Jim Smith 2,608 Posted December 10, 2008 Another very depressing evening. It is hard to convey in words precisely how s**t Watford are. They were really, really poor and totally there for the taking. We bossed 70% of the game and must have had at least 15 corners but somehow managed to gift them 2 goals out of nothing and lose a game I would have been disappointed with a point from. At the end of the day if you don''t put the ball in the net then you don''t deserve to win but my god we did not deserve to lose.Other thoughts:1. Marshall at fault for both goals;2. Semi had one of his away day shockers where he wimped out of everything;3. Roeder''s refusal to make a substitution when it was obvious one was needed was baffling and immensely frustrating. It was crying out for Lupoli but he seems to be totally out of favour.That is all! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfc90 0 Posted December 10, 2008 Sounds like Coventry away all over again Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tim Allman 1 Posted December 10, 2008 Just back from the gameFirst fifteen Watford looked like a conference team, but we didn’t score. If we had gone ahead them, I’m sure we would have won by loads.Awful first goal which was probably Watford’s only shot of the first half.We had the majority of the play, worked hard, but were firing blanks. Croft looked dangerous, some nice touches, but the half summed up our season. Decent play, bad mistake and go a goal behind.Surprised Roeder didn’t tug Russell at h/t. He wasn’t sure where he was playing what he had to do, and looked lost. Was he a midfielder, an attacker on an “in the hole” man? Who knows? Russell didn’t and nor did Roeder.Our goal was lovely - well worked, and if we had held out for a few minutes we would have won, but some catastrophic standing off and a rolled shot into the corner was enough.There were more and more shouts for a change, for Lupoli, or anyone to mix things up but nothing happened. Even Kennedy up front. Anyone. The general feeling was that the more we yelled at Roeder the less likely he was to do anything. It was a sort of game of double bluff between Glen “I have the only opinion that counts” Roeder and the 1000+ away fans who could all see we were playing well, but it needed a change. At least we now know it was Lee Clark who made all the good substitutions, but as he’s off now I’m not sure who will tell Roeder what to do.If we had scored it he would have been justified in standing there, but we didn’t and to be honest it looked like we would score less and less as we approached the 90 minutes.The last twenty or so Watford looked to have a decent shape, held their positions and repelled most attacks. We need to make a change and we didn’t. It was a dreadful dreadful error of judgement by Roeder.I was so annoyed I called Canary Call. Adams defended the indefensible tactics by Roeder somehow and when he talks we cannot speak back, so he just waffles for ages. I’m just pleased I didn’t’ swear on Radio Norfolk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bury Yellow 2 Posted December 10, 2008 Well said Tim and Jim. Just back from the game too.I admit I''m a Clark fan and it was b... frustrating watch Roeder stand there and do absolutely nothing.It was crying out for a change and Watford were there for the taking. My only defence for Roeder is that he''s a stubborn idiot.Whilst Clark remained at the club I had some hope. Now he''s gone, Roeder must be removed from his post soon or he will bring the club down even further than it is now.I''m off to bed - A very good night to you all !! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
votepedro 0 Posted December 11, 2008 so we''ve totally out-played watford tonight, made a couple of errors in defence and been unlucky in front of goal... and that''s roeder''s fault? yes let''s get rid of roeder and all the players he''s brought to the club, that will sort things out!!!ps - yes i was at the game.pps - cort hat-trick at reading anyone? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunky Norwich 0 Posted December 11, 2008 I keep saying it but playing badly and winning equals championships, playing well and losing equals.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,902 Posted December 11, 2008 I was at the game too and can understand Roeders reluctance to change it, to a point, because we were on top with the personnel we had on the pitch. That''s been the story of our season right from that first game at Coventry where we played well, dominated the game and lost 2-0. We just haven''t scored the goals to win games when we are on top. It''s happened too often now to keep calling us unlucky. We have to transfer our dominance into goals and win games when we are on top. The change most people were wanting was Lupoli for Russell and I agree because we could easily have changed to 442 without being over run in midfield. But the change I would really have liked to have seen would have been to get Kennedy on at the back. After The Doc got a yellow I feel he should have changed him for Kennedy. Doc wasn''t having his best game anyway and all those corners may have produced something if Kennedy was in the box. Kennedy is a real attacking threat from set pieces like Malky used to be. As it was we forced umpteen corners and we never looked like scoring from any of them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tim Allman 1 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="votepedro"]so we''ve totally out-played watford tonight, made a couple of errors in defence and been unlucky in front of goal... and that''s roeder''s fault? yes let''s get rid of roeder and all the players he''s brought to the club, that will sort things out!!! ps - yes i was at the game. pps - cort hat-trick at reading anyone?