Jimmy Smith returns to Chelsea

[jetstream 0]

No ''story'' on the offical site, just an aside in the Team News on canaries.co.uk

"With Jimmy Smith having returned to Chelsea at the end of his loan spell, the others to make way were Darren Huckerby and Ched Evans, who were both on the substitutes bench at Selhurst Park."

No great loss to us. He''s a tidy player but I''ll be glad to see the wages spent on someone who will make a difference.

[blahblahblah 2]

The suggestion from myfootballwriter is that Smith could be back soon.[quote]...there is no doubt that Roeder is expecting a busy month of the transfer

merry-go-round with the Canary chief still feeling positive as to the

chance of all four of his current loan signings - Matty Pattison, Jimmy

Smith, Mo Camara and Ched Evans - staying for a longer tour of duty.Smith

has already returned to Chelsea where he is due to meet new boss Avram

Grant over the next 48-hours to discuss his plans for the player. Out

of the Palace clash tomorrow, Roeder was hoping to see Smith again on

Friday ahead of this weekend''s FA Cup third round clash with League Two

strugglers Bury.Evans heads back to Manchester for similar

talks with Sven Goran Eriksson on Thursday; again with a view to being

back in Norfolk come Friday. Pattison is the one with a permanent deal

up his sleeve subject to both Norwich and Newcastle agreeing on a

valuation for the tenacious midfielder. Those talks continue. Roeder

was also hopeful that Derby boss Paul Jewell would agree to Camara

staying put at Carrow Road."We''ll be exploring the loan system

and we''ll be exploring some permanent transfers as well," confirmed

Roeder, not about to budge on his £750,000 valuation for Blues

centre-half Martin Taylor."It won''t be an easy market. I think

there are a few other Championship managers that have been promised

money and if I can justify why I need to spend a little bit of money, I

think I will be supported that way as well," added the City chief, with

Delia Smith''s new book proceeds and the Turners'' Central Trust fortune

both - potentially - in play this January. [/quote]

[jetstream 0]

Well, of all this season''s loanees, I would say that Smith has been the least effective.

Playing him on the right (although effectively he wasn''t due to him drifting into the middle) has cost us in the last two games - Croft''s impact yesterday being proof of that according to those who were at the game.

I would question the value of spending money on Smith when it could be spent elsewhere.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="jetstream"]Well, of all this season''s loanees, I would say that Smith has been the least effective.

Playing him on the right (although effectively he wasn''t due to him drifting into the middle) has cost us in the last two games - Croft''s impact yesterday being proof of that according to those who were at the game.

I would question the value of spending money on Smith when it could be spent elsewhere.[/quote]It does seem odd that we''ve been using him on the right when he was so effective for QPR last season as an attacking midfielder in the middle of the pitch.  I''d agree that if he''s not good enough to hold down a place in the first 11 in central midfield, it would probably make sense to use the money from his wages on cover / competition for Croft on the right now that Chadwick is out for 3 months, rather than playing Smith out of position.  That said he might surprise us in the second half of the season if he can get a few games under his belt.

[ca 1]

[quote user="jetstream"]Well, of all this season''s loanees, I would say that Smith has been the least effective. Playing him on the right (although effectively he wasn''t due to him drifting into the middle) has cost us in the last two games - Croft''s impact yesterday being proof of that according to those who were at the game. I would question the value of spending money on Smith when it could be spent elsewhere.[/quote]

 

I agree [:)]

[Old Boy 0]

I agree it doesn''t work for Smith out on the right, but until yesterday''s revelation Croft has been off the pace and, of the available options, I would have put Smith in ahead of him. If Croft is here to stay, who would you drop to bring Smith into the centre - Russell or Fotheringham? Neither, would be my answer at the moment, so Smith becomes a back-up and his value is reduced accordingly. If he''s cheap enough, buy him, because he''s undoubtedly got talent, and use him to put pressure on the others. But we don''t need him as desperately as we do some defenders.

[Syteanric 1]

agreed jeststream.. Smith looked a pretty ordinary player when he was here... lets not persue it again and add the funds to signing one of the other loaness (or Taylor) permanently

 

jas :)

[YellowIce 0]

I agree that Smith has not bought too much to the table at the moment.

