More positive and we could have won - from a Charlton supporter.

[silver fox 0]

I share an office with a Charlton supporter who attended the game last night and this morning he said if Norwich had been more positive then they could have won.  He was amazed that we didn''t start with Cureton and said that would have been a big confidence boost for the Charlton players.  He was even more amazed that we didn''t bring him on until the 90th minute and that Strihavka stayed on the bench.

 My colleague was a scout for both Luton and Blackburn for several years and has shown me some of the comprehensive reports that he wrote, in particular whilst working for Kenny Dalglish; and as such I value his unbiaised comments.  I asked for his report on the Norwich formation and players from last night and his comments are as follows;

Formation -  Didn''t think 4-5-1 was a good formation with Brown up front on his own, especially as Charlton''s two central defenders are suspect and were given the runaround when Shef Wed and Colchester and Scunthorpe played 4-4-2.  Midfield passed the ball well but there was no real end product or telling through balls.  Defence coped fairly well under a lot of pressure.

As for individual players:

Marshall had a good game in goal.

Dublin was a class act all night.

Doherty was brave in throwing his body in the way but was a liability at times.

Otsemebor didn''t get much opportunity to get forward and was caught out a bit at the back.

Drury had a reasonable game.

Russell formed a good partnership with Brellier and Lappin in midfield and improved as the game went on and were probably slightly better than Charlton''s midfield.  Unfortunately there was no real final product partly due to the options available up front.

Chadwick was disappointing and didn''t really contribute anything.

Croft made more of a contribution when he replaced Chadwick.

Huckerby had the only real chance and was caught offside.  Fell into the trap set by Mills and was rightly booked.

Brown won a few headers but control was poor and had very little support.

In summary, in his opinion had we started with a more positive line up, or brought the subs on a lot earlier we could well have come away with three points.

 

 

[Huddy 0]

I should be a scout, this is exactly what i''ve been saying about it. U and your scout friuend are right.

We have the players who could have won the game, we should have tried to win the game, we were too scared of Charlton when in fact there not the side people are making them out to be.

[london Canary 0]

i was also at the game last night and pretty much have to agree with this, although i wasn''t very impressed with russel. He just lacks that bit of quality to pick out the pass, but as your friend says he didn''t have many options in front of him. I wasn''t too upset at the result

[mbncfc 1]

That is 100% spot on.

The annoying thing is, to be honest, it was obvious we could have gone for it and I still don''t really understand why we didn''t.

[silver fox 0]

 i forgot to mention that my colleague thought the Norwich supporters were outstanding and that the turnout was excellent for a Tuesday evening.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Peter Grants Tartan Army"]

I should be a scout, this is exactly what i''ve been saying about it. U and your scout friuend are right.

We have the players who could have won the game, we should have tried to win the game, we were too scared of Charlton when in fact there not the side people are making them out to be.

[/quote]

So if we could just replace Doherty at centreback then all these things would have happened!

You should be a scout mate.. but not for us [;)][:P]

 

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Peter Grants Tartan Army"]

I should be a scout, this is exactly what i''ve been saying about it. U and your scout friuend are right.

We have the players who could have won the game, we should have tried to win the game, we were too scared of Charlton when in fact there not the side people are making them out to be.

[/quote]

So if we could just replace Doherty at centreback then all these things would have happened!

You should be a scout mate.. but not for us [;)][:P]

 

[/quote]

No, they could have happened if as well as having a new better centre half (or shackall), we played players capable of scoring goals!

[lobster catcher 0]

Surely the most obvious remark of the day but does grant know the meaning of positive

[Bryan Gunn 0]

I''d certainly agree with that, same conclusions I was drawing from where I sat.Trouble is, if we''d been more positive would we have been caught out earlier?Not sure I''d agree dury was reasonable. His distribution was poor and looked so slow when attempting to get forward and overlap.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="silver fox"]

I share an office with a Charlton supporter who attended the game last night and this morning he said if Norwich had been more positive then they could have won.  He was amazed that we didn''t start with Cureton and said that would have been a big confidence boost for the Charlton players.  He was even more amazed that we didn''t bring him on until the 90th minute and that Strihavka stayed on the bench.

 My colleague was a scout for both Luton and Blackburn for several years and has shown me some of the comprehensive reports that he wrote, in particular whilst working for Kenny Dalglish; and as such I value his unbiaised comments.  I asked for his report on the Norwich formation and players from last night and his comments are as follows;

Formation -  Didn''t think 4-5-1 was a good formation with Brown up front on his own, especially as Charlton''s two central defenders are suspect and were given the runaround when Shef Wed and Colchester and Scunthorpe played 4-4-2.  Midfield passed the ball well but there was no real end product or telling through balls.  Defence coped fairly well under a lot of pressure.

As for individual players:

Marshall had a good game in goal.

Dublin was a class act all night.

Doherty was brave in throwing his body in the way but was a liability at times.

Otsemebor didn''t get much opportunity to get forward and was caught out a bit at the back.

Drury had a reasonable game.

Russell formed a good partnership with Brellier and Lappin in midfield and improved as the game went on and were probably slightly better than Charlton''s midfield.  Unfortunately there was no real final product partly due to the options available up front.

Chadwick was disappointing and didn''t really contribute anything.

Croft made more of a contribution when he replaced Chadwick.

Huckerby had the only real chance and was caught offside.  Fell into the trap set by Mills and was rightly booked.

Brown won a few headers but control was poor and had very little support.

In summary, in his opinion had we started with a more positive line up, or brought the subs on a lot earlier we could well have come away with three points.

[/quote]

Silver Fox.

Most of what you and ''scout'' describe so well is so very obvious - and I''m not being rude, just truthful - to so many of us.

Now what does that make Peter Grant?

I have been fairly supportive of Peter Grant thus far because I considered (hoped, really, to be truthful I suppose) that his passion could overcome his several shortcomings. No longer. Why - principally because he is (a) tactically clueless, (b) unable to learn and (c) of insufficient stature to make obviously needed demands of the NCFC board - such as funds to acquire a quality central defender & creative midfielder.

Sorry Peter, mate. You lost me from kick off last night - buttressed by your absurd substitution strategy.

And I feel that you must be rapidly losing the players.

The solution is clear.

OTBC