Turning point for Smith or a false dawn?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

The problem is how to get more of the good stuff and minimise the poor.  It’ll be interesting  to see the starting XI on Wednesday - Kenny will be back available and presumably Josh, too.

We have had a number of injuries (and a suspension) that have sometimes forced the team selection, but we do need a decent handle on what or first choice side/squad is. If/when everyone is fit there’s a lot of choices and I’m not sure we know the answers.

This is where I'm looking forward to seeing what happens after the World Cup break, which will be the first really big chance Smith will have had to do serious work with practically the whole squad on the training ground since pre-season and for the whole squad to get back to fitness. 

[Number9 272]

1 hour ago, LaUnionCanary said:

Todd, who so far this season has zero goals and zero assists. He flatters to receive I'm afraid. 

Lies, damn lies and statistics 

[Mason 47 1,382]

In fairness I think the question in and of itself is part of the problem. Win one and it needs to be the start of a revolution or a final nail in the coffin, lose one and we're on the way to league one. 

If you took it objectively, a side that had 1 win in 8 and lost 4 of the last 5 are likely to be low on confidence, reluctant to risk errors and look nervous & cagey. Picking up a scrappy win as well as 6 yellow cards in front of a nervous home support sounds fairly par for the course IMO

Momentum can have a heavily influence both ways in this league, as we've experienced in 4k HD ourselves. A win on Wednesday would go a long way to getting the ball rolling again.

[kingsway 94]

We were there for the taking until we scored our 2nd goal, only bad Stoke misses and them not getting a definite penalty when Hanley blatantly and obviously tripped the guy in front of the Barclay prevented this from happening! 

 

The game confirmed what I and many other have known for quite a while. - No one in the playing squad and coaching staff have much idea on the best team and what the attacking plan is but cause we've got decent, quality players for this level we can still beat teams even though we are so disjointed!

 

 

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

8 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

This is the way I look at it: 

• Yes we're erratic. Yes, the uninteresting football still outweighs the easy on the eye football. 
• Improvement in football is never linear on account of the competitive nature and the variation in the teams you face. 
• You can't separate out the squad from the manager in any assessment, because all performance is under this manager; if they do well, it's as much (and as little) down to management as if they do badly. 
• The first priority is and always will be results. Promotion is the aim and seeing a convincingly good and deserved result yesterday to arrest a spell of bad form is a start to getting back on track. 
• There is absolutely no way of seeing into the future to see whether we'll get where we want to be or not. All I can do is look at the fact that this manager does have a 100% record of leaving clubs in a better position in footballing terms than when he found them prior to joining Norwich, which is a basis to let him get on with it in my view and to wish him well in trying to do so. If things go badly, then the players need scrutinising as much as the manager. 
• OTBC

I think you make some valid points. 
 

While I agree with your point that the players have to take some responsibility, for me I think there is more to this squad in terms of performance output that is being shown and that can only really be coming from the tactics and players the manager is choosing for each match. We showed in the 15 min period after Cantwell came on we can blow teams away at this level. My main worry is the 15 mins spells are the anomaly rather than the standard. If we can transfer that to 60-70 mins a game on a regular basis we will blow it he league away. It doesn’t take much to get the fans onside and all it took yesterday was Cantwell putting a shift in, which for me should be the norm for the entire 11 and not just Todd or Onel. 
 

in terms of it being a results businesses I don’t think that’s entirely accurate. Fans will accept poor performance if there is a result to show from it, likewise fans will accept loses if the performance is there. Of late we’ve not really had either. When the team isn’t playing well all the results will do is buy smith more time to get more convincing performances from the side. I still feel we will get found out against the better sides more because the team selection and tactics than that our squad not being of sufficient quality for this level. 
 

i am now maligned to the fact that Smith is now here after that win until at least after the World Cup so I might as well be hoping he sorts it out and we play well. 

[baldy09 158]

Believe we can gauge if we are on the way to improving if we can some flair at QRR and  points- will demonstrate we just went through a difficult patch .lose and we can really question where are we going from here

[littleyellowbirdie 2,551]

29 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I think you make some valid points. 
 

