Alienating Hoolahan

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

I also disagree that we lack a creative presence. I believe that Hughes is a high quality playmaker at this level, and will get his share of goals. Having said that we could have had Fabregas and  Xavi in the middle on Saturday with no difference to the outcome as the ball sailed backwards and forwards at altitude!

[/quote]

I should have probably said that we lack a creative presence in an advanced area. I agree that Hughes is capable of being our playmaker but get the impression that prefers to play a little deeper, much like Clingan did for us last season. We need someone who can work in those little areas between the oppositions defence and midfield and try and break their shape. Maybe drag a defender out and leave a space behind for an attack minded midfielder to exploit? Although as you rightly say all the creative influence in the world won''t make a difference if we play like we did on Saturday [:D]

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Yes he does play deeper Shack. I like him better than Clingan. I agree we need a player that makes things happen in advanced areas. We do have one in McVeigh. I don''t think we could play Hoolahan and  McVeigh and to be fair to Mr Carrows point of view McVeigh has done it at a much higher level than Hoolahan.

 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

And we do have one in McVeigh!

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Beauseant"]

I also disagree that we lack a creative presence. I believe that Hughes is a high quality playmaker at this level, and will get his share of goals. Having said that we could have had Fabregas and  Xavi in the middle on Saturday with no difference to the outcome as the ball sailed backwards and forwards at altitude!

[/quote]

I should have probably said that we lack a creative presence in an advanced area. I agree that Hughes is capable of being our playmaker but get the impression that prefers to play a little deeper, much like Clingan did for us last season. We need someone who can work in those little areas between the oppositions defence and midfield and try and break their shape. Maybe drag a defender out and leave a space behind for an attack minded midfielder to exploit? Although as you rightly say all the creative influence in the world won''t make a difference if we play like we did on Saturday [:D]

[/quote]

I think the thing that Hughes gives us which Sammy didn''t was the ability to make timed runs into the box beyond the strikers. The goal at Hartlepool was a perfect example, and he could have had a carbon copy second half on Saturday had Holt''s pass not clipped Curo''s heel. However, I agree that he prefers to come from deep and that we need something different higher up the pitch.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

I think what this thread shows is that many fans can become convinced a player is vital because he has some pretty tricks despite the facts showing there is little end product.

[/quote]

It depends what you determine as ''facts'' though doesn''t it? If you''re one of those posters who thinks that a players ability can be determined by a few numbers on Wikipedia* then I can understand why you don''t rate the guy. But there''s so much more to a game of football than bare statistics.

In the very few games last season where we actually looked half decent (around the time of Ipswich home game) Hoolahan was given a free role behind Lita in a sort of loose 4-2-3-1 formation. Bell and Croft were alongside him and Pattison and Clingan played slightly deeper. The Ipswich game was the highlight where we played some of the best football I''ve seen at Carrow Road in years. I can''t remember why Roeder changed the team from that point to be honest but that was as good as it got last season and Hoolahan was heavily involved.

* In fact if you look on Wikipedia it gives you a handy link to this page http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/6582201.stm . Does the ''fact'' that Wes Hoolahan is proven to be one of the best players at this level trump his goal and assist stats whilst playing mainly out of position for us? I don''t know to be honest but it makes you wonder why we can''t get the best out of a player who was previously voted one of the best in the division, doesn''t it [:^)]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Interesting that you should mention goal/assist stats in the same paragraph as Bell- do a quick comparison between his and Hoolahans stats against minutes on the pitch.  Who do you think we`d have been better off keeping?

[/quote]

I was one of the very few posters who argued that we should keep David Bell. Yet I was met with a tide of ignorance in the form of "doesn''t get stuck in/too one footed/doesn''t want to be here/no pace". Sound familiar?

[quote user="Smudger"]

Name just one fact that says Hoolahan deserves a place in the squad.

4 assists and 2 goals in 31 games so I believe?

If that pleases you from the supposed most creative player in the team then it is not hard to see why any team you have a say in managing will struggle.  Add to that we all know that he gives the ball away very cheaply and it really is a no brainer to see why he is struggling to get a chance under a decent manager.

