Missing Players/Mitigating circumstances

[Helsinki canary 242]

4 hours ago, Ken Hairy said:

****ing excuses chap, I'm sick of it. Palace had their best 3 (at least) players missing. 

The lethargy from many supporters of this club make me sick. 

The atmosphere MUST now get toxic, Delia HAS to be made aware in no uncertain terms that she is not wanted here. 

Will that happen? No our fans are too apathetic and quite frankly not passionate enough!!! 

Fully Agree, the average fan of Norwich doesn’t seem to have the passion we had at the back end of the Chase era when I for one demonstrated on Carrow Road after the games with thousands of others as we were charged and attacked by mounted police and police dogs . I did my bit for change back then but don’t see the current generation of fans showing the same passion and determination to force needed change for our club. 

[baldy09 158]

5 hours ago, Branston Pickle said:

This place can be pretty ridiculous after a defeat, full of stupid comments and throwing around of toys.  I dare say it will be the same tonight. 

In among that, I thought it fair to comment on the mitigating circumstances - not to diminish from undoubted poor performances but to maybe discuss things on a more ‘grown up’ manner.

We are clearly horribly low on confidence - from a morale boosting performance v Man U that deserved far more than it got, but then we had even more injuries and covid to contend with; Villa ought to have probably been postponed. 

We currently have more starting XI players out than I can ever remember, even last season, most of whom would have surely started today under normal circumstances - Krul, Aarons, Andrew O, Hanley, Kabak, Normann, Cantwell, Rashica, Rupp, Pukki; also Zimbo; now it looks like Dimi is also injured.  That’s 12, and some of those playing are probably not fully fit/carrying injuries.

I have to say that level of players missing would see any side struggle and make it hard to be perhaps as competitive as they should be.

So when we had most of our players fit -we defended good - passing the ball for fun - forwards were scoring goals a plenty, games were a pleasure to watch - Deano was chanted  by the fans ------- O Then you woke up and it was all a dream

Edited December 28, 2021 by baldy09
add

[Van wink 2,994]

There is no convincing mitigation for consistently conceding around 3 goals a game and not scoring.

Edited December 28, 2021 by Van wink

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,024]

4 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

We had 9 first teamers out when we beat Man City 3-2 and played the best game I've ever seen at Carrow Road. 

Of course I don't expect us to put in those kind of performances every time, but a bit of fight, grit and stubbornness should be the bare minimum no matter what side we field and we aren't getting to close to that. 

We're an a pathetic laughing stock of a side right now, and will deserve all the criticism that comes our way after another soulless performance.

I think it was 7, 8 if you included Patricks Roberts who couldn't play and never started a game for us. I would say that your comment would be relevant if we went to Crystal Palace  with just a couple of regular first team players alongside fringe players out, which was the case with the Man City game. The players out were Klose, Aarons and Zimbo, alongside Onel (14 starts), Trybull (15), Vrancic (6), and Leitner (7). The starting 11 was Krul (36), Byram (15), Amadou (8), Godfrey (30), Lewis (25), Tettey (28), McLean (32), Buendia (28), Stiepermann (13), Cantwell (30) and Pukki (33), in reality the only regulars missing were Aarons, Klose and Zimbo, so nothing like today where we were missing a number of players you would consider likely to start the game. Not trying to justify today, far from it, but your statement is very misleading.........

[hogesar 9,676]

@Branston Pickle - alot of what you say is of course correct and evidenced with facts but for some reason there seems to be an unrealistic expectation that our second string side can compete with relatively speaking established Premier League sides with 100s of millions of investment.

There is a reality.

Even with our best starting eleven and everyone fit, every game is tough. In 75% of them we have to play at our absolute maximum and probably hope the opposition plays a little beneath themselves. That is the fine margins for most newly promoted clubs.

We've discussed recruitment elsewhere. Regardless, we've had to chop and change the back 5 over the last few games to a ridiculous extent meaning the only mainstay today was an out of form Gibson. With Hanley and Gibson, Aarons and Williams, and of course Krul, we had started to build a bit of a defensive base. Only started to, but just look back on this forum and most of the same posters saying there's no excuses were praising our new defensive shape and solidity.

We've got now what, ELEVEN potential first team players out? You do that to a Arsenal, United with their hundreds of millions and they don't get top 4. You do it to a team at the bottom and they're going to...stay bottom.

