Budger 0 Posted September 25, 2007 Unthinkable last season, but should he really be included on Saturday? (if fit?) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
InLambertWeTrust! 0 Posted September 25, 2007 The simple answer is no, we played well tonight because we didnt have Huckerby plain and simple. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kissthebadge 0 Posted September 25, 2007 I understand what you''re saying, but the only thing our performance lacked tonight was a goal. Hux is still the most likely source it''s going to come from. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ricardo 7,385 Posted September 25, 2007 [quote user="Budger"]Unthinkable last season, but should he really be included on Saturday? (if fit?)[/quote]Best player in the club. Only a fool would not play him if fit.But perhaps those in charge are fools. Saturday will tell us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Humphrey 13 Posted September 25, 2007 Surely if we''re all going to complain when players are dropped after playing well then that applies to everyone, regardless of who they are? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Huddy 0 Posted September 25, 2007 If you play huckerby, who do you leave out? Rossi J? I''m not sure, it would deant the lads confidence after an apparent good performance and consistency is needed. We dont want to all of a sudden lose that sterdiness we had defensively tonight. Hucks is a match winner, but a 30 minute burst from Hucks as a sub could give us that threat and extra bit at the end. I''m undecided. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzathegreat 0 Posted September 25, 2007 A definite yes. He''s still our best player and the one who is likely to spark something out of nothing. What he has said off the pitch is understandable and shows at least he cares! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Time to go Delia 0 Posted September 25, 2007 Leave out Cureton or Brown or both come to that , we will need to score to win .Very much doubt Grant will leave both the boys in midfield anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chris Meadows 0 Posted September 25, 2007 good performance tonight but we''re at home on saturday against weaker opposition than Man City, Hucks is our main creater so has to play for mei''d probaly put him in for Brown and go for 4-3-3 with croft and hucks wide as i don''t think russell, jarvis and spillane can be split up Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anderz 0 Posted September 25, 2007 4-4-2 with Strihavka or Martin with Huckerby up front. Jarvis, Spillane and Russell to keep their places. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GJD 0 Posted September 25, 2007 If fit he must play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macdougalls perm 0 Posted September 25, 2007 I would agree with that CM, are you reading this Peter Grant? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="C.T"]The simple answer is no, we played well tonight because we didnt have Huckerby plain and simple.[/quote]By the same token CT we didn''t have Dublin, Shackell and Brellier either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salopian 1 Posted September 26, 2007 I think it may hurt his pride, but I would say "No". So far since his return, which has coincided with our decline, he has not been the player he was. If time will improve his hip condition, then give him time, if not then keep him on the bench to come on and turn a match when opponents are tiring. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
charlies dad 0 Posted September 26, 2007 Doherty''s injury appears to have made Grants decision for him. Spillane was excellent last night, everything Brellier isnt, and if he doesnt play Saturday, its a travesty. Likewise Jarvis minor, these two youngsters have shown that they want to play for norwich city, and have done enough to keep their shirts.places. space has to be found for Huckerby, despite his loss of form. We need a goal. But well done to Spillane and Jarvis, Grant only picked them because he had no other options, but they are better than the players they replaced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Old Boy 0 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="Salopian"]I think it may hurt his pride, but I would say "No". So far since his return, which has coincided with our decline, he has not been the player he was. If time will improve his hip condition, then give him time, if not then keep him on the bench to come on and turn a match when opponents are tiring.[/quote]Exactly. Apparently he''s got a long-term injury, and he''s not our "best player" because he''s not playing better than all the others, so he should be rested. At the same time we do need more firepower and I would try Strihavka and Cureton or Strihavka and Martin. I hope Grant has the guts to leave Hux out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FilletTheFishWife . 0 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="gazzathegreat"]A definite yes. He''s still our best player and the one who is likely to spark something out of nothing. What he has said off the pitch is understandable and shows at least he cares![/quote]Ditto. He hasn''t been at his best but he should still start as with him we have hope. Mind you, if he performs like he did at Charlton he wouldn''t last 90 mins. As for his performance at Wolves, there were some considerably worse (Lappin, otsemboor, brellier, strihavka, russell). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carlos Valderrama 0 Posted September 26, 2007 You cant play the same system at home too defensive. Sounded like we did well last night, the name I kept constantly hearing was Spillane. To be fair I though Spillane was the shining light at the end of last season, one of the best tacklers I have seen at the club so I hope he gets his chance saturday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LORD FOXY LOWE 0 Posted September 26, 2007 1. Left mid in a 4-4-2. NO - teams have worked it out (not hard!) that he won''t always defend, leaving our left back to defend against 2 men or worse one of our centre backs gets dragged across.2. Left striker in a 4-3-3. BETTER - but still leaves us exposed and not sure the players are totally sure what they''re doing in this formation. Has a tendency to become 4-5-1 with an isolated striker and central midfield sitting back too far.3. Striker in a 4-4-2. BEST POSITION - but can you play Cureton and Hucks up front together?What ever happens we need a solid base to build on. That means replacing Doherty (with Dublin or a loan signing) before Marshall and Shackell loose what little confidence they have left and a strong midfield four with Lapin playing on the left. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbncfc 1 Posted September 26, 2007 He could start.He could be a high-impact substitute (I hate that expression).But either way, he''s going to have to play far better than he has been doing. For all his words, his performances against Charlton and Wolves have been poor - and not because of who''s around him, but his own use of the ball. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sam 0 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="Anderz"]4-4-2 with Strihavka or Martin with Huckerby up front. Jarvis, Spillane and Russell to keep their places.[/quote] huckerby is not a striker!!!!!!he is a winger and that is his best position he must play on saturday on the left wing MARSHALLOTSEMOBOR DOHERTY/JARVIS MURRAY LAPPINCROFT RUSSELL SPILLANE HUCKERBY CURETON BROWNSUBS:GILKS, CHADWICK, BRELLIER,MARTIN, STRIHAVKA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Huddy 0 Posted September 26, 2007 Huckerby''s best games for Norwich have been on the left hand side! Look at our promotion season. He''s not a striker, he needs to get out wide and cause havoc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
O.T.B.C 0 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="sam"][quote user="Anderz"]4-4-2 with Strihavka or Martin with Huckerby up front. Jarvis, Spillane and Russell to keep their places.[/quote] huckerby is not a striker!!!!!!he is a winger and that is his best position he must play on saturday on the left wing MARSHALLOTSEMOBOR DOHERTY/JARVIS MURRAY LAPPINCROFT RUSSELL SPILLANE HUCKERBY CURETON BROWNSUBS:GILKS, CHADWICK, BRELLIER,MARTIN, STRIHAVKA [/quote]Well I would go with the same to be honest but if the Doc is back, I would keep the same midfield and I would go with a completely different strike force, yes Hucks has to be fit but I would have a go with Martin and Hucks up front. I think that Jamie could do with a rest and the creative side of both Hucks and Martin would be good, if Hucks is not fit I would put big Dave up with Martin.Thats my pennys worth.And I have a confession to make, I''m not going on Sat, can''t be bothered to come up from London, 1. its on Sky, 2. I have 10 straight days to work from Mon. Sorry boys, but I fancy a chilled out weekend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macdougalls perm 0 Posted September 26, 2007 If it was my choice (and assuming he is fit) I would go with what someone suggested on here last night - i.e, 4-3-3 with midfield of Russell/Spillane/Jarvis and Croft, Cureton and Hucks up front (Cureton down the middle with Hucks and Croft pulling wide or supporting as appropriate). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
7rew 0 Posted September 26, 2007 I would play Hucks in the role that Brown played last night, sharing left wing with Jarvis and also operating as a striker. Thats if he is clever enough to pull it off! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="Salopian"]I think it may hurt his pride, but I would say "No". So far since his return, which has coincided with our decline, he has not been the player he was. If time will improve his hip condition, then give him time, if not then keep him on the bench to come on and turn a match when opponents are tiring.[/quote]agreed! we have played our best Football WITHOUT hucks this season... start him on the bench... and if we wina nd play well without him then continue in this vain... He is a match winner but if we are winning games without him then he should be kept out of the side.. Getting wins is more important than keeping the Darling of the side happy? what would u wall rather we win games without hucks or we lose every game playing hucks because he MIGHT win us the game, he MIGHT score or he MIGHT change things? im not bashing hucks at all but he has to see that perhaps he isnt the first name on the team sheet now... i dont think his time has come, far from it in fact, but i do feel that he he is becoming a bit parter...jas :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Time to go Delia 0 Posted September 26, 2007 But he should be the first name on the teamsheet , even when off form he is head and shoulders better than anything else we have . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Carlos Valderrama 0 Posted September 26, 2007 [quote user="Jason and the Argonauts"]1. Left mid in a 4-4-2. NO - teams have worked it out (not hard!) that he won''t always defend, leaving our left back to defend against 2 men or worse one of our centre backs gets dragged across.2. Left striker in a 4-3-3. BETTER - but still leaves us exposed and not sure the players are totally sure what they''re doing in this formation. Has a tendency to become 4-5-1 with an isolated striker and central midfield sitting back too far.3. Striker in a 4-4-2. BEST POSITION - but can you play Cureton and Hucks up front together?What ever happens we need a solid base to build on. That means replacing Doherty (with Dublin or a loan signing) before Marshall and Shackell loose what little confidence they have left and a strong midfield four with Lapin playing on the left.[/quote]3. No, because IMO you need someone to hold the ball up at this level. Cureton and Hucks would be too light weight. He has to play on the left and he has got to learn to track back to help the full back. Otherwise we need to look for someone new, harsh I know but Hucks best years are behind him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites