Surman

[Razzmatazz 0]

I''m probably being harsh, but I''m just not convinced that he''s upto the Premier league, yes he''s got a nice touch but lacks pace and seems to offer very little defensively.

How long will it be before Johnson/Pilkington step into the fray....??

 

[NWC 239]

I thought he was week yesterday, and didn''t really contribute much - but he wasn''t the only one.He is a class player, and I''m sure once he and others are back to match sharpness he will be able to influence the game more when he plays.Having said that, I wouldn''t have him in my starting 11 - but I''m not the manager.

[unique 434]

I would fully expect Johnson to start next week. Just watched first half of Stoke v Chelsea, and they''re one helluva big bunch of bruisers.

City ideally need three points next week ahead of the trip to Stamford Bridge. If they get them they will have well earned them......

[Razzmatazz 0]

Yea Johnson certainly adds that grit and wont be afraid to put his foot in, I hope Surman does come more into it as the season progresses but I cant see it, Johnson/Pilks are the future.

People I''ve spoken to seem to think Stoke is 3pts.......????? they are a esablished prem side and hard as nails it will be a very tough game.

The other thing that worrys me is the diamond.....I think it leaves us to exposed certainly against the quality players we''ll be up against this season.

 

[ZLF 271]

Like last season I do think Surman will improve as he comes to terms to the pace of the prem - he brings great vision and creativity  as well as graft in his performances and that is the key to him being in the team;  being destructive is not his role.    

I dont see Crofts, Johnson and Fox starting in the same side unless we go to a deep 4-3-3 and that does not seem to be PL style.

If you drop Surman I am pretty sure it will be for Pilkington or Bennett,  while I can only see BJ replacing fox.

Stoke will be a hard match and far from an easy 3pts;  but stepping up from yest performances will happen

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,241]

Lambert is a huge fan of Surman. I can''t remember a time when Surman was available and Lambert didn''t pick him.

However, I wouldn''t be surprised to see Fox and Johnson/Crofts sitting in front of the defence in a 4-5-1 pretty soon - that seems the only way to get width into the team while also keeping Wessi on the field.

Interesting ramification of that is that the 1 needs to be very mobile. That looked like Morison to me. Holty''s going to be under some pressure soon, I reckon.

Crofts---Fox

Bennet----Wes-----Surman/Pilkington

Morison

would be the line-up I''d pick for Chelski. Probably against Stoke too. I don''t see it as being less attacking than the diamond...

[vos 155]

I do not rate Surman. Very lightweight and is slow to get back when an attack breaks down. I cannot recall a game where he has been particularly influential etc. Nice guy but as is already apparent there are numerous tough lads in the premiership who will give him a hard time.

After seeing Stoke today, we will do very well if we beat them. Lets keep hoping !!!

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

Surman had a decent games yesterday, he completed 80% of his pass and won 2 out of 3 tackles so not a decent return. If you look at how Norwich played most of our play would actually go through him and Fox during the game. I think he does things well quietly, meaning his contribution often gets overlooked.If you want a game where he excelled look no further than Nottingham Forest at home last year, he was excellent in that game.

[Norfolk Mustard 94]

Surman is cultured going forward but lightweight defensively - however he is cohesive with his team mates. Having seen BJ against Parma, the same cannot be said about him. Johnson understanderbly looked a ''new boy'' who was out-of-sync in that game - I wonder how much practice he''s had since then at Colney?

 

Swift interchanges on the deck between Surman and Wessi will be more productive than BJ kicking lumps out of the Stoke players in my opinion!

[Felixfan 53]

I thought Surman was one of our best players yesterday. The midfield was tied up - all of the Wigan attacks came down the flanks mostly through Moses.

[Hoshke 0]

[quote user="Felixfan"]I thought Surman was one of our best players yesterday. The midfield was tied up - all of the Wigan attacks came down the flanks mostly through Moses.[/quote]

Having gone to the match yesterday, and being forced to pick our worst player, Surman would be my choice.

To put the game in context, Wigan offered very little defensively in midfield, and as such Surman should have had plenty of space to string some passes together.

To BYAG, Surman did not just misplace one pass, there were three that I can remember vividly, and probably more.

