Clean sheet v Charlton and Drury's dropped!!!

[Matt Morriss 69]

Bertrand comes back in and what happens, 3 goals conceded.Im not saying its all his fault but surely when you keep a clean sheet you dont change the defence. And especially away from home when we should be looking to keep things a bit tighter, surely the solid Drury behind Bell makes sense.But oh no, Roeder likes to change things doesnt he. And look what happens.

[0 0]

I agree. I like Bertrand but he''s not playing well this season. We have absoloutly no consistancy and on the ptich we have no shape.

[Matt Morriss 69]

This Drury thing is really annoying me, more than any other Roeder decision i think, except Hucks obviously.Why on earth when we keep a clean sheet is Drury dropped. Bertrand has been awful all bloody season, whenever Drury plays he''s solid and the defence looks better for it. He''s dropped today and 3 goals are conceded.On a diff note Curo''s just scored for Barnsley.

[AJ 1,218]

[quote user="iagzisacocker"]I agree. I like Bertrand but he''s not playing well this season. We have absoloutly no consistancy and on the ptich we have no shape.[/quote]Totally agree, and bar Croft - why change a winning side?

[city4eva 207]

SCANDALOUS. Bertrand in Drury out is just wrong!

[ncfcstar 287]

I don''t agree, if any of you actually saw the Charlton match you would understand that Drury is nowhere near match fit, he was well behind the pace in the Charlton match and we were exposed a fair few times because of it.

That is why Bertrand was back in the starting 11.

[alex_ncfc 644]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]I don''t agree, if any of you actually saw the Charlton match you would understand that Drury is nowhere near match fit, he was well behind the pace in the Charlton match and we were exposed a fair few times because of it. That is why Bertrand was back in the starting 11.[/quote]

Let''s get this straight:

An unfit Drury and a clean sheet plus a win, or one of Roeder''s "I have to play him to try and get in Chelsea''s good books" London boys who has cost us goals and points all season and does not warrant his place in the team?

You just seem intent on making (piss poor) excuses for Roeder. Drury is a solid defender and a far better option than the limited Bertrand.

[Fuglestad 0]

How the hell is Drury expected to get mtach fit then? Having played at Charlton, he would probably have been match fit for yesterdays game. As it stands he will be out for a few weeks, then be unfit again when called upon.

Bertrand is Roeder''s favourite and that is why he plays regardless of form. Drury is the better defender.

[ncfcstar 287]

And you are making an excuse to make Roeder look like an idiot.

If Drury is unfit he shouldn''t be in the team, it''s a simple as that, and it is not a decision which you can blame Roeder on. Yes if Drury was fit, then at the moment I would say Bertrand''s performances mean he should not be in the team, but Drury was so off the pace in the Charlton match, who didn''t look like posing us any threats through the game anyway, that he could well be exposed in other matches.

If we had just been on an unbeaten run you wouldn''t be picking on the smallest pathetic little things, Drury isn''t match fit and shouldn''t be in the team.

[ncfcstar 287]

Of course he wouldn''t have been match fit!! One 90 minute game doesn''t automatically make you match fit. I''m not going to argue with you that perhaps he deserves a run in the team, but he is unfit both match unfit and generally. That means he shouldn''t be in the team.

[alex_ncfc 644]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]And you are making an excuse to make Roeder look like an idiot. If Drury is unfit he shouldn''t be in the team, it''s a simple as that, and it is not a decision which you can blame Roeder on. Yes if Drury was fit, then at the moment I would say Bertrand''s performances mean he should not be in the team, but Drury was so off the pace in the Charlton match, who didn''t look like posing us any threats through the game anyway, that he could well be exposed in other matches. If we had just been on an unbeaten run you wouldn''t be picking on the smallest pathetic little things, Drury isn''t match fit and shouldn''t be in the team.[/quote]

And as Fuglestad said, Einstein, how is Drury supposed to get ''match fit'' if he doesn''t play?

Druru is far and away the better player, I have never seen an NCFC manager so blatantly have his favourites, and I thought Worthy was bad.

Oh and FYI, I don''t have to make excuses to make Roeder look like an idiot...

[ncfcstar 287]

Alex, everytime you have a debate with someone you resort to insults so why should I bother responding to you.

I''ve answered Fuglestad, so make of that what you will.

[alex_ncfc 644]

I never asked you to respond. I''m just noting that you are clearly deluded if you think Bertrand should be in the side ahead of Drury.

