Hoolahan - Good or bad?

[Canary 0]

Now im one of Hoolahan''s greatest fans, but is it so bad that he''s out for the rest of the season?

For example, if he had not been injured, would lappin have been able to play brilliantly against birmingham?

And i think Hoolahan is a player who can only play at home, away we need a more solid, defence player who will track back.

Next season i think he will be vital, but in a situation like this one, i would prefer Lappin.

 

Comments???

[city-till-i-die 7]

i do like hooloohoop when he is up for it...but he frustrates me so much...does some lovely work then holds on to the ball that little bit to long...under roedant i wasnt a fan but he seems to have a noew lease of life...he will be missed but if lappin steps up then we have no probs...nice to see players having to fight for their place...makes them all play that little bit better/harder [Y]

[city-till-i-die 7]

i do like hooloohoop when he is up for it...but he frustrates me so much...does some lovely work then holds on to the ball that little bit to long...under roedant i wasnt a fan but he seems to have a noew lease of life...he will be missed but if lappin steps up then we have no probs...nice to see players having to fight for their place...makes them all play that little bit better/harder [Y]

[city-till-i-die 7]

opps soz [:D]

[BarclayA 0]

Good.Thread Closed.

[|BA 0]

luckily the board have seen fit to provide Gun with enough players to cover for Hula, look forward to his return next season[;)]

[Canary02 III 0]

Lappin played centre midfield replacing Rusty. Wes was replaced by Carney, although he too is much more defensively minded than Wes.

I don''t buy all this "Hoolahan can''t defend so we can''t play him away". It''s another variation on the old Huckerby debate, or Roeder''s "You can''t play with two wingers, especially away from home". It''s Rhubarb. Another reason we became a negative, scared team for so long.

Man United never have a problem fitting in Giggs and Ronaldo if they want to, and regardless of the ability of the players the reasoning is the same. The fact is that Alex Ferguson is tactically astute enough to be able to play a team with two attacking wingers and not create a cripplingly undermined defence, and the players he has are technically drilled to be able to play with two wingers without looking like a bag of fertilizer.

The last two managers have been technically and tactically deficient, and have created this negative mindset amongst players and fans, and we need to be big enough and confident enough to rise above it. We''re better than this mentality.

(Apologies if it seems like I''m having a pop at you Aza, because that''s not my intention. I know your point is a fair one and one shared by a lot of people. I just heartily disagree, and for me it''s symbolic of how our confidence and our ability to be winners has been eroded by negaive managers who have lowered our standards to match their own inadequacies.) [:@]

[Robert Ketts Yellow Army 35]

 

he''s had some good games but he''s a bit of a lightweight

[Canary 0]

its fine canary02 your point is a very good one aswell. point taken.

[Gingerpele 0]

Right im going to say this, i might get blasted, but i think Hoolahan is a better player than Huckerby.......I like Huckerby more, and i think he has done more for Norwich than Hoolahan could in 10 seasons here, but Hoolahan, isnt just a simple, run towards goal, look for a cross ot shoot kind of player, he is really intelligent, and i think he shows that, the main problem he has is his strength, and obviously, when he stays still for a couple of seconds, looking for a pass, he will get shoved off the ball, he does misplace passes a bit as well, but i think he is a wonderful player, the best thing Roeder did for Norwich was Buy Hoolahan, i didnt want to mention that mans name again, and have ignored all threads about him, but that was one thing i would thank him for,

[|BA 0]

[quote user="K1CK 1T 0FF"]its fine canary02 your point is a very good one aswell. point taken.[/quote]Not so sure. Huckerby was the biggest problem in this respect and Roeder had the balls to recognise that fact.However he failed to cure the problem even though he''s diagnosed it correctly. he also stated early on that we were too small. He failed to address this rather obvious point also.

[The Voice of the Thorpe Area 0]

[quote user="Ginger Pele"]Right im going to say this, i might get blasted, but i think Hoolahan is a better player than Huckerby.......
I like Huckerby more, and i think he has done more for Norwich than Hoolahan could in 10 seasons here, but Hoolahan, isnt just a simple, run towards goal, look for a cross ot shoot kind of player, he is really intelligent, and i think he shows that, the main problem he has is his strength, and obviously, when he stays still for a couple of seconds, looking for a pass, he will get shoved off the ball, he does misplace passes a bit as well, but i think he is a wonderful player, the best thing Roeder did for Norwich was Buy Hoolahan, i didnt want to mention that mans name again, and have ignored all threads about him, but that was one thing i would thank him for,
[/quote]

Better than Huckerby? Pele- were you in a coma for 3 years whilst he was here?!

[Gingerpele 0]

well obviously what he will do at Norwich isnt better, but as a technical footballer, he is, have you read all that i wrote, it explains why i think, and i PREFER HUCKERBY

[Gingerpele 0]

ALL IGNORE MY FIRST POST HUCKERBY IS GOD

[Jimbo_Jet_Set 0]

Hoolahan is a tremendous little player and I sincerely hope we will be able to keep him here for a few seasons to come.  Yes he is a bit lightweight and he needs to learn to shoot more and not attempt to walk the ball in to the net every time. However, he is probably the only true flair player we have and has the ability to do something out of the ordinary during a game-something this squad needs (you don''t want a team entirely of Dohertys)

[Matt Morriss 69]

Without doubt good. Hoolahan is a cracking player when on song but in the position were in he''s a luxury, especially at left wing. I much prefer a more solid midfield 4 where the left winger plays on the left only and doesnt wander, making us more solid. This is more important away from home.

[Gingerpele 0]

How many Decent teams play like that, look at the top 5,  liverpool probley have the best proper wingers, in Riera, and before the let him out on loan Pennant, a lot of good wingers (two of teh best players in the world Messi, and Ronaldo are wingers) dont saty on the wing, who would you rather pass the ball to if you had it, Hoolahan, who could do anything, or Croft who will run past 2/3 players and cross the ball to an empty space or the kepper??

[Binky 0]

Hoolahan or Lappin? I rate both players very highly - along with Clingan, Gow, Shackell and

Bertrand they are probably our best "natural" footballers. But Hoolahan

or Lappin are quite different players and not mutually exclusive - and

neither are true wingers. I prefer to see Hoolahan playing just behind

the forwards - but just as he did well on the left and linking with Gow

v Cardiff, am sure he could play with Lappin and Gow in the midfield.

It could be for Russell and maybe even Croft to keep the subs bench warm

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Canary02 III"]

I don''t buy all this "Hoolahan can''t defend so we can''t play him away". It''s another variation on the old Huckerby debate, or Roeder''s "You can''t play with two wingers, especially away from home". It''s Rhubarb. Another reason we became a negative, scared team for so long.

Man United never have a problem fitting in Giggs and Ronaldo if they want to, and regardless of the ability of the players the reasoning is the same. The fact is that Alex Ferguson is tactically astute enough to be able to play a team with two attacking wingers and not create a cripplingly undermined defence, and the players he has are technically drilled to be able to play with two wingers without looking like a bag of fertilizer.

[/quote]

Well said.

I''ve said before it''s a load of tosh about not being able to play with two wingers. If you''re strong enough across the pitch and well organised then it won''t make a difference. Unfortunately some people used Hucks as a scapegoat.

I''d have loved to have seen Hucks and Hoolahan combining. Especially with Croft and Semmy on the right side. We could have torn teams to shreds in this league if we''d had attacking players like that backed up with strong players and discipline in other areas.

As for Hoolahan in particular, he''s a brilliant footballer. If he was a bit bigger or had just half a yard more pace he''d be playing in the Premier League. Ability wise he''s good enough for that level.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Canary02 III"]

Man United never have a problem fitting in Giggs and Ronaldo if they want to, and regardless of the ability of the players the reasoning is the same. The fact is that Alex Ferguson is tactically astute enough to be able to play a team with two attacking wingers and not create a cripplingly undermined defence, and the players he has are technically drilled to be able to play with two wingers without looking like a bag of fertilizer.

[/quote]

Ryan Giggs hasn''t played as an out and out left winger for about five years now. I wouldn''t describe Ronaldo as a winger either although he often starts the game wide on the right.

[JJ 0]

Hoolahan is very fustrating sometimes the way he is constantly failing and falling over constantly. That free kick that he took at home (forget which match) was awfull. But he has certain sparks of brilliance that i love. He is never going to be a consistant player but for those great games that he has i think its worth it to keep him in the first team. [:)] Thats why i would chose Hoolahan over Lappin.

[Syteanric 1]

not as good as people seem to think he is but not a bad player either... he should however be told in training that he can only use his right foot! he''d then improve it enough for matches.

jas :)

[Lambo 0]

Hoolahan is an incredibly talented player, he''s clever, skillful and the one thing that''s really warmed to him is he shows for the ball when others don''t.

I remember the home game against Palace this season and the first half while Hoolahan was on the bench none of the team really wanted the ball then Wes came on and covered every blade of grass wanting the ball and trying to make things happen and we were a much better side for it.

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Bad. He''s a good little player and the more options we have in the squad the better.

[Wembley_Canary 0]

[quote user="Ginger Pele"]Right im going to say this, i might get blasted, but i think Hoolahan is a better player than Huckerby.......
I like Huckerby more, and i think he has done more for Norwich than Hoolahan could in 10 seasons here, but Hoolahan, isnt just a simple, run towards goal, look for a cross ot shoot kind of player, he is really intelligent, and i think he shows that, the main problem he has is his strength, and obviously, when he stays still for a couple of seconds, looking for a pass, he will get shoved off the ball, he does misplace passes a bit as well, but i think he is a wonderful player, the best thing Roeder did for Norwich was Buy Hoolahan, i didnt want to mention that mans name again, and have ignored all threads about him, but that was one thing i would thank him for,
[/quote]

Hoolahan hasn''t got anything on Huckerby, Huckerby is technically and physically a much better player, not knocking Hoolahan but he never was going to be the Huckerby replacement we all hoped he would be.On his day Hoolahan can look a class apart from the rest of the team, trouble is those performances are few and far between, Lappin will give you more consistancy, so i''m not too worried about Hoolahan being left out of the team.

[Lambo 0]

Hoolahan and Huckbery have different ways of playing, Huckerby is much more direct and pacey wheras Hoolahan is more skillful and thinks about things more.

Can''t really compare them as players IMO.

[Wembley_Canary 0]

[quote user="Lambo"]

Hoolahan and Huckbery have different ways of playing, Huckerby is much more direct and pacey wheras Hoolahan is more skillful and thinks about things more.

Can''t really compare them as players IMO.

[/quote]

I agree but if given the choice I would pick Hucks ahead of Hoolahan purely because he is more of an attacking threat.

[Lambo 0]

I wouldn''t say no to seeing Hoolahan on the wing with Hucks as an out n out striker would need CB''s like Rio and Terry with a Makele playing infront of them to get away with that though haha.

[Gingerpele 0]

Hoolahan is too intelligent for the rest of the team, know one moves about, its also not his fault he is small is it, obviously he could go and work out in the gym every day of the summer, and get stronger, but will still be bullied, he needs to have a proper role in the team as well, is he the winger, and going to do a croft job, or be more like a Hux, and go in more than out, or be a AM, and roam across the pitch, and do as he pleases???

[grantroederdisaster 0]

70% good - Is our No1 spark that can make things happen. I feel that Hoolahan would be more effective with a higher level of player who had the speed and speed of thought to read what Hoolahan was planning to do!

 

30% bad - Not enough end product, teribly one footed, Holds onto to the ball to long, not direct enough and should learn to put his boot through the ball when defending!