As many have noted, Surman is a good passer but offers nothing defensively. I have yet to see him get his socks dirty in a game, and has the tendency to tuck in, leaving Tierney very exposed. Did anayone else notice that 90% of Wigan''s attacks came from the flanks?

The simple question is, with most teams in the league playing 442 or an adapted 451, do we think the diamond allows us to protect our fullback effectively?

Would we have scored today without Morison pulling out wide?

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Hoshke"][quote user="Felixfan"]I thought Surman was one of our best players yesterday. The midfield was tied up - all of the Wigan attacks came down the flanks mostly through Moses.[/quote] Having gone to the match yesterday, and being forced to pick our worst player, Surman would be my choice. To put the game in context, Wigan offered very little defensively in midfield, and as such Surman should have had plenty of space to string some passes together. To BYAG, Surman did not just misplace one pass, there were three that I can remember vividly, and probably more. As many have noted, Surman is a good passer but offers nothing defensively. I have yet to see him get his socks dirty in a game, and has the tendency to tuck in, leaving Tierney very exposed. Did anayone else notice that 90% of Wigan''s attacks came from the flanks? The simple question is, with most teams in the league playing 442 or an adapted 451, do we think the diamond allows us to protect our fullback effectively? Would we have scored today without Morison pulling out wide?[/quote]

 

I didn''t say he only misplaced one pass, I said he had an 80% pass completion rate (above the total Norwich completion rate of 74%). Surman is a very neat and tidy player that allows us to retain possession, he is also more creative than Crofts or Johnson and but taking out players like Surman and brining in ''workhorses'' we will lose that ability to hit teams so quickly on the break.

 

I would say we actually looked worse after Surman was taken off and Pilkington brought on, but I think this is more down to us dropping to a more defensive 4-5-1 formation and allowing Wigan to keep the ball more whilst we hung on.

 

[ncfcfan 0]

I tought Surman played ok. Passed the ball well & helped Tierney out in defence. But it would appear that a few clueless fans don''t rate him because he doesn''t run about like a headless chicken, lunging into tackles. I suppose the same fans don''t rate Xavi. It was no surprise that we struggled to keep the ball aswell when he went off.

I was more worried about Crofts. Dreadful first touch, gave the ball away too much & didn''t help Martin out enough. We were getting ripped apart down the right hand side & I fail to remember crofts putting in one meaningful tackle.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

I thought he played well when we had the ball, probably our most composed player, and the main reason along with Hoolahan we matched Wigan on the possesion count.

However, he still doesn''t convince me off the ball and perhaps is a bit lightweight. You can''t have it all though.

I think he is better than the player we bought off Wolves who ''struggled with the pace and intensity of the premiership'' but he still has a bit more to go before he''s established premiership standard in my opinion.

[YellowLittle1 0]

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"]Lambert is a huge fan of Surman. I can''t remember a time when Surman was available and Lambert didn''t pick him.

However, I wouldn''t be surprised to see Fox and Johnson/Crofts sitting in front of the defence in a 4-5-1 pretty soon - that seems the only way to get width into the team while also keeping Wessi on the field.

Interesting ramification of that is that the 1 needs to be very mobile. That looked like Morison to me. Holty''s going to be under some pressure soon, I reckon.

Crofts---Fox

Bennet----Wes-----Surman/Pilkington

Morison

would be the line-up I''d pick for Chelski. Probably against Stoke too. I don''t see it as being less attacking than the diamond...[/quote]

I think Lambert will stick with two strikers for a little while longer, I don''t think at this time he would consider playing only one striker when he has a fair few at his disposal.

I also disagree about Holt being under pressure soon. I think he started slowly a few times, he will come back more determined against Stoke and I think he will thrive against them also.

I would play Holt and Jackson vs Stoke though. I know Morison had a blinder but I think he may sit out with that cheekbone. Plus we need to look at Stoke''s weakness'' rather then try and compete with them physically. If we play Johnson Crofts and Morison I fear we will probably try and play there game which I think they will play a lot better. We need to run at there defence and beat them technically rather then physically which they will be far superior to us in that department.