Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
a1canary

I disagree Grant...

Recommended Posts

He insists that having his family living up north is not an issue. He can say all he likes but we know how much football is about state of mind and he is a family man. He said his family comes first so if his family comes first, he should have them around him. He just isn''t going to be completely at ease and happy if they''re not around. He''s not a selfish kind who might not care about living away from his family so i don''t see how he can say it won''t affect his state of mind.

I don''t prescribe to the view that he is past it now - i think he could reproduce his first season for us but only if his head was right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m not about to start trying to get into Holt''s head. If he says it''s not an issue, then I''m more inclined to believe him than the opinion of someone on a message board.

Poor service, defensive solid approach rather than free flowing attack, possible friction with coaches who he fell out with when they managed him a few years ago, the ''honey moon'' effect of him riding on a wave of confidence being over and his ability being found out to be that of a decent squad player in the prem but perhaps not as good as we thought he might be after last season.

All more likely to be reasons for his lower goal tally this season than his family, if he says his family isn''t an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know his family weren''t actually down here in his first season right?

 

If his girls didn''t settle then it''s right for them to go back up North.

 

As he proved Sunday, he''s far from finished. Still a hugely important player for us on and off the pitch, we''d be mad to get rid of him unless he wants out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t know more about his personal situation, and lord know i have said on here a million times that his lower goal tally this season is much more about his role in the team than anything else.

But, second half of the season, after his injury (also a conrtibutory factor) no-one can say he has been in good form and he has lacked confidence. Living down here without his family, is going to also be a factor in his state of mind, whatever he says to the contrary. He isn''t going to be 100% on it mentally.

Anyone with a family of their own would understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sentimentality is for pets, starting love affairs and amateur sport. When all the allowances have been made the obvious explanation is still the likeliest - that Holt is is terminal decline as a professional footballer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, it seems to me that Holt is doing a pretty good job of diverting blame from himself.

Whether its regarding his poor form this season or the fact that he might move in the summer, none of it is apparently down to him... not even a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t know more about his personal situation, and lord knows i have said on here a million times that his lower goal tally this season is much more about his role in the team than anything else.

But, second half of the season, after his injury (also a conrtibutory factor) no-one can say he has been in good form and he has lacked confidence. Living down here without his family, is going to also be a factor in his state of mind, whatever he says to the contrary. He isn''t going to be 100% on it mentally.

Anyone with a family of their own would understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Militant Canary"]Actually, it seems to me that Holt is doing a pretty good job of diverting blame from himself. Whether its regarding his poor form this season or the fact that he might move in the summer, none of it is apparently down to him... not even a little.[/quote]

 

To be fair to Holt, he has scored 7 goals this season, not too shabby retrun given the standard of football in the second half of the season. On the pitch over the last 12 games we have started to see Holt the Leader again and his work rate has been overlooked.

 

I think everything he said is on the money, lots of people live away from their family it doesn''t mess with your head, I worked offshore and away for 13 years, so I know to some extent how you feel, but Holty will have time with his family throughout the season and he knows it''s only another couple years and he will spend all the time he wants with them post football.

 

Also I believe this is a man who would be happy to stay here another year but it''s down to hughton, if he can buy in all his primary targets I think Hughton will have to make the choice to keep Holt or move him out as thee are only 25 squad places.

 

I hope that we get to see the big man for another season and will be sad to see him go, but that''s football as they say and to improve you have to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At his best Holt is still a force to be reckoned with.  But he has to be at his best.  But the same could be said for any player.  Hoolahan.  Snodgrass. All players are subject to variations of form/fitness.  What our Grant seems to get is villification and being rubbished if he isn''t "at his best".  He''s had it since League 1.  He has never been good enough for some of our fans.  I think Holt has been a strong influence this season in inspiring the team, Hughton obviously has rated him as the best we''ve got in that forward position too.  Even though he has found it tough for whatever reason, so have the rest of the team and writing him off  is just nonsense. 

He has two years left on his contract and as has been said, family is important to him, but his work behind the scenes at Norwich  - as well as on the field -  is a good reason to keep him here.   Characters like Holt don''t come along very often, he will have plenty of time for his family during down times and off season, but he is a professional and a strong influence at Carrow Rd -  I wish all our fans could see that - and hopefully will be for the next two years.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont see why his private life is any of our buissness, it really doesnt have anything to do with the football and isnt our place to comment on.In terms of form, both Holt, Hughton and other members of the team have all said we are playing in a different style this year with Holt taking on a different role, with his chances at times being limited (listen to the interview he gave to radio norfolk on Sunday). I imagine his form will imporve with the combination of proper competetion from RVW and a slight change in tactics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the tactivs have killed him. Last year he had chances and scored goals. The manager (bizarrely IMO) asked him to make changes to his game, despite great success.I imagine RVP will be asked by MOyes, to change his game next year. Or Ponchettino, Lambert. Nah, thought not....Last year Grant Holt averaged 1.92 shots per game & 69 shots.Compare it to this year and its 1.38 & 44 chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For once I agree wholeheartedly with LDC, Holt will be a player I look back and remember as a Norwich legend in 20, 30 even 40 years time and whilst he still has more to give to the club as a whole we should keep him. One more year at least, one more year with what will in theory be a better team and a more attacking one to see what he can do given a real chance as he was last season.

For me he''s not done yet, but I fear that our management team will discard him all too hastily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the telling phrase is "You do what you are asked to do".Clearly there is disagreement with the manager when this gets constantly aired. Sundays metaphorical putting up of two fingers to Hughton by the players suggests that Grant Holt is pushing this matter further.Snodgrass made similar remarks on Radio Norfolk a few weeks back about ''having to play as they are told''. Clearly those instructions were nor adhered to in Sunday - no constantly passing back and no stumbling over to get a freekick. Maybe this level of ''freedom'' stopped the frustrations as there was none of the recent backchat and arguing with the referee.As to Grant Holt I''m sure he is able to cope with his family living in Carlisle and him playing for Norwich City, as are the club who would have certainly sanctioned it.The real question (ishoooooooooo) I suggest is the clear rift between the players and the style of play they are being asked to play - and which way will the board decide. Sundays 4-0 will have given the ''dissenters'' a great deal of ammo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firstly I think Holt will leave in the summer. Have thought this for a few months now.

I don''t pick up any rift between players and manager at all. I think Hughton saying they have struggled to find a formula to win since the turn of the year is right. He''s been too negative but we don''t have a poacher, an out and out goal scorer and you can only do so much until that clear gap in your team is noticeable.

For us, when Kamara and Becchio came in, our failure to score even though we signed these two players was there for everyone to see.

I don''t think there is a rift, I just think McNally and Hughton get it badly wrong when it came to signing a striker. I genuinely think last August and last January they didn''t know what to do. They panicked and got Kane, Kamara and Becchio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"]I think the telling phrase is "You do what you are asked to do".  Clearly there is disagreement with the manager when this gets constantly aired. Sundays metaphorical putting up of two fingers to Hughton by the players suggests that Grant Holt is pushing this matter further. Snodgrass made similar remarks on Radio Norfolk a few weeks back about ''having to play as they are told''. Clearly those instructions were nor adhered to in Sunday - no constantly passing back and no stumbling over to get a freekick. Maybe this level of ''freedom'' stopped the frustrations as there was none of the recent backchat and arguing with the referee.As to Grant Holt I''m sure he is able to cope with his family living in Carlisle and him playing for Norwich City, as are the club who would have certainly sanctioned it.The real question (ishoooooooooo) I suggest is the clear rift between the players and the style of play they are being asked to play - and which way will the board decide. Sundays 4-0 will have given the ''dissenters'' a great deal of ammo.[/quote]

This is just subversive claptrap.   All players have to play as they are told to. That''s why they have managers.  Really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Row D Seat 7"]Firstly I think Holt will leave in the summer. Have thought this for a few months now.

I don''t pick up any rift between players and manager at all. I think Hughton saying they have struggled to find a formula to win since the turn of the year is right. He''s been too negative but we don''t have a poacher, an out and out goal scorer and you can only do so much until that clear gap in your team is noticeable.

For us, when Kamara and Becchio came in, our failure to score even though we signed these two players was there for everyone to see.

I don''t think there is a rift, I just think McNally and Hughton get it badly wrong when it came to signing a striker. I genuinely think last August and last January they didn''t know what to do. They panicked and got Kane, Kamara and Becchio.[/quote]

I think you are talking rubbish. There was no panic! Does McNally really look like they type of person to panic.

I think they played the stupid January transfer window pretty well. We have just got RVW for only £8.5m because we DIDN''T panic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lincoln canary"]Too much rubbish about holt having to change his game. He''s played on his own upfront loads pre Hughton. He simply has not had his head in the right place which has resulted in a lack of desire and poor performances. No excuse I''m afraid.[/quote]But having watched "the dvds on his holidays" it was clear that he isnt a lone forward. We saw that last year. You play players to there strengths. Its the same in any line of work, no matter what you do. [quote user="City1st"]I think the telling phrase is "You do what you are asked to do".Clearly

there is disagreement with the manager when this gets constantly aired.

Sundays metaphorical putting up of two fingers to Hughton by the

players suggests that Grant Holt is pushing this matter further.Snodgrass

made similar remarks on Radio Norfolk a few weeks back about ''having to

play as they are told''. Clearly those instructions were nor adhered to

in Sunday - no constantly passing back and no stumbling over to get a

freekick. Maybe this level of ''freedom'' stopped the frustrations as

there was none of the recent backchat and arguing with the referee.As

to Grant Holt I''m sure he is able to cope with his family living in

Carlisle and him playing for Norwich City, as are the club who would

have certainly sanctioned it.The real question (ishoooooooooo) I

suggest is the clear rift between the players and the style of play

they are being asked to play - and which way will the board decide.

Sundays 4-0 will have given the ''dissenters'' a great deal of ammo.

[/quote]Completely agree City1st. We are told what to do by our managers, but if youve inherited something that has been consistenly brilliant why would you not make him your focal point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 31st 2012 we put in three bids for CMS. Two rejected. One accepted. We were in talks with him but the deal fell through late into the evening. We signed Harry Kane on loan at 1am on 1st September 2012.

In January 2013 Norwich received a bid from Leeds for Steve Morison. Morison wanted to go to Leeds. Deals for RVW and Hooper looked unlikely at this stage. Morison wanted to go to Leeds despite interest from Nottingham Forest. With Morison set on a move to Leeds, we exchanged with Becchio with us paying some on top as we didn''t want to risk losing Morison and not getting a replacement. Becchio, keen to test himself at Prem level, comes in - barely plays. Described by Chris Hughton as being "too similar to Holt".

Kei Kamara was signed when Celtic finally told us no over Hooper. A deal that fell through much earlier that day than everyone thought. RVW deal was already dead by that time. We signed Kamara early afternoon on the 31st January. A punt on a striker who barely set the world alight in the MLS. Didn''t set the world alight here either, hence no perm deal.

The deal for RVW now looks a master stroke. However, when we were in relegation trouble having paid £8.5m for a player who was away scoring for someone else, didn''t look so much of a master stroke then despite the back patting that went on.

To me Kane, Kamara and Becchio were all panic buys. All inexpensive and signed in the hope that we would strike lucky with one of them. Ironically the only player in our squad who''d scored over 15 goals this season barely played for us because he was seen as too similar to our main man. What was the point in signing him?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="City1st"]I think the telling phrase is "You do what you are asked to do".Clearly there is disagreement with the manager when this gets constantly aired. Sundays metaphorical putting up of two fingers to Hughton by the players suggests that Grant Holt is pushing this matter further.Snodgrass made similar remarks on Radio Norfolk a few weeks back about ''having to play as they are told''. Clearly those instructions were nor adhered to in Sunday - no constantly passing back and no stumbling over to get a freekick. Maybe this level of ''freedom'' stopped the frustrations as there was none of the recent backchat and arguing with the referee.As to Grant Holt I''m sure he is able to cope with his family living in Carlisle and him playing for Norwich City, as are the club who would have certainly sanctioned it.The real question (ishoooooooooo) I suggest is the clear rift between the players and the style of play they are being asked to play - and which way will the board decide. Sundays 4-0 will have given the ''dissenters'' a great deal of ammo.

[/quote]There are various explanations as to why we attacked more on Sunday than in previous games. One is that there is a rift at Carrow Road which saw the players ignoring Hughton''s instructions. But there are others. For example that Hughton, knowing a win was vital, actually told the players to attack more. Another one is that WBA were, as The Independent said, "comically inept".And this is the verdict of the Birmingham Mail''s WBA correspondent:Swamped by beachballs, lilos and Romelu Lukaku wigs, Albion’s 2,400 following were in fine voice and colour at Carrow Road. What they weren’t expecting was to see their own players performing as if they were already sat by the pool. The Baggies were poor throughout. From start to finish it was an error-strewn performance, riddled with a lack of intensity and finesse. And while the Premier League table isn’t too bad, this performance raised serious concerns about recent form. Sunday’s result makes it just one win out of the last seven games, four of which have ended in defeat. The defence had to be seen to be believed, the midfield struggled and the attack was non-existent. It took until after the hour before the visitors recorded their first shot on goal.It would have been hard for Norwich not to be attack minded under the circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That''s not what I heard, Row D. And, I don''t want to have a go or anything, but that comes across as a mindbogglingly arrogant thing to say.

Didn''t know what to do??? I just feel like saying, "Okay. If you and anybody else thinks they know better than the Board or management, go right ahead and prove it. And when you truly f**ked everything right up, I''ll be the first to stick the dagger in your back".

And relax.

Anyway, I heard quite the contrary. Last summer we had someone lined up (Mbokani) and it was all good to go and basically in the bag, but he backed out at the very last minute. Given his reasons, you can''t really argue with it.

Kane was what we had towards the bottom of the reserve list (we had to get him in quick) and he could have done a job for us, but got injured... which you can''t legislate for. So, not that they didn''t know what they were doing, just bad luck.

As for January, they knew who they wanted... we know who they wanted. But, they were not going to pay exorbitant amounts for them. Since then, they have secured one of those targets and I dare say the other is coming.

Becchio was a logical swap for a perpetually unpopular Morison and would probably have happened regardless of what happened with the other signings. He was on good form and, whilst not having much time on the pitch due to the undeniably positive impact of Kamara, Becchio is doing his bit. A good guy, too.

Kamara was a low risk experiment. An experiment that, in my opinion, was worth while as Kei offered something that Norwich''s attack has lacked for a very, very long time: an athlete. His character and athleticism added some energy to our team when it needed it. The fact that we seem very unlikely to take him up permanently does not reflect badly on him. It says to me that we have someone lined-up who offers what Kei does, but is better.

Says to me that McNally and Hughton know what they are doing. There are curve balls and bad luck that nobody can account for, but they have done remarkably well this year, all told.

I dare say, there will be people who disagree with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why raise the matter if it was not working, which clearly it hasn''t been ?Games where there have been virtually no shots on target ... or even off target it could be said. That has been the cause of the rift, not the manager instructing them what to do.I think if the players had played their way on Sunday and got mullered then we would not have been hearing this today, or after the game on Sunday.A further question is whether this ''rift'' is merely a few noses being put out of joint as a new regime kicks in, or a much wider disastifaction. Sunday suggests the later, more so given the talk of how close the squad are. Which suggests that this will not be healed by merely moving on a few malcontents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Row D Seat 7"]On August 31st 2012 we put in three bids for CMS. Two rejected. One accepted. We were in talks with him but the deal fell through late into the evening. We signed Harry Kane on loan at 1am on 1st September 2012.

In January 2013 Norwich received a bid from Leeds for Steve Morison. Morison wanted to go to Leeds. Deals for RVW and Hooper looked unlikely at this stage. Morison wanted to go to Leeds despite interest from Nottingham Forest. With Morison set on a move to Leeds, we exchanged with Becchio with us paying some on top as we didn''t want to risk losing Morison and not getting a replacement. Becchio, keen to test himself at Prem level, comes in - barely plays. Described by Chris Hughton as being "too similar to Holt".

