Snodders

[superzach 0]

Robert Snodgrass has urged Norwich City boss Chris Hughton to start playing with two up front.

Grant Holt pulled out of the goalless draw with Fulham with a back injury so he could not start with new signing Luciano Becchio.

And Scotland winger Snodgrass said Norwich needed to get more bodies into the box to stop their slide down the table.

“They are two out-and-out goalscorers who can do well for Norwich City,” he said.

“The first two minutes of the game I whipped one across the face of the

goal and you think to yourself ‘if there’s two strikers in there then

you’ve got a better chance of scoring’.

“I tried to do as well as I could really and tried to get at people, but

there was nobody in front of me and I had to keep going. There was

nobody I could pass to. You need to get players forward if you want to

win the game.”

[Salopian 1]

I feel sorry for Snodders when "there''s nobody in front of me". If he waits for reinforcements, the defence will be back in numbers, so what does he do?

 

The problem, of course, is that we play only one striker, even if Wes gets forward. Becchio is not the quickest either, and was marked by two huge centre backs who didn''t take prisoners. CH must surely heed what Snodders says and, when we play at home at least, consider using two strikers.I am not sure this would work against Everton, as they are a good side and could hurt us, but it would be a worthwhile risk against lesser teams.

 

I wouldn''t want to burden the man with too many hopes on his back, but Kei could be the asnwer, with his pace and strength. When he is facing goal and the defenders are facing him, it''s either a penalty or he''s past them while they are turning. He is much quicker than Holt, but just as well able to hold his own in a battle of muscle!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

I thought the plan was to play two up front on Saturday? From what little I''ve seen of Kamara I''d play Holty in an advanced Wes role with Kamara in front of him. That would give us the option of being dangerous from either wing and down the centre. If either striker goes wide to support the winger then the other should be in the box. We have seen this with Wes but he doesn''t really have the presence to be a big threat. However he had two great chances at QPR from Snodgrass crosses.

 

 

[superzach 0]

if we play with two up front where does that leave wessi? a think a front two of any of beccio, holt, kamara has goals in it.  and i wonder if holt needs a few games on the bench to re-motivate him?

[The Young One 0]

Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="The Young One"]Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .[/quote]

I see what you''re saying, but Hughton did go 2 up top when he put Jacko on for E Bennett in the 76th. Not early enough, but to say he settled for a point when he went to 442 with 15 to go and then made another attacking sub when he put Kamara on for Becchio with 5 left is a bit weird.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I thought the plan was to play two up front on Saturday? From what little I''ve seen of Kamara I''d play Holty in an advanced Wes role with Kamara in front of him. That would give us the option of being dangerous from either wing and down the centre. If either striker goes wide to support the winger then the other should be in the box. We have seen this with Wes but he doesn''t really have the presence to be a big threat. However he had two great chances at QPR from Snodgrass crosses.

 

 

[/quote]

 

My thoughts as well. As much as Wes spins and twists etc the end product is all to often of no great effect. We need to play to up front and that means sacrificing Wes. Games against Newcastle, QPR and Fulham were there for the winning.

 

We cannot rely upon players falling over in front of opponents and getting ''dodgy'' freekics just outside of the box as our main means of scoring. this has been found out. Maybe not in stopping the freekicks, but in dealing with them. When was the last time we scored from one of these set pieces ?

 

Get both Kamara and Holt giving the defence grief and interchange with Bechio to keep up the pressure. encourage Pilks, E Bennett to copy Snodgrass and attack the opponents defence. Don''t be frightened of attacking fotball, taking the game to the opponents rather than sitting back and playing eight men across the park.

 

Up and at ''em. is my view.

 

 

[Reasonable Canary 0]

[quote user="The Young One"]Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .[/quote]

Please. For the good of Norwich City, lose interest entirely.

[ricardo 7,342]

[quote user="The Young One"]Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .[/quote]Well I must have watched a different game because never at any time did I think Fulham were there for the taking. With a name like the Young One, I would guess that you are not an old stager. If you are losing interest in NCFC after a few uninspiring recent games then I doubt you will have the stamina to be a long term supporter. Some of us have stood and sat through decades of dross without weakening mate. I can promise you that when you''ve done fifty years the worst is over.[;)]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="superzach"]if we play with two up front where does that leave wessi?[/quote]Are you the same "superzach" as the opening poster? If not, it''s an uncanny coincidence.

[Not Nigel 0]

I believe Hughton when he says he was going to go with two up front to be honest, and suspect we will see 4-4-2 a bit more going forward.

[AJ 1,218]

Snodders seemed really peeved and frustrated after the match on Saturday - he knows we should have won as much as anyone. Such a trier and our only dangerous outlet. He''s right though, we need bodies in the box, and hopefully Hootaaaarn will listen to him

[Roodge 0]

Maybe, just maybe, the problem might be Wes? as good as he is at defensive ball holding, we could use someone with a bit more cut & thrust, someone who can hit a ball from the edge of the box, & back up the centre forward. The name of Graham Paddon springs to mind. If Wes gets marked, we really do have only one up front. How many goals has Wes scored this last couple of seasons? Kamara might just be the surprise package. Now wheres my flameproof suit?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Roodge"]Maybe, just maybe, the problem might be Wes? as good as he is at defensive ball holding, we could use someone with a bit more cut & thrust, someone who can hit a ball from the edge of the box, & back up the centre forward. The name of Graham Paddon springs to mind. If Wes gets marked, we really do have only one up front. How many goals has Wes scored this last couple of seasons? Kamara might just be the surprise package. Now wheres my flameproof suit?
[/quote]

 

You don''t need a flame proof suit but I don''t think Wes is the problem. The problem that I see is that we had no alternative to Wes and Holty until this window. If you remember Hughton tried other combinations first inclding Morison and Jackson. he soon found out that they didn''t work and Wes with Holty proved to be the best of what he had. Since this transfer window he now has options. This doesn''t mean the end for Wes. Just means we can have a realistic plan B and maybe plan C.

