CDMullins 498 Posted February 20, 2012 Seen a few posters suggesting we played a ''weakend team'' and ''didnt take it seriously''Really?Apart from Steer, who lets face it doesnt really influence the game that much.And Holt who through out the season as been in and out of the side.Barnett started early on in the season.Lambert as openly spoke about his admiration for Ward.That line up could have started any Premier League game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Excited Canary 19 Posted February 20, 2012 [quote user="CDMullins"]Seen a few posters suggesting we played a ''weakend team'' and ''didnt take it seriously''Really?Apart from Steer, who lets face it doesnt really influence the game that much.And Holt who through out the season as been in and out of the side.Barnett started early on in the season.Lambert as openly spoke about his admiration for Ward.That line up could have started any Premier League game.[/quote]The fact that Holty wasn''t even on the bench spoke volumes about our intentions before the game even started.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tim Dawson 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Fair point i thought that, our passing and movement was atrocious, never a better chance for silverware and as much as people are blaming Lambert for team selection, certain players didnt seem to be at the races....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ruddygore 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Extract taken from The Guardian (what do they know?):-http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/feb/20/five-things-learned-fa-cupThe magic of the CupIn some quarters Leicester''s victory over Norwich was painted as an upset – the plucky Championship side prevailing over the Premier League team. The magic of the cup. Hooray for the underdogs.But what happened at Carrow Road is the antithesis of everything the FA Cup should be. It was an utterly depressing example of what English football has become.Leicester City are a Championship side bankrolled by a Thai millionaire who could afford to let his former manager, Sven-Goran Eriksson, embark on a summer spending spree. They were playing a side operating under tight financial restraints. Some underdogs. But then Leicester don''t care about the FA Cup, they care about promotion. The manager, Nigel Pearson, admitted as much, damning his side''s win and also the Cup with faint praise. "I hope it''s a springboard for us to kick on in the Championship. The players can be pleased with their day''s work, because this is still a very important and prestigious competition, but we have a very important game on Thursday [at Derby]." The implication is clear.He was not the only manager who appeared less than bothered. Norwich City''s Paul Lambert sent out a much weakened side. The leading goalscorer Grant Holt, goalkeeper John Ruddy, defender Kyle Naughton and midfielder Andrew Surman were all rested. The final whistle and elimination seemed almost to bring relief. "The main thing is staying in the Premier League," he said. "Will [being knocked out] be a blessing in disguise? Only if we stay up. But nobody would thank me if we got to the semi-final, got knocked out and then got relegated. Nobody would pat my back then." Norwich are currently eighth in the Premier League. Relegation?There were 26,658 fans in at Carrow Road, Norwich''s highest FA Cup attendance since 1984. That''s just 375 short of capacity. If all those people care about the Cup, shouldn''t the sides they''re paying to watch care too? TB Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gingerpele 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Lambert has faith in his whole squad, but not even using Holt, Ruddy on the bench (would have probably managed the corners better, the only time Steer really had anything to do, and he was really under pressure), Naughton and Surman have both been key in recent weeks. Using Bennett and Pilks in less than effective positions (without Surman), Morison playing an hour when he should have really come off at half time, as it wasn''t his day. We didn''t really push much harder after they took the lead for the second time, the change of two strikers for two strikers, and a holding midfielder for a holding midfielder kinda showed Lambert wasn''t really desperate to win. I don''t think either side wanted to lose, but I don''t think either side wanted to win that much, which lead to the poor/less than average performance overall from both sides. Weekend side, not particularly, but the absence of Holt (who, despite Wilbraham probably being pretty useful, would have had a bigger impact) and the subs are probably bigger indications of our intentions.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paulo_M 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Did we play a weakened team? Yes...No Ruddy, Holt, Surman or Naughton, who where all fit and all playing wellTierney, Whitbread, Ayala would all start ahead of those that played, so we basically had a 2nd string back 4Gut feeling is Vaughan would be ahead of Jackson if fully fit.So I reckon we were missing at least 7 from that game... though we actually rested 4.That''s no excuse though... for me the reason we lost were:Leceister wanted it......we didn''t - just look at the messages from Lambert (i.e. Man U more important, not even having your Captain on the bench says alot).Replacing Fox with Johnson was a bit mental (we needed a ball winner, but Fox was the only one building any play at all... though again I think that was Lambert thinking about Man U).Morison may be the new boo boy favourite, but I though Wes was a much bigger issue... if you play the diamond, then it only works well if the tip of the diamond plays well. The midfield in general didn''t work... basically we had 5 attacking players on the pitch, but no ball winners in the middle of the park.A bit more luck and we would have won that game... we were rubbish, but it wasn''t like Leceister dominated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TIL 1010 5,246 Posted February 20, 2012 [quote user="Ruddygore"] There were 26,658 fans in at Carrow Road, Norwich''s highest FA Cup attendance since 1984. That''s just 375 short of capacity. If all those people care about the Cup, shouldn''t the sides they''re paying to watch care too? TB[/quote]Not having two players who are in the form of their lives not even amongst seven substitutes in Holt and Surman was daft coupled with Naughton who is the best full back(either at right or left !) on our books by a country mile missing also had me questioning the tactics and team selection even at 2.30pm. Hey even Lambert is entitled to the odd mistake so i forgive him.[;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ruddygore 0 Posted February 20, 2012 "i forgive him."26,657 to go then lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna Grey 0 Posted February 20, 2012 I thought that we may have seen Crofts, Johnson and Lappin in midfield. People would have said that was a weakened team but I bet we would have put up more of a game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ruddygore 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Well a certain anal retentive likes to complain about the pre-dominance of season ticket holders and the lack of availability of casual tickets, that this prevents a whole new generation of fans from making a link with the club but we all know now that thats a BS argument - certain anal retentive being pleased as punch - but the cup fixture was as prime an example as you''d get of more casual tickets being taken up, that opportunity for "new" fans or the "casual" fan to visit, make that link and what message did they take away from Saturday? That the club didn''t take the tie seriously? Didn''t take them but their money seriously? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
star_manic 0 Posted February 20, 2012 the team put out, while not being our strongest, should still have been good enough to beat an average championship team. the problem was that virtually none of the players seemed to be playing to anywhere near their normal ability, whether this was due to thinking the game would be easy i don''t know, but if they play like that on saturday it could be a record defeat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UEA Canary 0 Posted February 20, 2012 i''m fed up of people claiming it was a weakened side. Are these people who say this not seen norwich at all this season?! when has lambert ever not made 3-4 changes per game. we''ve played weaker looking sides in the league this season and won games, including games holt hasn''t played in.Some people need to calm down a bit and just accept we lost and move on, of course its disappointing and on average we should beat leciester more times than not, but this is football and upsets happen all the time. The reaction of some fans has been incredibly over the top. Had a good laugh reading all the moaners though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellowbeagle 0 Posted February 20, 2012 It was only a weakened team in the sense we left Surman, Holt and Naughton who are in good form out, every player that started on saturday has at some point been in the first 11 on merit this season. It was just one of those days, if we were having them frequently i''d be worried as opposed to just disappointed, as original poster said upsets happen it makes football the great sport it is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Orford65 0 Posted February 20, 2012 Not a weakened team, but some players out there with weak attitudes towards a game we could and should have won comfortably.IMHO there were three NCFC players out there on Saturday who did not earn their wages this week. No idea why.....only they would know.I can forgive any player having an off day or for not being very good .....lack of effort is another thing altogether, it shows disrespect to the paying punters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brighton Yellow 0 Posted February 20, 2012 It was not a weakened team. There is no such thing this season.Also Lambert has been stating quite clearly from the first post match interview from Wales last week up until the pre match press conference that Naughton was on his last legs and not likely to play. Would you lot of morons so quick to moan one bad performance be praising Lambert had he risked Naughton and then been unavailable for Man Utd or Stoke - forcing Drury/Lappin to defend against the likes of Nani/Young/Etherington?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shankslad 0 Posted February 20, 2012 [quote user="Ruddygore"]"i forgive him."26,657 to go then lol.[/quote] Funny that - I counted 26,682 including myself - but some people just wouldn''t sit still so I probably counted them twice! On paper the team looked fine, no what the **** is HE doing in the side reaction for anyone. There''s a bit of rotation but that''s normal. If a full house of paying fans turn up at a match I don''t think any manager or team have the right not to take a game seriously but that appeared to be the problem - a distinct lack of the usual commited determination to win influenced probably from the management downwards. There seems to be a couldn''t care less attitude towards these cup games and if you couldn''t care less then you will get less. But the mystifying thing is the performances against Burnley and WBA but perhaps that wasn''t about the FA Cup - more about pride. No good demanding loyalty from the fans come what may, if the same loyalty isn''t given to the fans in return. The biggest sin is not in losing but not in trying - that is guarteed to dishearten the staunchest of fan. Eleven talented players don''t necessarily make a good team - it''s about who gels with who, who ''click'' together. Many seemingly misplaced passes aren''t that at all, just other players not being in tune with the guy passing the ball. I believe team consistency is vital, therefore every match is taken seriously be it a practice session, a five-a-side or a kick about is approached with the same winning attitude. Most sportmen are like that - competitive. I wouldn''t trust an ability to turn it on and off at will. I was disappointed for the fans, they deserve better and also at this stage of the competition there is a financial benefit to the club by progressing further. Breaking a winning streak and putting in a lacklustre performance can demoralise and be a further demotivating factor which is not good for the man U match - on the other hand it can be a kick up the arse as was the case with the Sunderland match. That''s completely different though as it is the league. I don''t think Norwich would''ve sacrificed their league position or placed it in jeopardy by putting an emphasis on the FA Cup as well and as I have said, I believe it justified by the loyalty of the fans and the capability of the manager and team. Although the performance can be written off as just one of those days and it''s time to move on, a team can''t afford to have too many of just one of those days. Better to be consistently good rather than alternating betwix brilliant and mediocre. I think we all expect a very difference performance against Manchest United and fortunately I will be at that game too. But this time I''m going to count the attendance twice and use an abacus! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grantroederdisaster 0 Posted February 20, 2012 ["CDMullins"]Seen a few posters suggesting we played a ''weakend team'' and ''didnt take it seriously''Really?Apart from Steer, who lets face it doesnt really influence the game that much.And Holt who through out the season as been in and out of the side.Barnett started early on in the season.Lambert as openly spoke about his admiration for Ward.That line up could have started any Premier League game. YES big time! Steer despite everyone creaming over him is a long way short of being ready for the 1st team. He didn''t command his area well enough and we were dodgy from corners all game, something that led to the 1st goal. Despte many people still having doubts over Ruddy, he has one hell of a reassuring presence about him and his absence was noticeable on Saturday! Morison shouldn''t be anywhere near the 1st team paying like he did and Holt would of made hell of a difference up front. the ball would have stuck up the field more and a very ropey looking Leicester defence would have been put under more pressure. Holts enthusiasm would have rubbed off on the others as well! Just two players would have made us a lot better! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brighton Yellow 0 Posted February 20, 2012 grantroederdisaster - All you have said there is not for definite at all. You have absolutely no way of knowing that Holt and Ruddy would have made any difference what so ever. In fact there is just as much of a possibility that we could have played even worse. Lambert clearly has faith in Steer so why not use him once in a while when the opportunity presents itself? What is the point of having a reserve goalkeeper if they purely sit on the bench all the time? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CDMullins 498 Posted February 20, 2012 Very mixed opinions then, Struggling to think why Lambert would bother to put 2 clearly strong sides out against Burnley and WBA To put out a ''weak'' side against Leicester Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grantroederdisaster 0 Posted February 20, 2012 ["Brighton Yellow"]grantroederdisaster - All you have said there is not for definite at all. You have absolutely no way of knowing that Holt and Ruddy would have made any difference what so ever. In fact there is just as much of a possibility that we could have played even worse. Lambert clearly has faith in Steer so why not use him once in a while when the opportunity presents itself? What is the point of having a reserve goalkeeper if they purely sit on the bench all the time? Your right, but I was just going on your average Ruddy and Holt performance which then would have made a difference! Holt should have been on the bench at least. All this nonsense about resting is absolute dribble because Holtys spent most of career in the lower Leagues playing in 46 game Leagues and 3 cup competitions! No one will convince me otherwise that Saturday was a big let down because we lost through not taking the game seriously enough which was not fair on the paying supporters! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaun Tilly Lace 0 Posted February 21, 2012 I think we played a "weekend" team: as in, all eleven players wished they were enjoying a weekend on the beach, rather than running around on a field kicking a ball about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
star_manic 0 Posted February 21, 2012 [quote user="CDMullins"]Seen a few posters suggesting we played a ''weakend team'' and ''didnt take it seriously''Really?Apart from Steer, who lets face it doesnt really influence the game that much.And Holt who through out the season as been in and out of the side.Barnett started early on in the season.Lambert as openly spoke about his admiration for Ward.That line up could have started any Premier League game.[/quote].......sorry, i couldn''t resist this. do we only play a weakened team at the weekend. the spelling "weakend" suggests that this is so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
