Intersting read & poll

[Highland Canary 76]

@ Mr B - exactly.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

I''m not sure why Blackpool are relative to our current situation? Are you saying that if you play attacking football in the Prem you lose?

Because that''s not what anyone is asking for. We''ve not had anywhere near the right balance between defence and attack at all in 2013, yet we are not changing our approach? Is this down to our players not being good enough to create and score chances anymore, or is it down to the way they''re being told to play?

[can u sit down please 0]

I''m judging him because his ave sub time of 68 mins isn''t to far off.

He hasn''t changed his approach with a diff set of players.

[ron obvious 1,499]

Mr B

If you play attacking football in the Prem, & can''t defend, you lose. Our players were able to create & score chances - &, as I keep saying, even with the same tactics I do not believe Holt & Morison would have scored anything like as many goals this season - do you? - but at the expense of relying on hair raising (although often thrilling) defending.

That''s exactly why Blackpool are relevant. Also their squad value has a remarkable resonance with ours.

Lambert is playing a bloody dangerous game at Villa. Wigan have no problem scoring goals but cannot defend well enough.

There''s always a huge element of unpredictability in football, otherwise it wouldn''t have half the appeal it does. But surviving the way we were would have been beyond unpredictable & into the realms of fantasy.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

As we have moved on a page, I''m going to repeat my reply here, having spent a long time composing it:

Ron and Indy have certainly set out the opposite ends of this issue, but ,IMO, the answer lies somewhere in between. Looking at last year''s team, I think it was a mixture of CL players (eg. Tierney, Fox, Whitbread, Barnett, Lappin, Wilbraham, Jackson, C.Martin) and ''in-betweeners'' (eg.Hoolahan, R.Martin, both Bennetts, Howson, Surman, Pilkington). The only players who would have been likely to appeal to PL teams were Holt because of his 14 goals, Ruddy and Johnson. CH added PL players in Bassong, Turner, Garrido (though some might see him as an ''in-betweener''), Tettey, Whittaker and Snodgrass, who was the only real addition to the attack. I''m a supporter of CH, but I do think that it was a mistake to not strengthen the attack further (he tried, but didn''t succeed until January, and then in only a minor fashion). As a result, the team, rightly or wrongly, gravitated to its strengths, which were defensive. Unlike Indy, I do accept that RvW is a recognition of this by both CH and the club.

The other thing about last year is that PL made the most of the new excitement of being in the PL, and that was going to be hard to reproduce this year (the major factor in the ''second season syndrome''). There was also the good fortune of winning 2 away matches after the opposition (Bolton & QPR) lost players through stupid red cards. I think PL knew that this year was going to be difficult, so he left. What he has done at Villa does not convince me that he would have done better than CH has here.

As for CH praising the opposition, this is what PL also did before every match (''they''re a really good team and it''s going to be really tough''). It''s what all managers do before and often after matches. I do think he has also praised the team and individual players after matches and like, PL, he has avoided any criticism in public.

I''m sorry, I don''t accept the argument that players have had their confidence destroyed by CH. I think Wes has played well for much of this season (and lost the ball less). Holt hasn''t been the same player, possibly because of a drop in form, the second season syndrome, or playing much of the time as a sole striker, though when playing with another striker, he hasn''t seemed noticeably better, IMO). Fox is a great passer, but has little else to his game, IMO.

No religious zeal, Indy, just analysis. I do think things will move on next season because RvW and other PL quality players will be added and the ''second season syndrome'' will be a thing of the past. Now, let''s get tomorrow sorted! OTBC!

[Indy_Bones 441]

Forgive the pun here, but Ron - you''re missing the obvious in what we''re saying.Nobody is advocating that we should have gone "gung-go, ba**s out, kamikaze attacking football", what we''re saying is that there was a balance available between how we played under PL and how CH has us setup now that would have been ideal, but instead Hughton missed the opportunity to go down that route.We DID need better defenders and we DID need to add more defensive play to our game, the contention is that this been focused on far too much, especially when you see how badly our attacking play has been removed in the process.All we really needed was to add the defensive element that we''ve brought in, along with a good midfield playmaker and a strong striker to compete with Holt, and we could have adopted a much more balanced approach that would have kept things tighter, but without sacrificing our entire attacking threat.Instead we didn''t sign the striker or midfield playmaker, we let Vaughan go out on loan who could have added more to the squad than Harry bloody Kane, and Hughton set us up in what may as well be a 6-3-1 whilst totally shackling all offensive play from our wingers and full backs!We are advocating BALANCE Ron, not keeping the same play as under PL which may have been too offensive this season, but BALANCE...