 

 

[Michael Starr 519]

Somebody should tell our management team that for each minute the ball is in our opponents half, our opponent cannot score. In the cases of home games against average teams, surely it makes more sense to hit them, get the crowd going, and make teams know that they are not going to be in for an easy ride against us. We might be a smaller club, but we are still in the BEST league in WORLD football, our players are not poor. We can hurt teams and we proved it last season but finishing ABOVE alot of these so-called-bigger clubs.I watched the Fulham game on Saturday and there are no excuses for that level of performance. It wouldn''t be so bad had it been a one off, but it wasn''t was it. Frustratingly, I think Hughton is too scared to take a risk. How can 25,000 fans see something that a full time management team cannot see?

[The Young One 0]

[quote user="kick it off"][quote user="The Young One"]Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .[/quote]

I see what you''re saying, but Hughton did go 2 up top when he put Jacko on for E Bennett in the 76th. Not early enough, but to say he settled for a point when he went to 442 with 15 to go and then made another attacking sub when he put Kamara on for Becchio with 5 left is a bit weird.

[/quote]

Why is what I,m saying a bit weird ?  I said the change to 2 up front should have been made at 60 mins or at least much earlier than 76 mins, 14 mins isn''t long enough, as I said lambert would have changed it much earlier and even Shearer thought so.

[The Young One 0]

[quote user="Reasonable Canary"]

[quote user="The Young One"]Any decent manager at 60mins would have played 2 up front, Fulham were there for the taking it was obvious to most of our supporters, Lambert would have gone for it, but the Hoots decides lets get the point, what a joke. Boy I,m losing my interest in NCFC .[/quote]

Please. For the good of Norwich City, lose interest entirely.

[/quote]Do one you T W A T

[First Wizard 0]

I applaud Snoddy for speaking out, hopefully, it won''t land him in hot water.[Y]

[shefcanary 2,383]

I hear Snoddy and have a little bit of sympathy for his view.  However there was many a time on Saturday when a good early ball in from him would have given Becchio a chance of getting in before Hangleand- but what does Snoddy do, well he has to turn back to get it on his favoured left foot.  Sorry but he can''t really talk when he does that!  And as another person on this thread highlighted a lot of our goals this season have been from set pieces - Snoddy''s delivery from these on Saturday was woeful. 

 

Snoddy has the right to an opinion but he also needs to be better than though if he expresses it in such a manner.  This time all he had to back up his right to comment was a lot of running about - reminded me a bit of a typical Lee Croft performance.  I know a lot of you will disagree but if you look back at the vital moments Snoddy came up short.

 

I would encourage Hughton to swap Snoddy and Benno over for 10 minutes in the next game just to surprise the opposition.  Two up front might not be needed if that happened.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Shef, the two great balls that Snoddy put in for Wes at QPR were with his right foot. No checking back. At least one of those should have been buried and this board would have been a happier place since.

 

 

 

 

[shefcanary 2,383]

Indeed Nige - he can do it - so why not more often.  Becchio was there or there abouts.  He who dares, even if Becchio or Wessi don''t get to it, it might panic a defence innto a weak clearance and lead to a chance.  I think on saturday Snoddy himself was either lacking in confidence or was worn out by closing down too much!

[Sussexyellow 55]

Plus the cross for the goal against Spurs was with his right foot.

Very effective when he chooses to use it.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

I think far too much has been made of Saturday''s game. Hughton obviously didn''t want to start with Becchio on his own. Becchio has to quickly adjust to the pace of the prem. Our players have got to quickly learn to play with the new signings. January window is a nightmare that lasts ''til March. That''s how long it took Ashton to get going in 2005.

 

 

[superzach 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="superzach"]if we play with two up front where does that leave wessi?[/quote]Are you the same "superzach" as the opening poster? If not, it''s an uncanny coincidence.[/quote]yup. forgot i had the first account and signed in with it at work. derp.

[superzach 0]

[quote]

 

Just means we can have a realistic plan B and maybe plan C.

 

 

[/quote]no way. don''t believe you! plan B occurs at 86 min gone. so when is plan C?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="superzach"]

[quote]

 

Just means we can have a realistic plan B and maybe plan C.

 

 

[/quote]

no way. don''t believe you! plan B occurs at 86 min gone. so when is plan C?
[/quote]

If plan B was putting on Jackson 94 mins could be about right and then plan C could have been Moro during the warm down...

 

 

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Michael Starr"]Somebody should tell our management team that for each minute the ball is in our opponents half, our opponent cannot score.[/quote]Please tell them yourself.  I''m sure they would welcome such an insightful insight.