Salopian 1 Posted September 21, 2007 In my book all talk about “giving him 10 matches” is to beguilty of short memories and short sights. His achievemnts:He has released much deadwood from the payroll. He has acquired some good players without transfer fees, - Otse, Fozzy, Brellier, Murray,Gilks,which suggests that until the sudden departures of Ernie and Dickson, money was“prudently” tight, and acquired others for reasonable fees – Lappin, Rusty,Marshall.. He has actually gone to Europe on scouting missions,and gone to look at up-coming opponents to assess their strengths andweaknesses for himself(- in marked contrast to his predecessor.) In Jim Duffy has acquired a widely respected assistant. He clearly made plans and decided on prospective signings,some of who came but some did not in competition with clubs with more money.His long laid plans were partly scuppered by the sudden and late departures ofErnie and Dickson, out of his control, and by Safri. His difficulties:The effective nucleus left by Worthington,after the three departures is Dion, Hux, Shax, Doc and Drury and Croft, andapart from Dion and Hux there are severe critics on this board of theremainder, to some degree or other. In addition there are some youngsters, whohe clearly believes are not ready yet, even if they will be eventually. Injuries and illness have plagued him – last season andthis, (and also in the “friendlies”) and Hux appears to be only a shadow ofwhat he was. Settled teams tend to bemore successful, even for the wealthy clubs. The expected heart of the midfieldwas lost to him in the long injuries to Smith and Fozzy, the latter seeming to bebecoming one of the outstanding players. Some players have needed time to settle in to championshipfootball after having played elsewhere, - especially Fozzy and Dave. We haveyet to see them play at their best over an extended period. Criticisms:He has been accused of ignoring younger players. He made ita point to actually see youth matches whenever he could, (on one occasiondriving 200 miles to the south to watch a match), and he has encouraged loansof some to lower divisions to give them every chance to prove themselves. Mostof us, if honest, would be able to name only a few youngsters who might havebeen played more often – Martin, Spillane, Rossi, and others who surely will –Smart, Renton, Rudd, perhaps. He has been accused of being unable to motivate players, thatwe get only half a match of good quality football. That they are capable orraising their game is not disputable – they did against Chelsea,and once or twice this season. It is difficult for us to explain why, and Isuspect for him too. Clearly they work on tactics during the week and know whatis expected, but then freeze when it comes to Saturday. Peter Taylor, generallyrecognised as a good manager, now has his team in the lower reaches! He has failed to sign a CB, permanently or on loan.Outstanding CDs are few, and even good ones are prized by their managers. Toobtain one means paying money that we don’t seem to have, even to pay a loanfee for a very average player, according to PG. Davenport, who was OK when hecame but nothing exceptional, is now quoted at £3m. He is tactically naïve, and over-loyal to Brown. PG hasactually confirmed what some of us suspected, that on Tuesday in order toselect a slightly reduced Hux without weakening the midfield required a singlestriker. With Dave short of match experience after illness and arguably notfamiliar with the role, the logic dictated Brown. I think that he has made errors, - when it was obvious thatSharp was always destined for Sheffield, I wasdisappointed that he allowed Eastwood to go without a battle. Eastwood hasquietly made an impact. What I will not do is to condemn him without a fair chance. Hehas been here for less than a year, and inherited a mess and little money.There are some fickle members on this board – applauding his signings one byone, and then after the difficulties caused by injury, illness and suddendepartures, running out of patience and demanding his head. Let’s wait and seewhat happens if he has a full squad to select from, and a squad settled inconditions here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HARRYPOTTER 0 Posted September 21, 2007 Your attempt at trying to put spin on his achievements do not convince me that he actually has the ability to Manage at this level and he will leave either sooner or later.What I do know is that when I listen to him I find his comments confusing and vague. His continuous talking to any media that will listem irrinates me- He bounces from one topic to another and if this is the way he talks to the players my case rests. He seems to enjoy the spotlight and what goes with being a Manager but in my opinion does not have real skills to succeed.Apart from Ose i do not believe any of his signings have made a significant impact and ultimately this is why he will go.He seems a genuine bloke but is just out of his depth at this level-someone needs to throw him a lifeline, or two very good players Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YellowIce 0 Posted September 21, 2007 Very good post. . . . PG has done an excellent job with the limited resources. I believe Norwich were close to a collapse on the field under the last regime. Time is needed. People who call for his head now seriously over-estimate our clubs financial position.If you look at the pro''s vs con''s i.e. the above post. you can see reasoning behind PG''s thinking for every move. If prem clubs were as willing to loan out players not near the first team as we are we would find it easier to get cover. They are not willing too. WE CANNOT AFFORD A PREMIERSHIP CENTER BACK!!!Id love to see how well this club would do with full backing from fans rather than this constant bemoan of every single decision. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BBFF 0 Posted September 21, 2007 You said your self Salopian Grants had a year, how long do you thing he should be given to make us a success on the pitch? I believe 10 games gives you a good guide to the team he has built and will stick with it. As for the lack money he''s had to spend, blame NCPLC they control it all. FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hog 0 Posted September 21, 2007 [quote user="Salopian"]In my book all talk about “giving him 10 matches” is to be guilty of short memories and short sights. His achievemnts:He has released much deadwood from the payroll. He has acquired some good players without transfer fees, - Otse, Fozzy, Brellier, Murray,Gilks, which suggests that until the sudden departures of Ernie and Dickson, money was “prudently” tight, and acquired others for reasonable fees – Lappin, Rusty, Marshall.. He has actually gone to Europe on scouting missions, and gone to look at up-coming opponents to assess their strengths and weaknesses for himself(- in marked contrast to his predecessor.) In Jim Duffy has acquired a widely respected assistant. He clearly made plans and decided on prospective signings, some of who came but some did not in competition with clubs with more money. His long laid plans were partly scuppered by the sudden and late departures of Ernie and Dickson, out of his control, and by Safri. His difficulties:The effective nucleus left by Worthington, after the three departures is Dion, Hux, Shax, Doc and Drury and Croft, and apart from Dion and Hux there are severe critics on this board of the remainder, to some degree or other. In addition there are some youngsters, who he clearly believes are not ready yet, even if they will be eventually. Injuries and illness have plagued him – last season and this, (and also in the “friendlies”) and Hux appears to be only a shadow of what he was. Settled teams tend to be more successful, even for the wealthy clubs. The expected heart of the midfield was lost to him in the long injuries to Smith and Fozzy, the latter seeming to be becoming one of the outstanding players. Some players have needed time to settle in to championship football after having played elsewhere, - especially Fozzy and Dave. We have yet to see them play at their best over an extended period. Criticisms:He has been accused of ignoring younger players. He made it a point to actually see youth matches whenever he could, (on one occasion driving 200 miles to the south to watch a match), and he has encouraged loans of some to lower divisions to give them every chance to prove themselves. Most of us, if honest, would be able to name only a few youngsters who might have been played more often – Martin, Spillane, Rossi, and others who surely will – Smart, Renton, Rudd, perhaps. He has been accused of being unable to motivate players, that we get only half a match of good quality football. That they are capable or raising their game is not disputable – they did against Chelsea, and once or twice this season. It is difficult for us to explain why, and I suspect for him too. Clearly they work on tactics during the week and know what is expected, but then freeze when it comes to Saturday. Peter Taylor, generally recognised as a good manager, now has his team in the lower reaches! He has failed to sign a CB, permanently or on loan. Outstanding CDs are few, and even good ones are prized by their managers. To obtain one means paying money that we don’t seem to have, even to pay a loan fee for a very average player, according to PG. Davenport, who was OK when he came but nothing exceptional, is now quoted at £3m. He is tactically naïve, and over-loyal to Brown. PG has actually confirmed what some of us suspected, that on Tuesday in order to select a slightly reduced Hux without weakening the midfield required a single striker. With Dave short of match experience after illness and arguably not familiar with the role, the logic dictated Brown. I think that he has made errors, - when it was obvious that Sharp was always destined for Sheffield, I was disappointed that he allowed Eastwood to go without a battle. Eastwood has quietly made an impact. What I will not do is to condemn him without a fair chance. He has been here for less than a year, and inherited a mess and little money. There are some fickle members on this board – applauding his signings one by one, and then after the difficulties caused by injury, illness and sudden departures, running out of patience and demanding his head. Let’s wait and see what happens if he has a full squad to select from, and a squad settled in conditions here.[/quote]good points but Safri was 100% Grants fault, he decided from an early stage that he didnt like him, unlike, might I add, the majority of supporters Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
renegade tootsie 0 Posted September 21, 2007 At least six months with the team he has built closed season I would suggest. Ten games gives a clue, come january we will have a better idea. But then, some clubs rebuild (from what everyone accepts was a disaster under Worthington in the end) over YEARS. Are we guilty of acting like demanding children in a playground full of equally demanding peers?[quote user="BBFF"]You said your self Salopian Grants had a year, how long do you thing he should be given to make us a success on the pitch? I believe 10 games gives you a good guide to the team he has built and will stick with it. As for the lack money he''s had to spend, blame NCPLC they control it all. FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST[/quote] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
7rew 0 Posted September 21, 2007 [quote user="Salahuddin"]good points but Safri was 100% Grants fault, he decided from an early stage that he didnt like him, unlike, might I add, the majority of supporters[/quote]Grant decided early on that he didn''t like Safri. However Safri decided even earlier (second morning) that he didn''t want to play for Grant and instead wanted to leave. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lobster catcher 0 Posted September 21, 2007 Grant decided early on he liked the free scoring chris brown,the rest is history Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HappyhammerAndy 0 Posted September 21, 2007 Per yellowice - I think that alot of what you say makes great sense.However, I got slaughtered on here, for suggesting that the way forward for Norwich, might be, signing Premiership, players, on free loan deals, similar to Mark Noble, at your enemy last season. Noble, future, WHU and England captain, was used by them for six months. I tipped you off about the potential situation, regarding Dailly, but got abuse. Surely, there are loads of such players? All you have to do is pay their wages? Norwich fans told me, (in no uncertain ways), that they did not want other team''s, "cast offs, and, rejects." Do you think that Southampton have got a coux by signing him?Will there defensive record improve "big time"?Amongst his many qualities, he has experience, loyalalty, years of premiership and international experience. He is a very fit 33 year old. To get promotion, would fans be prepared to, shelve their principles for a while?Just trying to get you talking amongst yourselves??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0 Posted September 21, 2007 "In Jim Duffy has acquired a widely respected assistant." - errr this is his first assistant job, as a manager he is responsible for 3 relegations and no promotions. He is also rumoured to be an arrogant so and so.The worst thing that could happen would be Grant''s sacking and this inept individual being put in charge by the dumbos in our boardroom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites