Doherty and Shackell? - It is now the fourth transfer window looking for replacements.

[ncfclad 0]

Worthington failed in the summer of 2005 and 2006
Grant failed in 2007
Will Reoder fail in 2008?

How is it possible that since Malky left we have conceded an incredible amount of goals including many silly ones with these two in defence, but no manager has recognised this and even tried to replace them with better players.

I would sell Shackell for 250k and keep Doc as back up and try and buy Taylor and Ramage?

[kick it off 1,952]

Shacks would go for at least £750k. Glenn has noticed hence signing Taylor on loan and trying to buy him. Worthy noticed and signed Zesh Rehman amongst others on loan with a view to a permanent, but he was Sh*t.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="kick it off"]Shacks would go for at least £750k. Glenn has noticed hence signing Taylor on loan and trying to buy him. Worthy noticed and signed Zesh Rehman amongst others on loan with a view to a permanent, but he was Sh*t.
[/quote]

Who would pay "at least" £750k for Shackell???

£750k at most.

[The Voice of the Thorpe Area 0]

Peter Ramage on a free- worth a go?

[Cottaging Canary 0]

We''d be lucky to get more than 300-400k for Shackell. It''s been downhill for him since we were relegated.

[Wembley_Canary 0]

I would say get rid of Doherty and keep Shacks as back up, no way will we get anywhere near 750k for Shaks IMO. Two new centre backs are in order, Tiny would be the ideal replacement but I fear someone else will beat us to it.

[snakepit faithful 0]

Agree. keep shacks for back up thn get rid of doherty. taylor and ramage cb would be great. Try and get bertrand aswell for a season long loan or buy him.

[O.T.B.C 0]

Tough one for me, Shacks, on top of his game is a better defender than Doc, but those games are too few. Doc, just need to shave of his hair, so he does not do that stupid hair brushing thing with his hair. I reckon he would look hard and play better with a skinhead.

Lets start a ''Shave ya head Doc'' promotion..........................

[snakepit faithful 0]

COMPLETLEY AGREE. He looks terrible the way it is. Just shave it off. And stop doing that thing when you brush your boot along the ground. Its like smoking, a bad habbit-get out of it. You will feel much better. I will feel much better.

[kdncfc 0]

Ipswich are looking for a pair of central defenders, perhaps we should do a buy one get one free promotion, it would be a way to get rid of both of them and ensure Ipswich get nowhere near the play offs next season at the same time.

[ZLF 274]

Interestingly this season we conceeded the fewest goals since we got promoted yet finished lower than we have done for decades. Before the promotion season we regularly coneeded around 60 goals - with the fabled flem and mackay at the back.

For the first time in years the promoted teams conceeded more than 50 goals (only 4 more than we did) and the number of goals is on the increase - promoted teams used to conceed in the 30s, that has moved up by 60% in just 2 years.

If we can score and keep as tight as we have for the last 30 league games during next season the current back 5 five look more than comparable to anything in this league;   

[canary cherub 1]

We conceded fewer but our GD was still -10.

In the days of Flem and Malky we were more attack minded that''s all.

 

[komakino 272]

I don''t think I could stand another season with these two in tandem. I''d keep The Doc as a squad player, but I''ve had it with Shackell - him and Drury would be lucky to get a game with Peterborough United. Taylor really was the man, but it wasn''t to be.

[alex_ncfc 662]

I''m glad people are finally starting to see that Shackell is just plain not good enough for us. For years he was the ''Ryan Jarvis of the back 4'' in that we weren''t allowed to give him criticism because he came through the youth system [^o)]

Speaking of Jarvis, not seen any reaction about his (or his brothers) release from the club on here, but I for one am absolutely delighted to finally get this waster off our books.

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="alex_ncfc"]

Speaking of Jarvis, not seen any reaction about his (or his brothers) release from the club on here[/quote]

Which probably says it all, really.

[ZLF 274]

Over the last 11 seasons city have only had a positive goal difference on 4 occassions in 98/99 and then 01-2 to 03-4.  We finished 9th, 6th, 8th and 1st respectively.  They are also the only times we have scored more than 60 goals (62, 60, 60 & 79).    This seasons 49 goals is the 3rd worst total during that period (45 then 46 in 99/00 & 00/01) and we scored more goals per game in the prem than this.

As far as goals conceeded are concerned the average per champs season is 57, with 4 seasons worse than this one (97/98, 98/99, and the last two seasons) when we conceeded 69,61,65 & 71 respectively).  Three of the worst 5 seasons have been with Shax and Doc at the heart of the defence tho.

Looking at the seasons where we finished in the top half of the table (just 5) the lowest goals scored was 56 with an average of 63,  while the most conceeded was 65 with an average of 53.  

For me the old adage of attack being the best form of defence screams out here.   We did not conceed many less goals than those in the auto play off places, and based on our own recent history have conceeded just about an average number for a champ season.   However the goals scored is significantly average for our recent history and the requirements to into the top half of the table, let alone a play off spot.

Neither shax nor doc are prem players,  they are average champs players,  who are no better or worse than our competitors defenders;   Yes we need competition and new imporved players,  but not at the expense of getting us some real goal scoring potential as our strike force this season was well below the required standard.

