Butterfield.

[Gingerpele 0]

Didn''t enjoy the game tonight, thought we could have really easily won by a few goals if we stepped it up a gear or two. We had a few more good chances stopped by saves and blocks, but still didn''t feel like we were really interested.

But, Butterfield was impressive. I think he might be better than Snodgrass. He certainly appears to have better movement on and off the ball, and as I said I don''t think the team were really that bothered/trying very hard.

Him, Hoolahan and Snoddy could equal a very tricky attacking midfield trio, if we have the right striker to play in front of them.

[Largey24 0]

Better than Snodgrass? Behave!

Looked promising against a poor team. Not sure he is really a right midfielder, would like to see him playing behind the front two, but wouldn''t put him ahead of Hoolahan in that position and certainly not ahead of Snoddy out on the right.

He is coming back from injury and looked very fit and active, which is great to see.one who will build as the season progresses I think.

[Gingerpele 0]

I don''t think Snodgrass is all that. Should be on 3 goals by now, with a couple of assists. He seems to at to often fluff that final ball or shot. His set pieces are mostly overhit. He doesn''t move off the ball (the number of times he passed to Hoolahan then just stood still against Newcastle...). I hope he''s just getting used to playing at a higher level, but at e moment I don''t think Snodgrass is the wonder player so many seem to think he is.

Butterfield to me looked like he has the attributes to provide more to the team. Obviously you can''t say he''s better based on one cup game, but the way he played to me made him look like a better prospect. Thinking back, I''m sure Snoddy wasn''t even as impressive in the friendlies, not that anyone was in those games...

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]Didn''t enjoy the game tonight, thought we could have really easily won by a few goals if we stepped it up a gear or two. We had a few more good chances stopped by saves and blocks, but still didn''t feel like we were really interested. But, Butterfield was impressive. I think he might be better than Snodgrass. He certainly appears to have better movement on and off the ball, and as I said I don''t think the team were really that bothered/trying very hard. Him, Hoolahan and Snoddy could equal a very tricky attacking midfield trio, if we have the right striker to play in front of them.[/quote]

Why is there an obsession with "this player is better than that player?"

[Gingerpele 0]

That''s the way football/fans work.

Ok, to be fair I don''t necessarily mean better, but that I''m more exited by Butterfield and think he could be more effective at the moment, even from a perhaps weaker position for him out wide.

I''m hoping Bennett starts ahead of Snodgrass soon and we can see him come off the bench, I think he could be a fantastic impact player.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]That''s the way football/fans work. Ok, to be fair I don''t necessarily mean better, but that I''m more exited by Butterfield and think he could be more effective at the moment, even from a perhaps weaker position for him out wide. I''m hoping Bennett starts ahead of Snodgrass soon and we can see him come off the bench, I think he could be a fantastic impact player.[/quote]

Thanks for letting me in on that little secret. After 50 years of support, I had a feeling I was missing something! 

[Gingerpele 0]

Well what were you expecting?

A detailed essay on why football fans like to compare players?

[paul moy 235]

I have high hopes for Butterfield, having seen his scoring feats in the Champs. Gingerpele is correct regarding Snodgrass and his scuffed shots IMO.

[Gingerpele 0]

Well now I''ve lost the ounce of credibility I had, Paul Moy agreeing with me...

[Largey24 0]

And Snoddy doesn''t create all these chances by standing still and waiting for the ball to come to him.....there are plenty more players in our team who should be on the scoresheet!

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Thought Butterfield looked very good albeit against modest opposition. Given the injury that he had his fitness levels were pretty good and he showed very good close control

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

No reason Norwich couldn''t play Hoolahan, Snodgrass and Butterfield all together as attacking midfielders - Man City play this way with Nasri, Silva and Tevez operating behind Aguero.

 

It is quite a complicated system to work though with no players as dedicated wide men a bit of intelligence is needed, and if anyone has seen Snodgrass not being able to tell his left from his right on Canaries Player then it might not work out so well.

 

What is clear from the game last night and Newcastle is that Hoolahan must play more - and we miss Pilkington a lot.

[York Canary 29]

If we want a player behind the front two who can score a few then I''d imagine Butterfield would fit into that category more than Hoolahan who is more creative than anything and quite one-footed. However, Hoolahan is still a great player and makes things happen, holds the ball up well and brings others into the game. Both of them would be class..maybe in a 4-2-3-1? If they were joined by Snoddy then that would leave Pilks,Surman and Benno out though..

[kellybrook 0]

Butterfield is backup for Wes for this season, and next season he will start to replace him.

[RvWs 4 year contract 0]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]Well now I''ve lost the ounce of credibility I had, Paul Moy agreeing with me...[/quote]Oh no you didnt! [:D]