While I agree with your point that the players have to take some responsibility, for me I think there is more to this squad in terms of performance output that is being shown and that can only really be coming from the tactics and players the manager is choosing for each match. We showed in the 15 min period after Cantwell came on we can blow teams away at this level. My main worry is the 15 mins spells are the anomaly rather than the standard. If we can transfer that to 60-70 mins a game on a regular basis we will blow it he league away. It doesn’t take much to get the fans onside and all it took yesterday was Cantwell putting a shift in, which for me should be the norm for the entire 11 and not just Todd or Onel. 
 

in terms of it being a results businesses I don’t think that’s entirely accurate. Fans will accept poor performance if there is a result to show from it, likewise fans will accept loses if the performance is there. Of late we’ve not really had either. When the team isn’t playing well all the results will do is buy smith more time to get more convincing performances from the side. I still feel we will get found out against the better sides more because the team selection and tactics than that our squad not being of sufficient quality for this level. 
 

i am now maligned to the fact that Smith is now here after that win until at least after the World Cup so I might as well be hoping he sorts it out and we play well. 

Exactly, but there were a few substitutions in the mix and it was the manager's decision that led to him being there. For the rest of the game, the whole collection of 11 players on the pitch did not look like they could blow away anyone at this level, which underlines that you can't just separate out management from the squad's performance as a way of arguing that anyone else whatsoever could just come in and replace a manager of Smith's experience and automatically do any better with this squad. 

The game looked to me to be geared towards absorbing pressure and tiring the opposition for the first 2/3rds, to then switch into a more attacking setup towards the end. To my tastes this is a good strategy for getting results with a squad that doesn't seem to have it in it to defend well and attack well with the same group of players on the pitch at a time, as reinforced by the fact that their goal came in the last 30 minutes rather than the first 60, and that we did look far more weak defensively in that last 30 minutes. 

Edited October 30, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Keith Scott 244]

13 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

Neither.

It's more of the same. We'll beat bad teams and lose to half decent sides more often than not.

This.

Smith out.

And Webber.

And Delia.

All the best. Big Keith Scott.

[Mr Angry 1,563]

4 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

It was home game against a bottom half side who had lost their last two games, anything other than a win would have been unacceptable, yet expectations amongst some have already been lowered so much that they are treating this like a big win. 

In my opinion it's  a dead cat bounce, dreading Burnley away.

Next season?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

22 minutes ago, Mr Angry said:

Next season?

Sorry I meant Swansea, add QPR to that.

Let's see what we look like against teams who can keep the ball.

[sgncfc 1,228]

Until Smith and his coaching team realise that it's Pukki OR Sargent, not both, we will always be struggling. It's effectively like we are playing with 10 men. That's not a criticism of Sargent because he is clearly a central striker not a winger or a 10.

We HAVE to play 4231 because those are the players we have. It means we can play a double pivot with 3 creatives. What I don't understand is why our coaching team is so blind they can't see that.

We had Rashica, who could play in a 433 but he was always used with Pukki and Sargent, so was overloaded. So we sent him on loan rather than change the system to accommodate him. Tzolis could also have played, but he's gone too. Dowell is not a wide option. Nor is Cantwell. Nor is Nunez. They need to stop trying to make players do things they can't do - then we might look like a team.

[shefcanary 2,410]

34 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

We HAVE to play 4231 because those are the players we have. It means we can play a double pivot with 3 creatives. What I don't understand is why our coaching team is so blind they can't see that.

I don't think the coaching staff are blind to it, just that Webber has determined from our experience in the EPL under Farke that 4-2-3-1 won't work. Webber has concluded 4-3-3 should be pursued at aĺl costs.

So Webber has placed them under pressure, Smith comes with experience of working well under 4-3-3, hence why Webber went for him so quickly when he became "available".

The problem is however that Webber's recruitment has not come up with a squad who can naturally play 4-3-3. Smith is thus charged with coaching 4-3-3 into them, but he hasn't found the formula yet.

The fact our best moments seem to come when reverting to 4-2-3-1 tells me Webber is the problem.

Edited October 30, 2022 by shefcanary

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I really hope this is a turning point. More like that last 20 minutes and QPR will be beaten.

I can't warm to Deano unfortunately, maybe because I never wanted him in the first place, but nonetheless don't particularly see any method in his tactics let alone team selection. In fact, I think it was down to the players for that inspiring finish.

But that doesn't stop me from wanting him to create a dynasty of successful, exciting football. I want our club to make the correct decisions and it to be reflected on the pitch.

I must admit, I am waiting on Wednesday's team selection ready to cheer or scream.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

11 hours ago, sonyc said:

Good points @Hank shoots Skyler and nice to read through in a post the development of your thinking. I don't know if it's a turning point but it does still feel that Smith is experimenting - trying to perfect one or two starting line up permutations. He kept a continuity in that run of wins - why wouldn't he? But...as many have stated, we were not especially convincing. 

The fact that we now can have 5 subs will always mean a greater likelihood of subs and in this area I believe Smith has been quite effective. Yesterday was a great example. The subs changed the dynamic - immediately! It's happened before too.

The main point I wanted to make is a question actually. Would you say that Smith, in many post match statements, has actually echoed just what you've been saying? I feel (and I'm unconvinced still by Smith but want to be fair to the fella)  that he has been non-plussed, annoyed and frustrated too. He is someone not given to much emotion or much public display of his emotions. But I think he is as unhappy as many people. He also knows there is an "edgy" atmosphere. He stated he felt it in the crowd yesterday. 

Often we don't think managers can be as frustrated as fans. Smith stated that he wants a team to be attacking and show flair (as he mentioned he got with Brentford and Villa). So, he is also waiting to see it happen. I think we can criticise formations and other tactical decisions fairly. But...a big but...maybe we might get to a turning point very soon. If we can find those great touches again (Pukki, Cantwell examples) and other players get on to that wavelength then I'm hopeful.

 

Cheers Sony!

He has been experimenting yes but the 6 changes felt more like a back to the drawing-board shake up, like he’d swiped his notes off of his desk and started all over again… It does feel like there were some good takeaways though for Wednesday night and expect we will see Nunez in for Dowell and Cantwell for Hernandez as the only changes. That would probably mean Ramsey / Cantwell on the right though which is not ideal. We just can’t seem to find excellent looking starting line up without at least one square peg / round hole situation! 

I’d definitely give him credit for making good subs though, there’s been multiple games where that’s been true. I do like that he’s a lot more proactive than Farke with them, even in the narrow games - although the flip side being there have been a few occasions where it felt like the changes were a bit overboard - I’m not sure if I can just never be happy or if there could be a genuine middle ground between the two...  

And it’s an interesting question RE post match, I have found his interviews to be mostly favourable to our performances. I haven’t found him totally reflecting my thoughts and he hasn’t particularly said much to warm himself to the supporters either. The Luton game in particular where he moaned about the officials for most of the Radio Norfolk interview, where it was clearly a result entirely of our own making. How he felt that McLean sending off could be appealed I will never know. Whole thing just seemed like sour grapes and a deflection from another poor performance. That interview was particularly concerning as it was the first time I just didn’t follow nearly all of what he said. Usually when that kind of thing happens it feels like a signal for the start of the end. 

However he called it pretty right on Saturday after the game. And to be honest it’s probably not fair to read too much into the press comments as he’s more than likely telling a different story behind the scenes, he probably just wants to be seen as being on the players side / not throwing them under the bus. But he needs to be careful doing this not to alienate the supporters who can only rely on what he says in public. I did enjoy the frank honestly from managers like Alex Neil and Farke.

I hope he can turn it around too, if we can find that higher gear and stay in it for a full 90 mins (or just like 60/70) I’m sure the crowd would be properly energised again. But playing totally off it and only turning up for 20 minute spells is never going to get a baying crowd at Carrow Road. I think the supporters will be a little more up for it from get-go on Wednesday so maybe something good can happen!

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

7 hours ago, sgncfc said:

Until Smith and his coaching team realise that it's Pukki OR Sargent, not both, we will always be struggling. It's effectively like we are playing with 10 men. That's not a criticism of Sargent because he is clearly a central striker not a winger or a 10.

We HAVE to play 4231 because those are the players we have. It means we can play a double pivot with 3 creatives. What I don't understand is why our coaching team is so blind they can't see that.

Tend to agree, although I’d say I’m pretty gutted how the Preston game went because the way we started in the 4-3-1-2 was possibly the best I had seen us all season. The first 20 or so mins we could’ve easily scored 4, but were really wasteful.

The formation clearly wasn’t perfect as Preston’s equaliser showed, but we had more than enough chances to win that game and ultimately it was only that wastefulness, combined with irrelevant individual errors (Krul, Pukki’s terrible header on halfway for their first goal) / misfortune (deflected cross goal) which cost us. Yes the result didn’t go our way on the day but I think we could’ve played it out again and won the game comfortably 8 in every 10 times. Shame that it seemed to put the formation to bed in Smith’s mind after then as I think it’s worth another look!

[Robert N. LiM 4,381]

11 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

My main worry is the 15 mins spells are the anomaly rather than the standard. If we can transfer that to 60-70 mins a game on a regular basis we will blow it he league away.

Didn't watch Saturday's game but this seems the big issue to me. It's not even a question of whether we can convert 20 mins of good stuff to 60 or 70, it's whether we can control games during the periods when we are not blowing the opposition away. I still can't believe how open we allowed the Preston game to be when we'd taken an early lead, for example. Just keep the ball, rest in possession, all that obvious stuff. We seem to have gone from a team under DF that cared about possession more than anything else, to a team under DS that simply can't get hold of the ball. And most of our players seem reasonably technically proficient, so it must be a coaching issue, surely?

[By Hook or Ian crook 917]

11 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Didn't watch Saturday's game but this seems the big issue to me. It's not even a question of whether we can convert 20 mins of good stuff to 60 or 70, it's whether we can control games during the periods when we are not blowing the opposition away. I still can't believe how open we allowed the Preston game to be when we'd taken an early lead, for example. Just keep the ball, rest in possession, all that obvious stuff. We seem to have gone from a team under DF that cared about possession more than anything else, to a team under DS that simply can't get hold of the ball. And most of our players seem reasonably technically proficient, so it must be a coaching issue, surely?

I’d tend to agree it’s a coaching issue 

[Bonzo 198]

We have some of the best players in the division but sadly not yet the best team.

The acceptance that we don't have the players for 433 is a start. We need a very special centre mid to play that system and it doesn't suit Pukki's game either- furthermore the wider mids also have to do a lot of defensive work so that the full backs are not isolated or outnumbered, something which we have not mastered in nearly a season of failed attempts to play this way. 

Crucially it is telling that Farke was dismissed after the game at Brentford when he reverted to 4231. No one can tell for sure but it seems likely that Webber has been back seat driving. Perhaps he has some data that posits 433 is optimal and wanted the managers to persist but there is a lot more to it than data. 

Partnerships and understanding take time to create. Pukki looks to have a good understanding with Ramsay, Cantwell and Nunez are both players who can join up play and Gibbs looks better in a holding two. We should persist with 4231 and stop what has been a long running and failed experiment with 433.

There are signs that we can gel as a side but only with a formation which suits the players that we have. 

 

[ZLF 274]

Jurys out.   The plan of sitting Gibbs deep,  Sara deep and being the box to box play and having nunez, todd and ramsey (who was far better out wide than in the 10 role) worked well from an attacking sense.   But for the first 70 mins we were dire,  and both cbs were particularly ropey (it was def a pen from hanleys foul at 1-0) and, but for poor finishing, the result could have been very different.

 

QPR is a litmus test,  can we perform against a top half side?   We also have the challenge of accommodating Kennys guidance,  will he replace Hayden, Dowell (ahead of Sara, Nunez or Todd would be wrong)  McCallum (who i though had a decent game) or more likely Gibbs (who I though also had a  good game,  generating the first goal ) which would be equally unwarranted  

 

The team selection for weds and the players appetite will be key.

Edited October 31, 2022 by ZLF
fat fingered spelling

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, ZLF said:

Jurys out.   The plan of sitting Gibbs deep,  Sara deep and being the box to box play and having nunez, todd and ramsey (who was far better out wide than in the 10 role) worked well from an attacking sense.   But for the first 70 mins we were dire,  and both cbs were particularly ropey (it was def a pen from hanleys foul at 1-0) and, but for poor finishing, the result could have been very different.