 

The problem with this attitude of OK just get rid of themis the effect of the squads mentality dropping as it sees players who they associate this good run with leaving.

 

It was the same for Tiny, we need to keep these players or else risk being ''back where we started''.

[First Wizard 0]

Lets pray he stays at Chelski!

[jetstream 0]

I''m not advocating that the squad size should drop - just that the wages we are paying for Smith could be used more effectively.

For all the value Smith has added we may as well play Rossi Jarvis out on the right wing - it''s the same principle of playing a central midfielder out of position.

Smith would not be first choice in the centre ahead of Rusty, Fozzy (on current form) or Pattison so itjust seems a bit pointless to have him in the squad.

Spend the money on the right player (let''s just dream about an Ameobi-style player for a moment) and who knows what might happen!

[Infamy, Infamy 0]

Surely Jimmy Smith has been playing to Glenn Roeders'' intructions, which is why he keeps him in the team and wants him to stay with us.
It seems obvious to me that Glenn only wants to commit one player to an orthodox wide role, be it Hucks on the left or Croft on the right, at any one time. Only if we are chasing a goal late on will we throw caution to the wind with two wingers. Therefore Smith will naturally play narrower on the right if Hucks starts, while Pattison does the same on the left if Croft gets the nod.
Jimmy Smith has done OK, and would always be another option in the middle if injuries and suspensions pile up.[8-|]

[Coelho 0]

How much will he be earning, though, and would those wages be better spent on strengthening other areas of the team?I agree with you about him playing to Roeder''s instructions, though, but I think particularly for home games we''d be better off with two wingers. Certainly Otsemobor''s attacking nature can be used more efficiently if he has a proper partner on the right, rather than effectively playing as a wing-back and having to do the work of two people when the opposition is playing 4-4-2. I just can''t see the benefits of playing with a lopsided formation.

[renegade tootsie 0]

Spot on and well noticed.  Shame others who watch the same games cant see it!  Smith has been ineffective because he has not being playing wide or central - he has been in no mans land because Roeder asks him to sit there.  Woul Roeder allow him to drift in game after game unless he was meant to??

If you watched the last home game you would have noticed that halfway through the first half Glen came down to the dugout from the stand, called Smith over and gestured to him with hand movements that looked like getting forward more.  Smith from then on was even more central and got forward more, but still ineffective because he was torn between getting forward and covering the right defensively.

Dont judge or blame him on these performances, anyone with eyes can see he has quality - certainly Chelsea can - or is everyone that short sighted?

 

[Coelho 0]

[quote user="JC"]

Spot on and well noticed.  Shame others who watch the same games cant see it!  Smith has been ineffective because he has not being playing wide or central - he has been in no mans land because Roeder asks him to sit there.  Woul Roeder allow him to drift in game after game unless he was meant to??

If you watched the last home game you would have noticed that halfway through the first half Glen came down to the dugout from the stand, called Smith over and gestured to him with hand movements that looked like getting forward more.  Smith from then on was even more central and got forward more, but still ineffective because he was torn between getting forward and covering the right defensively.

Dont judge or blame him on these performances, anyone with eyes can see he has quality - certainly Chelsea can - or is everyone that short sighted?[/quote]

I can see what Roeder is trying to do – if the opposition is playing 4-4-2 and marking zonally (as most sides tend to do), it can confuse them positionally if a player is drifting infield, leaving gaps for free-roaming players like Huckerby to exploit. However, it''s a trade-off between confusing the opposition and confusing yourself, and I think that in this division we''d be better off playing a basic formation and going toe-to-toe with opposing teams. Look at the sides that have bossed this division in recent years (us in 2004, Wigan in 2005, Reading in 2006), and they''ve dominated the division by having the most solid and reliable 4-4-2 team unit and being excellent at the basics. Everything else Roeder has said and done since he took over has impressed me greatly, but this ''one winger'' system is really beginning to get on my nerves!

[Grando 283]

If you read the article in the EDP it makes clear that Roeder''s still trying to get Smith back - him returning was always part of the agreement from the looks of things. So I don''t think you can read anything either way yet.

[Indy_Bones 441]

Smith would be an excellent signing, and has already proved in his time at QPR that he is more than good enough at this level.

The fact that Mourinho also highly rated him says a lot to me.

He''s been played out of his usual position, in a very different type of role, which clearly shows why his form has not been as good as previously demonstrated.

With the right development, Smith could progress to being a full international, and Roeder is someone with a great track record in making this happen.

I certainly hope we do get him on a permanent deal.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]

Smith would be an excellent signing, and has already proved in his time at QPR that he is more than good enough at this level.

The fact that Mourinho also highly rated him says a lot to me.

He''s been played out of his usual position, in a very different type of role, which clearly shows why his form has not been as good as previously demonstrated.

With the right development, Smith could progress to being a full international, and Roeder is someone with a great track record in making this happen.

I certainly hope we do get him on a permanent deal.

[/quote]

Did you think Mourinho was likely to say he thinks the lad is rubbish? The Special One saying he''s a good lad doesn''t really say a lot to me, if Jimmy Smith wasn''t a Chelsea player and he had said it then that would be a bit different - that would be worth taking note of.

I think Jimmy Smith is a decent enough player with the ball at his feet, his use of the ball can be quite tidy and he seems to be fairly composed. But he''s not outstanding and I can''t see him ever playing regularly at a higher level than this.

[Infamy, Infamy 0]

It seems that Avram Grant rates Jimmy Smith enough to keep him at Chelsea now. He won''t be back.
Cue lots of posters moaning that we''ve let a real class act slip through our fingers, no ambition...................[8-)]

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote] It seems that Avram Grant rates Jimmy Smith enough to keep him at Chelsea now. He won''t be back.Cue lots of posters moaning that weve let a real class act slip through our fingers, no ambition...................[8-)][/quote]I wouldn''t be surprised if he scores a hat-trick against QPR this weekend now ! [:)]

[norfolkbroadslim 223]

If Smith doesn''t return the money from his wages should be put towards getting a striker.

[jetstream 0]

The story is now on the official site

Doesn''t sound like he is coming back:

http://www.canaries.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetails/0,,10355~1206075,00.html

[LORD FOXY LOWE 0]

I think the story now on the official site is a pretty big hint that he won''t be back, sounds like closure to me..."We would like to wish Jimmy the best of luck in his future career on

his return to Chelsea. He''s played his part here and we believe he will

return to his club a better player." GR

[Baldyboy 0]

wont be missed he was crap. looked too lightweight and ran around like a headless chicken. better off getting somebody else in.

[Coelho 0]

[quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]If Smith doesn''t return the money from his wages should be put towards getting a striker.[/quote]Official site says that we''re not extending his loan.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Chelsea are short of players - no wonder they are keeping him.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Coelho"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]If Smith doesn''t return the money from his wages should be put towards getting a striker.[/quote]
Official site says that we''re not extending his loan.
[/quote]

Hooray!.[:D]

[Coelho 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"]

[quote user="Coelho"][quote user="norfolkbroadslim"]If Smith doesn''t return the money from his wages should be put towards getting a striker.[/quote]Official site says that we''re not extending his loan.[/quote]

Hooray!.[:D]

[/quote]I''m inclined to agree Wiz, although whether this spells the end of the lopsided ''one winger'' formation remains to be seen...

[sam 0]

agree he didn''t show his full potential here, but in his defence he was played out of position and injured in the pre season, i think that with the recent injury to chadwick he would be a handy player to have around, because in my opinion croft isn''t good enough to fill the right side either, his fitness is worrying, he can''t last 90 mins consistently.

but on the other side of this it is going to be extremelly difficult for him to get into his best position in the centre with the likes of russell, fotheringham and pattison taking up those slots.

for me i would have him back as a squad player for injuries and out of form players

[Grando 283]

I don''t think he looked up to much in his time here, though I accept the out of position thing must have been a factor. If he''d have stayed for the rest of the season I don''t think he would have done anything much for us, so I''m not too sad.

However, given the nature of things, I won''t be at all surprised if he turns out to be phenomenal somewhere else - particuarly if he goes to one of our rivals on loan!