Only Norwich would hire Dean Smith

[Matt Morriss 69]

2 minutes ago, chicken said:

A similar thing happened during Farke's first season. People complained about a lack of plan, that it was hard to see what we were trying to do. That he was a manager out of his depth along with several of the players brought here to play.

I can see what Smith is trying to do in the same way I could see what Farke was trying to do.

I don't actually think there is masses of difference, I think both would prefer us to have more possession. The key bit is that Smith doesn't want aimless posession. There is no point holding onto the ball for 55-65% possession or better, if you can't put it in the net. He wants more speed in getting the ball from the back to the front players where possible, rather than cut inside and play safe which is what we would do a fair bit under Farke.

There are things to iron out, he has his players to bring in yet. And it still, may not work. I don't believe what he is trying to convert us to is hoofball either. In fact, I think he has said as much, and he has certainly not encouraged long balls. Pre-season saw few of them to be fair.

Teams that are struggling and under pressure will naturally hit it long more often, it's the easiest thing to do. It's about confidence and getting the team in that zone to play rather than panic or revert to more instinctive measures rather than get it down and look to play it.

You have better eyesight than me then as since November 21 I have failed to see any sense of progressive gameplan from Smith.

Maybe it will change with the new players. I disagree with Farkes first season though, to me it was clear what Farke was trying to do, we just didnt have the players to execute it.

[SwearyCanary 1,333]

12 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

Just use your real name then.

I have a career also and my firm has connections with the club as a regional partner, however this doesnt mean i have to post anonymously .

Your just making excuses.

If you knew me personally you would know im far from the sensitive type, i just get sick of everytime i come on here we see keyboard warriors like you, posting anonymously, spouting abuse at people who disagree. You seem to also have made more out of my suggestion. It wasnt a virtual 'lets step outside', and i dont see whats laughable or pathetic about it. Your just saying that to distance yourself even further from actually doing it, along with your 'safeguarding issues cause of your career' crap. 

Its a valid suggestion to try to get the anonymous and cowardly children on here that act big and tough and hurl abuse, to act like adults and just have conversation and debate about NCFC. I have always said dont say things on the internet that you wouldnt have the balls to say to someones face (cue the ' i would say everything ive said to your face cause im hard' reply).

I also dont understand why you so vehemently are attacking people who said we were a laughing stock and an embarassment last season.

We were, and it was a running theme in the sports media. I dont know where your getting it from that it wasnt the case.

And also why you seem to be taking it so seriously and are battling people who say that we were and demanding 'proof'.

Firstly, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

Secondly, no evidence then. Yawn 

My name is Colin 

[chicken 3,045]

10 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

You have better eyesight than me then as since November 21 I have failed to see any sense of progressive gameplan from Smith.

Maybe it will change with the new players. I disagree with Farkes first season though, to me it was clear what Farke was trying to do, we just didnt have the players to execute it.

I'm not saying you couldn't see it in Farke's first season, but there were certainly many who couldn't. There was much criticism about Farke and signing players from the German 2nd/3rd tiers which were not up to championship standard.

It certainly isn't hoofball under Smith though, no matter which way you look at it. It's nothing like Allardice, Pullis or to a lesser extent Bruce. And if you look at Brentford and Villa, it wasn't a style or approach he employed there either.

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,808]

8 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Firstly, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

Secondly, no evidence then. Yawn 

My name is Colin 

Warnock!!? 

 

Always knew you loved us really!

[chicken 3,045]

17 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

I also dont understand why you so vehemently are attacking people who said we were a laughing stock and an embarassment last season.

Not my discussion but if I may, tell me to keep out if you want. 😉

One thing that used to bother me was people that said "everyone saw us as an embarrassment" - as in the wider footballing community. Or that the premier league saw us as such etc.

I have less issue with our fans saying they felt embarrassed by us. I say that because largely this all kicked off with incredibly the incredibly awful talk sh!t radio with a... lets call him presenter, as no journalist would comment that blind on a subject, who said we'd spent no money.

We then had Simon Jordon sort of weigh in with "taking the **** out of the system" comments... even though Palace under his ownership had done the same thing.

Now, as much as I don't like and don't listen to talk sport, hence me calling them talk sh!te, one needs to consider their business model. They are essentially a radio equivalent to tabloids. They shout and scream almost anything to get attention, they'll take the hits for getting it wrong because by the point they have been told off, they've made the money from the carp they peddle. They are deliberately divisive, they want people to call in, they push buttons, they exaggerate, they throw around accusations like tickertape at a presidential parade.

I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again, what I found embarrassing was just how little and how quickly supposed fans of this club turned on the club itself and others who refused to make such outlandish statements or to disagree with them. The ease in which two people from one radio station were able to get under the skin and cause the sorts of meltdowns they did.

It certainly played a heavy part in Farke's demise. Those same people carried those uninformed, hypocritical views and blamed Farke as part of the system for us not doing better. Many on here are now claiming there wasn't this loud vocal chorus, many of whom were part of it even, and are saying how it was such a bad decision to sack Farke.

That should be what people are embarrassed about, if you ask me. 

[horsefly 5,281]

1 hour ago, Matt Morriss said:

I think it would have served us better than spreading £50m thinly like we did.

We arent competing with Man U. We're trying to stay up. History shows filling your team with £7m players is far more unlikely to result in survival next to the team that buys £25m players. Pretty obvious one that one id say. We did it once or twice, but the teams that remained in the Prem, your Southamptons and Burnleys, have consistently bought players in the £25m mould rather than £5m-£10m like we do.

Also you seem to have misunderstood what I said. I didnt say we should have kept Emi and Skipp. I said we needed to have kept Emi and Skipp and added with the £25m players, to have stood a far more realistic chance of being competitive and staying up. 

 

What history? If you're simply stating the blatantly obvious then of course we all know that teams that can lash out on numerous £25m+ players stand a better chance of staying up. But £25m+ players also demand £80 grand + wages, and the idea that NCFC could sustain that sort of financial outlay is pure fantasy. Also what is supposed to be the point of your idea that "we needed to have kept Emi and Skipp and added with the £25m players, to have stood a far more realistic chance of being competitive and staying up"?  You might as well have said we needed to buy Messi and Van Dijk to stand a realistic chance of staying up. Neither scenarios were remotely possible. 

BTW which players did Burnley and Southampton "consistently" buy for £25m? 

[corbs 147]

It is a truth universally accepted that whenever “any” football team has a poor run or looses their manager without a ready made replacement; the judgement shall be we are officially a ‘laughing stock’. 

[horsefly 5,281]

9 hours ago, chicken said:

I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again, what I found embarrassing was just how little and how quickly supposed fans of this club turned on the club itself and others who refused to make such outlandish statements or to disagree with them. The ease in which two people from one radio station were able to get under the skin and cause the sorts of meltdowns they did.

It certainly played a heavy part in Farke's demise. Those same people carried those uninformed, hypocritical views and blamed Farke as part of the system for us not doing better. Many on here are now claiming there wasn't this loud vocal chorus, many of whom were part of it even, and are saying how it was such a bad decision to sack Farke.

That should be what people are embarrassed about, if you ask me. 

Spot on Chicken! 

For those who want to remind themselves of the things they and others said at various times:

:https://forum.pinkun.com/index.php?/topic/144457-the-official-farke-out-poll/&tab=comments#comment-2602795

https://forum.pinkun.com/index.php?/topic/143953-should-we-sack-farke-poll/&tab=comments#comment-2584949

https://forum.pinkun.com/index.php?/topic/139507-poll-how-long-should-farke-get/&tab=comments#comment-2405589

 

 

[Matt Morriss 69]

11 hours ago, horsefly said:

What history? If you're simply stating the blatantly obvious then of course we all know that teams that can lash out on numerous £25m+ players stand a better chance of staying up. But £25m+ players also demand £80 grand + wages, and the idea that NCFC could sustain that sort of financial outlay is pure fantasy. Also what is supposed to be the point of your idea that "we needed to have kept Emi and Skipp and added with the £25m players, to have stood a far more realistic chance of being competitive and staying up"?  You might as well have said we needed to buy Messi and Van Dijk to stand a realistic chance of staying up. Neither scenarios were remotely possible. 

BTW which players did Burnley and Southampton "consistently" buy for £25m? 

Christ, some people will argue with a lamp shade.

Its just an opinion mate, you dont have to disect everything people say and try to work out the scientific validity and whether its provable or not. 

Any 'might have been' opinion is just that, speculation and conjecture.

I think its pretty universal to suggest had we been able to keep Buendia and Skipp, and then spent £50m on two proven quality Premier League players, that we we would have had a far better chance of survival than spunking the lot on Tzolis, Sargent and Rashica and PLM.