 

[Wings 0]

I think when partnered alongside a class defender, Shackell looks a lot better for it. His partnership with Taylor was, IMO, one of the most solid, natural looking central defensive partnerships we''ve had in my time as a Norwich fan.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Before the promotion season we regularly coneeded around 60 goals - with the fabled flem and mackay at the back.

[/quote]

Not true, always under 60....  check your facts Zipper...  subsequently we have always conceded more than 60 apart from 59 this season.  And that is probably a lot to do with the very defensive and uncreative midfield we played this season.

[Old Boy 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Over the last 11 seasons city have only had a positive goal difference on 4 occassions in 98/99 and then 01-2 to 03-4.  We finished 9th, 6th, 8th and 1st respectively.  They are also the only times we have scored more than 60 goals (62, 60, 60 & 79).    This seasons 49 goals is the 3rd worst total during that period (45 then 46 in 99/00 & 00/01) and we scored more goals per game in the prem than this.

As far as goals conceeded are concerned the average per champs season is 57, with 4 seasons worse than this one (97/98, 98/99, and the last two seasons) when we conceeded 69,61,65 & 71 respectively).  Three of the worst 5 seasons have been with Shax and Doc at the heart of the defence tho.

Looking at the seasons where we finished in the top half of the table (just 5) the lowest goals scored was 56 with an average of 63,  while the most conceeded was 65 with an average of 53.  

For me the old adage of attack being the best form of defence screams out here.   We did not conceed many less goals than those in the auto play off places, and based on our own recent history have conceeded just about an average number for a champ season.   However the goals scored is significantly average for our recent history and the requirements to into the top half of the table, let alone a play off spot.

Neither shax nor doc are prem players,  they are average champs players,  who are no better or worse than our competitors defenders;   Yes we need competition and new imporved players,  but not at the expense of getting us some real goal scoring potential as our strike force this season was well below the required standard.

 [/quote]

I agree with all this analysis, except I''m not so hard on the strikers. My gripe is about the midfield and the way they don''t get the ball to the strikers quickly enough. We used to be very dangerous on the counter-attack, and we still can be, but generally the ball gets bogged down in midfield and we don''t release it to Ched or Cureton when they''re in dangerous postions. Instead we slow it down for 3 or 4 seconds, by which time the defence has covered our threat, then we have to push the ball wide. And the problem with our strikers getting to crosses are a) we haven''t got anyone who can consistently deliver dangerous crosses and b) our strikers are usually a lot smaller than the defenders they''re up against. Ched is a brilliant striker, and so is Curo. They both thrive on half-chances, and if we gave them more, the goals-for figure would be much higher I''m sure. Instead, Curo has to go wide to get the ball (I don''t agree that he does too little for the team - I think he does too much, too far from goal). It doesn''t worry me too much that he''s missed a lot of chances, we just need to feed him more. It''s the fact that every chance he''s missed has been a crucial one that''s been the problem, and that''s because there haven''t been enough of them. So my key signing this summer would be the playmaking midfielder - assuming we can get Ched back!

[ZLF 274]

I think that was fair under Grant Old Boy;  we simply were not creating enough chances,  driving JC wide as you say.  Under Roeder things have changed and the midfield and defence have significantly up their game.  We have created far more chances,  but since March these chances have not been taken and poor finishing from all three main strikers (Jamie in particular had several games where he missed several - and then each one is crucial because the previous one didnt go in!) cost us a much higher finish. 

As for goals conceeded the numbers since 97/98 are 69,61,50,58,51,49,39,77,65,71,59.  

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

I think that was fair under Grant Old Boy;  we simply were not creating enough chances,  driving JC wide as you say.  Under Roeder things have changed and the midfield and defence have significantly up their game.  We have created far more chances,  but since March these chances have not been taken and poor finishing from all three main strikers (Jamie in particular had several games where he missed several - and then each one is crucial because the previous one didnt go in!) cost us a much higher finish. 

As for goals conceeded the numbers since 97/98 are 69,61,50,58,51,49,39,77,65,71,59.  

[/quote]

Mackay didnt arrive at the club until sometime during the 98/99 season.  The true Mackay/Fleming seasons were 58,51,49,39.  then he was sold.

I doubt it has helped that Cureton is put under so much pressure from the manager, with comments about his wife cleaning trophies.  And his general attitude towards Cureton.  Apparantly his strike rate per minutes on the pitch is still the highest at the club.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

As for Goals scored - 7 appearances or more

Strikers

Cureton 12
Evans 10
Dublin 7
Strihavka 1
Brown 1
Martin 0

Midfield

Hucks 5
Russell 4
Fozzy 2
Chadwick 1
Croft 1
Lappin 1
Pattison 0
Brellier 0
Smith 0
Gibbs 0

Defense

Taylor 1
Semmy 1
Doherty 0
Shax 0
Bertrand 0
Camara 0
Murray 0
Drury 0

 

 

[Unlucky Fried Kitten 0]

Why can''t we put in bids for John Terry and Rio Ferdinand?? They would certainly bolster our defence!!