The problem is made worse because the confidence is already low and fragile. Then you're at a tough away game and you've got an 18 year old in Tzolis who's struggled since he arrived on one wing and another guy who most people wouldn't have chosen in our championship squad last season.

All I know is when we had a fully fit team, under Smith we started to look like we were at least competitive in every game. And it wasn't just me saying that, a quick search shows that plenty on here ripping into every facet of the club now were saying exactly the same. Yet they can't bring themselves to establish the main difference between then and now is approximately 10 first team players being unavailable. No amount of recruitment or tactics or 'grit and determination' will make up for that fact at this level.

[Surfer 1,547]

5 hours ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

I don’t want to hear it. We are simply not good enough to compete at this level. 

Want to hear it or not, it's a fact we are badly affected at the moment. Given the gulf in technical quality and physicality between the Champs and EPL everything has to go right to be a successful promoted team - this year Bentford are succeeding, just as Sheff Utd did before them. And so when your squad is not good enough to compete (and it isn't) you have to rely on your first team staying fit (and we can't) to give yourself a proper chance. I agree that Billy Gilmour was a strange signing given we needed taller, faster, more aggressive players to compete, but Rashica and Norman certainly look(ed) the part. And despite all the gnashing of teeth this squad will almost certainly walk the Championship next year unless management elects to have a complete re-build. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

34 minutes ago, hogesar said:

@Branston Pickle - alot of what you say is of course correct and evidenced with facts but for some reason there seems to be an unrealistic expectation that our second string side can compete with relatively speaking established Premier League sides with 100s of millions of investment.

There is a reality.

Even with our best starting eleven and everyone fit, every game is tough. In 75% of them we have to play at our absolute maximum and probably hope the opposition plays a little beneath themselves. That is the fine margins for most newly promoted clubs.

We've discussed recruitment elsewhere. Regardless, we've had to chop and change the back 5 over the last few games to a ridiculous extent meaning the only mainstay today was an out of form Gibson. With Hanley and Gibson, Aarons and Williams, and of course Krul, we had started to build a bit of a defensive base. Only started to, but just look back on this forum and most of the same posters saying there's no excuses were praising our new defensive shape and solidity.

We've got now what, ELEVEN potential first team players out? You do that to a Arsenal, United with their hundreds of millions and they don't get top 4. You do it to a team at the bottom and they're going to...stay bottom.

The problem is made worse because the confidence is already low and fragile. Then you're at a tough away game and you've got an 18 year old in Tzolis who's struggled since he arrived on one wing and another guy who most people wouldn't have chosen in our championship squad last season.

All I know is when we had a fully fit team, under Smith we started to look like we were at least competitive in every game. And it wasn't just me saying that, a quick search shows that plenty on here ripping into every facet of the club now were saying exactly the same. Yet they can't bring themselves to establish the main difference between then and now is approximately 10 first team players being unavailable. No amount of recruitment or tactics or 'grit and determination' will make up for that fact at this level.

But why are our fringe players (Byram, Sorensen, Placheta) acquitting themselves so much better than the normal second string /  first teamers (i.e. literally everyone else who has played the past few games)?

[Petriix 2,839]

18 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Want to hear it or not, it's a fact we are badly affected at the moment. Given the gulf in technical quality and physicality between the Champs and EPL everything has to go right to be a successful promoted team - this year Bentford are succeeding, just as Sheff Utd did before them. And so when your squad is not good enough to compete (and it isn't) you have to rely on your first team staying fit (and we can't) to give yourself a proper chance. I agree that Billy Gilmour was a strange signing given we needed taller, faster, more aggressive players to compete, but Rashica and Norman certainly look(ed) the part. And despite all the gnashing of teeth this squad will almost certainly walk the Championship next year unless management elects to have a complete re-build. 

Wow, that's some optimism right there. This squad is far worse than last year's. No Skipp and no Buendia, Pukki two years older, Cantwell replaced by his apathetic and talentless evil twin. None of the dressing room motivators like Tettey. No Vrancic to pull out a moment of class. 

But, most of all, we don't have the consistent footballing philosophy running throughout the club. We don't have any identity anymore. When we were relegated last time we were able to pick up from where we were two seasons before. There's no possibility of doing the same thing again.

It would cost £100m to assemble a team as good as last season. Then it would take time for them to gel. I can't see the current squad (minus loanees) finishing in the top six in the Championship.

