BUNN

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

The Guardian seem to think he did alright;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/dec/03/premier-league-10-talking-points

See point 9.

 

[Gingerpele 0]

He''ll be in Garth Crooks team of the week I reckon.

[First Wizard 0]

Bunn''s saves in the second half were superb...........and still some gripe about him, amazing! [:S]

[Mr Wolf 0]

Bunn also made some tremendous saves to keep us in the game.  He was rightly awarded man of the match.

[Steady On... 0]

Big hole left in the right flank. Very similar to surez goal position. Snodgrass doubled up on the winger and left it. Simple to fix. Not bunns fault, had a great game and I have full confidence in him in Ruddys absence.

[splutcho 173]

Just my two cents, and I don''t want to get on his back to much because by and large he had a very good game and I think he''ll get better.

I do think Ruddy would have saved the goal, but it was hardly a simple save. The other point which I think has been overlooked here is that he was bloody lucky that Wickham was offside because he pushed it right back out to him. No case to answer for the Kilgallon miss of course because getting anything on that free kick was fantastic.

[Six Pack 91]

Yesterday was the first time I have seen Bunn in action - I was stunned with how small he is.  To me this is the main  difference between Bunn & Ruddy. For a goalkeeper Bunn is too small for this league. Ruddy is 6ft 4 - 6ft 5 - Bunn is about 6ft or under which is the same height as the outfield players. Ruddy looks formidable and gives me great confidence. Bunn looks a very good shot stopper but his lack of height is a major concern for me.  He is punching at balls where Ruddy would comfortably collect and Bunn can be easily "sandwiched" by opposing players at corners and set pieces, so lacks that physical presence to dominate his penalty area. I didn''t think he was at fault with the Sunderland goal and probably saved us from defeat with some excellent stops - that''s something we''re use to now with Ruddy. I did not come on here to criticize Bunn but to air my point of view. If he becomes our regular goalkeeper & with his lack of height- I fear we will eventually be "found out" .

[shefcanary 2,383]

Hi I''m not griping about Bunn''s goal saving ability, I was just curious as to why people think he now seems to boot the ball clear, when with Ruddy the team seemed to mainly look to build from the back.  Given we are supposed to be a good passing side, against Sunderland on Sunday we just seemed to surrender possession back to Sunderland all the time as Bunn''s clearances found no-one in particular. 

 

Again I ask for people''s opinions - did Bunn continue to kick long because Sunderland were pressing more than other teams have against us, was it because Bunn''s boomers were seen as an appropriate outlet against Sunderlands high defence line, or is it because Bunn is not so hot on finding the right outlet for a short pass to defenders.  I was perplexed and felt it had to be the latter but it might have been for the former two.  What say you?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Rock The Boat"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]I wasn''t just talking about this thread. Some are dead against even talking about the suggestion of Bennett or Morison starting a game. I assumed this OP was sarcastic, because anyone blaming Bunn for the goal is out of their mind.[/quote]

 

Well I''m certainly gainst making changes to a team thats on an 8 game unbeaten run. What''s the argument in favour of making these changes?

 

 

[/quote] One good argument is that only QPR have scored fewer goals in the league. That suggests we owe our league position to our defense and that we could improve our attack. I''m sure that while Chris Hughton and his staff are happy with our current form, they will be looking at ways to improve the team and I don''t see that GingerP is suggesting nothing more than CH is thinking - how to make good become better.[/quote]

 

That''s it then! Me and GPele having a debate about whether we should keepfaith in the players who have taken us on this amazing run. But we can''t possible compete with Rocky who speaks on Chris Hughton''s behalf.

 

One small thing though Rocky.. If Hughton is looking to bench players why hasn''t he done it?

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

The Guardian seem to think he did alright;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/dec/03/premier-league-10-talking-points

See point 9.

 

[/quote]

 

Bethnal, I''ve seen that, but then what the average football journalist knows about the finer and less obvious points of goalkeeping, such as positional play, could be represented by a blank page. I''m not saying that Bunn didn''t make some fine saves, which may well have made up for a single lapse. I have no idea. I didn''t see the game. All I have seen are the goals, and he was positionally at fault. Others may have been at fault too; I didn''t say there weren''t.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Six Pack"]Yesterday was the first time I have seen Bunn in action - I was stunned with how small he is.  To me this is the main  difference between Bunn & Ruddy. For a goalkeeper Bunn is too small for this league. Ruddy is 6ft 4 - 6ft 5 - Bunn is about 6ft or under which is the same height as the outfield players. Ruddy looks formidable and gives me great confidence. Bunn looks a very good shot stopper but his lack of height is a major concern for me.  He is punching at balls where Ruddy would comfortably collect and Bunn can be easily "sandwiched" by opposing players at corners and set pieces, so lacks that physical presence to dominate his penalty area. I didn''t think he was at fault with the Sunderland goal and probably saved us from defeat with some excellent stops - that''s something we''re use to now with Ruddy. I did not come on here to criticize Bunn but to air my point of view. If he becomes our regular goalkeeper & with his lack of height- I fear we will eventually be "found out" .
[/quote]

 

Oh really?

 

You''d love him at Poorman Rd, you know you would.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

The Guardian seem to think he did alright;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/dec/03/premier-league-10-talking-points

See point 9.

 

[/quote]

 

Bethnal, I''ve seen that, but then what the average football journalist knows about the finer and less obvious points of goalkeeping, such as positional play, could be represented by a blank page. I''m not saying that Bunn didn''t make some fine saves, which may well have made up for a single lapse. I have no idea. I didn''t see the game. All I have seen are the goals, and he was positionally at fault. Others may have been at fault too; I didn''t say there weren''t.

[/quote]

To be honest - I''m a little bit with you on this one PC.

 

During the game I tweeted that Bunn''s handling had been suspect at times - but he had so much to do in the second half there were always going to be some slip ups. He coped with most things well and I don''t see and urgent need to bring anyone else in to replace him (not that you were suggesting such).

 

Goalkeeping is position of fine margins that lead to dramatic results, by possibly standing 1 meter in the wrong direction Gardner was able to squeeze the ball in at the far post - I am more frustrated with the midfield for allowing him a shot when his ability from distance is no secret and Martin O''Neill was screming at him to shoot more.

 

All shots are saveable of course, but I''m happy to give Bunn the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[dpit 1]

Wiz, be careful. You know how much criticism you receive for changing your viewpoint like the wind and you have also been accused of being a secret binner. You have defended yourself,fair enough, but I do feel that this type of comment is somewhat...unwise, given the fact that you object when similar stuff is aimed at you.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

The Guardian seem to think he did alright;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/dec/03/premier-league-10-talking-points

See point 9.

 

[/quote]

 

Bethnal, I''ve seen that, but then what the average football journalist knows about the finer and less obvious points of goalkeeping, such as positional play, could be represented by a blank page. I''m not saying that Bunn didn''t make some fine saves, which may well have made up for a single lapse. I have no idea. I didn''t see the game. All I have seen are the goals, and he was positionally at fault. Others may have been at fault too; I didn''t say there weren''t.

[/quote]

To be honest - I''m a little bit with you on this one PC.

 

During the game I tweeted that Bunn''s handling had been suspect at times - but he had so much to do in the second half there were always going to be some slip ups. He coped with most things well and I don''t see and urgent need to bring anyone else in to replace him (not that you were suggesting such).

 

Goalkeeping is position of fine margins that lead to dramatic results, by possibly standing 1 meter in the wrong direction Gardner was able to squeeze the ball in at the far post - I am more frustrated with the midfield for allowing him a shot when his ability from distance is no secret and Martin O''Neill was screming at him to shoot more.

 

All shots are saveable of course, but I''m happy to give Bunn the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[/quote]

 

The thread''s got a bit sidetracked from Purple''s original point. Which was probably a fair one. All goalkeepers make saves but what seperates the best from the rest is their judgement. Ruddy''s an England ''keeper and Bunn won''t be so good right now. Bunn will make brilliant saves but will fall short of Ruddy''s high standards in the art of goalkeeping. But to avoid that we''d have to have to international quality goalkeepers and that wouldn''t be the best use of the resources available to us.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="dpit"]Wiz, be careful. You know how much criticism you receive for changing your viewpoint like the wind and you have also been accused of being a secret binner. You have defended yourself,fair enough, but I do feel that this type of comment is somewhat...unwise, given the fact that you object when similar stuff is aimed at you.[/quote]

 

Dippity buddy....

 

Is your day job a traffic warden[:^)]

 

 

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="dpit"]Wiz, be careful. You know how much criticism you receive for changing your viewpoint like the wind and you have also been accused of being a secret binner. You have defended yourself,fair enough, but I do feel that this type of comment is somewhat...unwise, given the fact that you object when similar stuff is aimed at you.[/quote]He loves the attention and knows what he''s doing.  People seem to be ignoring him at the moment so he''s probably trying to stir some crud.  Expect a "Stephen Fry is HOMOSEXUAL!!!!!" thread on Friday.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="dpit"]Wiz, be careful. You know how much criticism you receive for changing your viewpoint like the wind and you have also been accused of being a secret binner. You have defended yourself,fair enough, but I do feel that this type of comment is somewhat...unwise, given the fact that you object when similar stuff is aimed at you.[/quote]

He loves the attention and knows what he''s doing.  People seem to be ignoring him at the moment so he''s probably trying to stir some crud.  Expect a "Stephen Fry is HOMOSEXUAL!!!!!" thread on Friday.

[/quote]

 

And a happy Christmas to you too.

[Vazzza 62]

Ok, I''m a little bit late joing this convo, but I wasn''t 100% convinced by Bunn yesterday.

My biggest worry was where he was parrying the ball to when making saves. That Gardner chance where he put it over the bar from 6 yards out and an empty goal was the main one. I think the goal was his fault aswell. He got a touch on it but it went right through his hands. A stronger touch would have put that round the post.

But, on the flip side he made some fantastic saves. I think a couple more games and he''ll be playing very well and we''ll barely miss Ruddy. But last night, I think MotM is a bit too far.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="dpit"]Wiz, be careful. You know how much criticism you receive for changing your viewpoint like the wind and you have also been accused of being a secret binner. You have defended yourself,fair enough, but I do feel that this type of comment is somewhat...unwise, given the fact that you object when similar stuff is aimed at you.[/quote]

 

In general dpit, I''ve kicked this website into touch, 90% are a*seholes who post on here now anyway. The good posters have all gone elsewhere and I just ''lurk'' now.

 

The one''s who always slagg me off are now picking on other posters (although one mug''s already started on me within 5 minutes of my return!) so their motives are clear!

 

So in short I''ll ignore your well meaning advice, I''ve moved on, but I''ll still chip in..........if and when I feel like it.

 

Happy Christmas.

[a1canary 0]

I hesitate to return to GP vs Nutty which has run on a bit but...

I''m with GP on this. To answer Nutty''s repeated question - "why change a team that has gone 8 games unbeaten?" i would say the following:

1. To keep the team fresh - those players are goosed, Holt has said it, Hughton has said it. 8 games unbeaten is as much a reason to freshen it up as to leave it the same because you won''t keep it going forever.

2. Show the rest of the squad that they are valued and as important as the first 11. You wouldn''t do this if they weren''t but our midfield patently is as good as those who are going out at the moment and you are damaging their confidence and squad morale by not giving them a look in. The same goes for Jackson and Morison although i accept it''s harder here because they are different types of players. 

You can not underestimate the importance of squad morale - it''s a huge part of what has made us successful these last years. The reason it was so good under Lambert was because he showed that he believed in all the squad by making sure they get games.

This does NOT mean i am suggesting you put an inferior player on just to make him happy. But we have a good number of players who aren''t playing and are just as good as the players out there and there is a good reason to get them on now given the fatigue levels and let them play a part. No matter what you say about how important they are, if you don''t play them, you''re not backing your words with actions and this will affect squad morale and they will eventually leave.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="a1canary"]

 "why change a team that has gone 8 games unbeaten?"

[/quote]

 

Why wait until a team gets beaten to make changes?

 

It was obvious last night that Tettey and Johnson are absolutely goosed - not surprising as they have both played every minute in every game for a while now and both play high energy games.

 

[Bill 1,788]

or maybe you have been exposed as a fraud, too many times

 

As to the irony of you once again playing the victim, I doubt it is lost on most on here

 

Who was it ''always slagg'' ing of the club and it''s officials, in quite some nasty and malicious posts. Who was it wishing '' the witch dead'' ? Accused her and her husband of stealing money from the club, Fry of being a convicted class A drug user, Bowkett of lying to the fans ? And the all too predictable and constant stream of attacks upon Hughton.

 

When our club has needed support you have been all to gleefully prepared to put the boot in. Even to the point of encouraging City fans to gob on the football ground.

 

You are no more a Norwich City supporter than the pope is a condom salesman, and your self imposed exile is a reflection of you knowing that most on here now know that fact.

 

 

[dpit 1]

"Dippity buddy....

Is your day job a traffic warden"

Head of the Forum Decorum Police? or Trumped Up Little Twerp with Over-Inflated Sense of His Own Importance?

If I were a traffic warden, I''d want to exercise pro-active anti-social parking avoidance strategies.

"Do you really want to park there, sir? May I suggest you may offend the owners of this driveway were you to do so. Perhaps it would be better to avail yourself of the local multi-storey facilities."

I''ll get me yellow banded peak cap...

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

You don''t change a winning side (unless forced to). West brom and RDM''s Chelsea have done so recently and both lived to regret it.

Forget the adverse effect/mixed messages it would send to the players that have given us our longest unbeaten run since 1993.......They''re getting us points and winning us games!

I couldn''t give a flying f**k at the moment if snodgrass makes the odd mistake or pilks fluffs a shot into the upper Barclay (as both of these players were mentioned as needing improvement) they both contributed to our goals yesterday. It''s the one moment when they score/assist that makes the difference....and how are they going to do that on the bench!

As for improving their individual game, what''s training for? I''m sure Hughton has a good assessment on each player and has them working on improvements all the time. They''re not thinking we''re the finished article and just need to win 1-0 at home and take a point away each week, continual improvement and hard work is what Hughton talks about a lot. From each match and training in the week, he will pick the best team possible to win, And as we''re unbeaten in 8, I think he''s got it right.

There would be a point to this debate if a player stood out as having a poor game, but that simply hasn''t happened and one of the most impressive (and commented on) aspects of this run is the team working as a unit and playing for each other. I''m sure anyone coming into the team would also work their socks off for the team, but again, why the need to change it.

Key point for me: Every player in the world can improve a part of their game, but why take them out of a winning side with no guarantee their replacement will fare better? It''s asking for trouble in more ways than one.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

Mark Bunn was a trainee with Spurs from 1998 - 2000. Presumably that''s where Chris Hughton knew him from.

 

At the age of 28 this is his BIG chance.

 

So far he''s doing just fine and the crowd needs to support him all they can. He''ll make an error or two but all goalkeepers do.

 

Good luck to you Mark Bunn.

 

OTBC

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Persnickety"]You don''t change a winning side (unless forced to). [/quote]

Strongly disagree with that - better to make small manageable changes to the team rather than needed to make larger changes due to fatigue. Both Johnson and Tettey were showing it against Sunderland and both need a rest, but it would be impossible to do that for both players at the sametime, better to rest one at a time.

