So now we know

[king canary 7,580]

Just now, Ian said:

Brighton? Burnley?

We were not remotely unlucky v Burnley, we were lucky to hold on for the point we got! That was backs to the wall type stuff. Brighton was an even game that could have gone either way, a point was probably fair, I wouldn't call that unlucky.

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, king canary said:

Come on, this is a bit stupid right?

He had 5 points from 11 games. The first 5 don't magically disappear. If we have 5 points from 11 games under Smith I'll come back and tell you how right you were.

Which set of fixtures would you, or any neutral, call easier?

Everton (A), Burnley (A), Brighton (H), Chelsea (A), Leeds (H), Brentford (A)

versus

Southampton (H), Wolves (H), Newcastle (A), Spurs (A), Man Utd (H), Aston Villa (H)

There is a correct answer, that wasn't a rhetorical question.

And as for not unlucky under Farke, as well as your point v Leicester, we also deserved a point v Arsenal and were an absolute howler of a miss from Sargent away from getting an additional two v Brighton.

[king canary 7,580]

1 minute ago, canarydan23 said:

Which set of fixtures would you, or any neutral, call easier?

Everton (A), Burnley (A), Brighton (H), Chelsea (A), Leeds (H), Brentford (A)

versus

Southampton (H), Wolves (H), Newcastle (A), Spurs (A), Man Utd (H), Aston Villa (H)

There is a correct answer, that wasn't a rhetorical question.

And as for not unlucky under Farke, as well as your point v Leicester, we also deserved a point v Arsenal and were an absolute howler of a miss from Sargent away from getting an additional two v Brighton.

I'd say they are pretty even. I know you won't agree but there you are.

As I said, we won't agree on this, so I'm calling it a night.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Here is what I don't get.

Under Farke we saw many performances significantly worse than this.

Don't think that's true - there aren't any genuinely 'easy' games in PL but Smith has had a run of games that were definitely easier - in fact right at the start of the season with a horrible set of fixtures the last few games were the ones which a lot of people identified as ones were we could to expect pick up points.

Under Smith this was our poorest effort and it comes with some caveats (I don't think many teams cope well with losing so many players at short notice). So why are we so willing to ignore the evidence of Wolves, Man U, the second half v Southampton and even some of the Spurs game after tonight?

Again don't think that's true, surely Newcastle was worse? And whilst we did get a brief 'new manager bounce' none of the performances you mention were as good as Brentford (IMO).

Smith is a competent manager, I don't think there is any doubt about that but he is still a downgrade from Daniel Farke. Also think it was simply too quick for him to step into a new jobliterally days after what was arguably a pretty harsh sacking from his boyhood club.

 

Edited December 14, 2021 by Creative Midfielder

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, king canary said:

I'd say they are pretty even. I know you won't agree but there you are.

I genuinely think you're a decent poster on here.

But neither of us believe that statement.

[king canary 7,580]

2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

I genuinely think you're a decent poster on here.

But neither of us believe that statement.

Honestly (I swear its my last ****ing post of the night, I swear). I do believe it. The second lot are slightly easier due to having more home games but I don't think its by much.

[Newtopia 517]

It is tough to be positive as result matter, the injuries are huge, does anyone know the rules for calling off a game, Man U had their game postponed, are their injuries worse than ours?

[canarydan23 4,060]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

Honestly (I swear its my last ****ing post of the night, I swear). I do believe it. The second lot are slightly easier due to having more home games but I don't think its by much.

Even if you are right and they are only slightly easier (they're more than slightly easier) Dean Smith has still got the same number of points as Farke's last six games despite them behind at least slightly easier by your own admission.

Farke ****ed up against Leeds and Watford at home for sure, but other than that he pretty much got par results (if not scorelines, see Chelsea and Man City drubbings). Deserved a point against Leicester which would have been par at least and deserved a point away at Arsenal that may have even been a birdie. Brentford away was a definite birdie.

Smith won a game that we should have won (and was an easier fixture than the previous one which we won), drew a game that we should have at least drawn, drew a game that we should have won, lost a couple of games we should probably have lost and then lost a game that we should have at least drawn if not won.

He's below par. He's shown nothing to suggest he is an upgrade on Farke, which I think we were all hoping for when Webber pulled the trigger. There was no rabbit to be pulled out of the hat.