 

QPR is a litmus test,  can we perform against a top half side?   We also have the challenge of accommodating Kennys guidance,  will he replace Hayden, Dowell (ahead of Sara, Nunez or Todd would be wrong)  McCallum (who i though had a decent game) or more likely Gibbs (who I though also had a  good game,  generating the first goal ) which would be equally unwarranted  

 

The team selection for weds and the players appetite will be key.

I can understand replacing Gibbs with Hayden. I wouldn't necessarily agree but could see its six or two threes which one is selected.

But the attacking flair we showed that last 20 minutes put us on the front foot. There was no need to worry about two holding etc. I know Stoke scored but that was down to McCallum tiredness if anything.

Lets get at Rangers from the off. Get the crowd onside and singing. Score a goal or two. What is there to worry about. Confidence is such a big part of the game.

[Tumbleweed 106]

It is no wonder that we look disjointed and often inept when the personnel, tactics and formation seem to change at a whim.

It is even less surprising when the manager by his own admission gives them information but not a plan.

This could also explain, perhaps, why we play well for a spell once the players have themselves figured it out and it sort of clicks for a bit. But it is not sustainable against a well drilled opposition.

To me they also look as though, despite not having a plan, they get "hairdryer-ed" if things go wrong. I can imagine a bit of shouting and bawling behind the scenes. If so, that would erode confidence and reduce flair or risk taking, a sort of jittery panic might set in.

I don't agree that we don't have the players, bar a combative DM unless that is supposed to be Hayden.

In my view we just have a guy who was on the rebound, found an easy home in an EPL club with still some hope of survival, who knows he doesn't really fit in and realises that he has bitten off more than he could chew in the footsteps of a much loved visionary.

If we had invested big on the management team (and bided our time a bit more) instead of more player gambles we'd be in a very different place I reckon. Sadly, I have zero confidence that things will just suddenly turn around all of a sudden, the patchy form will allow us to pickpocket points here and there but unlikely to be much more than that. And if we do scratch enough to get promoted in a league where no one is yet running away? Cripes, it doesn't really bear thinking about!!!!

 

 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

On 30/10/2022 at 00:06, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I think we can all hold on to the result as well as that spell towards the end of the game, and hope that it provides a proper boost to the players for Wednesday’s game. But based on the flow of the season so far, it’s hard to see if we can ever improve enough under Smith to do better than the playoffs. Consistency is key and we are simply far too volatile. I had thought the good run of results would breed more success and improvement in performances but that didn’t worked out - to say the least. So how can one good result suddenly change everything now?

Ultimately I fear that today has just given Smith some free extra rope to use up which he doesn’t particularly deserve, and less time for a new coach to work with some clearly very capable players. Of course I would be genuinely pleased if he could turn it all round from here and prove the fans wrong!

I know its supporter blasphemy and shades of First Wizard and 'beating West Ham could relegate us', but I genuinely wish we lost against Stoke, we never deserved that win and it bought Smith that little bit of extra time to take us to the World Cup break, time we could've spent incorporating the new coach we clearly need. Massive missed opportunity in saving our season IMO, and really poor from Webber to not see what was already obvious to many. We should still be able to negotiate a play-off place, but the longer this current situation drags out the more I am led to think that top-two is absolutely out of the picture, and I don't think it should be for the squad of players we've got.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

On 31/10/2022 at 16:41, Tumbleweed said:

If we had invested big on the management team (and bided our time a bit more) instead of more player gambles we'd be in a very different place I reckon. 

Unfortunately there is no reason at all to suspect that we didn't invest big in the management team, I suspect Smith and Shakespeare are on some serious dosh?

[Canary Wundaboy 1,359]

2 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Unfortunately there is no reason at all to suspect that we didn't invest big in the management team, I suspect Smith and Shakespeare are on some serious dosh?

Unfortunately I suspect you're right.

[KeiranShikari 1,420]

On 30/10/2022 at 00:11, KeiranShikari said:

Neither.

It's more of the same. We'll beat bad teams and lose to half decent sides more often than not.

If I can see it why can't the club?

[Nexus_Canary 1,019]

On 30/10/2022 at 00:09, Nexus_Canary said:

Love it if it was a turning point - but false dawn more likely.

Dont forget Stoke missed a couple of sitters as well so should have been 3-3?

QPR will be a tougher game.
My biggest fear is that this win has bought Smith more time to make a deeper mess. 

Top post this