Stop Holt and you Stop Norwich

[Syteanric 1]

thats the long and the short of it after yesterday... Holt is a decent player who will hodl the ball up front and try and create openings but our midfield is simply not creative and we are not playing with Wingers to get up and support.

Walsalls Tactic was to defend tight, and high and cut off the supply line to olt.. when Holt did have it he had no room to manouver or create a pass or shot. We were missing a creative Midfielder, Smith wasn''t in the game much and Hughes passing was sloppy..

and im sorry to say it but for me Askou and Nelson look like an accident waiting to happen! askou tries to head EVERYTHING , even at waist and knee height and nelso was caught out of position yesterday as well as missing tackles he perhaps should of made. this puts more pressure on the defence and keeper in general and better teams (MK dons for example) will make us pay for that.

 

jas :)

[Excited Canary 19]

Totally agree with the title and most of the thread.

[chicken 0]

I agree with most of that appart from that we don''t rely on Holt to much, we rely on teams giving us the space to play full stop. The reason for that is that without a pacey player to threaten in behind the oppo back four they can hold a reletively high line and stifle midfield and stop teams playing.Askou seems to play better alongside Spillane for me, he tends to do as is advised and Spillane seems to be the only centre back that wants to pass it out from the back.

[barclay seats 4849 0]

[quote user="chicken"]I agree with most of that appart from that we don''t rely on Holt to much, we rely on teams giving us the space to play full stop. The reason for that is that without a pacey player to threaten in behind the oppo back four they can hold a reletively high line and stifle midfield and stop teams playing.

Askou seems to play better alongside Spillane for me, he tends to do as is advised and Spillane seems to be the only centre back that wants to pass it out from the back.
[/quote]

I agree with you chicken..................Spillane would be a far better starting option............and i think that chris martin is worth a few games also....this done ......we still have a small problem in mid field, a good Russell would probably make the difference, along side Hughes. Only my opinion !

[GJP 79]

[quote user="chicken"] Spillane seems to be the only centre back that wants to pass it out from the back.
[/quote]

He might want to pass it out from the back but general his use of the ball and passing is pretty sloppy. He gives it away cheaply even when he''s not under pressure.

The weakest central defender in the senior squad, in my opinion.

[Barclay Kid 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

[quote user="chicken"] Spillane seems to be the only centre back that wants to pass it out from the back.
[/quote]

He might want to pass it out from the back but general his use of the ball and passing is pretty sloppy. He gives it away cheaply even when he''s not under pressure.

The weakest central defender in the senior squad, in my opinion.

[/quote]

You Must Have Forgotton Doc! [;)]

[ChelmsfordCanary 0]

Dont play a flat 4 4 2 and play a midfielder behind holt and cody, do we have that creative midfielder? That would help the supply to holt?

[B-ru 0]

um... yes! Hoolahoop!!

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="ChelmsfordCanary"]Dont play a flat 4 4 2 and play a midfielder behind holt and cody, do we have that creative midfielder? That would help the supply to holt?[/quote]

Hoolahan is described on the Official Web Site as a "creative midfielder".[:D]

Also he is sponsored by Cheese Truckle who''ll probably be wanting their money back soon.

[Snoots 0]

Gunn''s team against Yeovil included both Hoolahan and Cody MacDonald from the start as well as Spillane and Adeyemi. The attacking football from Norwich in the 2nd half was easily the best we have seen for some time with Cody coming close to getting a brace and Whaley''s excellent cross setting up Holt''s first goal. I don''t think anybody can argue that Hoolahan is clearly the most creative player we have and it was ridiculous not to have had him available on Saturday. Saturday''s dour game against Walsall was a prime example of the need for a genuine impact sub coming on for the last 20 minutes to break the deadlock. Hoolahan would have performed that role and, dare I say it, if he was a Norwich player there would be none better than a certain Mr Huckerby.

I can only believe that Hoolahan is already earmarked to go out on loan so the club don''t want to run the risk of him being injured. If that assessment is wrong then Lambert is an even worse coach/tactician and man manager than I already have him down for.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Bob Franklin"]

Gunn''s team against Yeovil included both Hoolahan and Cody MacDonald from the start as well as Spillane and Adeyemi. The attacking football from Norwich in the 2nd half was easily the best we have seen for some time with Cody coming close to getting a brace and Whaley''s excellent cross setting up Holt''s first goal. I don''t think anybody can argue that Hoolahan is clearly the most creative player we have and it was ridiculous not to have had him available on Saturday. Saturday''s dour game against Walsall was a prime example of the need for a genuine impact sub coming on for the last 20 minutes to break the deadlock. Hoolahan would have performed that role and, dare I say it, if he was a Norwich player there would be none better than a certain Mr Huckerby.

I can only believe that Hoolahan is already earmarked to go out on loan so the club don''t want to run the risk of him being injured. If that assessment is wrong then Lambert is an even worse coach/tactician and man manager than I already have him down for.

[/quote]

 

And still you bang on about poor old Gunny. What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

Hughes offers much more as an all round playmaker than Hoolahan, but until you get your blinkers off and stop trying to find fault with Lambert every five minutes you''re never going to see that.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[Lambo 0]

Hughes is the difference maker for us IMO, Grolt''s only going to be as good as the service he gets, with the midfield geting by-passed Saturday and long balls being aimed at Holt against that monster CB he was never going to do too much.

If we get Hughes, WLY and Lappin on the ball more we''ll do alright against most sides.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[nutty nigel 7,512]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[/quote]

To this day I can''t work out why that was. It could be that Hughes was still getting fit but then if he was fit enough for 40 mins against Yeovil he would have been fit enough to play at least a decent part in the following two games.

As for the thread topic it could be that if you stop Hughes you stop Norwich. The defensive part of his game was still good on Saturday. He was protecting the back four and winning tackles. Maybe Walsall stopped him playing which tempted us to "launch it".

To be fair it''s not the "launching it" that really upset me... it was the fact that we were so useless at it!

 

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="Bob Franklin"]

Gunn''s team against Yeovil included both Hoolahan and Cody MacDonald from the start as well as Spillane and Adeyemi. The attacking football from Norwich in the 2nd half was easily the best we have seen for some time with Cody coming close to getting a brace and Whaley''s excellent cross setting up Holt''s first goal. I don''t think anybody can argue that Hoolahan is clearly the most creative player we have and it was ridiculous not to have had him available on Saturday. Saturday''s dour game against Walsall was a prime example of the need for a genuine impact sub coming on for the last 20 minutes to break the deadlock. Hoolahan would have performed that role and, dare I say it, if he was a Norwich player there would be none better than a certain Mr Huckerby.

I can only believe that Hoolahan is already earmarked to go out on loan so the club don''t want to run the risk of him being injured. If that assessment is wrong then Lambert is an even worse coach/tactician and man manager than I already have him down for.

[/quote]

 

And still you bang on about poor old Gunny. What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

Hughes offers much more as an all round playmaker than Hoolahan, but until you get your blinkers off and stop trying to find fault with Lambert every five minutes you''re never going to see that.

[/quote]

"Poor old Gunny" is your expression , not mine. Yes, Hughes did make a difference when he came on and I applauded the substitution at the time and the fact, of course, that it was Gunn who persuaded Hughes to join Norwich in the summer. I''m pleased that you agree that Hughes was an excellent acquisition by Gunn. I have referred to Gunn''s generally very good summer "player trading" in other threads particularly mentioning Hughes as well as Holt and others. Anyway, the thread was focusing upon Hoolahan hence my response specifically on that player and, like I said, if there is no question of Hoolahan being protected because of an imminent loan agreement then even the most blinkered of anti Gunn posters on here has to concede that Lambert''s decision to exclude our most creative player is at best highly questionable.

As for the first half at Yeovil, yes, understandably perhaps, it wasn''t the best. However, they went into the dressing room at half time with a clean sheet and that, coupled to self-evidently a positive and motivational teamtalk from Gunn, resulted in the Norwich players coming out and playing a second half of fast, exciting  attacking football which could have netted more than 4 goals and MacDonald, playing from the start of course, was exceptionally unlucky not to get onto the scoresheet.

What you conveniently fail to mention is that we were poor for the whole match at home against lowly Walsall and, not only that, Lambert''s team selection was dubious and his "tactics" , sorry, "tactic" depressing. What was also worrying was the fact that the players looked poor and unmotivated to a man even though they were playing in front of a home crowd of 23K plus and there was the incentive of a third consecutive league win at stake.

We have some genuinely tough matches coming up with MK Dons away and Charlton at home and I will be interested to see what tactics our latest manager deploys. I think we will all be a in a better position to judge the impact of Lambert on our fortunes after the Bristol Rovers game at home on 3rd October. I hope that we will all, including me, be congratulating Mr McNally on an excellent choice of replacement for Gunn. We shall see.

By the way, what did you mean by your comment "The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure." ? The "bald maestro" as you so unnecessarily unpleasantly put it didn''t get the chance did he ... or maybe I am missing something here. More to the point, Lambert hasn''t used the second half midfield combination used at Yeovil, has he ?! Perhaps you are blinkered by your extreme dislike of Gunn ?

[Lambo 0]

"What you conveniently fail to mention is that we were poor for the whole match at home against lowly Walsall and, not only that, Lambert''s team selection was dubious and his "tactics" , sorry, "tactic" depressing. What was also worrying was the fact that the players looked poor and unmotivated to a man even though they were playing in front of a home crowd of 23K plus and there was the incentive of a third consecutive league win at stake."

How can you seriously slate Lambert and praise Gunn after Gunn''s side spectacularly failed to show up in so many games infron of bigger crowds with Championship survival as the incentive??

Or the fact they were drubbed 7-1 to a sold out Carrow Road with the best atmosphere going into the game there''d been for a while.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[/quote]

so it was nothing to do with the fact that Gunn was sacked straight after Yeovil and didnt have the chance to use that midfield again... ok then...

jas :)

[nutty nigel 7,512]

I''m not sure Jas.. I was under the impression Gunny had already picked the team for Exeter and they went with it. He can''t be blamed for not using him as a sub though.

 

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Bob Franklin"]

By the way, what did you mean by your comment "The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure." ? The "bald maestro" as you so unnecessarily unpleasantly put it didn''t get the chance did he ... or maybe I am missing something here. More to the point, Lambert hasn''t used the second half midfield combination used at Yeovil, has he ?! Perhaps you are blinkered by your extreme dislike of Gunn ?

[/quote]

 

Fair cop, I should have said Team Gunn and I''m sorry you see my phraseology as offensive, it was intended to be tongue in cheek. I have no issue with Bryan Gunn personally, just his management.

As for Lambert, I would argue that by dropping Whaley and reintroducing WLY he has improved the right side, whereas by introducing Lappin for Hoolahan he has given us balance on the left and made us less vulnerable to counter attacks. I still haven''t formed an opinion on whether he is the man to lead us to better things, but no-one can argue that we now look considerably less fragile. While highlighting the dire performance against Walsall might seem to bolster your argument, the football played against Wycombe only serves to undermine it.

I suppose that, at the end of the day, we all see different things, but that''s surely part of the joy of football, isn''t it?

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[/quote]

so it was nothing to do with the fact that Gunn was sacked straight after Yeovil and didnt have the chance to use that midfield again... ok then...

jas :)

[/quote]

Are you suggesting that Butterworth''s teams at Exeter and Brentford were a radical departure from Gunn''s strategy? They certainly weren''t picked by Lambert, were they? For Gunn read Team Gunn.

[ref89 0]

In our two previous games we won and played good attacking football, albeit league one football (which is the league we are in in case anyone forgets).We had a draw against Walsall.  Still a point and we had an off day.  Walsall cancelled us out and steadied their ship.  To use one poor match to ask some of the questions being asked here seems a bit mental TBH.

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="ref89"]In our two previous games we won and played good attacking football, albeit league one football (which is the league we are in in case anyone forgets).

We had a draw against Walsall.  Still a point and we had an off day.  Walsall cancelled us out and steadied their ship.  To use one poor match to ask some of the questions being asked here seems a bit mental TBH.
[/quote]

 

I seem to recall that after a summer of taking stock, moving some players out and bringing players in (12 ?), a successful pre-season, Gunn had one poor match and then got sacked, no questions asked ! Sure the poor match was a 7-1 home drubbing by Colchester but we still only lost 3 points and only days later Gunn''s team put 4 past Yeovil on their own ground. The weekend that followed Gunn''s sacking saw Everton thrashed 6-1 at home but no hysterical there and days later Everton beat Olomouc 4-0 in the UEFA cup.

So, the knee jerk panic reaction as a result of just one match was indeed mental. I''m not calling for Lambert to be sacked after one poor match, far from it in fact. However, I am trying to counter balance the ridiculous euphoria that has followed Lambert''s appointment, a euphoria that seems to be in direct measure to the equally ridiculous and unwarrented contempt that was and is still being shown to Gunn on here.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Bob Franklin"]

[quote user="ref89"]In our two previous games we won and played good attacking football, albeit league one football (which is the league we are in in case anyone forgets).

We had a draw against Walsall.  Still a point and we had an off day.  Walsall cancelled us out and steadied their ship.  To use one poor match to ask some of the questions being asked here seems a bit mental TBH.
[/quote]

 

I seem to recall that after a summer of taking stock, moving some players out and bringing players in (12 ?), a successful pre-season, Gunn had one poor match and then got sacked, no questions asked ! Sure the poor match was a 7-1 home drubbing by Colchester but we still only lost 3 points and only days later Gunn''s team put 4 past Yeovil on their own ground. The weekend that followed Gunn''s sacking saw Everton thrashed 6-1 at home but no hysterical there and days later Everton beat Olomouc 4-0 in the UEFA cup.

So, the knee jerk panic reaction as a result of just one match was indeed mental. I''m not calling for Lambert to be sacked after one poor match, far from it in fact. However, I am trying to counter balance the ridiculous euphoria that has followed Lambert''s appointment, a euphoria that seems to be in direct measure to the equally ridiculous and unwarrented contempt that was and is still being shown to Gunn on here.

[/quote] 

I''m sorry but that is pure sophistry. Gunn was appointed with plenty of games left last season and oversaw a steady slide to relegation. There are no points for pre season games and no-one would suggest that pre season is played in the same way as League games. Yes, he brought players in, but the jury is still out on most of them (Nelson, Whaley, Gill,OTJ) and poor old Theo has already been hung, drawn and quartered. Only Hughes and Holt can be considered unqualified successes so far.

The "one match" was one of the most shambolic performances that most of us have ever seen, against an average Colchester side. As for the Yeovil game, it could easily have gone the other way in the first half, although that''s all academic now.

Gunn was given every chance to succeed, but failed. It''s a shame, but he had to go. Whether Lmabert will improve things only time will tell.

[Lambo 0]

Bob,

Please don''t tell me you''ve tried to compare David Moyes to Bryan Gunn???

David Moyes was the last manager from a club not Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea or Man U to break the top 4. He was the man Wayne Rooney made a name for himself under and he''s been consistantly guiding Everton to 5th placed finishes and pushing for a Champions League spot whilst working on a small budget compared to the teams around him.

Bryan Gunn steadily took us into the relegation soon, got us relegated then gave us our worst ever home defeat.

There''s absoloutly no comparison between them.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[/quote]

so it was nothing to do with the fact that Gunn was sacked straight after Yeovil and didnt have the chance to use that midfield again... ok then...

jas :)

[/quote]

Are you suggesting that Butterworth''s teams at Exeter and Brentford were a radical departure from Gunn''s strategy? They certainly weren''t picked by Lambert, were they? For Gunn read Team Gunn.

[/quote]

thats a complete backtrack to what you said. you tried blaming Gunny.. and it wasn''t "team Gunn" Butterworth was his own man with his own thoughts on how the game should be played....

jas :)

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

 

 What you conveneintly fail to mention is that we were poor in the first half at Yeovil, but the game changed when Hughes came on. The bald maestro then failed to use the second half midfield combination again in his tenure.

 

[/quote]

why do you think that was?

 

[/quote]

 

Because Gunn was totally clueless as a manager and Butterworth was no better, if you want my honest opinion.

[/quote]

so it was nothing to do with the fact that Gunn was sacked straight after Yeovil and didnt have the chance to use that midfield again... ok then...

jas :)[/quote]

Are you suggesting that Butterworth''s teams at Exeter and Brentford were a radical departure from Gunn''s strategy? They certainly weren''t picked by Lambert, were they? For Gunn read Team Gunn.

[/quote]

thats a complete backtrack to what you said. you tried blaming Gunny.. and it wasn''t "team Gunn" Butterworth was his own man with his own thoughts on how the game should be played....

jas :)

[/quote]

It''s a backtrack in the sense that my original statement was incorrect. Yes, Gunn was sacked before Exeter, but yes, I do blame him for the shambolic start for the season and the wasting of our very limited funds on the likes of Theoklitos, Whaley and Gill. Maric also looks like a complete punt which seems doomed to failure.

I also blame him for the complacency that was allowed to set in after a leisurely preseason against very poor Scottish opposition, Man U youth and a disinterested Wigan side and his failure to take decisive action in the Colchester game when it was clear we were being taken apart. I also blame him for courting the job when every evidence last season was that he was totally out of his depth, but I blame the Board more for giving it to him.

As for Butterworth having a mind of his own, I assume that''s why he has made a career out of being a number two? Exeter and Brentford showed no development from Gunn''s "tactics" or selection policy and to my mind they simply represent an extension of his management.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]and it wasn''t "team Gunn" Butterworth was his own man with his own thoughts on how the game should be played....

jas :)

[/quote]

I find that hard to believe. Gunny had no manegerial or coaching experience before he took over. It''s entirely possible that he ran pretty much every decision past Butterworth so that the teams at Exeter and Brentford were pretty much an extension of Gunnys overall strategy.