Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Matt Morriss

The Hoolahan dilemma

Recommended Posts

Hughton obviously doesn''t like Wes, or more he just doesn''t fit into Hughtons rigid 442 style, and I agree, he doesn''t fit into a rigid 442.

But the fact is Wes, along with Holt has been our best player of the last 3 yrs and is the reason we are in the Prem.

He had a good season last yr proving he can do it at this level, and he hasn''t had a look in. For me it''s like Mancini not giving Silva one minute so far at Man City, or Fergie not giving Rooney a sniff at all.

We don''t give our most attacking player and the guy that can win us games a look in and what happens? We fail to win, and in two home games that were very winnable.

I remember last year a similar home game to QPR, 1-1, and Hoolahan and Holt came on and totally changed the game and we won.

What I saw Saturday was a second half of running out of ideas and the way we played didn''t change for 45 minutes. The wrong subs were made, the wrong people came off and the wrong people stayed on.

Why isnt Wes in the team, who is better in the squad? He''s our Modric, our Silva. These kind of players the team is built around by there managers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn''t compare Wes to Modric or Silva, but I still can''t understand why he was not introduced during the game on saturday... He''s a game changer!

I''m still dissapointed we didn''t get a striker in, but I am still there to give all the lads a chance...although I completely agree with your stance on WES...GIVE HIM A GAME!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m not comparing Hoolahan to Modric or Silva, I''m saying he''s our Modric/Silva.

If they were on the bench and Man City or Spurs/Real were drawing 0-0 at home and running out of ideas they''d be on wouldn''t they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoolahan had an injury at the beginning of the season which set back his chances in the team - Hughton has been very loyal to the team that has produced 3 good performances in the last 3 games and as you said Hoolahan doesn''t fit into a 4-4-2.

 

Hoolahan was being prepared to come on against West Ham but with the game on such a knife edge I suspect CH was concerned that bringing on the rather diminutive Wes would have given West Ham the advantage in not only midfield but also at set-plays. I can understand this thinking, if Norwich had lost the game because Winston Ried had risen to a head above Hoolahan we would have all being moaning about the stupid decision to take off a larger player.

 

Norwich were creating chances without Wes on the pitch, so I guess it was deemed more important to not allow West Ham a greater chance from scoring from a set piece (their only real threat) by leaving the bigger guys on the field. It''s impossible to say whether this is the right choice or not. Everyone is saying Wes should have come on, but I haven''t seen a sensible suggestion yet for who should have been taken off in his place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
he was our classiest player in league one and the championship, but has only occasionally reproduced that sort of form in the PL. we have moved on and he, for all that the fans love him, is not top of the pile anymore. and once butterfield is fully fit i can see him slipping further off the radar. maybe a brilliant performance against donny may bring him back to CL''s attention but otherwise i can''t see him getting much of a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

Wes should have come on, but I haven''t seen a sensible suggestion yet for who should have been taken off in his place.

[/quote]

I think by the 75th minute Howson was not really in the game and was looking very leggy. I probably would have opted for Fox over Hoolahan, just as he is a bit more sturdy going backwards, but would have also been much more effective with the long ball tactic we had adopted by that point in the game.

 

I want Hools in the team, but at the moment, I can''t really see a way of using him effectively. As we all know, you need him at the tip of a diamond, and under Hughton I can''t see us playing that shape. So unless we go back to 1 up front, with Hools, Pilks and Snoddy just behind, I can''t see him getting much playing time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="star_manic"]he was our classiest player in league one and the championship, but has only occasionally reproduced that sort of form in the PL. we have moved on and he, for all that the fans love him, is not top of the pile anymore. and once butterfield is fully fit i can see him slipping further off the radar. maybe a brilliant performance against donny may bring him back to CL''s attention but otherwise i can''t see him getting much of a chance.
[/quote]

 

A young rookie with a bit of experience in the championship? If you really think that he''s going to come in and be streets ahead of Hoolahan in terms of abillity then you really have got a shock coming your way.

Hoolahan more then occasionally produced good form last season. He was key in many of the points we won last year. The sooner he''s returned to the starting line up the better. Stabillity is key, we need our requlars like Hoolahan and Fox back in the team. Its funny how lost Holty looks when Hoolahan isn''t playing behind him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After 60 minutes on Saturday it was clear that we we''re in desperate need of someone to get hold of the ball & start passing it around and Hoolahan was the obvious choice. Anyone of the 4 midfielders who started the game could have been taken off as they all faded badly & looked more & more tired the longer the game went on. The game was there for the taking & in all honesty we should have gone for it by using all 3 subs by the time the match got to 70 minutes.When opportunities such as this come along, which is not very often, you have to do everything possible to get the 3 points & not take the safe option of being satisfied with 1. IMO if Hoolahan couldn''t get on the pitch on Saturday then he probably never will unless Hughton changes his thinking & starts taking more risks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Theres no dilema,

Neither Lambert, Houghton nor Trappatoni believe Hoolahan is good enough at this or international to have a team built around him.

It really is, as simple as that.

If he was ''that good'' he''d be be the first name on the team sheet, like Silva, Rooney and Modric (At Spurs). He may be'' that type'' of player but that doesnt mean hes good enough at this level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''m not surprised that Hoolahan hasn''t really figured yet because we''ve had some good performances in midfield, Bradley Johnson has probably been our best player so far. I can understand Hughton showing faith in those who had been doing well.

 

With regard to Saturday''s game in particular, it was probably the worst I''ve seen Howson play for Norwich. He had one or two good moments but in general a lot of stuff wasn''t coming off for him and he was finding it hard to produce under the quick closing down from West Ham. Surman had a good first half but was less effective in the second, he was a contender to come off. And even Snodgrass was only threatening in patches.

 

Had it been me I''d have sacrificed Howson, put Wes on and gone for the diamond. It was worth a shot just to give them something different to worry about. I can understand the arguments about how we might have lost something in the physical battle but to me it looked like we''d started running out of steam and ideas after the 70th minute and could have done with something to spark us again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that we ought to consider selecting Wes, although we have other players who can do much the same, in Surman and Snodgrass especially. I would urge this for a home game, rather than one away where we need to be slightly more defensive perhaps.

 

I am not sure that changing the midfield will make things much more productive at the moment, however, unless at the same time we can make the strikers convert chances. We are perhaps not as fluent in the one-touch passing which delighted us earlier, but we are, as CH said, creating chances. Our major problem is converting them. If Wes did play would this make much of a difference? I think that we might look a more attractive side but, as Wes himself did not score many last season, is this going to change things dramatically?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wes cant defend argument is a bit of a myth - i cant find the link at the moment but I think he completed more successful tackles per minute than most of his midfield colleagues last year, including johnson and howson,   and his energy levels are as good.

 

I agree that he is physically at a disadvantage but you balance that with what more he would give us going forward - for 30 mins he is a potential match winner.

 

As for the set piece argument leave dont detail him to defend against a reid but leave him on the half way line and not morison for example - always ways to flex.

 

The thing on sat was energy levels were flagging in midfield and we needed a lift,  which the manager did not address. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

Hoolahan had an injury at the beginning of the season which set back his chances in the team - Hughton has been very loyal to the team that has produced 3 good performances in the last 3 games and as you said Hoolahan doesn''t fit into a 4-4-2.

 

Hoolahan was being prepared to come on against West Ham but with the game on such a knife edge I suspect CH was concerned that bringing on the rather diminutive Wes would have given West Ham the advantage in not only midfield but also at set-plays. I can understand this thinking, if Norwich had lost the game because Winston Ried had risen to a head above Hoolahan we would have all being moaning about the stupid decision to take off a larger player.

 

Norwich were creating chances without Wes on the pitch, so I guess it was deemed more important to not allow West Ham a greater chance from scoring from a set piece (their only real threat) by leaving the bigger guys on the field. It''s impossible to say whether this is the right choice or not. Everyone is saying Wes should have come on, but I haven''t seen a sensible suggestion yet for who should have been taken off in his place.

[/quote]
This. A change was needed in the final 20 minutes as Norwich struggled to keep possession and their passing accuracy nose-dived but Fox would have fitted the situation better than Wes. We were creating plenty of chances throughout the game but that final 20 minutes we weren''t really trying to push any advantage we had home, we needed to recycle possession better to allow us to create more chances Fox is superior to Wes at this IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“It’s been a tough one for Wes because he’s a very good player but I’m quite sure that if he continues to do what he’s doing there is certainly scope for him to be involved, definitely.”

 

Says Hughton. I am the only one that finds this statement a little disrespectful? "Some scope to be involved" I''m sure that''ll do Wes''s confidence the world of good. Not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"]

“It’s been a tough one for Wes because he’s a very good player but I’m quite sure that if he continues to do what he’s doing there is certainly scope for him to be involved, definitely.”

 

Says Hughton. I am the only one that finds this statement a little disrespectful? "Some scope to be involved" I''m sure that''ll do Wes''s confidence the world of good. Not.

[/quote]

Why have you added the word ''Some'' in the quotation, Hughton didn''t say ''some''.

I''m sure that Wes isn''t as insecure as you think, Hughton''s statement is hardly going to dent his confidence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hughton on EDP website“I was tempted to bring Wes on because I know he can produce that little

bit of magic, that little bit of gold, but there is two sides to it.

West Ham are so strong, they are direct in their play and I just felt we

needed to keep some height on the pitch"Bottled it then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Making Plans"]Hughton on EDP website“I was tempted to bring Wes on because I know he can produce that little

bit of magic, that little bit of gold, but there is two sides to it.

West Ham are so strong, they are direct in their play and I just felt we

needed to keep some height on the pitch"Bottled it then

[/quote]

Wes may have made a difference but I would think that we did enough to win the game with what was on the pitch at the end.   Kane had two great chances to score and on another day would have put them away.    We did everything except win the match. Simply didn''t put the ball in the net.   The Wes argument is whether he will play much part this season.   That, at the end of the day is up to him - he has to take his chance when he gets it and displace one of the others.   Can he do it?   Imo I don''t think he will get enough chances to have an effect.   Thats not to say he''s not good enough but is an indication of the strength we now have in midfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Making Plans"]Hughton on EDP website“I was tempted to bring Wes on because I know he can produce that little

bit of magic, that little bit of gold, but there is two sides to it.

West Ham are so strong, they are direct in their play and I just felt we

needed to keep some height on the pitch"Bottled it then

[/quote]

Wes may have made a difference but I would think that we did enough to win the game with what was on the pitch at the end.   Kane had two great chances to score and on another day would have put them away.    We did everything except win the match. Simply didn''t put the ball in the net.   The Wes argument is whether he will play much part this season.   That, at the end of the day is up to him - he has to take his chance when he gets it and displace one of the others.   Can he do it?   Imo I don''t think he will get enough chances to have an effect.   Thats not to say he''s not good enough but is an indication of the strength we now have in midfield.

[/quote]You really believe we did everything but win the match ? we could easily have been 2 down before Surman flashed his shot across the face of goal .It was a very scrappy game between two sides who lacked the class to create anything much for the entire 90 mins , i doubt we will see many teams as poor as West Ham this season . As for the midfielders , yes we have several , way too many in fact , no way are we going to keep them all happy this season . Two or three midfielders less and one or two decent strikers at the club would have been the way to go .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m not sure we need to build a side around Hoolahan, or that he needs "special treatment" to be accommodated in the side.  His work rate over the last two seasons has increased immensely to the point where he could possibly fill a similar role to Howson (who I would have replaced with Hoolahan after 65-70 minutes on Saturday).Yes there is the risk he''ll try the difficult pass and give the ball away, but equally he can see and make passes that nobody else in our midfield can and on his day he is a match winner.It felt to me on Saturday that we settled for the point and stopped pushing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="CDMullins"]Theres no dilema,

Neither Lambert, Houghton nor Trappatoni believe Hoolahan is good enough at this or international to have a team built around him.

It really is, as simple as that.

If he was ''that good'' he''d be be the first name on the team sheet, like Silva, Rooney and Modric (At Spurs). He may be'' that type'' of player but that doesnt mean hes good enough at this level[/quote]You sir are an idiot. Arsenal away.....Did you see that game or were you too busy licking some-ones ar$e?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="cityislife"][quote user="CDMullins"]Theres no dilema,


Neither Lambert, Houghton nor Trappatoni believe Hoolahan is good enough at this or international to have a team built around him.


It really is, as simple as that.


If he was ''that good'' he''d be be the first name on the team sheet, like Silva, Rooney and Modric (At Spurs). He may be'' that type'' of player but that doesnt mean hes good enough at this level
[/quote]

You sir are an idiot. Arsenal away.....Did you see that game or were you too busy licking some-ones ar$e?


[/quote]

 

So the whole of your evidence that we should build a team around Wes Hoolahan is..... one game.

 

Nice one

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I''m not sure we need to build a side around Hoolahan, or that he needs "special treatment" to be accommodated in the side.  His work rate over the last two seasons has increased immensely to the point where he could possibly fill a similar role to Howson (who I would have replaced with Hoolahan after 65-70 minutes on Saturday). Yes there is the risk he''ll try the difficult pass and give the ball away, but equally he can see and make passes that nobody else in our midfield can and on his day he is a match winner. It felt to me on Saturday that we settled for the point and stopped pushing."

This. People always hark on about Hoolahan losing the ball all the time, he can''t play central midfield, he can''t play on the left, he doesn''t tackle enough, he is too light weight etc.

People need to look at the stats from last year and where he actually played when brought on in games (he wasn''t only used at the tip of the diamond) and find something to back up their opinions. To not bring on your most creative player from last season when you need him is a bit worrying for me. Especially when Howson and Surman were providing very little in the last 20 minutes and are either muscled powerhouses in comparison to Wes? How exactly would he have been that big a change to Surman in particular, his tackling and work rate was good last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="TCCANARY"][quote user="lincoln canary"]

“It’s been a tough one for Wes because he’s a very good player but I’m quite sure that if he continues to do what he’s doing there is certainly scope for him to be involved, definitely.”

 

Says Hughton. I am the only one that finds this statement a little disrespectful? "Some scope to be involved" I''m sure that''ll do Wes''s confidence the world of good. Not.

[/quote]

Why have you added the word ''Some'' in the quotation, Hughton didn''t say ''some''.

I''m sure that Wes isn''t as insecure as you think, Hughton''s statement is hardly going to dent his confidence.

 

[/quote]

where has ANYONE stated we should build the team around Wes???? talk baout taking things off as a tangent. He is one of several midfield options, and on sat he looked a possible unused solution to unlock a couple of achievable extra points.

there is not one player at ncfc that is good enough to have the tactical play built around them. each should be picked on their merits.

we have strength in depth in midfield, with a variety of skills. Tettey to add ball winning capability, fox to sit deep disrupt and keep the ball moving and wes to add some creative flair. Good options, different skills for different scenarios and games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="CDMullins"]

[quote user="cityislife"][quote user="CDMullins"]Theres no dilema,

Neither Lambert, Houghton nor Trappatoni believe Hoolahan is good enough at this or international to have a team built around him.

It really is, as simple as that.

If he was ''that good'' he''d be be the first name on the team sheet, like Silva, Rooney and Modric (At Spurs). He may be'' that type'' of player but that doesnt mean hes good enough at this level[/quote]You sir are an idiot. Arsenal away.....Did you see that game or were you too busy licking some-ones ar$e?

[/quote]

 

So the whole of your evidence that we should build a team around Wes Hoolahan is..... one game.

 

Nice one

 

 

[/quote]Brilliant. So your saying that completely pulling ARSENAL to bits isnt good enough? Also....''there is no dilema'' so the main subject on the pink''un homepage and whats giving Hughton a headache is nonsenseand err.... Trapattoni has called up Hoolahan 5 times...nearest being a month ago...Under lambert in the premier league he played 33 times...Hughton has been in charge a couple of months how has he dumped him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It will be interesting to see whether Hughton gets around to his plan of playing 4-2-3-1. With Johnson and Tettey as the favourites for the defensive two, Hoolahan may get a chance as one of the three AMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Lincoln, what Hughton is saying is the quality of Snodders, Howson, Pilks, Johnson and others is better than Wes has to offer in Hughton''s set up of the team.

 

There will be times when Wes will have a psrt to play, but it speaks volumes that our midfield is that good.

 

I think people''s love with Wes needs to move on, he has done well for us and he is still part of the squad but I doubt will get picked ahead of Tettey, Butterfield and Surman, not to mention Howson, Johnson, Pilkingotn and Snodders, than we have Lapps and Bennett too!

 

Time''s have changed and our midfield is strong, creates chances and shores up the defence, it looks solid with options from the bench.

 

For me Wes will feature mainly from the sidelines this year and that''s no bad thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...