Hoolahan is the best replacement for Huckerby we could get, discuss

[James Kent 0]

So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.

[Have Heart 0]

Another post on the same old topic!

[CambridgeCanary 0]

Yes, another post praising the Club.  Clearly an anathema to you.

[archer4721 0]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

 

Erm. no. Hardly a fight for him was there. There are plenty of reasons why not too.

I wouldn''t expect too much for him.

[CiderkiddCanary 0]

Don''t tell me to discuss.Thankyou.

[Good News Gordon 0]

[quote user="archer4721"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

 

Erm. no. Hardly a fight for him was there. There are plenty of reasons why not too.

I wouldn''t expect too much for him.

[/quote]

No fight for Wes you really are talking rubbish, about 7 or 8 clubs wanted him, more negative crap from the Norwich faithful

[CiderkiddCanary 0]

[quote user="Good News Gordon"][quote user="archer4721"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

 

Erm. no. Hardly a fight for him was there. There are plenty of reasons why not too.

I wouldn''t expect too much for him.

[/quote]

more negative crap from the Norwich faithful

[/quote]Hahaha. Look who''s back off the Ipswich "Fan" websites!

[jed exodous 0]

Yes, yes he is for the money...

[Good News Gordon 0]

[quote user="Shazzakidd"][quote user="Good News Gordon"][quote user="archer4721"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

 

Erm. no. Hardly a fight for him was there. There are plenty of reasons why not too.

I wouldn''t expect too much for him.

[/quote]

more negative crap from the Norwich faithful

[/quote]
Hahaha. Look who''s back off the Ipswich "Fan" websites!
[/quote]

Whoever is posting on scum websites is pinching the name, I am a NCFC season ticket holder and could tell you more about this club and its history than you would ever know in you lifetime

[Salopian 1]

Replacing Hux at his best, probably not, but Hux latterly was not at his best. His devastating runs which could turn the whole course of a match had become fewer.As a marksman, Hux probably still has an edge, but he plays much further forward than Wes.As a midfielder who will tackle back, I would guess that Wes probably has a slight edge.Hoolahan''s contribution I expect to be as something of a play-maker bringing others in to play, and creating goals - less dramatic than Hux but in the end probably more effective as a team player. We now have two players who are able to pass well, apart from Wes himself - Fozzy and Clingon, and apparently one of his great qualitites is to make himself available, to receieve the ball and then to make things happen.If we find central defenders who can pass out of defence as well, I think that Wes will be the channel through which many attacks happen.I am very optimistic that we have found a good player for the future.

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Good News Gordon"]Whoever is posting on scum websites is

pinching the name, I am a NCFC season ticket holder and could tell you

more about this club and its history than you would ever know in you

lifetime[/quote]

You could start by telling us why you''ve been so wrong about every

single one of your "predictions"....?  No?  Thought not...

[CiderkiddCanary 0]

[quote user="Good News Gordon"][quote user="Shazzakidd"][quote user="Good News Gordon"][quote user="archer4721"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

 

Erm. no. Hardly a fight for him was there. There are plenty of reasons why not too.

I wouldn''t expect too much for him.

[/quote]

more negative crap from the Norwich faithful

[/quote]Hahaha. Look who''s back off the Ipswich "Fan" websites![/quote]

Whoever is posting on scum websites is pinching the name, I am a NCFC season ticket holder and could tell you more about this club and its history than you would ever know in you lifetime

[/quote]I''m not even a Norwich fan, but I was born and raised in the Norwich area so I do have an affinity to the club. Also ... do I care if you know more than I ever would. That''s a thoughtless question, you have no idea who I could be.

[Good News Gordon 0]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Good News Gordon"]Whoever is posting on scum websites is pinching the name, I am a NCFC season ticket holder and could tell you more about this club and its history than you would ever know in you lifetime[/quote]

You could start by telling us why you''ve been so wrong about every single one of your "predictions"....?  No?  Thought not...

[/quote]

what a saying signing would happen the day Sammy signed?

Saying that Wes was a done deal for days and days?

Don''t suppose they count, we will just wait for the others then, shall we?

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Good News Gordon"]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"][quote user="Good News Gordon"]Whoever is posting on scum websites is pinching the name, I am a NCFC season ticket holder and could tell you more about this club and its history than you would ever know in you lifetime[/quote]

You could start by telling us why you''ve been so wrong about every single one of your "predictions"....?  No?  Thought not...

