Me and Wiz realists, fans and fed up like most of you

[ROBFLECK 134]

I reckon many people feel the same way about the club now. But every time we get this rambling on about how well we played....

This is no league for esthetics, it''s hard grafting and if you can''t get results with your pretty football the manager has to change his way of playing.

Roeder is stubborn and arrogant, sorry Glenn this is the Championship, not La Liga or whatever. So first Wizard I agree with you most of the time. But there must be more people on this site realising this!

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="ROBFLECK"]

 

Roeder is stubborn and arrogant, sorry Glenn this is the Championship, not La Liga or whatever. So first Wizard I agree with you most of the time. But there must be more people on this site realising this!

 

[/quote]

Very true Rob, but they''ll choke to death before they admit to it![Y]

[WeAreYellows49 0]

Things aren''t that great, but be prepared to be bombarded by the fans who think it''s still possible that we could make the play off''s. I admire the fans who are positive, even if what they watch is dire, however I wish they wouldn''t chastise the fans who can see that all in the CR garden is not rosey.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[bristol_canary 0]

Pesimistic arseholes?

[WeAreYellows49 0]

It''s true that they can on occasion play well, however I and a lot of others would be more positive if they could turn out performances like they did against the scum each week, but we have all watched dross on the pitch, with a good 45 minutes chucked in here and there over the season so far.

Good flowing football is great to watch, however I think that points at the end of the season count more than good looking football where you get no results. At the end of the day we need points on the table, without those points things don''t look good.  Want a replay of last season?  Sailed a little close to the relegation wind for my liking.

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

But the trouble is Nutty, I know that the team and more so the manager are total poo, the table doesn''t lie, thats being realistic.

I cannot deny what the stats and results are saying can I?.

[SecretSanta 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="ROBFLECK"]

 

Roeder is stubborn and arrogant, sorry Glenn this is the Championship, not La Liga or whatever. So first Wizard I agree with you most of the time. But there must be more people on this site realising this!

 

[/quote]

Very true Rob, but they''ll choke to death before they admit to it![Y]

[/quote]

7,907 posts .. do you have a life ?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

But the trouble is Nutty, I know that the team and more so the manager are total poo, the table doesn''t lie, thats being realistic.

I cannot deny what the stats and results are saying can I?.

[/quote]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

But the trouble is Nutty, I know that the team and more so the manager are total poo, the table doesn''t lie, thats being realistic.

I cannot deny what the stats and results are saying can I?.

[/quote]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

Didn''t I just answer that Nutty?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

But the trouble is Nutty, I know that the team and more so the manager are total poo, the table doesn''t lie, thats being realistic.

I cannot deny what the stats and results are saying can I?.

[/quote]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

Didn''t I just answer that Nutty?

[/quote]

No.

You just made another point.

Would you like to answer it?

 

[Hairy Canary 754]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

The first game of the season was against Coventry away and I remember Neil Adam''s match report. We were all over them but failed to score and ended up letting in a couple of soft goals and losing. 22 long games later and you could say exactly the same about the Watford game.

Now you could be right and it will eventually turn but after a half a season of the same thing repeating itself over and over I have to say it doesn''t look too realistic to me.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Hairy Canary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

The first game of the season was against Coventry away and I remember Neil Adam''s match report. We were all over them but failed to score and ended up letting in a couple of soft goals and losing. 22 long games later and you could say exactly the same about the Watford game.

Now you could be right and it will eventually turn but after a half a season of the same thing repeating itself over and over I have to say it doesn''t look too realistic to me.

[/quote]

There you go Nutty, HC has summed it up for me nicely.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

Well said that man.

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="ROBFLECK"]

I reckon many people feel the same way about the club now. But every time we get this rambling on about how well we played....

 

[/quote]

But, as I mentioned before, that''s not the only comment those who go to the games make though is it? After analysing the game - who played well, who didn''t, Roeder''s tactics, official''s decisions, the opposition fans, etc, etc. sometimes there will be general agreement that we played well even if we lost. The reasons for that loss (in the case of Watford - Marshall''s howlers, Rusty''s ineffectiveness and Roeder''s decision not to substitute him for Lupoli spring to mind) are always discussed so it''s not just a case of  "We played well, everything will be alright". You are cherry-picking one point out of several made and making out that those that go to games are not aware of what is happening, when, in reality, they have more grasp of the situation than anyone.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Hairy Canary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

The first game of the season was against Coventry away and I remember Neil Adam''s match report. We were all over them but failed to score and ended up letting in a couple of soft goals and losing. 22 long games later and you could say exactly the same about the Watford game.

Now you could be right and it will eventually turn but after a half a season of the same thing repeating itself over and over I have to say it doesn''t look too realistic to me.

[/quote]

There you go Nutty, HC has summed it up for me nicely.

