Positives and Negatives

[Canary02 0]

Positives from last night

1) Gallacher played really well and boosted his confidence and the defences confidence in him.

2) Colin had a good game at right back and his play going forward (in particularly his crossing) was superb.

3) Doherty managed 45 minutes without getting sent-off or giving away a penalty (or to be fair, bearhugging anyone as far as I remember).

4) Etuhu is growing with stature in every game

5) Eagle had a good home debut and slung in some beautiful crosses and corners. Had he and Dublin been on the pitch at the same time the result would have undoubtedly been different

6) Earnie and Hucks laid their bodies on the line and slung in 90 minute shifts for the cause. Our best players are team players who care.

 

Negatives

1) Carl Robinson had no clue what he was supposed to be doing.

2) Carl Robinson''s rubbish anyway.

3) Safri and Drury had stinkers, and Shackell wasn''t much better.

 

On the whole though, it could have been worse, and we have to expect some changeable results and performances as Grant settles in and sorts the wheat from the chaff with this squad.

 

[StimKing 0]

I think thats a fair assesment of the game last night.

Another positive - the number of times our goalkeeper threw the ball out to one of our players instead of launching aimlessly up the pitch was greatly increased. In time with better player''s (hopefully) to come in in January this will see an inprovement in results.

 

Negative - fans, weren''t we all abit quiet? We got what we wanted- a new manager, all we need now our some new player''s! Lets get behind them.

[can u sit down please 0]

Positives

1) We managed a point against a well organised,hard working team.

2) Big "D" came on and has opened everyones eyes to a possible change of formation

3) Eagle can be encouraged by his performance.

4) Ethuhu, when he wants can take the game by the scruff of the neck and drive forward.

 

Negatives.

1) Our defensive distribution is absolutely crap. Now noticing opponents are letting them have it which is resulting in them getting the ball back.

2) This formation (451/433) does not suit Earnie. Everytime he gets the ball his back is to the goal. He is a poacher. A 18yd box player. Not a target man to hold things up.

3) Safri didnt look interested. As much as i love him, i think its time we got someone else in whether it be for a fee or give Rossi J a go.

4) Our defence were being out jumped and pulled about (notably first half) by Cureton and the big lump Iwelumo.

5) What was the benefit of having both Dublin and Thorne on the bench? Clearly once one had came on the other wasnt going to be used. Could Ryan Jarvis of been a better option on the wing than Hughes?

Oh well.....got that off of my chest. I am fully behing PG and believe he was the right choice. It is unfair to judge him imo at the mo. Same players as before, same bare squad and same backroom staff. Worthy is still here in spirit!

[FilletTheFishWife . 0]

agreed but thanks to the board''s shameful frugality there isn''t much wheat to make a team from - and they''ll harvest that too given the opportunity !!

 

 

 

[Cluck 0]

Re "we got what we wanted".......that makes it sound as if we were happy with performances but just wanted Worthington out.

We wanted Worthington out because of poor performances......and are now looking for progress. Peter Grant is still finding his way and trying to understand the squad of misfits he has inherited. Time will tell and we can only hope that all will be well come next May.

[No 9 - Bly<P><FONT size=1>Its better to have loved a short girl, than never loved a tall.<FONT><P> 0]

Err... we played 442 last night not 433

[Baldyboy 0]

looked more like 4-4-1-1 with hux behind earny. thought that worked well and we lost our way when eagle went off, would have preferred to see earny off and hux and dublin up front with eagle putting those crosses in

[Canary02 0]

[quote user="No 9 - Bly"]Err... we played 442 last night not 433[/quote]

I think to be fair we played 4-2.5-1.5-1-1, with Robinson hiding between midfield and flank and Huckerby running wherever he felt (which was often three yards in front of Rob Eagle, giving the poor kid nowhere to go).

[can u sit down please 0]

Hucks played as a supporting striker last night not as a direct partner to Earnie.

[StimKing 0]

I agree we got what we wanted (worthy sacked) because of bad performances. I can''t see why you would think I was saying any different?

What I am saying is that there cant be a massive change in performances until PG has a chance to get some new players in. We should all recognise that and really get behind them even if it isn''t that great at the moment. I just thought it was a bit quiet. Mind you I thought Colchester done a good job on us, Halford looked good.

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="StimKing"]

I agree we got what we wanted (worthy sacked) because of bad performances. I can''t see why you would think I was saying any different?

What I am saying is that there cant be a massive change in performances until PG has a chance to get some new players in. We should all recognise that and really get behind them even if it isn''t that great at the moment. I just thought it was a bit quiet. Mind you I thought Colchester done a good job on us, Halford looked good.

[/quote]

I guess sometimes our words get misinterpreted when written rather than spoken StimKing.......[:)]

You''re right that nothing much is likely to change between now and May even given the task Grant has......but after such a long dark winter at Carrow Road, we are all getting tired of waiting. It costs good money every time we go to a game and really we should be getting much more effort for our money.

Awhile back a home draw against Colchester would have been seen as an awful result.......but we''ve got to the point now where it is fairly acceptable. That''s how far we have fallen..........