[/quote]As Roeder is responsible for the team selection & tactics - yes it is his fault. Russell playing in a position (the Wes position?) where he looked totally lost; who asked him to play there? Pattsison tried to get forwward there as well, but he''s no Wes either. The Manager, Roeder made those decisions.No subs at all in a game where we were losing. Roeder''s decision & Roeders'' fault.Yes, we were playing ok, but it was against the poorest team I have seen this season. We needed to make a change to liven things up. We didn''t.I don''t think that we should get rid of Roeder. For the record I think he should stay, but he made a dreadful error of judgement this evening in the tactics and personnel. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ROBFLECK 134 Posted December 11, 2008 Yes GK might have made mistake(s), but it''s up to the manager to get his decisions right. Now he''s gonna moan over luck and all that ... But you make your own luck rodent, it''s your faulty decision making all over again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Taxing 0 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="votepedro"]so we''ve totally out-played watford tonight, made a couple of errors in defence and been unlucky in front of goal... and that''s roeder''s fault? yes let''s get rid of roeder and all the players he''s brought to the club, that will sort things out!!! ps - yes i was at the game. pps - cort hat-trick at reading anyone?[/quote]Yes, I wondered about Cort too. 20 minutes to go and needing to get a goal someone like Cort (6''4'''' I think he is) coming on would provide a completely different initiative. I have to say that if Roeder thought Cort worth a gamble, and I think he''s right, then i don''t understand why he felt that Hucks wasn''t woth the gamble for another season. A fit Huckerby coming on with 20 minutes to go last night would probably have made the difference. Anybody know yet why Hoolahan wasn''t playing and why Roeder change the team which all performed so well against Ipswich ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted December 11, 2008 We lost again.........thats all we really need to know isn''t it?[:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,902 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="1st Wizard"]We lost again.........thats all we really need to know isn''t it?[:S][/quote]I guess that''s right if you just follow the club through results and league positions. For fans who go to the game there''s obviously more to it than that. The disappointment is probably greater for the fans that went so if you''re not interested in what they have to say why not post on one of the many threads started by fans who didn''t go.We were on top and although I can understand that fans were frustrated about no subs being used, and I posted my thoughts on here last night, we should have won that game with the side we had out there and part of me understands why roeder didn''t want to make changes to a side that was so dominant in the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="1st Wizard"]We lost again.........thats all we really need to know isn''t it?[:S][/quote]I guess that''s right if you just follow the club through results and league positions. For fans who go to the game there''s obviously more to it than that. The disappointment is probably greater for the fans that went so if you''re not interested in what they have to say why not post on one of the many threads started by fans who didn''t go.We were on top and although I can understand that fans were frustrated about no subs being used, and I posted my thoughts on here last night, we should have won that game with the side we had out there and part of me understands why roeder didn''t want to make changes to a side that was so dominant in the game. [/quote]And guess what? Mr better fan than me.................we still lost![:|] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,902 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="nutty nigel"] [quote user="1st Wizard"]We lost again.........thats all we really need to know isn''t it?[:S][/quote]I guess that''s right if you just follow the club through results and league positions. For fans who go to the game there''s obviously more to it than that. The disappointment is probably greater for the fans that went so if you''re not interested in what they have to say why not post on one of the many threads started by fans who didn''t go.We were on top and although I can understand that fans were frustrated about no subs being used, and I posted my thoughts on here last night, we should have won that game with the side we had out there and part of me understands why roeder didn''t want to make changes to a side that was so dominant in the game. [/quote]And guess what? Mr better fan than me.................we still lost![:|][/quote]Where did I say I was a better fan than you?Many fans can''t go to games for various reasons. Both home and away. I consider myself a luckier fan than a lot of them and not better.Your sole purpose on here at times seems to be to stoke up divisions between the fans. If the result and league position was all that''s importatant why would anyone ever go to games? Watching it on Ceefax would be much cheaper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="nutty nigel"] If the result and league position was all that''s importatant why would anyone ever go to games? Watching it on Ceefax would be much cheaper. [/quote]I never thought of that, thanks for the tip![:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beaker 0 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="nutty nigel"]Doc wasn''t having his best game anyway [/quote]does he ever?!!? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chicken 0 Posted December 11, 2008 I posted this thought on a nother thread but whilst Lita is playing Lita upfront alone we either have to go more direct or get more players in the box attacking crosses.We could have had more goals against the Scum if we had had more people attacking crosses. People have criticised the quality of the crosses but the way you train people is to cross near post, far post and between the two. You do get some unbelievable players that can cross on the run and pick out a players head where ever he is. But the point is with one or two targets you have to know where they are going to attack and put it there. With three or four it shouldn''t matter which option you choose as they should all be attacking an option.Take Matty''s goal on Sunday. Semi came in and took a defender with him and Patty attacked the back post. The cross was not actually great but the ball reached the far post and there was Matty to try and take the net off!Its simple but if we are to continue to play balls of height into the box then we need players attacking it so that Lita isn''t fighting against two centre backs and a keeper to get to the ball. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,902 Posted December 11, 2008 Agreed Chicken. Crosses need to go into space for players to run into. It''s always a gamble, Pattison gambled on Sunday. Lita got into the space early last night and missed. Croft gambled to make a run to the far post and it paid off. Set plays are more difficult but again it''s the movement towards the ball in the box that''s crucial but in set plays physical size and strength is equally important as defenders have time to regroup and mark the players and or the spaces. This is where Kennedy has been effective for us this season and is why I would have brought him on for Doc last night. Doc was on a yellow and Kennedy would have been a huge bonus for us in a game where we were winning corners for fun. This also wouldn''t have disrupted the formation that was obviously working up to the last third. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Taxing 0 Posted December 11, 2008 [quote user="chicken"]I posted this thought on a nother thread but whilst Lita is playing Lita upfront alone we either have to go more direct or get more players in the box attacking crosses.We could have had more goals against the Scum if we had had more people attacking crosses. People have criticised the quality of the crosses but the way you train people is to cross near post, far post and between the two. You do get some unbelievable players that can cross on the run and pick out a players head where ever he is. But the point is with one or two targets you have to know where they are going to attack and put it there. With three or four it shouldn''t matter which option you choose as they should all be attacking an option.Take Matty''s goal on Sunday. Semi came in and took a defender with him and Patty attacked the back post. The cross was not actually great but the ball reached the far post and there was Matty to try and take the net off!Its simple but if we are to continue to play balls of height into the box then we need players attacking it so that Lita isn''t fighting against two centre backs and a keeper to get to the ball.[/quote] Agree with all you say excpet that I thought that the cross from which pattison scored was a very good cross. I also think that Cort, if fit, will provide literally a completely new dimension for us up front, one that we haven''t had since Crouch. The sort of player that perhaps JC would have played well off ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Duncs Bloody Shirt 0 Posted December 11, 2008 Thanks to Nutty Nige and Chicken for bringing some sense to this thread ... I''ll get my hard hat ready but this Roeder bashing the second we fail to win is getting really tiresome! Does anyone really believe that getting rid of a third manager in 3 years is really going to help the long term stability? ... besides, how can we afford to do it? ... ok, so he''s stubborn and makes decisions that baffle, but are we such a catch that we''ll be bowled over with applications from top notch mangers if we sack him? .... I think not!You guys also make a decent point re Lita ... the guy is bursting with power and pace but so far, with the exception of the Wolves game, we''ve been unable to use this to real good effect. Although clearly easier said that done, we somehow need to release him earlier to get him in behind opposition defences more than we do currently. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites