Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Big Slob

pattison

Recommended Posts

I was in the upper Barclay last night near the front and sat next to this old Scottish chap who knew a lot about Kenendy (highly rated by all accounts). Anyway, with only 8 mins. gone he turned to me and asked ''whos that bald guy on the left for Norwich''?

I told him about Pattison and he reeled off a list of his faults with that minimal experience of seeing him!

The guy was clearly overweight and not match fit so why the hell was he even playing, at the very least he should have been taken off at some stage.

The result (as I said yesterday) was irrelevant but the performance shouldn''t have been, nor should the team selection, tactics and substitutions. I think GR got some basics badly wrong. Instead of slagging off the Italian FA WHY did we play the entire game with onl;y one upfront when Renton didn''t even get on the pitch and Martin had 20 minutes!! It doesn''t matter that we are still trying to sign strikers, last night we should have used those we did have and given the youngsters a proper chance. It was a friendly so where was the flexibility and changes in tactics, formation and personnel? Sadly lacking I''m afraid. Seems GR had one plan and that was it come hell or high water!      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree Yellow Rider, it was a surprisingly defensive formation in the second half and I''m not sure what GR would have learned from it.

On the Patty front, I second what Seat0123/ryang have said about how poor he was.

He looked like a Sunday League player, out of his depth.

How he survived 90 minutes I don''t know.

On the plus side Clingan looked ok and Hoolahan looked very promising (he always seemed to give himself that extra second or two on the ball to weigh up who to play it to). I think Hooly is going to be a real star this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Rider"]

I think GR got some basics badly wrong. Instead of slagging off the Italian FA WHY did we play the entire game with onl;y one upfront when Renton didn''t even get on the pitch and Martin had 20 minutes!! It doesn''t matter that we are still trying to sign strikers, last night we should have used those we did have and given the youngsters a proper chance. It was a friendly so where was the flexibility and changes in tactics, formation and personnel? Sadly lacking I''m afraid. Seems GR had one plan and that was it come hell or high water!      

[/quote]We couldn''t cope 5-v-5 in midfield - how do you think we''d have done with 4-v-5? As for putting on either Renton or Martin (both marginal players at best this season) instead of giving the first-team players vital pre-season football, I don''t see any merit in that at all. In any case, if you think any tactical change at all would have improved last night''s result, I think you''re deluding yourself - they had better players, from 1 to 11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don''t understand how some of you muppets can be so disparaging about Pattison without being constructive.

Actually I do understand, it''s because you''re muppets, but it would be nice if you tried.

Pattison looked overweight last night. He''s not a proper lefty - his rightful position is in central midfield where he can break up the game and get passing.

Those of you who have watched him properly since he came here will know that he CAN be a very good, strong player, with an exquisite left foot. However, he hasn''t been the same since that drinking palaver and something isn''t right with him.

To call him useless, though, is childish and pathetic.

Cue mindless abuse, etc, blah...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, so I''m a "muppet" who doesn''t watch the match "properly" and therefore doesn''t see this "exquisite left foot" that Matty has.

I''m also "childish and pathetic" for daring to point out a(nother) poor performance by Matty.

But if I were to turn this round and fail to accept that Match Day Pie''s opinion is correct I''ll be guilty of "mindless abuse".

Pot? Kettle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Match Day Pie"]

I just don''t understand how some of you muppets can be so disparaging about Pattison without being constructive.

Actually I do understand, it''s because you''re muppets, but it would be nice if you tried.

Pattison looked overweight last night. He''s not a proper lefty - his rightful position is in central midfield where he can break up the game and get passing.

Those of you who have watched him properly since he came here will know that he CAN be a very good, strong player, with an exquisite left foot. However, he hasn''t been the same since that drinking palaver and something isn''t right with him.

To call him useless, though, is childish and pathetic.

Cue mindless abuse, etc, blah...

[/quote]

Normally I will defend any City player good or bad, but I draw the line at Patty.....He is hopeless, and unless you have 2 glass eyes you really need an optician. Overweight, out of position in any position and did NOT make one decent tackle. Anytime the ball came near him in his own area he gave it straight to the opposition a real panicker of a footballer.

