Some Good some bad - Roeder today

[ZLF 274]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.[/quote]

It was great watching us passing the ball for a change.  I''d agree with the names thing, but you need old heads for a derby game after our run of form.  The chances are that Cureton and Brellier would have been back in the team sooner if it wasn''t for Grant''s unerring ability to burn bridges.

[hogesar 9,709]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]I thought Brellier was solid and consistently winning us posession again.If not for form, but for the mental boost and experience, i believe Dublin should have started. Cureton, on another day could have had a hattrick.To conclude, i cannot complain at the starting 11. Before kick-off, i''d have preferred Croft to start, but now, i realise i was wrong =]

[breaker2 0]

I think, Cureton would have done anything to play this game, and he played well (should have had a hatrick!).

[Norfolk Boy 0]

Well said mate, I wouldn''t have put Chadwick in but he had his best game for us so I was also wrong about that! I certainly thought Dublin and Cureton should have started just for their experience.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

I don''t think it was so much of a case of relying on names, I think it was more that he went with players he knows a bit about. His lineup was fairly sensible really given the short space of time he''s had to work with the squad.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

Seems harsh to criticise anything he did today.  After a few days to get to know the players he got them playing like a team - we put a string of passes together; we closed down and harried in midfield; we had width, we could put set pieces into dangerous areas; the likes of Brellier, Chadwick and Rusty suddenly looked like professional footballers (and Hucks looked up for it as well although his stupid challenge at the end deprives us of his services at a time we can ill afford).  That team today was so different in attitude and confidence from the last days of Grant and the Duffy period yet the spine of the team was basically the same individuals.

I hope to God this is not a false dawn and that we can carry this form on into the Watford game and beyond - but if we can surely some wins cannot be far away. 

Great start Glenn, you have gone some way towards making some of us doubters eat our words and I will happily tuck into another plate full on Tuesday if you could arrange it.

[Nexus_Canary 1,024]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]Gotta disagree with that im afraid.The only thing i would have changed would have been Croft on from the start, but then Chadwick on the day was superb so it shows the boss got it 100% spot on.

[Dionysus 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

Brown? Form? Did I miss something?

[Cobain18 0]

God I so hope Glenn Roeder continues to leave Brown out of the 1st team squad, I''m sure he will he seems like a reasonably intelligent man.

[lobster catcher 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]Are you drunk.Dublin was class first half and cureton will always score 1 in 3 times.As for brown not on bench i didn''t hear many complaining.I can''t find a single fault with todays performance apart from hucks in the last minute,get a life pal today was the best city have played this season and we now have a real chance of staying up

[O.T.B.C 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

I agree in a small part, but he has been with them at the training ground for a few days now and more than likely saw them in action and you can bet your bottom dollar that players like Dubs and Curo would have been the most passionate players at the club.

I was very surprised that he played Brellier, but he showed in patches what a player we al thought he was when he signed for us, keep it up mate, like I said in a post before someone like Clarke and Roadio will show and help him.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,034]

ZLF - Sorry but I disagree, how can you talk about "form" off the back of so many defeats?. I hope to god we continue to play like that, because 1) It was a pleasure to see us playing from the back, not defending to deeply and not relying om the aimless ball forward and 2) It will mean we should have no trouble staying up.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Simple really, he went for experience.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

[quote user="biggleyellow"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

I agree in a small part, but he has been with them at the training ground for a few days now and more than likely saw them in action and you can bet your bottom dollar that players like Dubs and Curo would have been the most passionate players at the club.

I was very surprised that he played Brellier, but he showed in patches what a player we al thought he was when he signed for us, keep it up mate, like I said in a post before someone like Clarke and Roadio will show and help him.

[/quote]

I agree about Brellier (who was a revelation this afternoon) - one through ball with outside of foot to Rusty in first half which Cureton shot wide was worthy of Chippy Crook at his best.  Let''s not get too excited but I hope he keeps this standard up.

[Tumbleweed 106]

He also said he wanted two leaders on the pitch and needed Dion in there somewhere- notice how he led the team huddle? I thought Dion did pretty well apart from a couple of poor passes when in space, but Hartson was terrific in the second half and we actually looked better up front with him instead of Dion.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

Brown is going to get us 4 goals a season, we need to look to playing strikers who can get us goals.  He is a lower division player at the moment.

[Mook 0]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]

Brown is going to get us 4 goals a season, we need to look to playing strikers who can get us goals.  He is a lower division player at the moment.

[/quote]

I don''t think Hartson''s gonna score many either. But he changed the game for us, and Brown''s feet actually leave the ground when he jumps!

Zip, I think you''re being a bit harsh on Roeder. There was so much more to the game tactically that he A, noticed and B, did something about.

Ipswich weren''t attacking down our right, so he asked Chadwick to take a more central role which took the scum to pieces in the first 15 mins of the second half.

Their midfield was "in front" of our midfield in the first half - therefore every time the second ball came from their strikers, an Ippo midfielder was first to the ball. In the second half, Brellier dropped even deeper to counter this and with Russell and Chadwick in more central positions we dominated the midfield.

It''s so good to see a manager who has some idea of tactics!!!

[Norwich R Us 59]

[quote user="Tumbleweed"]He also said he wanted two leaders on the pitch and needed Dion in there somewhere- notice how he led the team huddle? I thought Dion did pretty well apart from a couple of poor passes when in space, but Hartson was terrific in the second half and we actually looked better up front with him instead of Dion.[/quote]

agreed. first time i''ve seen hartson play for us and although i did ''lol'' when i saw how many pies he''d eaten his hold up play was brilliant and allowed the midfield and full backs time and space to push forward. his strength and dominance caused a lot of problems for the binner defence with cureton benefitting immensley.

Its clear we shouldn''t get carried away but personally i was thrilled by the attacking performance, every player looked different class to recent times, we must have created more chances in this game than in the last 8 combined! Spot on today glenn, well done.

Keep it going lads, its about time we had some excitement back at carrow road.

[yellow hammer 0]

[quote user="Mook"]

Their midfield was "in front" of our midfield in the first half - therefore every time the second ball came from their strikers, an Ippo midfielder was first to the ball. [/quote]

Mook, you seem quite a knowledgeable tactician yourself, maybe you should apply for the vacant coaching post.

But what do you mean by ''the second ball came from their strikers''? Were there two footballs on the pitch?

Please help us numptys

YH

[Unlucky Fried Kitten 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith 

Bad - felt the starting line up relied  on ''big names'' rather than form and ability;  neither  Dublin and CUreton form did not deserve a starting place fortunately onl;y one was a mistake;  Brown not even on the bench was harsh given his form this year.

[/quote]

I have to disagree. I thought Glenn got it 100% correct as regards team selection, motivation and tactics. I said to several people yesterday that if Grant or Duffy had still been in charge of team affairs at Carrow Road, we would most probably have lost 4 or 5 nil with Town leading 2 nil at half time.

[Mook 0]

By second ball, I mean after the initial punt upfield from their defence (that being the first ball), their strikers jump with our defenders and when that ball goes loose (ie if Shackell or Taylor head clear, or a striker knocks it down) that''s what I mean by "second ball". Not sure if it''s the correct terminology, but I think it is!

And anyway, Ippo beat us to it every time in the first half because their midfield pushed so far up, past our midfield. When Brellier dropped even deeper, it meant that he could challenge for that ball and break the play up.

Also by doing that it meant our full backs could push up too, hence Semmy and Lappin being so involved in the attacking play. I thought it was a really positive sign that Roeder seemed to have an effect on our tactics during the game, something that Grant (and Worthington to an extent) seemed incapable of doing.

[Old Boy 0]

You have to say that Roeder''s selection was right, whatever his reasons for it. Cureton''s played himself back into some sort of form, after a dodgy first half. The same applies to Brellier and Chadwick, and we need both of them desperately at the moment. I can''t see that Brown would have been as much of a threat as Dublin or Hartson. I would have liked to see Strihavka on at some stage, because both Dublin and Hartson are only short-term solutions, but I accept that short-term solutions is what we need at the moment.And what Mook says about changing tactics to respond to the opposition is key - that''s what makes a great manager isn''t it? The coaches and assistants can do the rest, but the manager''s time comes when the players run out onto the pitch. It seems at the moment that Roeder''s OK at that.

[FilletTheFishWife . 0]

it seems to me that so many people  - i''m not directing this at anyone in particular - are overly prone to judge a player solely on their last game. It''s astonishing.

Chadwick, Brellier and Russell probably had their best games of the season yesterday and suddenly everyone forgets how dire they were before.

Hartson has one assist and everyone conveniently forgets how immobile he was for the rest of the game (I guess the wba supporters felt the same when he scored 2 on his debut).

It was the same when Fotheringham when had a decent match for a change against Soton.

If these players deserve a reappraisal how about those who haven''t played for Roeder yet (Brown and Doherty in particular). or are they beyond redemption until they play in a winning (or drawing) side?

Remember, Grant won 2 tough away matches at the start of his term and then look what happened.

Meanwhile Hucks''s sending off brings out the usual ignorant detractors who forgot to note that Ipswich were regularly closing him down with 3 or 4 players. How many of our players get that level of attention and who''s forgetting that 3 other players on that pitch yesterday have also been sent off, even Darling Dublin.

There''s so much knee-jerking going on that I reckon BBC will be reporting a mass-outbreak of St Vitus Dance tonight.

 

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

agree with alot you said zlf, but:-

Good - brought back brellier,  kept it 442, and focused on passing the ball,   Introducton of Hartson changed game,  used smith.  allowed chadders to roam (esp 2nd half) and feed balls in to curo''s feet - better service for the wee man.   

Bad - happy with line up - i thought our best display until yesterday was versus cardiff - glad to see roeder picked virtually this line-up bar injuries permitting - and replacing dublin and hartson for brown enabled us to create better chances - cureton got 3 good chances.  winner set up by hartson with neat layoff to curo, but what about his layoff for chadders to go one-on-one 2nd half??? - can''t see brown ever doing that unfortunately. 

with dublin injured, and hartson unable to last a match, will roeder be forced to use brown on tuesday night???