example, so the club has to be seen to be making an effort.

When you have owners that morally don't like the EPL, but are happy to take its money every two or three years to keep them and the ultimately doomed self funding model in situ - it's an unholy alliance and an unsustainable one at that. 

We need owners that want and enjoy NCFC to be in the EPL as an established figure. We don't have that. Instead with have pathetic owners - not pathetic as people  - but pathetic in the position they hold in relation to the club and what is needed in 2021, though that hasn't fundamentally changed since the 90's. 

Frankly I don't believe that anyone on this site genuinely expected the club to spend the amount of money it did this summer? I'm afraid your narrative just doesn't accord with reality. It's one thing to recognise that Delia expresses genuine concern for the way the EPL currently functions (I hope all true fans of football would at the very least question its current reliance on very dodgy billionaires), it's another thing to claim that means our current owners and staff do not aspire to compete at that level. Yes of course the self-funding model puts us at a significant disadvantage compared to the mega-rich clubs (more accurately, mega-rich owners), but just what alternative do you suggest? Delia's and Michael's wealth is puny compared to many owners of clubs throughout the PL, Championship, and even League 1; what they have achieved is thus far from "pathetic" (just ask the lot down the road about billionaire owners). The simple fact is that no beneficent billionaire ready to throw hundreds of millions at the club has popped up at CR, and none of you wanting Delia out have provided the name of one kicking down the gates of CR to do so. Fantasizing about one turning up doesn't constitute a strategy for future success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me laugh how the policy under the current owners is lauded yet the almost same thing under Chase had him run out of town! He sold our better players but got us into Europe and 3 top 5 finishes, yet now we have an ownership who had us in the third tier for the first time in 50 years and constantly sells our best players too

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

It makes me laugh how the policy under the current owners is lauded yet the almost same thing under Chase had him run out of town! He sold our better players but got us into Europe and 3 top 5 finishes, yet now we have an ownership who had us in the third tier for the first time in 50 years and constantly sells our best players too

 

 

It makes me laugh when people try to attack the owners for a relegation that happened 10 years ago and where we bounced up immediately, and then we're promoted again the following season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it didn’t happen then? My mistake. 
 

I must have dreamt it.
 

You never talk about years gone by then on here Nutty? 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheBaldOne66 said:

So it didn’t happen then? My mistake. 
 

I must have dreamt it.
 

You never talk about years gone by then on here Nutty? 
 

 

We all talk about years gone by, I don't think most of us think one season in the third tier is the best way to judge a nearly 25 year long ownership of the club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 1902 said:

It makes me laugh when people try to attack the owners for a relegation that happened 10 years ago and where we bounced up immediately, and then we're promoted again the following season.

Where have I attacked the owners? Just stated an opinion but then there are so many on here who would never hear a bad word said against our fabulous owners isn’t there?

 

it’s the same as when people say about changing owners would have to be bad yet there are many cases where it’s been successful but they have to be glossed over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 1902 said:

We all talk about years gone by, I don't think most of us think one season in the third tier is the best way to judge a nearly 25 year long ownership of the club. 

So what is the best way to judge it then? There are positives and negatives and for each promotion we’ve achieved I believe there’s been as many relegations? How many cup semi finals or finals have there been?

It again makes me laugh how people only want to talk about the positives under Delia when as I say there’s been many negatives too, but we are not allowed to mention those 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheBaldOne66 said:

Where have I attacked the owners? Just stated an opinion but then there are so many on here who would never hear a bad word said against our fabulous owners isn’t there?

 

it’s the same as when people say about changing owners would have to be bad yet there are many cases where it’s been successful but they have to be glossed over. 

I don't think you can reasonably argue that this isn't an appeal to change owners and that you aren't using our one season in league one as a reason for that despite it happening a decade ago. 

There's no point dealing with your second point, as you yourself have said it's been discussed in thousands upon thousands of posts on here and it just descends into "but what about... Pick X example" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

So what is the best way to judge it then? There are positives and negatives and for each promotion we’ve achieved I believe there’s been as many relegations? How many cup semi finals or finals have there been?

It again makes me laugh how people only want to talk about the positives under Delia when as I say there’s been many negatives too, but we are not allowed to mention those 

You can mention them as much as you like, but we can also say that picking the lowest point in the club's recent history is ridiculous.

The reality is that we have been a yo-yo club for close to a decade between the premier league and the championship, that's our place in the football hierarchy and it's whether you feel that's good enough that I believe the owners should be judge on. Not as a club that was once in the third tier for one season.

Edited by 1902

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Petriix said:

I'm out of likes, but 👍

In a way, the fact that we had those chances to miss yesterday is beside the point. Pukki didn't exactly miss a sitter, he had a couple of half-chances which he might have taken. Sargent really should have had two goals, simply from the positions he received the ball in.

But let's look at where those chances came from: a blunder by the goalkeeper and a swift counter when they gave us the ball.