 

Lack of rotation has done for many better teams than Norwich''s current squad in the past, Redknapp''s teams always fall away towards the end of the season as he is famously bad at knowing when to rest players, resulting in injuries. Going back a few years but Charlton''s end of season failings were also due to squad members becoming burnt out. Everton also have had the same problems over recent seasons as David Moyles tries to get too many games out of his players.

 

Rotation is vital over a course of a season, it has to be managed correctly of course, but attempting to play the same players week in, week out will result in fatigue at best and long term injuries at worst.

[eldrich canary 0]

I do have some concerns, I remember a few years ago we had the England #2 keeper (Greeno) and he go injured so Gallacher payed, he played well and so when Greeno moved on he became the holder of the shirt. Then that season was the season of 5 keepers under Mr Grant.

We''re blessed to have the England #2 keeper in our squad and as long as Bunn is as good a keeper as your average Championship one then we''ll be okay until Ruddy gets back.

Bunn looks to have most of the qualities needed of a top level reserve keeper so I think that getting him in was a great decision.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Persnickety"]You don''t change a winning side (unless forced to). [/quote]

Strongly disagree with that - better to make small manageable changes to the team rather than needed to make larger changes due to fatigue. Both Johnson and Tettey were showing it against Sunderland and both need a rest, but it would be impossible to do that for both players at the sametime, better to rest one at a time.

 

Lack of rotation has done for many better teams than Norwich''s current squad in the past, Redknapp''s teams always fall away towards the end of the season as he is famously bad at knowing when to rest players, resulting in injuries. Going back a few years but Charlton''s end of season failings were also due to squad members becoming burnt out. Everton also have had the same problems over recent seasons as David Moyles tries to get too many games out of his players.

 

Rotation is vital over a course of a season, it has to be managed correctly of course, but attempting to play the same players week in, week out will result in fatigue at best and long term injuries at worst.

[/quote]

 

What I''ve noticed is that when the manager doesn''t change a team the fans want squad rotation. But when he does change the team and there''s no improvement he''s a tinkerman.

 

The suggestions to bench Pilkington/Snodgrass and start Bennett are interesting. These two players have been instrumental in scoring and making the goals that have put us on this amazing run. Snodgrass has 2 goals in 15 games, Pilkington 10 goals in 45 games and Elliott Bennett 1 goal in 44 games. Elliott Bennett however is a better crosser of the ball than the other two. But that would be of limited use whilst Holt is dragging defenders all over the place to make room for other players to score.

 

I was surprised that these players managed to put in 3 big performances in 8 days. I agree with Beth that they will be in danger of becoming "burnt out". I don''t think this system would work so well with different personnel so eventually we will need a plan b. Maybe after January we will have more options.

 

Elliott Bennett will get his chance and the side will evolve during the season through injuries and suspensions. The team in May maybe totally different to the one that has produced this magnificent run. I don''t pretend to speak for Hughton and I''m just offering a supporter''s opinion. But I would start with Bassong, Tettey, Hoolahan and Holt then select the rest of the players to fit a system which best suits these four.

 

 

[Steady On... 0]

There''s no way Johnson and especially tettey were tired. Complete tosh. Watch the game

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="City1st"]

or maybe you have been exposed as a fraud, too many times

 

As to the irony of you once again playing the victim, I doubt it is lost on most on here

 

Who was it ''always slagg'' ing of the club and it''s officials, in quite some nasty and malicious posts. Who was it wishing '' the witch dead'' ? Accused her and her husband of stealing money from the club, Fry of being a convicted class A drug user, Bowkett of lying to the fans ? And the all too predictable and constant stream of attacks upon Hughton.

 

When our club has needed support you have been all to gleefully prepared to put the boot in. Even to the point of encouraging City fans to gob on the football ground.

 

You are no more a Norwich City supporter than the pope is a condom salesman, and your self imposed exile is a reflection of you knowing that most on here now know that fact.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

 

Okay, 91% of posters on here!

 

Prove it............minus your usual imbellisments, add on''s and dramatisations.