Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Not Nigel

HOLT: Signed Up Just To Say This

Recommended Posts

It has been years since I had a PinkUn account, I read it a lot (although less these days, this place has gone downhill). I just had to sign up to say my piece on Grant Holt.

It''s unbelievable how damn incapable some of the people on here are at reading a game and understanding football. I''ve seen people say that we should get rid of Grant Holt, that he doesn''t care, that he is lazy, that we should have flogged him, I''ve even seen people say that he was a liability against Spurs.

Are you people f''in serious? Without Holt in our team this year we''d be below QPR in the league.

It was Holt finding his feet in the 4-5-1 which ended our awful start to the season and took us on a 10 game unbeaten run, and it was Holt''s injury which played a huge part in our subsequent 1 point in 21 run.

It was Holt''s return which enabled us to play with so much confidence in the final third against Spurs in the first half, it was Holt''s header which led to the goal.

Grant Holt has never scored goals in a 4-5-1, he didn''t when Lambert tried it, he scores more goals in a 4-4-2..... that''s just the way he plays. That''s true with many strikers.

What he does do very well in a 4-5-1 is lead the line, hold the ball up, provide an outlet when the midfield is uninspired, pull defenders all over the place, scare opposition defenders sh*tless everytime we win a corner or free-kick (so much so that they seem to give far too much room to Bassong and Turner).

We look like twice the team with Holt in it than we do with Holt out of it. I find it unbelievable how many Norwich fans underrate Holt despite watching him, or purporting to watch him, pretty much every week.

Everybody is looking at the fact that he scored 15 league goals in an incredibly offensive gung-ho team last season, most in a 4-4-2 formation, and then equating his performances on the basis that he has scored just 4 in 21 so far this season.

Comparing goals is illogical. Kevin Davies played up front on his own for nine seasons with Bolton.... how many times did he get into double figures for them? The answer is once.... he scored an average of 7.55 goals per season.

Whilst Davies is getting on now, nobody could doubt that he was an essential part of a Bolton team in an incredibly successful period in their history (four top half finishes, qualified for Europe twice, eleven consecutive years in the Premier League).

Do you think that Kevin Davies would be scoring anymore than Holt is in this 4-5-1 formation? I don''t.

I''d like nothing more than for Hughton to try and make a 4-4-2 work, I think that 4-5-1 is a bit boring to watch at times, not always effective, and the ability to switch to 4-4-2 as soon as we go a goal down would fill me with personal joy.

I''d even hazard a guess that Holt is frustrated at having to play the lone striker role. I fear that the failure to sign Hooper will mean that 4-4-2 remains unlikely.

But the problem IS NOT Grant Holt, the problem is 4-5-1. We are never going to have a Didier Drogba, so we have our own version of Kevin Davies instead. Even Drogba would only just get into double figures in the league most season in Chelsea''s 4-5-1.

For me our 31 year old Grant Holt is just as important to us as a 31 year old Kevin Davies was to Bolton..... he was a crucial component to their prolonged success, and his gradual decline as a footballer as he aged (he is almost 36 now, by the way) correlated almost perfectly with Bolton''s gradual demise and eventual relegation.

If Hughton is going to persist with 4-5-1 then I''d be happy for Holt to be leading the line for the next few years. If Hughton is planning to eventually revert back to a 4-4-2 then I''d start judging Holt on goals again.

That''s about it, actually, my piece said. See you in four years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please post more often.An absolutely incredibly insightful and knowledgeable (sp?) post on why Grant Holt is as influential as he is. Hopefully the addition of Luciano will mean we can play 4-4-2 but I''m not holding my breath.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can''t disagree with any of that OP. Well said.

 

My one concern is that perhaps we have over the seasons become too dependent upon the big-man''s presence.

 

Other teams survive without our Grantzilla and we will have to as well, sooner rather that later.

 

I want him around for some time to come, but I also want us to explore playing options without his style being as fundamental to our approach, as it currently is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Grant Holts 3 year contract"]Please post more often.An absolutely incredibly insightful and knowledgeable (sp?) post on why Grant Holt is as influential as he is. Hopefully the addition of Luciano will mean we can play 4-4-2 but I''m not holding my breath.[/quote]

Thanks but I think I''ll remain mainly a lurker, else I''ll get dragged into the politics of the PinkUn.... it''s boring enough to read it, yet alone get sucked into it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely brilliant OP. As has been said, you should post more often but I can understand why you don''t.

I try not to respond to the morons who continually criticise Holty but sometimes I have succumbed.

Thanks for taking the time and effort to post. I have an extra spring in my step having read it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good post

I too think we need to learn to play without him, maybe bechio will help in this respect.

It was the same with huckerby, it was as if both players and fans just resigned themslves to loseing when he wasnt playing.

Holt is a massive player for the club, possibly the most influential in our history

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No player is beyond criticism and sometimes, just sometimes, Grant Holt has a bad game.

 

My main worry about Holt is the team becomes too dependent on him, like Bolton did with Kevin Davies, and never spends the money to get in someone better. Bolton bought Elmander to replace Davies and ended up selling him and keeping Davies, and then getting relegated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Grant, dont worry Becchio is just backup, your safe until summer and I doubt the boss reads these boards anyway.

 

p.s. please put Samba on his arse tommorow, greedy little mercenary.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

Hi Grant, dont worry Becchio is just backup, your safe until summer and I doubt the boss reads these boards anyway.

 

p.s. please put Samba on his arse tommorow, greedy little mercenary.

 

 

[/quote]

 

[Y]

Although Samba almost certainly took a pay-cut to join QPR.

Share this post


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

I can''t disagree with any of that OP. Well said.

 

My one concern is that perhaps we have over the seasons become too dependent upon the big-man''s presence.

 

Other teams survive without our Grantzilla and we will have to as well, sooner rather that later.

 

I want him around for some time to come, but I also want us to explore playing options without his style being as fundamental to our approach, as it currently is. 

[/quote]

Oh I agree, it''s worrying how much we still rely on Hoolahan and Holt..... the fourth consecutive season that we have relied on them. Snodgrass is fast becoming a really important attacking player for us too, but we don''t look like we have the ability to really impose ourselves on a game without Holt or Hoolahan.

That''s partly my point though really, we''ve signed several multi-million pound players and still Holt is our talisman. If people think that we can ship him out for a few million and be confident of remaining in this division then they have another thing coming.

The only way that Holt could ever be replaced is if we are lucky enough to sign strikers who come in and prove that they can keep him out of the team. Selling Holt and attempting to replace him would be suicidal, we''d end up with somebody like Jay Rodriguez (a £7m flop).

Why would anybody want Holt to leave though? The blokes a legend and a very good player, he''d get a fair amount of football at half a dozen teams in this league..... there would be no shortage of takers at £2m to £3m.... we could quite easily spend £7m on somebody who proves themselves unworthy as a replacement. I wouldn''t swap Holt for Rodriguez, it would be a terrible idea. Holt doesn''t need to leave until there are three strikers in front of him in the squad..... that will be when his legs are gone.

And it remains a possibility that should we sign Gary Hooper (I think we will in the summer), he could have a terrible first season too. He could be a Jay Rodriguez.

Craig Bellamy at Coventry is a case in point. Signed for £6m to replace Robbie Keane. Scored just 6 goals, four of them penalties, Coventry went down. Bellamy went on to rip the Premier League to shreds for five or six years, and ripped the SPL to shreds in a loan spell in fact, but took him a year to find his feet in the Premier League.

These ''grass is greener'' types should look at Paul Lambert. He thought that the grass was greener too..... Holt is a top player, we are lucky to have him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

Hi Grant, dont worry Becchio is just backup, your safe until summer and I doubt the boss reads these boards anyway.

 

p.s. please put Samba on his arse tommorow, greedy little mercenary.

 

 

[/quote]

I''m a little bit offended that you would think that I''m Grant Holt. He may be a great footballer but he is barely-literate and completely incapable of spelling!!!

Share this post


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

Hi Grant, dont worry Becchio is just backup, your safe until summer and I doubt the boss reads these boards anyway.

 

p.s. please put Samba on his arse tommorow, greedy little mercenary.

 

 

[/quote]

 

[Y]

Although Samba almost certainly took a pay-cut to join QPR.

[/quote]

Yeah BYG I did read somewhere that he took a 20k pw pay cut (how will he cope?) but I stand by the greedy mercenary bit for two reasons. Firstly the way he conducted himself at blackburn and engineered his move out and secondly it is my opinion the guy is actually pretty good, capable of playing in the current teams of clubs like liverpool, arsenal, everton and others aiming for european qualification. The reason he ended up in Russia and QPR is that he''s chasing the money instead of glory. If it was me I would rather play in a good team on £70k pw than a relegation doomed team on £100k pw and I say that hand on heart.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A very good read and so true. I wondered whether CH wanted Hooper to replace Wes? I love Wes and his workrate is phenominal these days but his pace and scoring record are not up to the mark for a withdrawn striker, after all Holt is mainly doing the donkey work to give Wes space.

Share this post


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

No player is beyond criticism and sometimes, just sometimes, Grant Holt has a bad game.

 

My main worry about Holt is the team becomes too dependent on him, like Bolton did with Kevin Davies, and never spends the money to get in someone better. Bolton bought Elmander to replace Davies and ended up selling him and keeping Davies, and then getting relegated.

 

 

[/quote]

Grant Holt is not and should not be immune to criticism.

My criticism of Holt is the way that he always seems to start the season half a stone heavier than he ends it, having spent most of pre-season out on the lash. He is a slow-starter and I think that may be his own fault. He admits that he doesn''t train very hard too.

But for me he found his feet by October and has shown how important he is since. I haven''t seen him have too many, if any, bad games since early late September.

When you are playing up front on your own you are stuck there and have to wait for the midfielders to get the ball for you..... I mean we have five of them on the pitch at any one time every week, and that is a huge part of their job.

When you are playing as part of a front two one of you can drop deep to collect the ball, or drift out wide, Holt is stuck up there on his own leading the line waiting for a long ball..... and when those balls aren''t coming there is nothing he can do about it.

When he is in a 4-4-2 he does just that..... drops deep and drifts out wide. He looks lazier now to some people because he doesn''t run all over the place..... his job now is to NOT run all over the place. That''s Hughton''s system not Holt..... I''d love to see a 4-4-2, but alas we just don''t use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sweet baby Jesus..don''t leave for 4 years. Absolutely spot on and the best way of putting it in every sense. I love the big man and couldn''t imagine us without him tbh. I, like most people I think, just hope that someone is good enough to play beside him. Holt with a decent and worthy partner would be bang on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I don''t understand some of the abuse about that Holt''s getting performance wise as he''s been great this season again in a different role to last season. Although he will be (quite rightly) disappointed he hasn''t got more goals, his job this season is to create space for our attacking midfielders, which is a hard job done very well.

 

However, next season we will spend alot of money on a quality striker, (perhaps two) because Holt is getting old and we don''t want him to turn into Kevin Davies thankyou very much; someone Bolton should have sold beforehand to get a reasonable fee (I think Mcnally would agree due to the contract issue in the summer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

Yeah BYG I did read somewhere that he took a 20k pw pay cut (how will he cope?) but I stand by the greedy mercenary bit for two reasons. Firstly the way he conducted himself at blackburn and engineered his move out and secondly it is my opinion the guy is actually pretty good, capable of playing in the current teams of clubs like liverpool, arsenal, everton and others aiming for european qualification. The reason he ended up in Russia and QPR is that he''s chasing the money instead of glory. If it was me I would rather play in a good team on £70k pw than a relegation doomed team on £100k pw and I say that hand on heart.

[/quote]

Chance would be a fine thing, hey?

 

I know what you mean but when Samba moved to Russia it was in Feb last year, after the January window had closed for most European teams. Samba had tried very hard to get a move to a Liverpool, Everton etc through his agent, but none of them made an offer for him that Blackburn would accept (I think they basically refused to sell him to an EPL club). Players can''t choose to play for a club that doesn''t want them and that was the case for Samba - it''s not really his fault a Russia team with bags of cash offered him a crazy deal.

 

He wasn''t given the choice of a £100k a week or a £70k a week deal - he was offered a chance back into the Premier League or staying in Russia. The real mercanary would have refused and stayed there collecting his extra money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 haha, sorry Singup and you are correct, the spelinz shud of givin it away!

OT I do agree that Holt remains an important part of our team, maybe even more so now than last season as the role he plays is that much harder mentially (had morro been trying to do this role his head would of dropped months ago after a few barren games). while we are blessed with scoring midfielders it doesnt matter so much if Holt only score 6-7 a season and we remain tight at the back. its remaining tight at the back that concerns me, if we cant do it then we need more goals.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add on the Holt debate - I think he has made it pretty clear that he doesn''t feel much of a connection to Norwich and would happily switch clubs if the chance came along. Fair enough, Norwich will try to get shot of him as soon as he doesn''t make the grade anyway.

 

I''d happily sell him in the summer and bring in a replacement - it is of course a risk but its also a risk to keep him and hope he is as good at 33 as he was at 31. Best to cut your loses on these kind of things rather than have a beloved player who is slowly getting worse and worse.

Share this post


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

Hi Grant, dont worry Becchio is just backup, your safe until summer and I doubt the boss reads these boards anyway.

 

p.s. please put Samba on his arse tommorow, greedy little mercenary.

 

 

[/quote]

 

[Y]

Although Samba almost certainly took a pay-cut to join QPR.

[/quote]

Yeah BYG I did read somewhere that he took a 20k pw pay cut (how will he cope?) but I stand by the greedy mercenary bit for two reasons. Firstly the way he conducted himself at blackburn and engineered his move out and secondly it is my opinion the guy is actually pretty good, capable of playing in the current teams of clubs like liverpool, arsenal, everton and others aiming for european qualification. The reason he ended up in Russia and QPR is that he''s chasing the money instead of glory. If it was me I would rather play in a good team on £70k pw than a relegation doomed team on £100k pw and I say that hand on heart.

 

 

[/quote]

Typical Redknapp spin, makes me laugh. Samba signs a four year £100k a week contract with Anzhi in February 2012..... gets a signing on fee of £1.25m (based on 10% of transfer fee, that is typical).

Then he signs for QPR one year later on a four and a half year deal, grabs another signing on fee of £1.25m.

So Samba had 3 years left at £100k a week = £15.6m with signing on fee already banked so not in the equation.

He joins QPR who give him £80k a week for four and a half years and gets another signing on fee of a similar amount = £18.72

In three years at the end of his Anzhi contract he would have been almost 32. His new contract is the equivalent of earning the exact same amount of money for the first three years, and then £40000 per week for a year a half that he wasn''t already contracted for.

So as opposed to "taking a pay cut" he is effectively just guaranteeing that he will be earning £40000 a week as a 33 or 34 year old center back..... by which time it is more than possible that his legs could be gone. Signing his next contract early....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you Singup, my faith is restored in the fact that there are still people with a proper understanding about the way the game is played. Not many mind you, but you are certainly one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="singupcarrowroad"]

 Typical Redknapp spin, makes me laugh. Samba signs a four year £100k a week contract with Anzhi in February 2012..... gets a signing on fee of £1.25m (based on 10% of transfer fee, that is typical). Then he signs for QPR one year later on a four and a half year deal, grabs another signing on fee of £1.25m. So Samba had 3 years left at £100k a week = £15.6m with signing on fee already banked so not in the equation. He joins QPR who give him £80k a week for four and a half years and gets another signing on fee of a similar amount = £18.72 In three years at the end of his Anzhi contract he would have been almost 32. His new contract is the equivalent of earning the exact same amount of money for the first three years, and then £40000 per week for a year a half that he wasn''t already contracted for. So as opposed to "taking a pay cut" he is effectively just guaranteeing that he will be earning £40000 a week as a 33 or 34 year old center back..... by which time it is more than possible that his legs could be gone. Signing his next contract early....[/quote]

What you are forgetting is the 12% tax rate in Russia, so he would have been earning a lot more there net than he will in England. Also Anzhi buy all their players very nice flats to live in, in Moscow.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

Just to add on the Holt debate - I think he has made it pretty clear that he doesn''t feel much of a connection to Norwich and would happily switch clubs if the chance came along. Fair enough, Norwich will try to get shot of him as soon as he doesn''t make the grade anyway.

 

I''d happily sell him in the summer and bring in a replacement - it is of course a risk but its also a risk to keep him and hope he is as good at 33 as he was at 31. Best to cut your loses on these kind of things rather than have a beloved player who is slowly getting worse and worse.

[/quote]

Bethnal Yellow, how has he made it clear that he doesn''t have much of a connection to Norwich? Sounds like pure conjuncture to me. If you mean the transfer request then I think you will find that his discontentment was at the length of his contract. He wanted three years, he had two years, wanting to stay an extra year? Doesn''t sound too desperate to leave to me. Both Lambert and Hughton gave him the captain''s armband, the players love him, we play better with him on the pitch..... the idea that he doesn''t want to be here doesn''t sit with me.

The thing is that the statement "a beloved player who is slowly getting worse and worse" isn''t one which I agree with, that''s my point of this thread - I simply cannot agree that he is any worse than he was last year. I thought I''d done a pretty good job of illustrating how he is doing the job that he has been given very well.

You are, basically, one of the people that I was referring to in my original thread. You don''t understand Holt''s ability, his importance to the team, and think that he is somehow easily replaceable. You think that he is declining as a player when it is obvious that he is being heavily restricted by tactics. What evidence is there that he is in any way declining or "getting worse"? Less goals? Simple.... less chances. Less running? Simple..... he has a responsibility to the team to stay rigid. He hasn''t got the license to be fluid and all over the place like some sort of maverick trequartista..... there is no evidence to suggest that, if played in a 4-4-2, he wouldn''t be all over the place drifting wide, running to the corners, and dropping deep.... like we are used to him doing.

I 100% disagree with you on this.

Share this post


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

[quote user="singupcarrowroad"]

 Typical Redknapp spin, makes me laugh. Samba signs a four year £100k a week contract with Anzhi in February 2012..... gets a signing on fee of £1.25m (based on 10% of transfer fee, that is typical). Then he signs for QPR one year later on a four and a half year deal, grabs another signing on fee of £1.25m. So Samba had 3 years left at £100k a week = £15.6m with signing on fee already banked so not in the equation. He joins QPR who give him £80k a week for four and a half years and gets another signing on fee of a similar amount = £18.72 In three years at the end of his Anzhi contract he would have been almost 32. His new contract is the equivalent of earning the exact same amount of money for the first three years, and then £40000 per week for a year a half that he wasn''t already contracted for. So as opposed to "taking a pay cut" he is effectively just guaranteeing that he will be earning £40000 a week as a 33 or 34 year old center back..... by which time it is more than possible that his legs could be gone. Signing his next contract early....[/quote]

What you are forgetting is the 12% tax rate in Russia, so he would have been earning a lot more there net than he will in England. Also Anzhi buy all their players very nice flats to live in, in Moscow.

 

 

 

[/quote]

Oooooo 12% tax rate in Russia, maybe as Jimmy Carr about the completely legal 1% tax rate in London. That will explain the QPR move.... always handy to have a tax expert on hand 24/7.

Share this post


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

[quote user="singupcarrowroad"]

 Typical Redknapp spin, makes me laugh. Samba signs a four year £100k a week contract with Anzhi in February 2012..... gets a signing on fee of £1.25m (based on 10% of transfer fee, that is typical). Then he signs for QPR one year later on a four and a half year deal, grabs another signing on fee of £1.25m. So Samba had 3 years left at £100k a week = £15.6m with signing on fee already banked so not in the equation. He joins QPR who give him £80k a week for four and a half years and gets another signing on fee of a similar amount = £18.72 In three years at the end of his Anzhi contract he would have been almost 32. His new contract is the equivalent of earning the exact same amount of money for the first three years, and then £40000 per week for a year a half that he wasn''t already contracted for. So as opposed to "taking a pay cut" he is effectively just guaranteeing that he will be earning £40000 a week as a 33 or 34 year old center back..... by which time it is more than possible that his legs could be gone. Signing his next contract early....[/quote]

What you are forgetting is the 12% tax rate in Russia, so he would have been earning a lot more there net than he will in England. Also Anzhi buy all their players very nice flats to live in, in Moscow.

 

 

 

[/quote]

On a par with Timbuktu then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So true I have been complaining about this all season. Wes doesnt shoot enough which is one of the major reasons we are amongst the most goalshy in the League. Will be interesting to see the options we now have with Becchio/Kamara. Bechio as No10 (has played there for Leeds) Snodgrass Behind with Bennet on the wing or vice versa. Kamara  wide with Snod/Bennett/Wes/ Behind Holt.

I couldn''t believe anyone would think of letting Holt go would be suicidal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excellent stuff singup. A huge part of our great run earlier in the season was the discipline and workrate of,in particular, Holt, Hoolihan, Johnson,Tettey and Snodgrass.  Our decline in form coincided exactly with Holt getting injured and the others starting to look tired and jaded after their exertions in earlier games.  Given that Holty has never relied on pace i am completely confident that he will see out his contract as a vital player for us even if we remain in the Prem., and could well be given another one.

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  

×