Maybe that's the genuine answer to my original question. Our plan is to sit deep, press well and wait for a mistake to gift us an opening. 

It begs the question of why we signed the players we did when there's no place in the team for them. The transfer window is looking worse and worse as time goes on.

Yes. The chances we had yesterday came from errors. Admittedly we forced those errors which is good but I can’t recall many coming from flowing moves in open play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are still carping you weren't there. The reception the team got from the barclay at the end said it all. Might have been nil nil but the fans bought in to the approach big time. It won't be long now. Just wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Besthorpe-48 said:

If you are still carping you weren't there. The reception the team got from the barclay at the end said it all. Might have been nil nil but the fans bought in to the approach big time. It won't be long now. Just wait and see.

This is true. The last home game ended with boos. Not a boo to be heard yesterday. And the players got a great reception after the game and when subbed.

Sometimes there's a total disconnect between what's posted on here and what happens in the stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Frankly I don't believe that anyone on this site genuinely expected the club to spend the amount of money it did this summer? I'm afraid your narrative just doesn't accord with reality. It's one thing to recognise that Delia expresses genuine concern for the way the EPL currently functions (I hope all true fans of football would at the very least question its current reliance on very dodgy billionaires), it's another thing to claim that means our current owners and staff do not aspire to compete at that level. Yes of course the self-funding model puts us at a significant disadvantage compared to the mega-rich clubs (more accurately, mega-rich owners), but just what alternative do you suggest? Delia's and Michael's wealth is puny compared to many owners of clubs throughout the PL, Championship, and even League 1; what they have achieved is thus far from "pathetic" (just ask the lot down the road about billionaire owners). The simple fact is that no beneficent billionaire ready to throw hundreds of millions at the club has popped up at CR, and none of you wanting Delia out have provided the name of one kicking down the gates of CR to do so. Fantasizing about one turning up doesn't constitute a strategy for future success.

I would read or re-read Delia's infamous and badly advised Times article in 2016 and ask yourself the question of 'Whose interest is she acting in?' Certainly not in Norwich City's. 

She said she would 'never sell' and 'doesn't even listen to offers'. How has that attitude helped Norwich City? 

We will never know what offers did or would have come the clubs way. Logic would suggest there would have been a decent offer amongst that lot, but she has made the club a 'no go zone' in terms of a potential take-over. Therefore the club has had to endure majority shareholders who not only were ill equipped in the late '90's, but are so far removed from what is required it has well passed beyond a joke. Delia & MWJ mean well, but that means nothing. 

It's not about billionaires as such, but their ignorance and xenophobia means that the additional funding that the club has needed for a long time has never come our way. She has this parochial and localised version of what football should be and that has no place in any boardroom in professional football.

While I'm not mad on having a billionaire owner of NCFC, football clubs at the highest level need serious investment. Delia & MWJ have never invested or attracted serious outside investment. Therefore they are superfluous to what is needed, not only at Norwich City, but any club with decent aspirations to operative at the highest level. Their time has no so much past, but never existed - at least at the time they have been at Norwich City. 

Many fought and campaigned to get Robert Chase out of CR. His time was over. Sad that what replaced him was a Enid Blyton version of how football should be. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, komakino said:

She said she would 'never sell' and 'doesn't even listen to offers'. How has that attitude helped Norwich City? 

I'm sure there are others on here who know the law regarding takeover bids better than myself (e.g. Badger), but I think the club would be legally obliged to inform shareholders of any bid made by a prospective buyer. Further, if there was a genuine bidder out there wanting to take the club over do you really believe they wouldn't make that bid very public? I've yet to hear of any club takeover that isn't openly declared to the press well in advance of it happening. It is a very obvious tactic of a buyer attempting to get the fans on his/her side by making all sorts of promises to pressure the current owners into selling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, komakino said:

Apart the the fact they haven't spent that figure as our net spend is circa £20-25M - though I think Webber has largely wasted it - there may be some method in what your state. 

After the virtual zero spend of two seasons ago that got a lot of neutrals back ups - and commentators alike. Hence why we've had bad press so far this season. Had we had pulled the same stunt again with no results, then I could see a rule where clubs that are seen to be coming up for the money would be penalised in some capacity. Reduced or removed Parachute payments for example, so the club has to be seen to be making an effort.

When you have owners that morally don't like the EPL, but are happy to take its money every two or three years to keep them and the ultimately doomed self funding model in situ - it's an unholy alliance and an unsustainable one at that. 

We need owners that want and enjoy NCFC to be in the EPL as an established figure. We don't have that. Instead with have pathetic owners - not pathetic as people  - but pathetic in the position they hold in relation to the club and what is needed in 2021, though that hasn't fundamentally changed since the 90's. 

We spend the majority of PL tv cash on the wage bill. 

So how can we be reasonably seen not to be making an effort? 

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

×
×
  • Create New...