[Matt Morriss 69]

13 hours ago, SwearyCanary said:

Firstly, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

Secondly, no evidence then. Yawn 

My name is Colin 

This is possibly the worst comeback in the history of the internet.

Grammar correction, and telling us your Colin W&nker.

As for evidence, its all in my memory from last season's media attacks at how pathetic we were. 

 

 

[Matt Morriss 69]

13 hours ago, chicken said:

Not my discussion but if I may, tell me to keep out if you want. 😉

One thing that used to bother me was people that said "everyone saw us as an embarrassment" - as in the wider footballing community. Or that the premier league saw us as such etc.

I have less issue with our fans saying they felt embarrassed by us. I say that because largely this all kicked off with incredibly the incredibly awful talk sh!t radio with a... lets call him presenter, as no journalist would comment that blind on a subject, who said we'd spent no money.

We then had Simon Jordon sort of weigh in with "taking the **** out of the system" comments... even though Palace under his ownership had done the same thing.

Now, as much as I don't like and don't listen to talk sport, hence me calling them talk sh!te, one needs to consider their business model. They are essentially a radio equivalent to tabloids. They shout and scream almost anything to get attention, they'll take the hits for getting it wrong because by the point they have been told off, they've made the money from the carp they peddle. They are deliberately divisive, they want people to call in, they push buttons, they exaggerate, they throw around accusations like tickertape at a presidential parade.

I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again, what I found embarrassing was just how little and how quickly supposed fans of this club turned on the club itself and others who refused to make such outlandish statements or to disagree with them. The ease in which two people from one radio station were able to get under the skin and cause the sorts of meltdowns they did.

It certainly played a heavy part in Farke's demise. Those same people carried those uninformed, hypocritical views and blamed Farke as part of the system for us not doing better. Many on here are now claiming there wasn't this loud vocal chorus, many of whom were part of it even, and are saying how it was such a bad decision to sack Farke.

That should be what people are embarrassed about, if you ask me. 

wasnt my discussion either and I still cant work out why certain people seem to be so upset at the suggestion that the media labelled us a national embarrassment last season.

They did, because we were. Everytime we were mentioned on Match of the Day, Sky Sports, Talksport, the press etc. it was all about how $hite we were.

How someone is claiming this didnt happen, and is almost personally offended at the suggestion it did, is beyond me.

Said person also seems to conflate the above happening with people actually being affected by it personally and being upset.

[LaUnionCanary 145]

13 hours ago, SwearyCanary said:

Firstly, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

Secondly, no evidence then. Yawn 

My name is Colin 

Oh, Neil Warnock. Welcome to our world.

[Nora's Ghost 157]

37 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

This is possibly the worst comeback in the history of the internet.

Grammar correction, and telling us your Colin W&nker.

As for evidence, its all in my memory from last season's media attacks at how pathetic we were. 

 

 

Spread his and others' mentalities on here into the real world and it is obvious why Smith and Jones have managed to cling on to their ownership for so long.

 

Many same the game is dead.... the same can be said about the modern snowflake 'supporter' that the woke left wing education system has spewed out. 'They' are right and everyone else is wrong in true cancel culture thinking.

[SwearyCanary 1,333]

42 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

This is possibly the worst comeback in the history of the internet.

Grammar correction, and telling us your Colin W&nker.

As for evidence, its all in my memory from last season's media attacks at how pathetic we were. 

 

 

Once again, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

I think calling me a w&nker probably exceeds anything I have said your way.

Still no evidence then? Your memory is not sufficient to actually prove your point though is it? 

Much love, 

Colin 

[Hughie Curran's fruitcake 22]

48 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

Christ, some people will argue with a lamp shade.

Its just an opinion mate, you dont have to disect everything people say and try to work out the scientific validity and whether its provable or not. 

Any 'might have been' opinion is just that, speculation and conjecture.

I think its pretty universal to suggest had we been able to keep Buendia and Skipp, and then spent £50m on two proven quality Premier League players, that we we would have had a far better chance of survival than spunking the lot on Tzolis, Sargent and Rashica and PLM.

An opinion based on meaningless speculation which bears no relation to reality is drivel. 

[canarydan23 4,699]

1 minute ago, SwearyCanary said:

Once again, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

I think calling me a w&nker probably exceeds anything I have said your way.

Still no evidence then? Your memory is not sufficient to actually prove your point though is it? 

Much love, 

Colin 

Matt Morriss's recollection of his anecdotal accounts of last season is evidence, even if you don't think it's particularly valid. Don't conflate evidence with proof.

[horsefly 5,281]

51 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

Christ, some people will argue with a lamp shade.

Its just an opinion mate, you dont have to disect everything people say and try to work out the scientific validity and whether its provable or not. 

Any 'might have been' opinion is just that, speculation and conjecture.

I think its pretty universal to suggest had we been able to keep Buendia and Skipp, and then spent £50m on two proven quality Premier League players, that we we would have had a far better chance of survival than spunking the lot on Tzolis, Sargent and Rashica and PLM.

That's a bit rich given your own contributions. Perhaps you also need to be reminded that this is a public forum and if you post an opinion on here making certain claims you should expect others to post their opinions about your opinions. I'm still at a loss at what you think you achieve by posting something as obvious as saying, if we had held on to Buendia, and if Skipp had stayed, and if we had spent £25m each on two PL proven players, we might have stayed up. None of those were remotely possible, so why say it? It's of no more relevance that saying, if we had bought Messi,  and if we had bought Van Dijk we might have stayed up.

I note you still haven't listed all those £25m players you claim Burnley and Southampton have "continually" bought over the years, providing a model which you think City should follow. Looking forward to seeing that list as I'm struggling to find those players on Google. 

[horsefly 5,281]

54 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

wasnt my discussion either and I still cant work out why certain people seem to be so upset at the suggestion that the media labelled us a national embarrassment last season.

They did, because we were. Everytime we were mentioned on Match of the Day, Sky Sports, Talksport, the press etc. it was all about how $hite we were.

Except that's just a blatant lie.

[littleyellowbirdie 3,103]

On 04/08/2022 at 10:19, Matt Morriss said:

Well evidently not mate as Villa sacked him.

That was the decision of the Villa board; that doesn't necessarily equate to it being reasonable. 

[Matt Morriss 69]

6 hours ago, SwearyCanary said:

Once again, ‘you are’ is you’re. 

I think calling me a w&nker probably exceeds anything I have said your way.

Still no evidence then? Your memory is not sufficient to actually prove your point though is it? 

Much love, 

Colin 

Oh Sweary.....

Firstly, if you disect my comment I didnt call you a W&nker.

I assumed that you had just let it slip that you were in actual fact Colin W&nker, which as we all know is Neil Warnock's alter ego.

Secondly, what exactly is your issue? Are you actually trying to convince everyone that Norwich werent portrayed as anything other than a laughing stock by the sports media? You seem to be demanding proof of it and are convinced it didnt happen.

Everyone knows it did pal, we just didnt save every website article or record every Match of the Day clip/Talksport phone in.

Becuase, well, who the f&%k does that?

Doesnt mean it didnt happen.

[SwearyCanary 1,333]

6 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Matt Morriss's recollection of his anecdotal accounts of last season is evidence, even if you don't think it's particularly valid. Don't conflate evidence with proof.

Not when the claim is we are a ‘national embarrassment’ unless he lives in multiple places nationwide 

[SwearyCanary 1,333]

28 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

Oh Sweary.....

Firstly, if you disect my comment I didnt call you a W&nker.

I assumed that you had just let it slip that you were in actual fact Colin W&nker, which as we all know is Neil Warnock's alter ego.

Secondly, what exactly is your issue? Are you actually trying to convince everyone that Norwich werent portrayed as anything other than a laughing stock by the sports media? You seem to be demanding proof of it and are convinced it didnt happen.

Everyone knows it did pal, we just didnt save every website article or record every Match of the Day clip/Talksport phone in.

Becuase, well, who the f&%k does that?

Doesnt mean it didnt happen.

We played poorly. We were not a national embarrassment. Sports media that called us a laughing stock were not the media, they were a fraction of individuals designed to elicit an angry reaction. The sports media said rightly we recruited badly and played poorly. That’s not national embarrassment or laughing stock. This term is a massive overreaction to the ups and downs of football clubs the world over. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by SwearyCanary

[jaberry2 768]

Smith needs time, as much as not many people are prepared to give him. Scrapping a possession based game for something completely different is going to take time, especially with a change of personal required. He is slowly putting together his first team XI and over the coming weeks he can then be judged on the performance of the team etc. Come September we will know roughly where we are for this season and fingers crossed we can string together some good performances to install some much needed confidence in the playing squad and fan base.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

I mean in fairness we were a bit of a joke last season weren’t we?

