Oh dear, oh dear... (Lee Barnard)

[GJP 79]

The sooner Adam Drury is back, the better.

[Henry 0]

To be honest i was disappointed with McNamee today also. On several occasions he had the opportunity to run at defenders and opted to pass instead. I agree that Lappin has to be replaced as he was dire today, but the question is ... with who? I would go with Hughes as long as the Rusty red is recinded as it should be. It was interesting that Mcveigh was on the bench today ... was Lambert going to give 4-4-2 a try until the red card?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Rethinking the future"]Maybe we could have tried harder to buy Barnard - but that is assuming we hadn''t already tried our best, but for me, i think the real danger in trying to to sign Barnard too hard is that it would have unsettled Chris Martin, who at the time, had not signed the extension to his contract which expired at the end of the season.

I guess the question is Martin or Barnard?[/quote]No, not either or... BOTH... you need to be greedy go places... you know it makes sense! [;)]Martin and Holt would of still been first choices upon us signing somebody else.  It would of been up to them to play well enough to keep their places week in week out.  Same as it is now with them having to keep their places ahead of others in the squad.  Signing Barnard would of just added another striker to our squad who could compete in the air and hold the ball up a little.

[Henry 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Rethinking the future"]Maybe we could have tried harder to buy Barnard - but that is assuming we hadn''t already tried our best, but for me, i think the real danger in trying to to sign Barnard too hard is that it would have unsettled Chris Martin, who at the time, had not signed the extension to his contract which expired at the end of the season.

I guess the question is Martin or Barnard?[/quote]No, not either or... BOTH... you need to be greedy go places... you know it makes sense! [;)]Martin and Holt would of still been first choices upon us signing somebody else.  It would of been up to them to play well enough to keep their places week in week out.  Same as it is now with them having to keep their places ahead of others in the squad.  Signing Barnard would of just added another striker to our squad who could compete in the air and hold the ball up a little. [/quote]Just one point ... would Barnard have come to Norwich? As far as i remember he turned down Leeds for Southampton ... is that a case of sacrificing ambition for a quick buck?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="matt crowhurst"]theres no way MacNamee can come in for Lappin if we are going to use the diamond system, plenty of times today when their players went past him and he didnt even bother to try and get back to help out, if we go for 4 4 2 then i would have himk in the right and Lappin on the left[/quote]How many times did Lappin get back to help out his defence today?  Was he even on the pitch?  Can hardly say that I have noticed he has been there in most matches since the turn of the year![/quote]

Too weak on our left side today.

Rose and Lappin couldn''t cope with the pace and movement of Puncheon with the threat of Otsemobor''s pace in support.

And both of them were ball when in possession of the ball.

There was a moment in the first half when Rose and Holt were on for Lappin to knock a ball into the channel for them but for some reason he ignored and tried to play that ridiculous cross field diagonal which barely got off the ground and got cut out easily.

[/quote]Another great signing by the Saints.  I wasn''t aware that he had gone there until today... on a 3 and a half year deal too!How much did they sign him for???

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Henry"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Rethinking the future"]Maybe we could have tried harder to buy Barnard - but that is assuming we hadn''t already tried our best, but for me, i think the real danger in trying to to sign Barnard too hard is that it would have unsettled Chris Martin, who at the time, had not signed the extension to his contract which expired at the end of the season.

I guess the question is Martin or Barnard?[/quote]No, not either or... BOTH... you need to be greedy go places... you know it makes sense! [;)]Martin and Holt would of still been first choices upon us signing somebody else.  It would of been up to them to play well enough to keep their places week in week out.  Same as it is now with them having to keep their places ahead of others in the squad.  Signing Barnard would of just added another striker to our squad who could compete in the air and hold the ball up a little. [/quote]Just one point ... would Barnard have come to Norwich? As far as i remember he turned down Leeds for Southampton ... is that a case of sacrificing ambition for a quick buck?[/quote]I could be wrong, but I think it was more a case of Barnard not liking Northern Monkeys very much??? [:^)]

[Henry 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Henry"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Rethinking the future"]Maybe we could have tried harder to buy Barnard - but that is assuming we hadn''t already tried our best, but for me, i think the real danger in trying to to sign Barnard too hard is that it would have unsettled Chris Martin, who at the time, had not signed the extension to his contract which expired at the end of the season.

I guess the question is Martin or Barnard?[/quote]No, not either or... BOTH... you need to be greedy go places... you know it makes sense! [;)]Martin and Holt would of still been first choices upon us signing somebody else.  It would of been up to them to play well enough to keep their places week in week out.  Same as it is now with them having to keep their places ahead of others in the squad.  Signing Barnard would of just added another striker to our squad who could compete in the air and hold the ball up a little. [/quote]Just one point ... would Barnard have come to Norwich? As far as i remember he turned down Leeds for Southampton ... is that a case of sacrificing ambition for a quick buck?[/quote]I could be wrong, but I think it was more a case of Barnard not liking Northern Monkeys very much??? [:^)][/quote]Now thats just plain funny [Y]Puncheon was the bigger signing for them in that window ... a class player.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="GJP"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="matt crowhurst"]theres no way MacNamee can come in for Lappin if we are going to use the diamond system, plenty of times today when their players went past him and he didnt even bother to try and get back to help out, if we go for 4 4 2 then i would have himk in the right and Lappin on the left
[/quote]

How many times did Lappin get back to help out his defence today?  Was he even on the pitch?  Can hardly say that I have noticed he has been there in most matches since the turn of the year!
[/quote]

Too weak on our left side today.

Rose and Lappin couldn''t cope with the pace and movement of Puncheon with the threat of Otsemobor''s pace in support.

And both of them were ball when in possession of the ball.

There was a moment in the first half when Rose and Holt were on for Lappin to knock a ball into the channel for them but for some reason he ignored and tried to play that ridiculous cross field diagonal which barely got off the ground and got cut out easily.

[/quote]

Another great signing by the Saints.  I wasn''t aware that he had gone there until today... on a 3 and a half year deal too!

How much did they sign him for???
[/quote]

Out of him, Barnard and Seaborne it would have been Puncheon I''d have most liked us to sign. He''s got a bit of spark about him.

 

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Rethinking the future"]Maybe we could have tried harder to buy Barnard - but that is assuming we hadn''t already tried our best, but for me, i think the real danger in trying to to sign Barnard too hard is that it would have unsettled Chris Martin, who at the time, had not signed the extension to his contract which expired at the end of the season. I guess the question is Martin or Barnard?[/quote]

No, not either or... BOTH... you need to be greedy go places... you know it makes sense! [;)]

Martin and Holt would of still been first choices upon us signing somebody else.  It would of been up to them to play well enough to keep their places week in week out.  Same as it is now with them having to keep their places ahead of others in the squad.  Signing Barnard would of just added another striker to our squad who could compete in the air and hold the ball up a little.
[/quote]

 

It''s coming back to haunt us as you predicted, Smudge. Our front three are misfiring and there is no real back up apart from Cody, who''s not really up to starting. The time must also now have come to replace Lappin whose much vaunted "delivery" was shocking today. Running around and shouting a lot doesn''t make a great midfielder. I just wish Whitbread was fit, as Nelson is going to cost us big time soon on up to three levels; his huge turning circle, his appalling distribution or the fact that he forces the fullbacks and midfielders to sit deeper to cover all of the above.

Although I have no intention of panicking, we were thoroughly outplayed (and not just after the sending off) by avastly superior side in terms of pace, movement and creativity. I was very impressed with Saints, even allowing for the poorness of our performance, and they looked like a League leading side. I''m sure we''ll bounce back on Tuesday, but hoprfully today will throw a bucket of cold water on those suggesting that promotion is as good as in the bag. There is much work to do, but Lambert knows that and will, I''m sure, make the right decisions.

[MyGodWeArePoorToWatch 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]How many still agree that we should not have made a greater effort to sign Lee Barnard???How many also think that this may be the start of the end for Simon Lappin?  I am pretty sure it was Lappin who was due to come off for McNamee just before Russell got his marching orders from the ref.Will the team for Tuesday night be just Hughes in for Russell or is it time for Lambert to start the match with a more daring line-up?[/quote]You know smudger, i have no probs with you, but by f**k you pish me off only posting when there is something negative like a loss.Where are you the rest of the time ? sitting under your bridge grinding your axe ?Just give over will you.The club dont needs "fans" like you.Your only happy when there is something to biatch about.Yes there has been the odd positive post this season, but it wont make up for a lifetime of negative crap.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="GJP"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="GJP"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="matt crowhurst"]theres no way MacNamee can come in for Lappin if we are going to use the diamond system, plenty of times today when their players went past him and he didnt even bother to try and get back to help out, if we go for 4 4 2 then i would have himk in the right and Lappin on the left[/quote]How many times did Lappin get back to help out his defence today?  Was he even on the pitch?  Can hardly say that I have noticed he has been there in most matches since the turn of the year![/quote]

Too weak on our left side today.