I am afraid to say YOU my dear fellow are a muppet for defending the indefendably hopeless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
[quote user="Fozzie"]Anyone dare to find the "sign him up" thread started after his debut?[/quote]Yes![url=http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1090826/ShowPost.aspx]http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1090826/ShowPost.aspx[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patty wasn''t great last night and he clearly has his failings...he has the dreaded lead boot and surely needs to work on his weighting of passes, but he gives 100% and he is a fearless and persistent tackler. I agree that he will struggle to be a regular starter this season but perhaps that is the incentive to get him working on his weaknesses. I dont know whether he could do with trimming down, he''s not a big guy and perhaps some of that solidness in his tackling ability comes from his bulk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Graham Humphrey"]I do get the feeling that - especially with Doc absent for a few months - Pattison might be the new scapegoat...
[/quote]

Looks that way.

I didn''t go to the friendly - why would you? - but on last season''s evidence, Pattison has his qualities and his weaknesses, like most of the players in our squad. He''s a ferocious tackler, and his signing on loan had a real impact on the team. He did a useful job on the left hand side during our most successful spell of the season, enabling Roeder to play that "three tight midfielders + 1 winger" system that worked so well. He is an atrociously bad passer of the ball, especially when he tries something ambitious. And I agree that he hasn''t seemed the same since he left his trousers at Dunston Hall.

Surely we can all agree that getting on his back isn''t going to help him recapture his best form? Why do people need a scapegoat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took the missus to the game and she is not all that well informed on the Beautiful game. She picked up straight away on how fat Patty looked! he was simply awful. He obviously hasnt been putting in enough effort in the pre season training. The rest of the squad looked in tip top shape where as ''Fat Pat'' merely looked (and played) like a pub player.

Sort it out son or ship out. We should have the depth in midfield this year to have a really healthy battle for places. On Mondays showing you have a lot of work to do to get on top of that list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="gremlin griggs"]whatever does roeder see in him get rid of him like so many people cant see anything in him at all[/quote]

I would hope Roeder has a better eye for a footballer than most of us, whose experience is probably limited to FM 2008!

Theres no doubt he had a bad game. Yes, he looks unfit, he''s definitely overweight (though that needn''t be a handicap if the talent is there-Jan Molby for example!) and he was played way, way out of position-he''s a left sided central midfielder used to breaking up play and giving the ball to a player who can do something with it, don''t they call that sort of position/responsibility the "water carrier" in US football or something?

But to condemn him after that one game is a bit much. Taking that logic, Darren Bent ( 4 goals) is world class striker who should be a regular for England-but then, it was "only against Norwich". Pattison, unfit, out of position, and with zero confidence was up against players who, talent wise, ability wise, pace wise, and for sheer athleticism, are not even in the same solar system as him, let alone the same pitch.

He needs to get fit, Roeder needs to find and play him in his best position. If he can claim a regular place in our midfield next season, he will have earnt it, as will any of that four (please, don''t lets play a five man midfield) selected. If he can''t or doesn''t, then fair enough-but FFS, he''s going to be up against the likes of Plymouth, Barnsley, Doncaster and Reading next season, not Tottenham et al! If we go up -huge if, and it won''t be next season, whatever happens-Pattision won''t be the only player at Norwich not good enough for the Premiership, there are plenty of others!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1) He wasn''t played ''out of position'' at the start of the game, he was there to play defensively on the left side of midfield and only dropped back to left back when Bertrand went off injured. He was poor in this ''natural'' position and got worse as the game went on (as he got more and more exposed at left back with no designated left midfielder in front of him, granted).

2) Robert - if you were not at the game then how can you defend him? It''s not about making a ''scapegoat'', it''s a question of commenting on a player''s performance in a match people watched. He was poor towards the end of last season too so I think it is fair enough to comment that he does not seem to have improved over the summer break.

3) I agree that he did very well when he came on loan and I was one of those happy to see him sign a permanent contract. However, since he signed that contract in January his form dropped.

3) If we''re not supposed to ''get on the player''s backs'' by commenting on poor performances then what''s the point of a forum like this? If Patty had come out and played a solid, decent game many would have praised him for turning it around after his recent ''troubles'' and that would have been fair enough. In fact we''d ALL have been pleased to see that, surely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="jetstream"]1) He wasn''t played ''out of position'' at the start of the game, he was there to play defensively on the left side of midfield and only dropped back to left back when Bertrand went off injured. He was poor in this ''natural'' position and got worse as the game went on (as he got more and more exposed at left back with no designated left midfielder in front of him, granted). 2) Robert - if you were not at the game then how can you defend him? It''s not about making a ''scapegoat'', it''s a question of commenting on a player''s performance in a match people watched. He was poor towards the end of last season too so I think it is fair enough to comment that he does not seem to have improved over the summer break. 3) I agree that he did very well when he came on loan and I was one of those happy to see him sign a permanent contract. However, since he signed that contract in January his form dropped. 3) If we''re not supposed to ''get on the player''s backs'' by commenting on poor performances then what''s the point of a forum like this? If Patty had come out and played a solid, decent game many would have praised him for turning it around after his recent ''troubles'' and that would have been fair enough. In fact we''d ALL have been pleased to see that, surely.[/quote]

Point being that there is getting on his back - and then there is being constructive. All this ''he''s useless'' is just offensive, thoughtless nonsense. (and all of you who fell for the ''muppet'' jibe, well, I rest my case...)