Of course it’s all forgotten again for now but I have seen plenty of neutral fans on social media who are a bit fed up with us stinking the place out, amongst other clubs.

Thats not to say that makes us a ‘national laughing stock’ per se, we clearly aren’t, but it is becoming a running joke every time either us, Fulham, Watford and West Brom get promoted / relegated. 

And of those yo-yo clubs we are clearly the poster boy, emphasised in our recent history by the two title wins and followed by two 20th place finishes. Can’t really get more yo-yo than that can you? Not to mention having the most promotion / relegation seasons of any side to / from the PL.

I think for the neutrals it’s generally just nice to see the prospect of new teams like Notts Forest, Leeds, Brentford etc, which is understandable, particularly when we aren’t really contributing to the league whatsoever (although there were some good moments in the first 2/3s of 19/20).

I’d feel the same as a neutral too - hell I pretty much feel the same as a Norwich fan now and have said before it may not be good to bounce straight back without a more oven ready squad (TBC on our signings as they may give us a totally fresh look).

However, despite getting a bit picked on nationally / in the PL, we are still clearly outdoing a hell of a lot of other teams to get there in the first place. To even become meme-worthy to them. So it’s better to be the subject of a few memes every time we go up than to be totally irrelevant to the mainstream discussion.

We shouldn’t forget the level of success required to get there nor that football exists outside of the PL for the majority of teams even - if it doesn’t in the national media and discussion.

[canarydan23 4,699]

18 minutes ago, SwearyCanary said:

Not when the claim is we are a ‘national embarrassment’ unless he lives in multiple places nationwide 

Plenty of pundits on national platforms called us embarrassing did they not?

I don't agree that we were, but there was a school of thought that we were, largely led by morons like Jamie O'Hara. But if Matt Morriss wishes to share an opinion that others espoused loudly last season, so be it.

[Indy 3,448]

Funny we sacked a failing premiership manager and replaced him with a failing premiership manager!

I don’t think many argued that Farkes time might be up for the best go at staying up, but not for what we were served up, 27 games of no improvement, record breaking season for the wrong reasons and now we’re left with Smith in the Championship…..if we were planning for championship Smith might not have been the best choice!

We are where we are and it’s clear Smith isn’t going anywhere anytime soon as I genuinely believe most of our supporters are nonplus on this season, it’s almost as there’s little expectation!

Saturday should be an easy win, Wigan probably one of the weaker teams? Then again Cardiff aren’t too fancied either and we lost.

[canarybubbles 2,158]

22 minutes ago, jaberry2 said:

Smith needs time, as much as not many people are prepared to give him. Scrapping a possession based game for something completely different is going to take time, especially with a change of personal required. He is slowly putting together his first team XI and over the coming weeks he can then be judged on the performance of the team etc. Come September we will know roughly where we are for this season and fingers crossed we can string together some good performances to install some much needed confidence in the playing squad and fan base.

But should we be scrapping one type of game for another? I thought the idea of a DoF system was that you had a settled way of playing and any new manager came in and continued it. I know you can argue that our case is different, since it seems that Webber and Farke (probably) seemed to have decided that we needed to move away from the established style, but managers are appointed knowing the set-up and I don't think 'he hasn't got his own players' should be an acceptable excuse in this situation. If things haven't picked up by the anniversary of his appointment, he should be gone. That's a whole year without any sign of improvement whatsoever. He'll have had his chance and failed. Let's get someone new better suited to our club.

[Capt. Pants 4,882]

We'll never know of course but I doubt Smith would have got another Premier League job otherthan Norwich. Possibly Burnley at a stretch but they were just as useless as us.

 

[BurwellCanary 246]

6 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

We'll never know of course but I doubt Smith would have got another Premier League job otherthan Norwich. Possibly Burnley at a stretch but they were just as useless as us.

 

Burnely under Kompany look a better bet that we do under Smith IMO from a management perspective (not team). The bigger question is - If Smith hadnt become available who would Webber have got in because he looked like a panic appointment at  the time and really hasnt done too much yet to prove he is the right man, for me anyway

[Matt Morriss 69]

40 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Plenty of pundits on national platforms called us embarrassing did they not?

I don't agree that we were, but there was a school of thought that we were, largely led by morons like Jamie O'Hara. But if Matt Morriss wishes to share an opinion that others espoused loudly last season, so be it.

I didnt even share this opinion, I just echoed it. The OP i think used the term national embarassment.