Now, here's a question

[Camuldonum 0]

Your patched up side appear to have given a good account of themselves against Manchester City tonight.  The Man City fans were predicting six or seven goals having read this site and others with glee.

I think you should start against Sheffield Wednesday with the same squad.  Will your Manager be brave enough to do so do you think?

Well done Norwich: that was no dishonour was it?

[Graham Humphrey 13]

I think yes, we should start with the same team but I bet Grant won''t do it. It says a lot that our supposed "better" players can''t turn in displays like this.

As I''ve said before, I''m very pleased with our performance tonight but if we don''t carry it on it won''t count for anything.

[can u sit down please 0]

[quote user="camuldonum"]

Your patched up side appear to have given a good account of themselves against Manchester City tonight.  The Man City fans were predicting six or seven goals having read this site and others with glee.

I think you should start against Sheffield Wednesday with the same squad.  Will your Manager be brave enough to do so do you think?

Well done Norwich: that was no dishonour was it?

[/quote]

 

Grant is now the best thing since sliced bread Camm.....but some told him all along to play the boys [;)]

[silver fox 0]

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

I think yes, we should start with the same team but I bet Grant won''t do it. It says a lot that our supposed "better" players can''t turn in displays like this.

As I''ve said before, I''m very pleased with our performance tonight but if we don''t carry it on it won''t count for anything.

[/quote] I for one will be very disappointed if Spillane and Jarvis don''t keep their place as by all accounts they both had a very good game.  This will be a test for Grant because if he subsequently drops them then what message will it send out to the youngsters?  In my opinion they have earned the right to at least start against Shef Wed.  I''m sure we will get the usual posters spouting the same old B******s that you can''t throw them into such a big game.  If they are good enough then they are old enough, and from tonight''s reports they are good enough.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="can u sit down please"][quote user="camuldonum"]

Your patched up side appear to have given a good account of themselves against Manchester City tonight.  The Man City fans were predicting six or seven goals having read this site and others with glee.

I think you should start against Sheffield Wednesday with the same squad.  Will your Manager be brave enough to do so do you think?

Well done Norwich: that was no dishonour was it?

[/quote]

 

Grant is now the best thing since sliced bread Camm.....but some told him all along to play the boys [;)]

[/quote]

And you managed without The Legend!

How strange.

Fortunately for everyone I am not a football manager but, if I was, I would have replaced The Legend within minutes of Radio Norfolk and not waited for him to pick up an "ankle injury" on the training ground or have another twinge from his dodgy hip.

But that''s just me, of course, as I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="silver fox"][quote user="Graham Humphrey"]

I think yes, we should start with the same team but I bet Grant won''t do it. It says a lot that our supposed "better" players can''t turn in displays like this.

As I''ve said before, I''m very pleased with our performance tonight but if we don''t carry it on it won''t count for anything.

[/quote] I for one will be very disappointed if Spillane and Jarvis don''t keep their place as by all accounts they both had a very good game.  This will be a test for Grant because if he subsequently drops them then what message will it send out to the youngsters?  In my opinion they have earned the right to at least start against Shef Wed.  I''m sure we will get the usual posters spouting the same old B******s that you can''t throw them into such a big game.  If they are good enough then they are old enough, and from tonight''s reports they are good enough.[/quote]

So should Doherty remain captain too?

 

[XXL16 0]

It''s 10am Hong Kong time and I am working in the office, but earlier at about 2:45am, I was up in front of computer and listen our Cup tie against Manchester City. I can expect I was a bit sleepy at this moment.

We are head and shoulder over the Premiership side, but just need a regular goalscorer to put the ball into the back of the net. The performance, passion and commitment were 100 times better than what we got against Wolves. I should say our energy room was superb, Spillane and Rossi Jarvis displayed how Brellier and Russell missing this season: box-to-box, track back, put his foot to the ball and try to pass the ball; honestly both deserved a starting places on this weekend LIVE TV games against the Owsl at Carrow Road.

