Exactly what do gain from LOANING Hoolahan out?

[B-ru 0]

He isn''t a winger willo, he is a creative source in the centre of the pitch. Not the centre circle, but in "The Hole" to pull strings.

[willo 0]

Ahhhhh!!!

Ok, so when has he pulled any strings for us to justify this unique position.

[B-ru 0]

Didn''t see much from the team at all last season really when he was on the left, but he played in there for Blackpool on a number of occasions and was at the top of a diamond formation. He has got a great shot on him, but he can''t really cut in and shoot from that side... not much of a right foot as previously stated.

He can beat players no doubt (although perhaps tries this too many times), and he does have invention... again, no doubt. He clearly isn''t a winger, that is for sure, and having played a more central role successfully before it makes sense to me. He has a good left peg for shooting too, and I would play him!

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Exactly Shack! Worthy new the value of keeping the shape and being solid. Earning the right to play our football amongst the many phrases he would use. He expected his teams to work hard but he always tried to include a player who was capable of doing something special to win the game.

[/quote]

I knew I could reel you in with a mention on Worthy [;)]

You''re right though. Worthy was often criticised for being negative and that phrase ''earning the right to play football'' was often used to criticise his tactics. But I think that all he really meant was that he wanted us to get the opposition on the backfoot so that our attacking players could have more space to work in and we had more time on the ball. A truly negative manager would have never played two strikers and Darren Huckerby in the same team.

The beauty of that team was that although we had a similar lack of pace in defence as we do now it was never such a problem. A lot of this was down to Svensson and McKenzie pressing high up the pitch and making it difficult for the opposition to settle into any kind of rhythm. Then of course you had Gary Holt tracking any midfield runners. The non-stop running of the front two left massive gaps for Hucks to exploit and for Francis to burst into. People occasionally accuse Worthy of getting lucky in the season we got promoted but the players he brought in and the system he played them in were a perfect match.

It''s interesting that Lambert has brought Adeyemi, Smith and Daley into the squad and has on occasion mentioned the need to add ''legs'' to the team. I do wonder if perhaps we picked two of the kids in midfield alongside Lappin and Hughes we could then accommodate Hoolahan in the hole behind Holt (who seems a real workhorse much in the mould of a Svensson type player).

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="B-ru"]

Didn''t see much from the team at all last season really when he was on the left, but he played in there for Blackpool on a number of occasions and was at the top of a diamond formation. He has got a great shot on him, but he can''t really cut in and shoot from that side... not much of a right foot as previously stated.

He can beat players no doubt (although perhaps tries this too many times), and he does have invention... again, no doubt. He clearly isn''t a winger, that is for sure, and having played a more central role successfully before it makes sense to me. He has a good left peg for shooting too, and I would play him!

[/quote]

 

This is where I have the problem with Hoolahan. I agree that he is highly skillful and can create moments of magic, like his goal against Saints last season. As you say, he is no left winger, but the problem of playing him in the hole is that he is so painfully one footed. If you stop him going left he has to execute a complete turn and I think that after a while defenders in the Championship had him sussed. The simple fact is that I would defy anyone to name me a game last season where you could say he was a matchwinner. He simply doesn''t do enough in a full  90 minutes for me. Yes, you could say the same about Hucks, but he was always likely to score or create a goal by his directness because he could go either way when faced up by a defender, which Hoolahan can''t .

If we are to remain parsimonious at the back it seems to me that the only way to accomodate him is to play him behind Holt as a second striker with a two banks of  four behind him. Given the paucity of Cureton''s contribution that seems like a reasonable option to me, and I would be interested to see how Wes could combine with Hughes, but there is no way that Lambert will give him a free rein in the way that Gunn did.

[singing canary 0]

good idea ... loan a player out who was a big part of a team who got promoted from division one ....

sorry to see somethings never change .

[B-ru 0]

A good rebuttal Beauseant, agreed he hasn''t been a match winner, but if you put a player into a position that he isn''t used to he is going to be less effective. Hucks was great at what he did, and Hoolahan certainly hasn''t shown to be as direct as Darren. Hoolahoop is a different kind of creative source that can see the pass that Huckerby perhaps couldn''t, but he doesn''t have the pace that Hucks had either.

The ability to use his right foot does hold him back somewhat, but if he has been successful in this position, I see know harm in trying this out ( sooner rather than later) to see if its a trick that the management are missing.

[Dave Backham 0]

I''m not sure we should loan Hoolahan out to anyone in this division - we must learn from loaning Cureton out to Barnsley last year where he helped them score points whereby they finished above us. One way or another Wes should be helping us because we pay his wages. He has a lot to offer, and it''s up to the manager to find a way to deploy his talents most effectively. Keep him until January because he might yet have a part to play. If we''re short of money I don''t see how a loan is going to solve that, the next transfer window is only 16 weeks away - which at Wes''s wage level surely isn''t going to be much of a saving.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Loan with a related perm. transfer....Etuhu style.

[singing canary 0]

surely if  norwich wanted to sell him the best way for that is put him in the shop window and play him .

 

[Yellow Rider 0]

[quote user="Matt Juler"]He might have turned his man once, twice, three times, four times, five times... oh, and then lost the ball.

The sooner he''s off the better. I''m pleased that we''ve got a manager who knows what it takes to compete and win in this league.[/quote]

Er not sure about that Matt - jury still well and truly out on that and likely to be for many weeks yet. Lets just say that persisting with the boy Curo and replacing one donkey with another in the middle of defence doesn''t totally inspire me so far!

Sure lets hound out the one player with genuine creativity and potential to excite shall we?. Don''t know about you but I''m not obsessed with a ''win at all costs'' attitude. First and foremost I would like to be entertained by a Canary team not bored stiff by the turgid, Jewson Reserve league garbage I saw on Saturday (sorry - benefit of hindsight that is probably unfair on that league!). 

[Hardhouse44 261]

[quote user="singing canary"]

surely if  norwich wanted to sell him the best way for that is put him in the shop window and play him .

 

[/quote]Exactly. What do we stand to gain by keeping him here only to languish in the reserves. Like it or not he isn''t in the managers thinking. Didn''t even make the bench. It matters not one jot what you and me think of him. The manager picks the team and he isn''t picking Wes. What we stand to gain is a chance to put our prize asset in the shop window and get somebody to pay to do it. His wages will almost certainly be covered by the club taking him on loan and a fee may also be on the cards.Face facts he isn''t going to be a city star. Move on just like Wes will.

[USAcanary 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

What''s to be gained from this. Surely the point of him going during the transfer window was to generate a transfer fee, by loaning him we neither get the money or the player?

before anyone says "wages" - I can''t believe his wages are that crippling - besides which I''d rather have the player.

[/quote]

What good did it do us to have Dickson Etuhu "loaned" to us from Preston........................

I think you have to realize that "under the table" loans are not uncommon. Lambert suggested this himself

You agree to the loan with a further agreement to sign a permanent deal in the next window.

I could actually see us getting players in the same way when the loan window opens.

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

What''s to be gained from this. Surely the point of him going during the transfer window was to generate a transfer fee, by loaning him we neither get the money or the player?

before anyone says "wages" - I can''t believe his wages are that crippling - besides which I''d rather have the player.

[/quote]

It depends how skint we really are, doesn''t it?

At the Capital Canaries meeting McNally described our finances as "dire" and I don''t think he was exaggerating.

 

[Matt Juler 148]

[quote user="singing canary"]

surely if  norwich wanted to sell him the best way for that is put him in the shop window and play him .

 

[/quote]
What, and lose games in the process?

He is a liability that we simply can not afford to play.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

If he''s loaned out, Lambert will be able to get someone in who can play ''hoofball'' more effectively, then we can have a lot more games like Brentford and Walsall. Can''t wait!

[Matt Juler 148]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]If he''s loaned out, Lambert will be able to get someone in who can play ''hoofball'' more effectively, then we can have a lot more games like Brentford and Walsall. Can''t wait![/quote] Wycombe and Hartlepool were rubbish, weren''t they?! Take the blinkers off, Hoolahan isn''t the answer to winning games in this league.

[singing canary 0]

blackpool did not lose many ganes with him in the mix , he was a big part of the blackpool side that went up .

but in all honest i would have rathered we kept clinigan .

[Brendo 0]

Well the way i see it, is that we wouldnt have to pay his wages, he may then impress at that club so then either that club or another will probably buy him in january. Im he''s here and doesnt want to, he probably wont play. Its a waste for having him here and not playing him.

He hasnt actually gone has he?

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

What''s to be gained from this. Surely the point of him going during the transfer window was to generate a transfer fee, by loaning him we neither get the money or the player?

before anyone says "wages" - I can''t believe his wages are that crippling - besides which I''d rather have the player.

[/quote]It will be wages, plus the chance to let other clubs have a look at him and vice-versa.  He''s going to be a high earner and the wages we save could either help the club or go towards a younger unproven replacement, e.g. Burnley when they got Eagles on loan from Manchester United.

[Mr. Bump 0]

Russell is probably on a wage par with Hoolahan and plays in a position where we have plenty of players...

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Mr. Bump"]Russell is probably on a wage par with Hoolahan and plays in a position where we have plenty of players...
[/quote]

 

As is the useless cureton, why does he get to stay!

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]

[quote user="Mr. Bump"]Russell is probably on a wage par with Hoolahan and plays in a position where we have plenty of players...
[/quote]

 

As is the useless cureton, why does he get to stay!

[/quote]

If anyone came up with a half decent offer for Russell or Cureton - they''d both be on their way as well!  The main difference seems to be that no-one wants them!