[/quote]

When I finally get my big chance at managing a League One side you can pore over my stats on Wikipedia and slag off my win ratio[:|] I''d wager my team will be a damn sight more attractive to watch than yours though [:D]

In your earlier reply to Cam you stated that "maybe Leeds have a bigger squad that may bring the best out of Hoolahan". So you obviously think that in the right set up he can be a decent player (and his performances at Blackpool the year they got promoted would seem to back this up). How big do you think Blackpool''s squad was that year and did they have anyone as good as Jermaine Beckford up front? What did the mighty Blackpool have that we don''t but Leeds do?

[/quote]

I would wager that my team at whatever level they were playing at would win far more games than yours Shack and we all know that football is a results driven business.... [:P]

As for my comments to Cam, the word MAYBE kind of inclinates that I feel Cam MAY have a point when playing him alongside Beckford and Becchio.... The reason I chose to use the word MAYBE hints towards my opinion is that I do that see him being a great success at Leeds either if this move is indeed on the cards for Wes.  Who knows though, Grayson previously got the best out of him at Blackpool, even at his best though I still feel that Hoolahan would be lacking something to play in any team I would manage.  Good players do not give the ball away cheaply and this will always be a big reason why a shrewd manager would leave him out of their plans... he is a player you would bring on from the bench to see if you can grab something from a game you have already lost and nothing else in my opinion until he can learn to retain possesion.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

To be fair Shack i think it`s a well-balanced argument and i share your frustration that we haven`t got the best out of a decent player.  But on performances for previous clubs Cureton and Russell should be two of our top players....Surely we have to go on whether a player is/has performed for us and Hoolihan hardly ever has- as his stats bear out.  We then drop him, win three games and draw one and everyone`s up in arms!

Personally i think this is more about "value for money" in terms of wages and i wouldn`t be surprised if Lambert thinks he can get three more effective players in on less money than Hooly and Doc combined.

[/quote]

Don''t buy this Mr Carrow. Cureton and Russell have never been anything better than mid-table Championship players. It''s not surprising then to see them relegated as the league standard improved. Worthington always recognoised the need to improve to even stand still as did Roeder. I don''t think Grant did which was why we had these players on long contracts.

 

 

[/quote]

Where as Hoolahan has never played at the dizzy heights of mid-table Championship????

Until he can retain possesion instead of giving it to the opposition cheaply he is never going to reach that grade either.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

To be fair Shack i think it`s a well-balanced argument and i share your frustration that we haven`t got the best out of a decent player.  But on performances for previous clubs Cureton and Russell should be two of our top players....Surely we have to go on whether a player is/has performed for us and Hoolihan hardly ever has- as his stats bear out.  We then drop him, win three games and draw one and everyone`s up in arms!

Personally i think this is more about "value for money" in terms of wages and i wouldn`t be surprised if Lambert thinks he can get three more effective players in on less money than Hooly and Doc combined.

[/quote]

Don''t buy this Mr Carrow. Cureton and Russell have never been anything better than mid-table Championship players. It''s not surprising then to see them relegated as the league standard improved. Worthington always recognoised the need to improve to even stand still as did Roeder. I don''t think Grant did which was why we had these players on long contracts.

 

 

[/quote]

Has Hoolihan ever been anything better than a mid-table Championship player?

[/quote]

No and that''s a good point. For what it''s worth, and this is only my opinion, Hoolahan and Doherty are the only players out of our big earners who are good enough to interest clubs who can afford their wages. So we are stuck with the rest. Clingan was another so he went, but only to another bottom half Championship team.

The reason we were relegated was because we didn''t have enough players good enough to stay in the division. It''s my fear that we are in the process of getting rid of anyone good enough to get out of this division.

 

[/quote]

Oh?  What are they both still doing here then Nutty???

It is clear that Lambert has no plans whatsoever for them. 

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

To be fair Shack i think it`s a well-balanced argument and i share your frustration that we haven`t got the best out of a decent player.  But on performances for previous clubs Cureton and Russell should be two of our top players....Surely we have to go on whether a player is/has performed for us and Hoolihan hardly ever has- as his stats bear out.

[/quote]

That''s a fair point but how many games has Hoolahan started in his favoured position of attacking midfielder/second striker? I can''t back it up with any ''facts'' but I really think that if we play him in a more central role behind the main striker we would start to see what he can offer the team. At the moment we''re playing Cureton as the second striker so what have we got to lose?

The only reason I think we should get rid of him is if it frees up the wages to get in a couple of players who are going to give us a genuine goalscoring threat (preferably a left or right winger with pace and a second striker with a bit of guile) and take the pressure off Grant Holt. This notion of two banks of four with a big man up front is all very well until you come up against a reasonably well organised side with a decent centre back who''s not intimidated by Holt such as Walsall on Saturday. Then we need a creative presence and at the moment we haven''t got one (although maybe we could consider McVeigh in a more central role [^o)]). Unfortunately as the transfer window is shut we''re probably going to be relying on a couple of Premiership kids on loan to fill the gaps and we haven''t exactly got a great record with them.

[/quote]

I seriously think that McVeigh should get the heads up in a role upfront or behind the strikers/strikers over Hoolahan.

Why is it that McVeigh can hang on to the ball, use it wisely, create goalscoring opportunities and track back to bail out the clueless Ostomebor when he is played constantly out of position?

McVeigh has done far more for NCFC than Wes Hoolahan will ever do, but I didn''t hear too many people spring to his defence for being played out of position when previous managers constantly played him out of position and treated him like crap.   Let us not forget that McVeigh''s favoured position is upfront or in a role behind the striker/strikers, yet for 90% of his time with us he has ben played either out wide on the left or right.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Well.. if it''s clear now it wasn''t clear until the end of August. Before then it was clear he had no plans for Russell or Nelson. In truth it''s all about as clear as mud. If it''s still clear in a month and nobody has shown any interest in taking them on loan then we will be paying a lot of money for two players who are only playing reserve games.

 

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="Smudger"]

I seriously think that McVeigh should get the heads up in a role upfront or behind the strikers/strikers over Hoolahan.

Why is it that McVeigh can hang on to the ball, use it wisely, create goalscoring opportunities and track back to bail out the clueless Ostomebor when he is played constantly out of position?

McVeigh has done far more for NCFC than Wes Hoolahan will ever do, but I didn''t hear too many people spring to his defence for being played out of position when previous managers constantly played him out of position and treated him like crap.   Let us not forget that McVeigh''s favoured position is upfront or in a role behind the striker/strikers, yet for 90% of his time with us he has ben played either out wide on the left or right.

[/quote]

McVeigh has performed at a much higher level both in his favoured position and when used out of position. McVeigh suffered when Hucks came. It was very difficult to accomodate them both in the same team wherever he was played. That''s why I believe it''s McVeigh or Hoolahan. At present I''d play McVeigh and play him more centrally and give Daley a run wide right. With Lappin on the left flank we have to have some pace on the right.

 

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

I would wager that my team at whatever level they were playing at would win far more games than yours Shack and we all know that football is a results driven business.... [:P]

[/quote]

That''s fine Smudge. You can be 1982 West Germany and I''ll be France. Nobody remembers your players (except for the ar$ehole in goal) and you still lost in the final. Or maybe I''ll be 1974 Holland. Obviously nobody remembers them as they never won anything and footbal is a resultszzzzzz [|-)][:|]

[quote user="Smudger"]

As for my comments to Cam, the word MAYBE kind of inclinates that I feel Cam MAY have a point when playing him alongside Beckford and Becchio.... The reason I chose to use the word MAYBE hints towards my opinion is that I do that see him being a great success at Leeds either if this move is indeed on the cards for Wes.  Who knows though, Grayson previously got the best out of him at Blackpool, even at his best though I still feel that Hoolahan would be lacking something to play in any team I would manage.  Good players do not give the ball away cheaply and this will always be a big reason why a shrewd manager would leave him out of their plans... he is a player you would bring on from the bench to see if you can grab something from a game you have already lost and nothing else in my opinion until he can learn to retain possesion.

[/quote]

Your point about him giving the ball away is a good one but it''s not something that exclusively applies to Hoolahan amongst our team. Players of his type will give the ball away on occasions and for me that''s even more of a reason to get him playing further up the pitch rather than stuck out on the left. I''d also agree with the point you made later that McVeigh deserves a run being played just off Holt. He was probably the best finisher at the club in his first spell here and it does seem a little bit of a waste to stick him out wide on the right.

I guess the thing that''s really been bugging me about Hoolahan is that as you say "Grayson previously got the best out of him at Blackpool". Why is it that we can''t get the best out of him? I''ve been banging on about the Ipswich game where his perfomance really impressed me but Beau made a very good point earlier that maybe he needs the whole team to be playing well before he really raises his game. In the situation we''re in I guess we can''t really afford to have a player who is so reliant on the rest of the team to set up a platform for him to perform.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Smudger"]

I seriously think that McVeigh should get the heads up in a role upfront or behind the strikers/strikers over Hoolahan.

Why is it that McVeigh can hang on to the ball, use it wisely, create goalscoring opportunities and track back to bail out the clueless Ostomebor when he is played constantly out of position?

McVeigh has done far more for NCFC than Wes Hoolahan will ever do, but I didn''t hear too many people spring to his defence for being played out of position when previous managers constantly played him out of position and treated him like crap.   Let us not forget that McVeigh''s favoured position is upfront or in a role behind the striker/strikers, yet for 90% of his time with us he has ben played either out wide on the left or right.

[/quote]

McVeigh has performed at a much higher level both in his favoured position and when used out of position. McVeigh suffered when Hucks came. It was very difficult to accomodate them both in the same team wherever he was played. That''s why I believe it''s McVeigh or Hoolahan. At present I''d play McVeigh and play him more centrally and give Daley a run wide right. With Lappin on the left flank we have to have some pace on the right.

 

[/quote]

I would leave McVeigh where he is and give Daley a run of games upfront (you could even interchange the two without making a substitution as play dictates).

Failing that if Russell or Adyemi can come up with the goods in centre midfield, put Korey Smith on the right and McVeigh upfront.

I like what I have seen of Daley playing upfront and think he has a lot to offer us there if Lambert can raise his confidence.  I don''t like what I have seen of Daley on the right and think that playing him out of position there could well destroy a very talented young players confidence.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Smudger"]

I would wager that my team at whatever level they were playing at would win far more games than yours Shack and we all know that football is a results driven business.... [:P]

[/quote]

That''s fine Smudge. You can be 1982 West Germany and I''ll be France. Nobody remembers your players (except for the ar$ehole in goal) and you still lost in the final. Or maybe I''ll be 1974 Holland. Obviously nobody remembers them as they never won anything and footbal is a resultszzzzzz [|-)][:|]

[quote user="Smudger"]

As for my comments to Cam, the word MAYBE kind of inclinates that I feel Cam MAY have a point when playing him alongside Beckford and Becchio.... The reason I chose to use the word MAYBE hints towards my opinion is that I do that see him being a great success at Leeds either if this move is indeed on the cards for Wes.  Who knows though, Grayson previously got the best out of him at Blackpool, even at his best though I still feel that Hoolahan would be lacking something to play in any team I would manage.  Good players do not give the ball away cheaply and this will always be a big reason why a shrewd manager would leave him out of their plans... he is a player you would bring on from the bench to see if you can grab something from a game you have already lost and nothing else in my opinion until he can learn to retain possesion.

[/quote]

Your point about him giving the ball away is a good one but it''s not something that exclusively applies to Hoolahan amongst our team. Players of his type will give the ball away on occasions and for me that''s even more of a reason to get him playing further up the pitch rather than stuck out on the left. I''d also agree with the point you made later that McVeigh deserves a run being played just off Holt. He was probably the best finisher at the club in his first spell here and it does seem a little bit of a waste to stick him out wide on the right.

I guess the thing that''s really been bugging me about Hoolahan is that as you say "Grayson previously got the best out of him at Blackpool". Why is it that we can''t get the best out of him? I''ve been banging on about the Ipswich game where his perfomance really impressed me but Beau made a very good point earlier that maybe he needs the whole team to be playing well before he really raises his game. In the situation we''re in I guess we can''t really afford to have a player who is so reliant on the rest of the team to set up a platform for him to perform.

[/quote]

I too think Beau was right... put Hoolahan in a successful team at this level and you may see him perform.  We can''t have players who fit that description here though as we are still 3 or 4 players from having a successful team at this level ourselves.  I also don''t think Hoolahan was awesome in his best ever season with Blackpool.  I would say that the season Blackpool won promotion Hoolahan delivered what you would expect of at least one of your wingers/attacking midfielders in a successful side.

As for the West Germany thing... Franz Beckenbaur, Gerd Muller, Karl Heinz Rummenigger, Pierre Litbaski.... just a couple of players from each of those German sides who were fantastic footballers.... of course those from the 70''s are remembered as Germany''s real greats because they were also winners.  Just as the French team with Zidane & Co will be remembered more than Platini & Co between 1982 and 1986...  [:P]

Joking aside wasn''t their a fantastic match between France and Brazil in the 86'' World Cup???

[Smudger 0]

Thought you may be interested in reading this review of that match Shack? 

http://www.sportingo.com/football/a8509_france-brazil-stonecold-world-cup-classic-sweltering-mexico-heat

I think that the reviewer was maybe getting a little carried away with the following quote though... "The day the two best footballing sides in the world served up a mouth-watering feast of football at the quarter-finals in Guadalajara"

Does he not remember the Maradonna inspired Argentina who won a classic final against Germany 3-2?

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

 

Joking aside wasn''t their a fantastic match between France and Brazil in the 86'' World Cup???

[/quote]

 

Quarter final which the French won on penalties, if I remember correctly. I think Platini missed one, as did Socrates. Great game!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="Smudger"]

 

Joking aside wasn''t their a fantastic match between France and Brazil in the 86'' World Cup???

[/quote]

 

Quarter final which the French won on penalties, if I remember correctly. I think Platini missed one, as did Socrates. Great game!

[/quote]

Yes and Zico missed one in normal time... I am trying to remember if he declined to take one in the shootout or scored one?

As you say great game... I think the BBC should show some of these classics in their entirity again, or at least very extended highlights of them.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

McVeigh has performed at a much higher level both in his favoured position and when used out of position. McVeigh suffered when Hucks came. It was very difficult to accomodate them both in the same team wherever he was played. That''s why I believe it''s McVeigh or Hoolahan. At present I''d play McVeigh and play him more centrally and give Daley a run wide right. With Lappin on the left flank we have to have some pace on the right.

 

[/quote]

I would leave McVeigh where he is and give Daley a run of games upfront (you could even interchange the two without making a substitution as play dictates).

Failing that if Russell or Adyemi can come up with the goods in centre midfield, put Korey Smith on the right and McVeigh upfront.

I like what I have seen of Daley playing upfront and think he has a lot to offer us there if Lambert can raise his confidence.  I don''t like what I have seen of Daley on the right and think that playing him out of position there could well destroy a very talented young players confidence.

[/quote]

Giving a player a run of games is the way to find out Smudge! But you don''t get many chances and the way a forward takes his chances is by scoring goals. Cureton is being given a run of games but hasn''t scored. In his favour is he is a proven goalscorer at this level but hasn''t yet proved he retains that ability. McVeigh is another proven goal scorer but hasn''t been given a chance up front for sometime. Martin is a proven goalscorer when he has played up top for us but hasn''t been given a chance there this season. Daley is a proven goal scorer at a much lower level, has been given one chance and failed to score. Of the four Daley is the one with real pace and would be my choice to be given a run of games too. But it would be understandable if all the other three were to ask Lambert how many more chances Cureton will be given.

 

[Smudger 0]

Yes I agree... the question is how many games do you give a player?

Cureton has had 3 so far and not looked like scoring in any of them, to be fair to him though he has hardly been gifted with numerous chances has he?  Question now is how many more games should Lambert give him?  What has been going in Jamies favour so far is that although he has not been scoring he has been playing in a winning team.  It will be interesting to see if Jamie is to fire another couple of blanks and we are not picking up 3 points what will happen to Jamie from there.  I think he is as aware of anybody what is on the line for him if he doesn''t start hitting the back of the net soon or we are not picking up 3 points.

If we are not picking up results then a striker is likely to be dropped if they are not scoring goals.  If a team is winning games then it can be difficult (or even foolish) to change that line up regardless of whether a striker is scoring or not.  The clock will begin to tick faster for Cureton if we are not winning matches.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Thought you may be interested in reading this review of that match Shack? 

http://www.sportingo.com/football/a8509_france-brazil-stonecold-world-cup-classic-sweltering-mexico-heat

I think that the reviewer was maybe getting a little carried away with the following quote though... "The day the two best footballing sides in the world served up a mouth-watering feast of football at the quarter-finals in Guadalajara"

Does he not remember the Maradonna inspired Argentina who won a classic final against Germany 3-2?

[/quote]

Cheers for that Smudge, brought back some great memories [:D]

The French and Brazilian teams from the early eighties were my first footballing loves. I loved Zico (who of course missed a penalty in that game in normal time) and cried my little eyes out when Italy knocked Brazil out in ''82. To be fair I was already a City fan and Brazil played in the same colours! My Dad and our next door neighbour were probably quite disappointed when I was less than interested when England got knocked out (and Keegan missed that header).

I switched my alleigances to France after Brazil went out and then they went and got knocked out by a bunch of tossers too! That French team was seriously good with Girrese, Tigana, Rocheteau, Amoros and Six. And then of course there was Platini. He replaced Zico as my idol (along with a squat, chubby, curly haired Argentinian [:$]) and I would buy any magazine and comic in which he was mentioned. I was allowed to stay up and watch the semi-final of 1984 European Championships, which was as good a game as the Brazil one in ''86, and cheered as the French beat Portugal. They beat Spain in the final and I spent the summer holidays pretending to be Michel Platini or Mark Barham (and playing expansive cover drives off my Nan''s bowling).

1986 was the first time I really felt that I should want England to win (there was something about Lineker in that plaster cast and Beardsley buzzing around behind him like some sort of dwarf magician) but France and Brazil still loomed large in the background. If I remember rightly Brazil had a full back called Josimar who scored an absolute belter against Northern Ireland (did Worthy play in Mexico [^o)]) and they also had Careca (who went on to join Diego at Napoli). That France v Brazil match was a classic but there were so many other great moments in that World Cup. I can remember that scissor kick that Negrete scored for Mexico, some great goals from USSR (was it Rats who scored a couple of them?), the Scots playing in ridiculous shorts (with Gordon Strachan scoring against the Germans and pulling a quite amusing celebration) and getting booted around by Uruguay and Denmark being touted as the next big thing before getting dicked by four or five by Spain.

Then there was the whole ''Hand of God'' thing. I think it was the first time I ever felt a bit confused watching football. As much as we all like to boast about how many years we''ve been City fans or how patriotic we are there are always certain players who transcend those loyalties. Maradona was my weakness. I can remember reading about him in Shoot magazine and me and my mate trying to juggle a golf ball or a satsuma after reading that was how he developed his close control. I had pictures of him on my wall first in his Barca strip (and I seem to remember watching him play for them against United in either the UEFA or Cup Winners Cup in the early eighties) and then playing for Napoli. He was incredible and I think the reason the writer of that piece claims that Brazil and France were the two best sides in the world at that time is that Argentina were just so reliant on Maradona. They were the ultimate one man team.

Thanks again Smudge, I really enjoyed recalling all of that and writing it down. Screw Wes Hoolahan let''s talk football memories from the eighties [;)]

[nutty nigel 7,513]

It seems that Lambert was already a Cureton fan before he came so he got first dibs on the second striker role. This will have disappointed Cody (who I failed to mention earlier and is another to have claims on that starting place) who  did enough in that second half at Yeovil to put a claim on that berth beside Holt. Ultimately I guess it was that performance at Brentford that made up Lamberts mind about some. It was a typical Norwich away performance of the last couple of seasons with nobody seemingly intent on winning the game. All doing their jobs and not playing poorly but never looking good enough to win. We just had a similar scenario against Walsall. We never looked good enough to win, but we didn''t lose so it could be same again at MKDons on Monday. As you say Smudge, Cureton has done nothing wrong but has he done enough right? He hasn''t really had the chances to score but Saturday was crying out for someone to make themselves a chance to score. Cody, Martin, Daley & McVeigh is a long queue.

 

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

It seems that Lambert was already a Cureton fan before he came so he got first dibs on the second striker role. This will have disappointed Cody (who I failed to mention earlier and is another to have claims on that starting place) who  did enough in that second half at Yeovil to put a claim on that berth beside Holt. Ultimately I guess it was that performance at Brentford that made up Lamberts mind about some. It was a typical Norwich away performance of the last couple of seasons with nobody seemingly intent on winning the game. All doing their jobs and not playing poorly but never looking good enough to win. We just had a similar scenario against Walsall. We never looked good enough to win, but we didn''t lose so it could be same again at MKDons on Monday. As you say Smudge, Cureton has done nothing wrong but has he done enough right? He hasn''t really had the chances to score but Saturday was crying out for someone to make themselves a chance to score. Cody, Martin, Daley & McVeigh is a long queue.

[/quote]The problem with Cureton is this:  last season he was getting into good positions but failing to hit the target.  So far this season, he''s not even getting into good positions any longer.  All he does is hang around on the shoulder of the oppo''s central defender and hope that the defender makes a mistake, which isn''t the best way to create chances.He and Holt haven''t got any kind of understanding that I can see either.