When he first came here he was exactly what we needed - and nearly everyone agreed. What I''m saying is that he is far from ''useless'', because those with any brain will remember him being vital to us over the New Year.

The point is that he is overweight and something is clearly wrong. What we need is the old Patti back. But how do we get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Match Day Pie"]

[quote user="jetstream"]1) He wasn''t played ''out of position'' at the start of the game, he was there to play defensively on the left side of midfield and only dropped back to left back when Bertrand went off injured. He was poor in this ''natural'' position and got worse as the game went on (as he got more and more exposed at left back with no designated left midfielder in front of him, granted). 2) Robert - if you were not at the game then how can you defend him? It''s not about making a ''scapegoat'', it''s a question of commenting on a player''s performance in a match people watched. He was poor towards the end of last season too so I think it is fair enough to comment that he does not seem to have improved over the summer break. 3) I agree that he did very well when he came on loan and I was one of those happy to see him sign a permanent contract. However, since he signed that contract in January his form dropped. 3) If we''re not supposed to ''get on the player''s backs'' by commenting on poor performances then what''s the point of a forum like this? If Patty had come out and played a solid, decent game many would have praised him for turning it around after his recent ''troubles'' and that would have been fair enough. In fact we''d ALL have been pleased to see that, surely.[/quote]

Point being that there is getting on his back - and then there is being constructive. All this ''he''s useless'' is just offensive, thoughtless nonsense. (and all of you who fell for the ''muppet'' jibe, well, I rest my case...)

When he first came here he was exactly what we needed - and nearly everyone agreed. What I''m saying is that he is far from ''useless'', because those with any brain will remember him being vital to us over the New Year.

The point is that he is overweight and something is clearly wrong. What we need is the old Patti back. But how do we get it?

[/quote]old patti? hes performed ok for us once, when he was on loan against cov at home, abit like david nielsen, did well when on loan, thrn after we signed him on a perm deal hes was crap. Pattison is dreadful and probably worthy of our reserves at best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I remember i was the first one on here to slate him soon after his perm move, i got abuse left, right and centre. Glad more people can see it now, he''s our weakest link!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He''s not good at the moment but I''m sure that''s down to his weight, which must also be down to something else. I think Roeder knew what he was doing when he started him on Monday. Probably printing out this discussion as we speak...

Ah, David Nielsen. Best striker we ever had. For six games...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On loan to us last season, Matty P looked a good player.   Numerous posters here wanted him signed up, and several seriously suggested he was worth a place on the left ahead of Hucks.  He played a key role in the unbeaten run that took us to safety.

By common consent, he''s not reproducing the same form now.

So, we have a player, whom we have bought and who is one of ours, not a loanee, who is (a) capable of playing well, and (b) not playing well now.

I wonder, what would work to get him back to form?

(a) Boo him, abuse him, start threads against him, turn him into this season''s hate figure?

Or:

(b) Give him some support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Quote=Smudger]Fantastic... are we becoming Newcastle Reserves????

Am sure the usual crew will be singing his praises before he has done absolutely anything for us.[/Quote]

Guess what, SMUDGER, my hero, was right!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, he didn''t play well on Monday night and yes, he looks like buster bloodvessel but Matty Pattison had some fantastic games for us last season especially when he was employed just in front of the back four, I seem to remember out standing performances against Plymouth and in the game after his drink driving incident. Do we really have to have a boo boy before the season has even started ? He is no where near as bad as Hughes was and I actually think he could turn out to be a really good player for us (I seem to remember comparisons to Gary Holt when he first arrived) alot of the negativity in relation to the board has been fair grounds for complaint in my view , maybe the plans for protest have been a little over the top but some posters already saying he''s not fit to wear the yellow shirt actually makes my blood boil, it is that kind of negativity that rankles with me . Pattison signed on loan around November time ? In that time he produced a number of good performances some of which were excellent, even if this was not the case he should still be alloted a year to prove himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×