[ncfcstar 287]

Good for you, you seem like you understand the idea of a forum then.

If you actually read my posts you would understand why I think Bertrand is in the squad ahead of Drury.

[ZLF 271]

So nothing to do with the fact that we barely beat an extremely poor charlton side last time out who, until we scored,  we looked no better than and created less chances than them, despite their attack being more threatening and just about everyone agreeing that the men of the match were all defenders?  On top of this we are always poor at Selhurst park and our away form is shocking?

This defeat was always going to happen;  its our season and form so far so why so surprised?  And to blame it on Bertrand or Roeder for picking Betrand is ludicrous.  Once again the team was not good enough and failed to perform to its potential,  including Betrand.

Until we can get the players (or really the manager can get the players) to play 3 weeks out of 4 we will continue to suffer regular heavy away defeats.   And its now at the stage where I can sadly say thay the vast majority of players simply cant be bothered - and before anyone says,  that is irrespective of whether the players are loanees or not,  or most inconsistent part of the pitch is the midfield where have NO loan players...    

[alex_ncfc 644]

Err, yeah I have read your posts, and it still smacks of kissing Roeder''s backside, something you seem to like doing gauging your past posts. Constantly excuses, excuses, excuses.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

Drury is more than match fit, he isnt an old leper. It is a crime that Bertrand plays ahead of such experience. Roeder should have highlighted the fact that Bertrand (and lets be fair to him) is absolute crap this season. Just like Fotheringham too. But Roeder being Roeder does as Roeder does. Plays crap for the sake of playing crap. He just doesnt get that poor performances should be punished. Fotheringham and Bertrand must be as baffled as the fans.

[ncfcstar 287]

Ok well, we are going to have to agree to disagree. Yes I like Roeder, and think he is the man who can sort us out, and at the end of the day his job has been a struggle since day one because he hasn''t had any money to do his job properly. If he had got to spend the money that Worthington and Grant had had then I have no doubt that we would be in a completely different situation now.

[ncfcstar 287]

No I''m sorry tcf, but Drury is NOT match fit, he proved that in the Charlton match.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]No I''m sorry tcf, but Drury is NOT match fit, he proved that in the Charlton match.[/quote]

He looked match fit to me, and if he wasnt, after playing a full 90mins, he should be by now. It is not an issue of match fitness when it comes to Drury. Its an issue of Roeders inability to detect poor performances and his constant failure to field the best team available to him.

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]Of course he wouldn''t have been match fit!! One 90 minute game doesn''t automatically make you match fit. I''m not going to argue with you that perhaps he deserves a run in the team, but he is unfit both match unfit and generally. That means he shouldn''t be in the team.[/quote]What a ridiculous statement. If he wasnt fit he wouldnt have been on the bench and he wouldnt have played v Charlton.A game in which he played well, as he has done in other games. And a game in which we kept a clean sheet and won.

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

So nothing to do with the fact that we barely beat an extremely poor charlton side last time out who, until we scored,  we looked no better than and created less chances than them, despite their attack being more threatening and just about everyone agreeing that the men of the match were all defenders?  On top of this we are always poor at Selhurst park and our away form is shocking?

This defeat was always going to happen;  its our season and form so far so why so surprised?  And to blame it on Bertrand or Roeder for picking Betrand is ludicrous.  Once again the team was not good enough and failed to perform to its potential,  including Betrand.

Until we can get the players (or really the manager can get the players) to play 3 weeks out of 4 we will continue to suffer regular heavy away defeats.   And its now at the stage where I can sadly say thay the vast majority of players simply cant be bothered - and before anyone says,  that is irrespective of whether the players are loanees or not,  or most inconsistent part of the pitch is the midfield where have NO loan players...    

[/quote]Nobody is blaming Bertrand you fool, on the contrary i stated exactly the opposite.The point is that Drury is the more solid defender. And weve just kept a clean sheet.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Barclayman artist formerly known as Barclayboy"]Bertrand comes back in and what happens, 3 goals conceded.

Im not saying its all his fault but surely when you keep a clean sheet you dont change the defence. And especially away from home when we should be looking to keep things a bit tighter, surely the solid Drury behind Bell makes sense.

But oh no, Roeder likes to change things doesnt he. And look what happens.
[/quote]

Being saying the same thing myself mate. Bertrand has been very very weak defensively this season. So many problems and goals have occured because he hasn''t been alert, in the right place or just not strong enough in the challenge.