[/quote]

what a saying signing would happen the day Sammy signed?

Saying that Wes was a done deal for days and days?

Don''t suppose they count, we will just wait for the others then, shall we?

[/quote]

so your a season ticket holder and work infront of the TV cameras.. hello Kevin Piper! and we all know your not him... You stated the beleedin Obvious re Hoolahan... we were always leading the race if certain papers are to be believed.

jas :)

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Good News Gordon"]

what a saying signing would happen the day Sammy signed?

Saying that Wes was a done deal for days and days?

Don''t suppose they count, we will just wait for the others then, shall we?

[/quote]

Or saying that 2 players would sign the day Sammy did?

Or saying that Wes was a done deal and would be announced over a week ago?

Or Tuesday''s 12.30 press conference?

Or the "4 or 5" others that were to be announced last week?

Getting the day of one signing and the name of another right isn''t

exactly convincing, since Wes had been linked to us weeks before you

came along.

So, what''s the current situation then, Gordon?

[tribes 0]

Has Shola left the building yet?

[Rum Ol Boy 0]

[quote user="Shazzakidd"]Don''t tell me to discuss.Thankyou.[/quote]he wasn''t telling you to discuss, he was asking for structured replies........noones forcing you

[SuperWesIrishWizard 0]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

This is a hard question to answer. If Etherington and Commons were completely unviable, as they probably were, then yes Hoolohan is probably the best we could have hoped for. Would I have Commons over Hoolohan? yes.  Why? because Commons has shown over 3-4 years that he is a very good attacking player, Hoolohan still has to show that he hasnt just had one good season.

Most of all though, I think that we should be concentrating on the performance of the team as a whole next year rather than putting pressure on one individual to live up to the reputation of a past player. To me its about how the whole new look team will play rather than whether Hoolohan is exciting as Huckerby.

[James Kent 0]

Thank you for those people who have replied in a constructive manner.  I only wanted to open up a friendly debate and I am sorry if this has caused any offence. 

[TheCardinal 0]

[quote user="ryank"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

This is a hard question to answer. If Etherington and Commons were completely unviable, as they probably were, then yes Hoolohan is probably the best we could have hoped for. Would I have Commons over Hoolohan? yes.  Why? because Commons has shown over 3-4 years that he is a very good attacking player, Hoolohan still has to show that he hasnt just had one good season.

Most of all though, I think that we should be concentrating on the performance of the team as a whole next year rather than putting pressure on one individual to live up to the reputation of a past player. To me its about how the whole new look team will play rather than whether Hoolohan is exciting as Huckerby.

[/quote]Totally disagree with you in your comments about Commons, Ryank.Commons is a tidy player who has proven himself a capable player at Forest. His goals and assists have without a doubt been an essential element of their success in the season just gone - but we should remember that those seasons have been played in League One. It will be interesting to see how Commons copes with that step up. I suspect he''ll do very well for Derby.Hoolahan on the other hand has not only proven himself at the very same level that Commons played at, but also at Championship level - and for Livingston and Shelbourne before that as well. How you can say that he has had just one season is beyond me - he''s been a revelation at every club he''s been at so far. Commons has not had that season at Championship level and as such questions marks will be over his effectiveness in the Championship. For me, though, the only better player we could have got is Plymouth''s Halmosi. I seriously doubt, however, we could have afforded him or snared him ahead of the Premiership sides interested - so I''m delighted to have Hoolahan in the team and signed up.

[TheCardinal 0]

[quote]How you can say that he has had just one successful season is beyond me - he''s been a revelation at every club he''s been at so far[/quote]Sorry, amending above

[Hardhouse44 261]

He would have made an excellent team mate for Huckerby. Here’s a thought. And yes I know he''s gone and we have all moved on but it’s been niggling me since he said it. I believe that Roeder said the decision to release Huck’s was a difficult one but he did so because he "Could not guarantee him a place in the starting line up" Surely after the season we''ve just had and the string of apathetic performances that we''re by no mean’s limited to just a few players, surely he can''t guarantee any of the current squad first team football. I would hope that players are not picked on reputation. Well Huckerby was the only player with one so unless Darren was demanding confirmation that he would always start if fit, which I doubt, we could release the entire squad on that logic.I’m moving on, I’m moving on!

[Evil Monkey 52]

[quote user="Hardhouse44"]He would have made an excellent team mate for Huckerby. Here’s a thought. And yes I know he''s gone and we have all moved on but it’s been niggling me since he said it. I believe that Roeder said the decision to release Huck’s was a difficult one but he did so because he "Could not guarantee him a place in the starting line up" Surely after the season we''ve just had and the string of apathetic performances that we''re by no mean’s limited to just a few players, surely he can''t guarantee any of the current squad first team football. I would hope that players are not picked on reputation. Well Huckerby was the only player with one so unless Darren was demanding confirmation that he would always start if fit, which I doubt, we could release the entire squad on that logic.I’m moving on, I’m moving on!

[/quote]I think Roeder was showing Darren some respect by not taking up another year (bear with me here).  If he''d already started to think about his squad for next season, which he undoubtedly had, he was hoping to get in some talented young players and its likely that, if they made the impact expected, then Hucks would probably be reduced to a bit-part player or, worse, not even on the bench every week.  This isn''t necessarily a detriment to Hucks'' ability, just a recognition that the club has to move forward and plan further ahead.  We will never know how much of a contribution Huckerby would have made next season, but I guess that''s better than watching him slowly rot in the reserves.  He still has talent and deserves to be playing every week for another few years at least, so now, hopefully, he''ll get those years.Now... sniff... getting over it, promise....

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="TheMarshmallowMan"][quote user="ryank"]

[quote user="Jim Kent"]So now we have finally secured wes is this the best replacement for hucks that we could hope for.  Now I know he is a different sort, but I can''t think of too many better replacments we could have got.  Also does this change anything as regards to the decision to release Hucks, for me not yet but its a very good start.  Well done Roeder and welcome wes.[/quote]

This is a hard question to answer. If Etherington and Commons were completely unviable, as they probably were, then yes Hoolohan is probably the best we could have hoped for. Would I have Commons over Hoolohan? yes.  Why? because Commons has shown over 3-4 years that he is a very good attacking player, Hoolohan still has to show that he hasnt just had one good season.

Most of all though, I think that we should be concentrating on the performance of the team as a whole next year rather than putting pressure on one individual to live up to the reputation of a past player. To me its about how the whole new look team will play rather than whether Hoolohan is exciting as Huckerby.

[/quote]

Totally disagree with you in your comments about Commons, Ryank.

Commons is a tidy player who has proven himself a capable player at Forest. His goals and assists have without a doubt been an essential element of their success in the season just gone - but we should remember that those seasons have been played in League One. It will be interesting to see how Commons copes with that step up. I suspect he''ll do very well for Derby.

Hoolahan on the other hand has not only proven himself at the very same level that Commons played at, but also at Championship level - and for Livingston and Shelbourne before that as well. How you can say that he has had just one season is beyond me - he''s been a revelation at every club he''s been at so far. Commons has not had that season at Championship level and as such questions marks will be over his effectiveness in the Championship.

For me, though, the only better player we could have got is Plymouth''s Halmosi. I seriously doubt, however, we could have afforded him or snared him ahead of the Premiership sides interested - so I''m delighted to have Hoolahan in the team and signed up.
[/quote]

I think that a very fair assessment.  It''s worth pointing out that the Blackpool chairman went out of his way in doing the "usual thank you bit" in pointing out the part he played in getting them promoted in the first place.  I think he may end up being one of the better bargains of this season - he''s not a great goalscorer but as I have said before he causes chaos in defences by being "all over the place", pulling markers with him and thus creates chances for other people.  I have a friend who supports Falkirk and he rates Gow (if you get him) so I think already your options appear better for next season.

Other clubs did want Hoolahan - as other posters have remarked he made an impression on a number of fans (and no doubt Managers as he did with yours) and I very much hope he will do a good job.  It''s worth also pointing out that although we are a very small country he has made it into the Republic of Ireland squad, selected by a new and foreign manager who has ditched a number of  players in the process.  He obviously saw something in their training programme which warranted his inclusion - mind you it''s not too difficult to bamboozle an Irish defence!

[jordimurrell 0]

today i saw delia smith with her husband micheal whyn jones and i said "have you heard who norwich have signed" micheal answered "yeah wes hoolahan" i said " its a very good signing for city and i hope he will make an empression on the fans at the club". delia then said "hope and pray, hope and pray, cya later" this all happend at the royal norfolk show today outside the food hall.

enjoy!