Smith has managed the same amount of points in his first 6 fixtures as Farke managed in his last 6. And Farke's were more difficult, either significantly moreso or slightly moreso depending on your bias.

[chicken 2,604]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

What a baffling conclusion from a usually sensible poster.

Under Farke we lose that game about 5-0.

And lets be honest, as much as we have to respect Farke, Smith was dealing with a much more severely depleted squad today. One injury and we were playing players out of position again. Surprised he didn't bring on Byram at CB as I believe he has played there before, but I guess it made some sort of sense as Sorensen had played there in our last game.

We were really down to scraping the barrel in terms of U23's etc.

When you go through the starting 11 it's even worse. Placheta is on his 2nd game back after being out until then with long covid. Kabak was starting his 2nd game after being out with illness. Gibson returned from an injury that kept him out of the last game. Cantwell returned to the starting line up after being out and then on the bench last week. Byram was on the bench for the 2nd time and was the first time in 22mths that he got on the pitch for us. Giannoulis also feeling unwell hence only on the bench. 

Walking wounded and U23's about sums it up. 

Edited December 14, 2021 by chicken

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

Farke played Liverpool x2, Man City, Leicester, Arsenal, Watford, Everton, Brighton, Burnley, Chelsea, Leeds and Brentford.

Which of those match outcomes do we think Smith would have got a better result in? Arguably Watford, honestly I doubt there'd be different outcomes in any of the others.

Smith beat Southampton (off the back of the teams first win of the season under Farke against Brentford) got draws against Wolves and Newcastle, and has lost the rest.

Are we saying Farke's team couldnt have beaten Southampton? A game pretty much given to us by their goalkeeper having a mare - considering it was the game after we had just won? Are we saying Farke couldnt have got a point against 10 man Newcastle, the worst team in the division when we played them? Is a goalless draw for Farke against Wolves (seeing as he got the same against Brighton and then Burnley) out of the realms of possibility?

Smith isnt so far changing outcomes. We're still not scoring.

Smith isnt a bad manager. Neither was Farke. The problem wasnt who was managing the team it was and is the calibre of player in it.

People talking about Farke's record in the Premier League, well, last time around is a write-off in my book. I think only Oldham in 1992 invested less in their squad upon promotion than we did, and lets not forget Farke's promotion the season before with essentially frees and 3rd tier German players was a complete surprise and we shouldnt be shocked that his team couldnt compete.

The players are not world-beaters being held back by bad managers - they're not good enough.

Edited December 14, 2021 by The Great Mass Debater

[The Great Mass Debater 1,078]

22 minutes ago, chicken said:

And lets be honest, as much as we have to respect Farke, Smith was dealing with a much more severely depleted squad today. One injury and we were playing players out of position again.

Yeah because Farke never had to play DMs at CB

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

We were hopelessly **** tonight and even with the 8/9 injuries and the makeshift team the individual performances were far below par and overall I think its reasonable that we could've expected the team perform much greater than it mustered.  

But to act like there hasn't been a significant improvement in matches since Smith has joined compared to Farke is outrageous. 

I also don't think its a coincidence that our worst performances (tonight and Newcastle away) have been Farke-esque in how poor they are, slow and turgid possession across the back 4, hopeless long passes forwards, no cutting edge, no individuals willing to take the game by the scruff of the neck. Its very clear that the players are reverting to type, I imagine its quite hard to coach out terrible habits and a loser's mentality which has been so deeply ingrained into this team under Farke over two separate PL seasons (sad to say but ultimately appears to be true).

Smith deserves a crack at turning the ship around next season pretty much however this season pans out (unless we go on a total hopeless Farke losing run but I don't think we will), give the guy some patience.

[chicken 2,604]

Just now, The Great Mass Debater said:

Yeah because Farke never had to play DMs at CB

I was comparing it specifically to the 5-1 thumping Villa gave us that was being alluded to before. This was the line up:


Would you rather have that side from a couple of seasons ago or the one we put out today? The Villa squad on that day?