If you are concern about quality of the MC side we played against then no, okay they may have made 9 changes to the side compare against playing Fulham on Saturday, but half of them were internationals, included an Brazilian international (Geovanni) who scored against Manchester United earlier this season, so our players were not playing against a weak side.

Please, please Peter, learn from your mistakes! Don''t do it wrong again!!!

 

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]

Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?

 

 

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]

Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?

 

 

[/quote]

But your "better players" wanted to leave and took advantage of their contracts to do so.  There''s no point in having players who don''t want to play for you.  Better to have a committed team who give everything as the team at Manchester seemed to do last night.  If you look at some of the Man City boards your team was thought unlucky to lose.  One poster says: "They were all over us......."

I''d go with a team "all over the opposition" who lose rather than those who (apparently) rolled over at Wolves and lost and without managing one telling shot on goal.  Eventually a team all over the opposition is going to win - teams that lie down never will.

I am aware of what a fine player Mr Huckerby has been for you and why he is so respected by the majority of your fans - a wonderful club servant in his time.  But personally I thought his outburst on the radio was completely and totally unprofessional and I would have dropped him for doing so.  (See, it could be a lot worse - I could be the Manager!).

What a confidence booster to a team on the ropes: "The worst Norwich team I''ve played for."  As far as I understand from the match reports he did not exactly light up the sky on the day.

He''d have been straight in my office where I would have pointed out that I wanted him to go out as a Legend.  And to enable that he would be going - out.

It seems to me that what you need most at the moment is to get a team - not a team centred on one person.  If the reports from Manchester are correct it would appear you got closer towards getting a "team" last night.  It does not matter if they were City reserves or not - that team would probably do well in this League.

And you took them on, apparently, and made a game of it.  I don''t think you did that at Wolves.

[mbncfc 1]

[quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]

Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?

 

 

[/quote]

All three players engineered their own exits.

They didn''t have to go around telling their agents exactly how much they could go for.

Be annoyed at the club for the lack of replacements definitely. But not for these players wanted to leave.

And no, it wasn''t Grant''s fault Earnie and Etuhu wanted to leave.

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="camuldonum"][quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]

Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?

 

 

[/quote]

But your "better players" wanted to leave and took advantage of their contracts to do so.  There''s no point in having players who don''t want to play for you.  Better to have a committed team who give everything as the team at Manchester seemed to do last night.  If you look at some of the Man City boards your team was thought unlucky to lose.  One poster says: "They were all over us......."

I''d go with a team "all over the opposition" who lose rather than those who (apparently) rolled over at Wolves and lost and without managing one telling shot on goal.  Eventually a team all over the opposition is going to win - teams that lie down never will.

I am aware of what a fine player Mr Huckerby has been for you and why he is so respected by the majority of your fans - a wonderful club servant in his time.  But personally I thought his outburst on the radio was completely and totally unprofessional and I would have dropped him for doing so.  (See, it could be a lot worse - I could be the Manager!).

What a confidence booster to a team on the ropes: "The worst Norwich team I''ve played for."  As far as I understand from the match reports he did not exactly light up the sky on the day.

He''d have been straight in my office where I would have pointed out that I wanted him to go out as a Legend.  And to enable that he would be going - out.

It seems to me that what you need most at the moment is to get a team - not a team centred on one person.  If the reports from Manchester are correct it would appear you got closer towards getting a "team" last night.  It does not matter if they were City reserves or not - that team would probably do well in this League.

And you took them on, apparently, and made a game of it.  I don''t think you did that at Wolves.

[/quote]

Point of information camul.  He did NOT say "worst" team.  He was misheard and/or misquoted.  He said "weakest".  Undeniably true.  For the past two summers we have spent less than half the money we have made from selling players on replacing them.  What else can you expect?

Regardless of who is or is not to blame for reducing us to a one man team, it certainly isn''t Huckerby.  But don''t let that stand in the way of your quest for a scapegoat.  Get rid of Hucks and everything will be OK?  I wish it were that simple, but I think not.

If we were looked like more of a team last night, maybe it was because Huckerby, Dublin, Shackell and Brellier weren''t playing?  Or maybe it had something to do with the fact that for once in his life Peter Grant put out a starting XI and let them play instead of tinkering with the formation and the personnel every five minutes?