[Boris 56]

45 minutes ago, hogesar said:

@Branston Pickle - alot of what you say is of course correct and evidenced with facts but for some reason there seems to be an unrealistic expectation that our second string side can compete with relatively speaking established Premier League sides with 100s of millions of investment.

There is a reality.

Even with our best starting eleven and everyone fit, every game is tough. In 75% of them we have to play at our absolute maximum and probably hope the opposition plays a little beneath themselves. That is the fine margins for most newly promoted clubs.

We've discussed recruitment elsewhere. Regardless, we've had to chop and change the back 5 over the last few games to a ridiculous extent meaning the only mainstay today was an out of form Gibson. With Hanley and Gibson, Aarons and Williams, and of course Krul, we had started to build a bit of a defensive base. Only started to, but just look back on this forum and most of the same posters saying there's no excuses were praising our new defensive shape and solidity.

We've got now what, ELEVEN potential first team players out? You do that to a Arsenal, United with their hundreds of millions and they don't get top 4. You do it to a team at the bottom and they're going to...stay bottom.

The problem is made worse because the confidence is already low and fragile. Then you're at a tough away game and you've got an 18 year old in Tzolis who's struggled since he arrived on one wing and another guy who most people wouldn't have chosen in our championship squad last season.

All I know is when we had a fully fit team, under Smith we started to look like we were at least competitive in every game. And it wasn't just me saying that, a quick search shows that plenty on here ripping into every facet of the club now were saying exactly the same. Yet they can't bring themselves to establish the main difference between then and now is approximately 10 first team players being unavailable. No amount of recruitment or tactics or 'grit and determination' will make up for that fact at this level.

fully agree here and must say that we was totally competitive until wolves game, then we loose Rashica who was onfire  ,was toe to toe with Man Utd and then avalanche of problems come and since Villa game we look like Farke team from last 20 premiere leagues games ...

4 5 first games under Smith we look like reborn team who need only 1 2 new players especially Pukki help etc  and all here agree about that now all is like Richter 9 earthquake vanished everything for 2 weeks!

Villa game was key to not be played then problems come soo many and we lost all confidence from good start under Smith.

Its crazy we have fully fit squad when Smith come despite Zimmermann and now we have 12 out players 3 weeks later !

 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

I think it was 7, 8 if you included Patricks Roberts who couldn't play and never started a game for us. I would say that your comment would be relevant if we went to Crystal Palace  with just a couple of regular first team players alongside fringe players out, which was the case with the Man City game. The players out were Klose, Aarons and Zimbo, alongside Onel (14 starts), Trybull (15), Vrancic (6), and Leitner (7). The starting 11 was Krul (36), Byram (15), Amadou (8), Godfrey (30), Lewis (25), Tettey (28), McLean (32), Buendia (28), Stiepermann (13), Cantwell (30) and Pukki (33), in reality the only regulars missing were Aarons, Klose and Zimbo, so nothing like today where we were missing a number of players you would consider likely to start the game. Not trying to justify today, far from it, but your statement is very misleading.........

I don't think its misleading at all. My point was to illustrate that we should be expecting a lot more from this team than what we've seen in the past few games, which you also ultimately agreed with. 

Maybe the Man City injury list wasn't as catastrophic, but the holes at centre back were severe and we were forced to play Amadou at CB with a very aging Tettey also having to fill in at CM in the absence of any other central midfielders. Byram was thrown into the deep end with just his second start for the team. Also the opposition was Man City not Palace / Villa / Arsenal. I remember the pre match prediction threads where everyone mocked Lakey for saying we could get a result. I remember saying to Dad on the way to Carrow Road if we keep it below 5 I'll be happy. I've never felt dread like it for a football match. 

So yes I will agree with you that we are more hampered with injuries right now than we were for that game. But today's starting line up featured regular starters in Gibson, McLean and Giannoulis (okay so not a regular starter as such but we all know he bloody well should be), plus 4 of our signings made over summer (Gunn, Gilmour, Lees-Melou, Tzolis), with two more signings on off the bench in Sargent and Williams. 

These players should be capable of doing a much better job than the one we saw today. These players aren't 'fringe' players they were signed to compete for places in the first team and keep us in this ****ty league.

Funnily enough it is only the genuine 'fringe' players who do escape this awful period with any credit (Sorensen, Placheta and  maybe Byram to a lesser extent).

That's my whole point. 

The excuse of the injuries would hold much better for me if our regular players and signings were actually capable of half a job, and it was our fringe players who were understandably struggling. But no, its the opposite, and players who barely featured in the championship last year, and one who hasn't played for 2 years, are actually carrying the regulars and new signings. 

If you don't think that is ****ed then I don't know what else to say. Its shocking that we've spent so much money yet can't rely on these new signings chipping in when given the opportunity. 

Oh and I just remembered Rowe coming on for Tzolis and instantly having more of an impact than he did, in the space of minutes. Did Rowe not realise we had an injury crisis and he can't possibly be expected to actually do anything remotely good?

We're pathetic and don't deserve the excuses to anything like the extent some are giving us. To a degree, yes. To what we have seen the past 3 games, not even ****ing close. 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

The problem is made worse because the confidence is already low and fragile. Then you're at a tough away game and you've got an 18 year old in Tzolis who's struggled since he arrived on one wing and another guy who most people wouldn't have chosen in our championship squad last season.

All I know is when we had a fully fit team, under Smith we started to look like we were at least competitive in every game. And it wasn't just me saying that, a quick search shows that plenty on here ripping into every facet of the club now were saying exactly the same. Yet they can't bring themselves to establish the main difference between then and now is approximately 10 first team players being unavailable. No amount of recruitment or tactics or 'grit and determination' will make up for that fact at this level.

Jonathan Rowe is 18 and made his league debut today when we were already 3-0 down, yet instantly looked brighter than Tzolis. 

I have seen plenty of 'grit and determination' from Sorensen and Placheta.  

Why do these players look better than the ones we are expecting to actually perform?

Smith has clearly been dealt a rubbish hand right now but that does not change the fact that this team is still performing below the sum of its parts, even after factoring in the injuries. Otherwise our best performing players wouldn't be fringe players and youngsters!

[Highland Canary 76]

Simply goes to poor recruitment or, perhaps more accurately, recruitment of players of insufficient quality to make an impact at PL level. That goes to our inability to pay the wages for better players. Until our business model changes we will continue to be nothing other than a PL embarrassment.

Edited December 28, 2021 by Highland Canary

[paddycanary 539]

While sadly it's not hugely surprising, it looks like once again the central players acquired (in particular central & deep-midfield) are not of sufficient quality to be consistently competitive for a proper assault on this division. We've had a few attempts now and continue to demonstrate that it's extremely difficult to achieve survival & consolidation in the EPL without the financial ability to pay for contracts & wages akin to our direct competitors in the bottom half. For right or wrong. 

Just recently we're witnessing the once again familiar 'crisis' with player unavailability. 

This experience all seems eerily familiar. Don't the French have a name for this?

 

[canarybubbles 1,923]

7 hours ago, Highland Canary said:

Simply goes to poor recruitment or, perhaps more accurately, recruitment of players of insufficient quality to make an impact at PL level. That goes to our inability to pay the wages for better players. Until our business model changes we will continue to be nothing other than a PL embarrassment.

Yes and no. Lack of money makes it very tough for sure, but that's a reality and means the recruitment needs to be spot on. Basically, you identify where the worst weaknesses are and try to plug the gaps. OK, you may not get the dream player you had wanted all along, but you address those core problems. What you don't do is splurge money in all directions, wasting at least half of what you have on unnecessary players who don't fill those gaps. In other words, you have a strategy, and we might have expected that our resident self-proclaimed uber-genius had one, but clearly he didn't.

EDIT: And if you are going to sack your manager, it is a good idea to have someone ready to replace them, as Villa did with Gerrard. However did they manage that without our uber-genius to guide them? 

Edited December 29, 2021 by canarybubbles

[dylanisabaddog 4,931]

I think we had 8 or 9 first choice players missing yesterday and some of those who were playing are clearly not fit. In the circumstances any criticism of the performance is a bit silly. 

My criticisms this season are that we changed formation with hardly any preparation or friendly games and we sacked a competent manager and replaced him with someone who threw around a shed load of money at Aston Villa and only kept them up because of an extraordinary refereeing error. Sorry, but he's not in the same class as Farke. 

The truth of the matter is that we were an average Championship side with Emi Buendia. If we hadn't had Emi we wouldn't have been promoted and once he left it was only going to end one way. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by dylanisabaddog