Kei Kamara was signed when Celtic finally told us no over Hooper. A deal that fell through much earlier that day than everyone thought. RVW deal was already dead by that time. We signed Kamara early afternoon on the 31st January. A punt on a striker who barely set the world alight in the MLS. Didn''t set the world alight here either, hence no perm deal.

The deal for RVW now looks a master stroke. However, when we were in relegation trouble having paid £8.5m for a player who was away scoring for someone else, didn''t look so much of a master stroke then despite the back patting that went on.

To me Kane, Kamara and Becchio were all panic buys. All inexpensive and signed in the hope that we would strike lucky with one of them. Ironically the only player in our squad who''d scored over 15 goals this season barely played for us because he was seen as too similar to our main man. What was the point in signing him?![/quote]

 

No. Kamara was signed on January 30 and the deal for Becchio was done on the same day, although he didn''t sign until January 31. But we were still bidding for Hooper on January 31. Neither Kamara nor Becchio was signed because we failed to buy Hooper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and we have not tried to sign CMS since Lambert tried to get him when we were in the Championship.

Please let that go. It is embarrassing how you hold on to a very bad rumour as a stick to beat the manager with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
City1st.

I can''t help but feel you are being too kind to the players and too harsh on the management.

In no way does Hughton encourage a team to be negative or overly defensive - ask Newcastle fans. The fact that the players have been too passive in a number of games is down to them. Once they cross that white-line, its on them (Lambert said that once after a bad game).

Surely, the way Hughton has been at the side-line screaming his head off trying to get them to get stuck in is evidence enough of that?

Yes, Hughton wanted them to play a little differently. Not attack, attack, attack. But these are professionals and should have the cognitive capacity to comprehend more than one playing style.

Besides which, look at the Sunderland games, the Spurs games among others. We were very positive, but got unlucky. Over the course of the season, that had an impact on the players. Situations occur in a game that made them think "this isn''t our day".

Sunday was different. Personally, I think Hughton told them exactly what they needed to hear - go out and prove you deserve to be here.

But, the real turning point was the second goal. We haven''t had luck like that all season. Usually, that sort of thing has gone against us. They thought "its our day" and played like they believed they could win.

All this nonsense aside, why are there so many people unwilling to either enjoy this week, or perhaps admit they were wrong about Hughton?

What do you do if we do really well next season? Call me crazy, I doubt there will be many holding there hands up and admitting their mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PurpleCanary: It would have been hard for Norwich not to be attack minded under the circumstances.

------------------------------------------

Absolutely, and as you mention, WBA, Swansea, Man City, Fulham... all teams with absolutely nothing to play, and their form has nosedived in recent weeks.

It was an excellent performance from Norwich, but there is no denying the opposition were on the beach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Militant Canary: But, the real turning point was the second goal. We haven''t had luck like that all season. Usually, that sort of thing has gone against us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I completely disagree, we are 18th in shots, 18th in shots on target and 18th in goals. We are no better or worse off than we should be for the amount of chances our defensively orientated team creates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Citizen:

Sorry, but you''ve ignored everything else on my post.

Why are we 18th in shots etc? Its not down to Hughton, its down to the players. And why is it down to the players?

Y''know what? Never mind. There is no way I''m convincing you, is there? You and several others won''t be happy until Hughton is gone, regardless of what we do next season.

You''ve got to bare in mind that more than a few Everton fans said the same about Moyes at one stage. But have had to eat their words.

Would you admit you are wrong about him if the next season is a really good season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you imagine him changing the philosophies of a toon team? Anyone that''s tried is lynched.

He couldn''t have been negative with players such as Barton , Nolan, Carroll, Lovendkrands, ameobi. Attacking players.

Anybody could''ve got them promoted tht year, with that squad they had.

Ironically most of his signings were defenders! Simpson Williamson van aanholt perch hall and kizinishvilli.

He always likes to build from the back.

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  

×