 

[Old Boy 0]

[quote user="mbncfc"][quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?[/quote]

All three players engineered their own exits.

They didn''t have to go around telling their agents exactly how much they could go for.

Be annoyed at the club for the lack of replacements definitely. But not for these players wanted to leave.

And no, it wasn''t Grant''s fault Earnie and Etuhu wanted to leave.

[/quote]Exactly mbncfc. People blather on about losing "quality" players, forgetting a) how they actually played when they were here, b) how they''re getting on with their new clubs, and c) the real reasons we lost them. These so-called "stars" were criticised, sometimes mercilessly, on this forum when they played here. The same goes for the "best" players currently at the Club - you can only judge a player on his performances not on his reputation. There''s been too much of the latter with England, and hopefully we''re getting over that, and we must get over it here.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"][quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="camuldonum"] 

I am not in favour of one man teams. 

[/quote]

Nor am I camul, and nor is Huckerby judging by his protests against selling our better players and not replacing them with like quality.  He''s the only one left now.  Whose fault is that?

 

 

[/quote]

But your "better players" wanted to leave and took advantage of their contracts to do so.  There''s no point in having players who don''t want to play for you.  Better to have a committed team who give everything as the team at Manchester seemed to do last night.  If you look at some of the Man City boards your team was thought unlucky to lose.  One poster says: "They were all over us......."

I''d go with a team "all over the opposition" who lose rather than those who (apparently) rolled over at Wolves and lost and without managing one telling shot on goal.  Eventually a team all over the opposition is going to win - teams that lie down never will.

I am aware of what a fine player Mr Huckerby has been for you and why he is so respected by the majority of your fans - a wonderful club servant in his time.  But personally I thought his outburst on the radio was completely and totally unprofessional and I would have dropped him for doing so.  (See, it could be a lot worse - I could be the Manager!).

What a confidence booster to a team on the ropes: "The worst Norwich team I''ve played for."  As far as I understand from the match reports he did not exactly light up the sky on the day.

He''d have been straight in my office where I would have pointed out that I wanted him to go out as a Legend.  And to enable that he would be going - out.

It seems to me that what you need most at the moment is to get a team - not a team centred on one person.  If the reports from Manchester are correct it would appear you got closer towards getting a "team" last night.  It does not matter if they were City reserves or not - that team would probably do well in this League.

And you took them on, apparently, and made a game of it.  I don''t think you did that at Wolves.

[/quote]

Point of information camul.  He did NOT say "worst" team.  He was misheard and/or misquoted.  He said "weakest".  Undeniably true.  For the past two summers we have spent less than half the money we have made from selling players on replacing them.  What else can you expect?

Regardless of who is or is not to blame for reducing us to a one man team, it certainly isn''t Huckerby.  But don''t let that stand in the way of your quest for a scapegoat.  Get rid of Hucks and everything will be OK?  I wish it were that simple, but I think not.

If we were looked like more of a team last night, maybe it was because Huckerby, Dublin, Shackell and Brellier weren''t playing?  Or maybe it had something to do with the fact that for once in his life Peter Grant put out a starting XI and let them play instead of tinkering with the formation and the personnel every five minutes?

 

[/quote]

 

Firstly I am not making Mr Huckerby a scapegoat.  I admire and respect him as a player and I well understand why he is so popular with your club.  I still think what he said is out of order but that''s only my opinion or, at best, hardly helpful. 

Two other players I admire and respect greatly are your Mr Dublin and our Mr Sheringham and I can''t for a moment believe that either of them, consummate professionals in my view, would come out with that sort of stuff and particularly not in the middle of a rough time.  I can''t imagine it at all, actually.

And to answer your final question it could  be one or either or a combination of both.  Or, additionally of fielding some younger players who have a distinct point to make?  Who knows, this is football not a scientific forum.

What I do think - and again, it''s just my view, not a statement of fact - is that it is dangerous to build a team around one player.

Either way every good wish to you for Saturday.  I would stick with the same starting lineup myself.