Krul, Aarons, Pukki, Cantwell, Idah and Byram are the only players in our side in the same place in todays starting line up and bench. Equally, apart from Amadou at CB, they were all arguably first choice players at the time. Though there is possible an argument that with Zimmermann and Hanley both fit they would have been the preferred starting pairing. But we'll never know. Godfrey started alongside Zimmermann the season before due to injury to Hanley.

Smith has got a better result with a worse Norwich side and against a Villa side that whilst it may be lacking Grealish, now has other options to call upon in Watkins, Ings and Buendia and has to be considered to be at least as good as the one put out two seasons ago.

[Van wink 2,994]

3 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

 

Smith deserves a crack at turning the ship around next season pretty much however this season pans out (unless we go on a total hopeless Farke losing run but I don't think we will), give the guy some patience.

I’m certainly not saying Smith doesn’t deserve a crack at turning the ship around. When Farke was sacked I commented that we will now find out if our poor showing in the Prem was down to him, or was it the squad that wasn’t good enough. My view is that it’s the squad, getting rid of Farke will make little difference to the outcome of this season.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

2 minutes ago, Van wink said:

I’m certainly not saying Smith doesn’t deserve a crack at turning the ship around. When Farke was sacked I commented that we will now find out if our poor showing in the Prem was down to him, or was it the squad that wasn’t good enough. My view is that it’s the squad, getting rid of Farke will make little difference to the outcome of this season.

Sorry Van Wink wasn't replying to you specifically, more a general point to anyone who doesn't think Smith has been an upgrade. 

I do think we'll still go down and they're overall probably not good enough, but hard to argue that Smith hasn't got more out of the players than Farke had. 

Tonight was shambolic but could you imagine how badly Farke would've had us playing with 8-9 first team players out given how badly he had a full strength NCFC side playing?  

 

[Mullet 293]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

What a baffling conclusion from a usually sensible poster.

Under Farke we lose that game about 5-0.

Agreed, we wouldn't be on 10 points under DF. We have become more competitive but DS can't do anything about our poor recruitment and lack of quality. If only we could get two wins fairly sharpish we could get right back in the mix. Hopefully DS can rid the club of some dross in January and get in some lower league quality rather than foreign league hopefuls. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

Even if you are right and they are only slightly easier (they're more than slightly easier) Dean Smith has still got the same number of points as Farke's last six games despite them behind at least slightly easier by your own admission.

Farke ****ed up against Leeds and Watford at home for sure, but other than that he pretty much got par results (if not scorelines, see Chelsea and Man City drubbings). Deserved a point against Leicester which would have been par at least and deserved a point away at Arsenal that may have even been a birdie. Brentford away was a definite birdie.

Smith won a game that we should have won (and was an easier fixture than the previous one which we won), drew a game that we should have at least drawn, drew a game that we should have won, lost a couple of games we should probably have lost and then lost a game that we should have at least drawn if not won.

He's below par. He's shown nothing to suggest he is an upgrade on Farke, which I think we were all hoping for when Webber pulled the trigger. There was no rabbit to be pulled out of the hat.

Smith has managed the same amount of points in his first 6 fixtures as Farke managed in his last 6. And Farke's were more difficult, either significantly moreso or slightly moreso depending on your bias.

You are totally ignoring the level of performances though. 

The Southampton game we were extremely poor and passive in the first half yes, but Smith turned the tide at half time and we turned the game totally on its head.

So in his first game in charge, we turned around a losing positive into a winning one, something Farke never managed across two premier league seasons, in fact Farke never even managed to rescue so much as a single point from a losing position in the PL. What a strange coincidence!

Can you honestly say you think that we'd have come back from going down 1-0 against Southampton at home under Farke and even managed a draw given the precedent set in his 48 PL games for us? 

The Newcastle game was poor but we very clearly reverted to type after the sending off, we didn't know what to do in that situation as we had gone there with the expectancy to defend and silence the crowd. The players clearly showed scars from the Farke era with an extremely Farke-esque performance. Yet we still managed to rescue another point from a losing position.

In 6 games that is 4 points rescued from losing positions, under Farke we managed to rescue 0 points from 48 games. I'm not sure but I think there might be some trend in there or something...

The Wolves game at home was the first game we significantly outweighed our opponent in xG all season. We controlled it from start to finish and created the chances to win it where the other team simply did not. There is no example of Farke achieving this level of performance in this season. Even the Brentford game we scored our only two chances in the first half and then held on for dear life for the second half with no aura of security or organisation... It was a bit of a miracle that Brentford never equalised and if you have forgotten then please just take another look at the highlights and match stats...

And the Spurs games and United games were overall very positive. Spurs we dominated possession and wasted chances at key moments in the game (and they scored an absolute worldie before we tailed off in the end), and United we were desperately unlucky not to get at least a draw, and more than matched them throughout the game. 

Compare that to Farke's performances which overall had us looking like boys against men week in, week out. Plus all the speak of how stacked against the odds everything about our club is, talking down our own players in favour of other teams. Smith's positivity in the press has been a breath of fresh air. 

Yes today was poor, but please try to imagine how a Farke side, which already looked so uncompetitive, would've done with 8-9 first team players out. Thank god we never got to see that. 

I'm seriously a bit shocked that anyone could question the overall improvement in this team since Smith has come in. Though I do genuinely worry that the continuing injury problems may halt the progress he has made!

Edited December 15, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

Also that Leicester game at home was absolutely pitiful under Farke, they were absolutely hampered with injuries and played horrendously bad on the day yet still came out winners. We 100% would've overran a team playing that poorly at Carrow Road under Smith. 

I don't think we will see three poorer PL sides come to Carrow Road than that seriously hampered Leicester team, the Leeds team bang out of form and Watford who made us look like a pub side. Come on now! 

I'm also not sure why anyone thinks we deserved a point at Arsenal, they battered us nearly all game, we put up a decent fight and their goal was a bit dodgy but on the balance of play we would've been fortunate to get a point of it. 

And Ian's suggestion that we were unlucky against Brighton and Burnley? Burnley dominated us from start to finish we simply held on for the point, what bit was unlucky about that performance? I don't begrudge us the draw but god we definitely did not deserve anything more. And the Brighton game, yes we had a few chances, but so did they - a draw was probably reflective of the game overall. The Sargent miss was atrocious but we only created that chance thanks to a shocking error as opposed to any good play. 

I was gutted Farke went in the way he did, but the Farke apologists in this thread trying to rewrite our season under him are bizarre. I don't know why anyone feels the need to do it given Smith has had us performing to a much higher level so far?

[king canary 7,580]

10 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Even if you are right and they are only slightly easier (they're more than slightly easier) Dean Smith has still got the same number of points as Farke's last six games despite them behind at least slightly easier by your own admission.

Farke ****ed up against Leeds and Watford at home for sure, but other than that he pretty much got par results (if not scorelines, see Chelsea and Man City drubbings). Deserved a point against Leicester which would have been par at least and deserved a point away at Arsenal that may have even been a birdie. Brentford away was a definite birdie.

Smith won a game that we should have won (and was an easier fixture than the previous one which we won), drew a game that we should have at least drawn, drew a game that we should have won, lost a couple of games we should probably have lost and then lost a game that we should have at least drawn if not won.

He's below par. He's shown nothing to suggest he is an upgrade on Farke, which I think we were all hoping for when Webber pulled the trigger. There was no rabbit to be pulled out of the hat.

Smith has managed the same amount of points in his first 6 fixtures as Farke managed in his last 6. And Farke's were more difficult, either significantly moreso or slightly moreso depending on your bias.

Hank has done a good job of addressing most of this but I have to take issue with the bit here in bold.

Brentford, when we played them, had lost 3 on the bounce, including going 3-0 down before halftime to a previously winless Burnley team.

Southampton on the other hand came into their game with us on back to back wins and clean sheets, having picked up 10 points from their previous 12.

I'm not sure how you can claim that Southampton was easier than Brentford when looking at the context.

[hogesar 9,618]

I think we all have to (or should atleast) respect the fact we have one of the poorer squads in the division. It might not be the worst, but we can all agree it's in the bottom 5 at the very least.

With that take into account, it's not remotely surprising that we didn't look competitive at this level when we have 8 realistic first-teamers out injured. Top sides would struggle with that - look at United rearranging their fixture for 3 or 4 covid cases.

I have to defend Smith a bit on that basis - I don't think any manager in the world makes us competitive with that 11 and it's associated fitness issues etc.

Even when we have all our players available we're in that bottom 5 bracket and have to play really well to get anything from games. We ain't getting no freebies.