He''s been off form most of the season, we all know it, and after keeping a clean sheet against Charlton it seems a bizarre choice from the manager to change that defence just to include the under-performing Bertrand.

But then it''s a bit like why did he take the captaincy away from the Doc? He put in a Man of the Match performance against Charlton while wearing the armband and then in the next game he loses the armband to a guy who has been a bench warmer in recent weeks.

It''s hard to see Norwich making any sustained progress while Glenn is making the easy little things like that so difficult. Too many unnecessary changes. That''s why for however many steps we take forward we take just as many back.

 

[ncfcstar 287]

Barclay man in response to your comment on my post, Drury only played because Bertrand got injured in the warm up.

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="ncfcstar"]Barclay man in response to your comment on my post, Drury only played because Bertrand got injured in the warm up.[/quote]I know that. Point is if he wasnt fit he wouldnt have been on the bench or played.

[ncfcstar 287]

Right, come on mate, Drury was clearly off the pace during that game and it can''t be denied. I honestly think that people are having at go at people on here who seem to have "blind faith" in Roeder, but others are also using anything to have a go at Roeder.

In my opinion, based on the way he played, and by the fact he was so off the pace, he was neither fit or match fit.

[Huddy 0]

Ive said many times on here that the drury thing is a joke. Its a great example that Roeder has his favourites, Bertrand plays whatever it seems at the moment. Drury''s a bloody good championship defender, who we own; we''re risking losing him by Roederes attitude towards him; and then come May we wont have a left back at all!!

...and considering as pointed out the Charlton clean sheet and roeder wanting consistency, it stinks of hypocrisy and sums up Roeder.

[Fuglestad 0]

The only question I asked was "How the hell is Drury supposed to get match fit then?" Implying that in order to get match fit you have to play games. That is what match fit means. Players should be fit generally, but "match fit" is a term used to describe a players level of fitness when he is fit enough to play games regularly. Players become match fit by playing matches, and stop being match fit when they don''t play. Your reply to that question was, and I do paraphrase, "But, he''s not match fit so he shouldn''t play."As I have said before on these forums I have no doubt that Bertrand will play at a higher level than Drury in his career, however I do not think he is the best option at left back for us, right now.All I am saying is sometimes you have to look beyond the next game. It would be logical to play a young player with potential to get better than Drury, if we owned the player. However, we do not, and it makes sense to give Drury the number 3 shirt.Having played 1-4 games in a row (I didn''t know there was a specific number of games it takes to get match fit after a long term injury then half a season playing very little football, but perhaps you can enlighten us) I think we would have a happy, match fit, solid left back who can do a good job for us for the next three seasons or more. If Drury contines to be left out, he may want to leave, and a year of not playing is certainly not going to help his long term fitness, either way left back isn''t a problem for us now, but with such short term thinking it''ll be another crisis position in the summer. In my opinion Drury should play, and Bertrand should cover if we have injuries to either left back or left midfield. Some of the coments Roeder has made about Bertrand make it very clear he is a favourite, as do his decisions. Roeder is paid to make said decisions, and fair play, maybe Bertrand will suddenly play amazingly and save our season, having been given time to establish himself. Who knows? I can only say things as I see them, but I cannot understand your logic. If a player is out for a season injured, surely the only way to get them back to their best is to give them a run of games. Drury hasn''t retired, players recover from injuries, start playing football again. Perhaps they are a bit sluggish at first but after a few games they settle into their stride, and prosper.

[ZLF 271]

Whether I am a fool or not is not the debate here,  Drury playing instead Bertrand was unlikely to change the result; by implication you blaming roeder by stating that playing Drury would have made a difference;  becuase you dont change a team that has done that in the previous game;   Not taking into account that chartlton and city were both poor and Palace are far better.

If as  amanager you have a clear best team why would you play a weaker one by keeping in you second choice player?

 

[CNS-Canary 0]

In my opinion Drury < Bertrand ..

I am aware that bertrand is off form, however at the end of the day, Roeder is building for the future. Therefore i agree with Roeders choice. How old is Drury 30 old. Whereas bertrand is young, and keen for the game. He has a future in football, a bright one, and has a good chance of signing for us.

This season is OVER. Face it. Time to build.

 

ROEDER IN.

In Glen we trust.