Rose and Lappin couldn''t cope with the pace and movement of Puncheon with the threat of Otsemobor''s pace in support.

And both of them were ball when in possession of the ball.

There was a moment in the first half when Rose and Holt were on for Lappin to knock a ball into the channel for them but for some reason he ignored and tried to play that ridiculous cross field diagonal which barely got off the ground and got cut out easily.

[/quote]Another great signing by the Saints.  I wasn''t aware that he had gone there until today... on a 3 and a half year deal too!How much did they sign him for???[/quote]

Out of him, Barnard and Seaborne it would have been Puncheon I''d have most liked us to sign. He''s got a bit of spark about him.

 

[/quote]That would depend on the price.... how much was Puncheon.... any ideas???We all know that Seaborne and Barnard were great value for money.Would have loved to of seen all 3 of them added to what we had here! [;)]

[Yellowfuture 71]

[quote user="GJP"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="GJP"]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="matt crowhurst"]theres no way MacNamee can come in for Lappin if we are going to use the diamond system, plenty of times today when their players went past him and he didnt even bother to try and get back to help out, if we go for 4 4 2 then i would have himk in the right and Lappin on the left
[/quote]

How many times did Lappin get back to help out his defence today?  Was he even on the pitch?  Can hardly say that I have noticed he has been there in most matches since the turn of the year!
[/quote]

Too weak on our left side today.

Rose and Lappin couldn''t cope with the pace and movement of Puncheon with the threat of Otsemobor''s pace in support.

And both of them were ball when in possession of the ball.

There was a moment in the first half when Rose and Holt were on for Lappin to knock a ball into the channel for them but for some reason he ignored and tried to play that ridiculous cross field diagonal which barely got off the ground and got cut out easily.

[/quote]

Another great signing by the Saints.  I wasn''t aware that he had gone there until today... on a 3 and a half year deal too!

How much did they sign him for???
[/quote]

Out of him, Barnard and Seaborne it would have been Puncheon I''d have most liked us to sign. He''s got a bit of spark about him.

 

[/quote]

 

Puncheon was excellent today, very direct and powerful, I was watching him shooting before the game and he looked very classy. 

[Lambo 0]

I agree that the squad needs freshening up for Tuesday.

Hopefully McNamee & Hughes will be coming in & we desperately need Askou & Whitbred back.

As for Barnard, yes i''d have liked him here, would be foolish to turn down such a quality striker, however, S''oton would have always garenteed him a starting place, we couldn''t IMO. Hence why Lambert went for Oli Johnson. Ultimately I think Lambert probably made the right call, he wants a settled side, not one where we need to keep rotating in order to keep certain people happy.

[LinkNR9 0]

[quote user="bloodwagon"][quote user="Smudger"]How many still agree that we should not have made a greater effort to sign Lee Barnard???

How many also think that this may be the start of the end for Simon Lappin?  I am pretty sure it was Lappin who was due to come off for McNamee just before Russell got his marching orders from the ref.

Will the team for Tuesday night be just Hughes in for Russell or is it time for Lambert to start the match with a more daring line-up?
[/quote]
Well well well, didnt take you long did it smudger ?
[/quote]

It wouldn''t be him unless he was able to whinge at the first opportunity.

[ZLF 274]

The stars of the soton performance today was their midfield; hard tackling and passed well, showed committment drive and energy against a midfield showing none of that. I would have rather have any of them today than either lambert or barnard.

TBH neither of their strikers impressed much. A fabulous free kick from Lambert deserved a goal but pretty much he and Barnard got nothing out of Doc despite their apparent pace and class advantage, if they cant better him how good can they be?

They did exploit nelsons problems on the floor but again got little out of him in the air, but on the floor was more than enough.

If we want automatic promotion we do not need a lee barnard, we need a more committed midfield, just like sotons today.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Henry"] It was interesting that Mcveigh was on the bench today ... [/quote]

a bit of advertising in the hope that someone will take him on loan for 3 months?

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]
That would depend on the price.... how much was Puncheon.... any ideas???

[/quote]

£250k. What a bargain.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

The sooner Adam Drury is back, the better.

[/quote]

Agreed.

When Drury is playing its like you have a left back and a left winger......very useful when playing the diamond system.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Henry"]
Just one point ... would Barnard have come to Norwich? As far as i remember he turned down Leeds for Southampton ... is that a case of sacrificing ambition for a quick buck?
[/quote]

Or Barnard thinks that Southampton have got better prospects given who the owner is.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Barnards record for Southampton including the FA Cup:

4 starts + 2 subs       2 goals ......thats right the two against us.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]The stars of the soton performance today was their midfield; hard tackling and passed well, showed committment drive and energy against a midfield showing none of that. [/quote]

Exactly!

[When Saturday Comes 0]

I can''t believe that no one has mentioned that maybe, just maybe, Lambert didn''t WANT Barnard. Undoubtedly a goal scorer at this level but who are we to say who he should be signing, and criticising the club for not buying him.

Maybe Lambert spoke to him and didn''t like his attitude? Maybe he simply didn''t fancy playing here? Maybe maybe maybe.......we didn''t actually want him at all.

Quite frankly, who cares, it is a stupid argument.  

Smudger you are just an idiot with an unhealthy obesession with both Lee Barnard and Simon Lappin!

[Two Tails 0]

Lambert obviously did not want Barnard, as McNally has stated in an interview just before the match, that every player Lambert has wanted the club has got for him.Who knows best, Lambert or some twat on a forum?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]The stars of the soton performance today was their midfield; hard tackling and passed well, showed committment drive and energy against a midfield showing none of that. I would have rather have any of them today than either lambert or barnard.

TBH neither of their strikers impressed much. A fabulous free kick from Lambert deserved a goal but pretty much he and Barnard got nothing out of Doc despite their apparent pace and class advantage, if they cant better him how good can they be?

They did exploit nelsons problems on the floor but again got little out of him in the air, but on the floor was more than enough.

If we want automatic promotion we do not need a lee barnard, we need a more committed midfield, just like sotons today.[/quote]I agree that the battle was more than likely won in midfield... not surprising considering that we have only had 2 or 3 playing there in recent weeks with Lappin being anonymous is it?Again how can you say that of Southampton''s strikers?  Barnard got TWO GOALS and where was the Doc when he nodded in the first at the rebound off the bar from Lambert''s free kick?  Surely Barnard had to be the Doc''s man during that set of circumstances?  Did the Doc not also conceed the freekick that led to the goal?  Even then we are not mentioning Llanna turning him inside out before knocking it against our upright twice!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Two Tails"]Lambert obviously did not want Barnard, as McNally has stated in an interview just before the match, that every player Lambert has wanted the club has got for him.Who knows best, Lambert or some twat on a forum?[/quote]and you really believe that do you?So we only have Lambert to blame if promotion is not clinched I suppose?I know what I believe and I know that they will sing from the same hymn sheet at the club, but I for one do not believe that Lambert was backed as much as he should of been in January.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Smudger"]That would depend on the price.... how much was Puncheon.... any ideas???[/quote]

£250k. What a bargain.

[/quote]Agreed... [Y]But far too pricey for us so it seems?  Prudence with ambition still rules at Carrow Road so it seems???

[Twitchy 0]

However this pans out Smudger, in the end it''s not gonna please you, win you''re happy, lose even happier, if it was a contest you win the crown.......drama queen.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Smudger"]
That would depend on the price.... how much was Puncheon.... any ideas???

[/quote]

£250k. What a bargain.

[/quote]

Agreed... [Y]

But far too pricey for us so it seems?  Prudence with ambition still rules at Carrow Road so it seems???
[/quote]

Smudger like you I feared this game and expected a loss.

Oh can you please learn the difference between "of" and "have" as it gets on my............

Is this a midlands thing?[;)]

[newboy 0]

[quote user="Yarmyed"]

I wouldnt change the system just the personel

My ideal team if everyone was fit would be:

Forster, Drury, Whitbread, Askou, Spillane, Smith, Hughes, Hoolahan, Russell, Holt, Martin.

[/quote]

No Doc ! unbelievable. from what i have seen of Whitbread i think he will be a quality player but to pick him ahead of doc based on a couple of sub apperances is nuts.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="Smudger"]That would depend on the price.... how much was Puncheon.... any ideas???[/quote]

£250k. What a bargain.

[/quote]Agreed... [Y]But far too pricey for us so it seems?  Prudence with ambition still rules at Carrow Road so it seems???[/quote]

Smudger like you I feared this game and expected a loss.

Oh can you please learn the difference between "of" and "have" as it gets on my............

Is this a midlands thing?[;)]

[/quote]I said it was a Midlands thing about this time last year on here BUTLER, but some were having none of it! [;)]I have to get out of the way I speak when writing, but never do it frequently enough when posting numerous times on a football messageboard.