[/quote]

That''s spot on Hairy Canary. I was at Coventry and remember it just like you remember Neil Adams match report. And I also agree we could say exactly the same about the Watford game. In fact I do say exactly the same about the Watford game. But you are putting words into my mouth here, at no point did I say it will eventually turn. I replied to a post about Rob and Wiz being realists and asked :-

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

And Wiz will not answer it [|-)]

 

[gazzathegreat 0]

It''s a lot of ifs isn''t it, on both sides. IF only we could play well and be consistent, take advantage of some good play and dominance of teams and IF we don''t get results we will be in real trouble.

I tend to think we are in trouble, despite playing some excellent football the results are largely consistent with our inconsistency. If somehow Roeder and the team can start to put a run together then we should be okay. But despite numerous changes here and there, and the insistence from the manager that all players are up for the cause we are not getting the results, and sadly it''s results that matter most at the end of the season.

I am most worried about our likely team post January, it seems we can play well and win - but not enough times to secure a confidence both off and on the pitch which would do more to ensure a sustained progress and therefore a leap to the comfort zone of mid table or above. What the missing factors are I am not sure. Is it just a matter of a settled team being out there - or rather the manager identifying any mistakes made and rectifying them?

[Barclay_Boy 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Hairy Canary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

The first game of the season was against Coventry away and I remember Neil Adam''s match report. We were all over them but failed to score and ended up letting in a couple of soft goals and losing. 22 long games later and you could say exactly the same about the Watford game.

Now you could be right and it will eventually turn but after a half a season of the same thing repeating itself over and over I have to say it doesn''t look too realistic to me.

[/quote]

There you go Nutty, HC has summed it up for me nicely.

[/quote]

That''s spot on Hairy Canary. I was at Coventry and remember it just like you remember Neil Adams match report. And I also agree we could say exactly the same about the Watford game. In fact I do say exactly the same about the Watford game. But you are putting words into my mouth here, at no point did I say it will eventually turn. I replied to a post about Rob and Wiz being realists and asked :-

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

And Wiz will not answer it [|-)]

 

[/quote]

look at the league table NN. What does that tell you about how realistic your opinion is? Yes we are getting results, but by and large they''re not very good ones are they?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Barclay_Boy"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Hairy Canary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[/quote]

The first game of the season was against Coventry away and I remember Neil Adam''s match report. We were all over them but failed to score and ended up letting in a couple of soft goals and losing. 22 long games later and you could say exactly the same about the Watford game.

Now you could be right and it will eventually turn but after a half a season of the same thing repeating itself over and over I have to say it doesn''t look too realistic to me.

[/quote]

There you go Nutty, HC has summed it up for me nicely.

[/quote]

That''s spot on Hairy Canary. I was at Coventry and remember it just like you remember Neil Adams match report. And I also agree we could say exactly the same about the Watford game. In fact I do say exactly the same about the Watford game. But you are putting words into my mouth here, at no point did I say it will eventually turn. I replied to a post about Rob and Wiz being realists and asked :-

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

And Wiz will not answer it [|-)]

 

[/quote]

look at the league table NN. What does that tell you about how realistic your opinion is? Yes we are getting results, but by and large they''re not very good ones are they?

[/quote]

Perhaps you''d like to answer the question I asked instead of assuming what my opinion is BB.

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results. What do you and Wiz find unrealistic about that?

 

[|BA 0]

And those of you that would prefer a different style of play are ''realistically'' proposing......what?

The board resigns. Dublin as Mnager? Long ball tactics? kidnap a Prem striker?

Whats your answer. Easy to tear a tower down.....

[pennywise 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="ROBFLECK"]

 

Roeder is stubborn and arrogant, sorry Glenn this is the Championship, not La Liga or whatever. So first Wizard I agree with you most of the time. But there must be more people on this site realising this!

 

[/quote]

Very true Rob, but they''ll choke to death before they admit to it![Y]

[/quote]

i just go to games  for a good day out [:D]

[Canary Poirot 1]

[quote user="IBA"]And those of you that would prefer a different style of play are ''realistically'' proposing......what? The board resigns. Dublin as Mnager? Long ball tactics? kidnap a Prem striker? Whats your answer. Easy to tear a tower down.....[/quote]

There''s no denying that we have a fine footballing side going forward. I believe, with Lita up front and the present midfielders, that technically, we have a good side going forward (although heaven knows what to expect post December minus the excellent Lita). Still, I believe that should we improve the quality of the crosses made in general, we''d be in business - especially if Carl Cort can get on the end of them. Time will tell.