I have to say generally Smith has made us look more competitive and closer to a Premier League side. We haven't looked totally uncompetitive against anyone under him apart from yesterday, with the caveat of a lot of players missing from an already poor-by-premier-league-standards squad.

 

[king canary 7,580]

9 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

And the Spurs games and United games were overall very positive. Spurs we dominated possession and wasted chances at key moments in the game (and they scored an absolute worldie before we tailed off in the end), and United we were desperately unlucky not to get at least a draw, and more than matched them throughout the game. 

Compare that to Farke's performances which overall had us looking like boys against men week in, week out. Plus all the speak of how stacked against the odds everything about our club is, talking down our own players in favour of other teams. Smith's positivity in the press has been a breath of fresh air. 

This is where CanaryDan's analysis is lacking.

You can say 'we expected to lose v Chelsea and we expected to lose v Man U and we lost them both' but the performances were absolutely night and day from each other. 

[kirku 1,332]

11 hours ago, The Great Mass Debater said:

The players are not world-beaters being held back by bad managers - they're not good enough.

This was my concern when we sacked Farke - Webber stated the players were good enough to do better, but I'm not sure what evidence he based that on.

It's fair to say that Webber, out of his three transfer windows at this level, has absolutely failed to make us better.

With Skipp and Emi sized holes in the first eleven, he seemed to prioritise making the squad stronger (on paper) but the result has been a less effective and talented team than we had in the Championship.

Edited December 15, 2021 by kirku

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

This is where CanaryDan's analysis is lacking.

You can say 'we expected to lose v Chelsea and we expected to lose v Man U and we lost them both' but the performances were absolutely night and day from each other. 

I can say that because it's true. Until points are awarded for performances it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to our chances of survival. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

14 hours ago, Van wink said:

No passion, no determination, no performance. 

Its ok though because we'll be better in the second tier... 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

I think we all have to (or should atleast) respect the fact we have one of the poorer squads in the division. It might not be the worst, but we can all agree it's in the bottom 5 at the very least.

With that take into account, it's not remotely surprising that we didn't look competitive at this level when we have 8 realistic first-teamers out injured. Top sides would struggle with that - look at United rearranging their fixture for 3 or 4 covid cases.

I have to defend Smith a bit on that basis - I don't think any manager in the world makes us competitive with that 11 and it's associated fitness issues etc.

Even when we have all our players available we're in that bottom 5 bracket and have to play really well to get anything from games. We ain't getting no freebies.

I have to say generally Smith has made us look more competitive and closer to a Premier League side. We haven't looked totally uncompetitive against anyone under him apart from yesterday, with the caveat of a lot of players missing from an already poor-by-premier-league-standards squad.

 

He has done wonder with the rubbish he has to work with.... Pukki, Idah & Sargent upfront? Come on.... but if your wage structure and finance are not fit for purpose.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

14 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

We were 2 points ahead of Villa when Dean Smith took over

They lost their main playmaker for months through injury though.

We didn't lose ours.

Why does everything have to be black or white in your head, is it because your brain is too small to contemplate squeezing anything inbetween two extremes? 

He achieved at Villa what Steve Bruce failed to do with two attempts, and Steve Bruce has got out of that league with two other teams. 

[king canary 7,580]

11 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

I can say that because it's true. Until points are awarded for performances it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to our chances of survival. 

Sure it is true but its also a deeply shallow analysis, which I find especially odd considering your reaction to me pointing out Farke's terrible PPG record.

[canarydan23 4,060]

3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Why does everything have to be black or white in your head, is it because your brain is too small to contemplate squeezing anything inbetween two extremes? 

Tubby. Accusing people of having small brains. Good lord.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

4 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Tubby. Accusing people of having small brains. Good lord.

Way to avoid discussing the valid point made about losing his talisman and achieving what a twice promoted manager couldn't.

What a tool. 

Why not get behind our manager and give him a proper chance? He's not got a great deal to work with at the moment and yet was close to snatching a point from Man Utd just the other day.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

13 minutes ago, king canary said:

Sure it is true but its also a deeply shallow analysis, which I find especially odd considering your reaction to me pointing out Farke's terrible PPG record.

Out of reactions but lol