However, despite playing decent football going forward, we continue to give soft goals away. This is our fundamental problem, weakness, and is the albatross around our necks this season. If we are to improve, Roeder must sort out the defence. And that means getting four solid experienced guys back there. As good as Omosuzi can be in one game, he can be very average in the next, relying on his pace to get him out of trouble. Same with Bertrand. Both suffer from inconsistency. Ostembor is another who relies too much on his pace to overshadow his fundamental weaknesses in his game defensively. I''d look to replace all three, although I think Omosuzi on his day can be excellent.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Canary Poirot"]

[quote user="IBA"]And those of you that would prefer a different style of play are ''realistically'' proposing......what? The board resigns. Dublin as Mnager? Long ball tactics? kidnap a Prem striker? Whats your answer. Easy to tear a tower down.....[/quote]

There''s no denying that we have a fine footballing side going forward. I believe, with Lita up front and the present midfielders, that technically, we have a good side going forward (although heaven knows what to expect post December minus the excellent Lita). Still, I believe that should we improve the quality of the crosses made in general, we''d be in business - especially if Carl Cort can get on the end of them. Time will tell.

However, despite playing decent football going forward, we continue to give soft goals away. This is our fundamental problem, weakness, and is the albatross around our necks this season. If we are to improve, Roeder must sort out the defence. And that means getting four solid experienced guys back there. As good as Omosuzi can be in one game, he can be very average in the next, relying on his pace to get him out of trouble. Same with Bertrand. Both suffer from inconsistency. Ostembor is another who relies too much on his pace to overshadow his fundamental weaknesses in his game defensively. I''d look to replace all three, although I think Omosuzi on his day can be excellent.

[/quote]

Well of course this is the problem with young players. Defence is far more an experienced players domain. Tuesday at Watford the average age of our back five was just under 23. Omozusi and Bertrand are 19. Roeder has been unlucky to lose the guy he brought in for experience. Stefanovic might have made all the difference there. January would be a good time to bring in another experienced defender to replace Stefanovic, if Roeder can find one.But Roeder shows belief in the young players. Wouldn''t it be great if they were our young players who were so good but just struggling to find the consistency. One of the things Roeder has done is to try and make that happen. In the end it may be that another manager gets the credit for the changes we are making within the club now.

 

[gazzathegreat 0]

Agree with you Nutty, losing Steph was a big blow. Not only for his experience in defence (at a higher level) but also his organisational abilities. The defence at present is missing this. Only Clingan there seems to make up for that loss.

As we now have Cort upfront to presumably replace Siberski, is it not time for Roeder to concentrate on someone to orchestrate the defence.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Well I think it''s realistic to believe that if we keep playing well and dominating games there''s more chance of getting those results.

[/quote]Your statement is correct.  Yes, it is realistic to believe that a team which consistently plays well and dominates games will get better results than a team which does not consistently play well or dominate games.Norwich City, sadly, are not a team which consistently plays well and/or dominates games.  So that''s where I would disagree with you: i.e. in reality rather than in theory.

[|BA 0]

"Stats and results"

Says it all. You watch a nice printout, I''ll stick to football thanks

[Xavi- Poor Mans Ian Crook 0]

[quote user="IBA"]I''ll stick to football thanks[/quote]Agree I would hate to see Norwich start playing like Stoke. If they did i would stop coming.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Fabregas- Poor Mans Ian Crook"][quote user="IBA"]I''ll stick to football thanks[/quote]
Agree I would hate to see Norwich start playing like Stoke. If they did i would stop coming.
[/quote]

So you wouldn''t watch City in the Premier then? sorry, I just don''t believe you!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="1st Wizard"]

[quote user="Fabregas- Poor Mans Ian Crook"][quote user="IBA"]I''ll stick to football thanks[/quote]
Agree I would hate to see Norwich start playing like Stoke. If they did i would stop coming.
[/quote]

So you wouldn''t watch City in the Premier then? sorry, I just don''t believe you!

[/quote]

At the end of 2005/6 we won home game after home game. Six home wins on the trot amidst constant protest from the fans who wanted Worthy Out. The posts said the results were irrellevant, they said they were more concerned with the style of play and didn''t want to pay money to watch hoofball [:S]

You wouldn''t have been on any of those threads would you Wiz [:^)]

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

[quote user="Fabregas- Poor Mans Ian Crook"][quote user="IBA"]I''ll stick to football thanks[/quote]
Agree I would hate to see Norwich start playing like Stoke. If they did i would stop coming.
[/quote]

So you wouldn''t watch City in the Premier then? sorry, I just don''t believe you!

[/quote]

At the end of 2005/6 we won home game after home game. Six home wins on the trot amidst constant protest from the fans who wanted Worthy Out. The posts said the results were irrellevant, they said they were more concerned with the style of play and didn''t want to pay money to watch hoofball [:S]

You wouldn''t have been on any of those threads would you Wiz [:^)]

 

[/quote]

Nutty 1 Me 0[:D]