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]As we have moved on a page, I''m going to repeat my reply here, having spent a long time composing it:[/quote]Yes, well, no offence, but we''re perfectly capable of clicking page 8 instead of 9 rather than you re-posting a very long reply. [:)]

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]

Mr B If you play attacking football in the Prem, & can''t defend, you lose. Our players were able to create & score chances - &, as I keep saying, even with the same tactics I do not believe Holt & Morison would have scored anything like as many goals this season - do you? - but at the expense of relying on hair raising (although often thrilling) defending. That''s exactly why Blackpool are relevant. Also their squad value has a remarkable resonance with ours. Lambert is playing a bloody dangerous game at Villa. Wigan have no problem scoring goals but cannot defend well enough. There''s always a huge element of unpredictability in football, otherwise it wouldn''t have half the appeal it does. But surviving the way we were would have been beyond unpredictable & into the realms of fantasy.

[/quote]

 

That''s what I''m saying Ron, Lambert got through the first season playing a certain way, he was always going to add more quality in defence over the summer and improve that area but I doubt at the total expense of any sort of attacking threat. And no, I don''t think I''m exaggerating there, we don''t have any sort of threat from open play, we only look a danger at set pieces. If Lambert was guilty of a gung-ho approach then Hughton is guilty of the exact opposite, and the trouble with that approach is if you don''t score goals you don''t win games, as 2 wins in half a season proves. A balance has to be found and Hughton doesn''t even seem to be trying to look for it, we have the same approach regardless of personnel and formation every week, particularly away from home.

 

As I''ve said in just about every response, I''m not asking us to play like Lambert did last year (and I very much doubt he would have done this year, he''s not a fool, he''s a Champions League winning player and extremely successful manager thus far), I want to see us attempt to find a balance rather than attempt to fit sqaure pegs in round holes week in week out.

 

Don''t agree that Blackpool''s squad was worth anywhere near what ours is. The only player of note in that squad was Adam, we''d have a job to hang on to Ruddy, Bassong, Garrido, Turner, Johnson, Pilkington & Snodgrass if we went down, it would be catastrophic. Holt could have been added to that list if he were younger. You can''t even compare the 2 squads, Blackpool spent nothing when they went up, we''ve invested everything.

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]

We are advocating BALANCE Ron, not keeping the same play as under PL which may have been too offensive this season, but BALANCE...

[/quote]

 

This is what I was attempting to say in my 3 paragraphs of waffle.

 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Vanwink"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Vanwink"]Then there will be less people making a contribution, new posters very quickly get fed up with all the personal stuff, they don''t follow it and want to talk about Norwich City[/quote]

 

Take the Pepsi Challenge then. For every so called good poster who has run away I will name you two so called good posters who still post...

 

[/quote]

So by your reckoning there''s 30 % gone, in the context that we are discussing, ie people responding to the poster rather than the post that is sad![/quote]

 

No..; that''s not what I''m saying. I''m saying there''s at least 50% more good posters than there were in the Dumble Delia days that CUSDP is hankering for. That was nearly 10 years ago! Posts were moderated and some times took hours to appear on the board. It was impossible to have a proper debate. When you analyse the good old days you realise they were not so good after all.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

So is that why you''re not going to reply to my reply to you and Ron, Indy? You asked for a reply and I gave it.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

I''ve never said we were found out last season and have never said we would have been found out this season. Whether we''d have been found out or not is an unknown. What is also unknown is whether we''d have been above or below where we are if we''d have had continuity or even Lambert had stayed. So those of you who are on your high horse about those posters who do think we''d have been found out are doing exactly the same thing by saying we wouldn''t. Your putting your faith into an unknown and your opinion has no more substance than those who oppose it.

 

 

[ron obvious 1,499]

Indy_Bones

What I am refuting is the notion that we had a Premier League squad.

I actually agree with about everything you say (except perhaps Vaughan; his injury history is so bad, & it may be he just didn''t want to be here anyway).

It has been noted in the past how difficult it is for Norwich to attract top class players. I can think of several reasons for this. I imagine Hughton ran into the same problems this season, & this, together with being focused on getting the type of player he wants, led to him failing. Kane was a sign of that failure.

However, being in the top flight will inevitably help & I am extremely hopeful of at least two more RVW class signings.

I reckon Hughton regarded that, without the midfield creator & additional firepower - particularly the lack of pace in attack - a solid defence & scoring from set pieces was our best chance.

Next season will be different. Daddy promise!

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I''ve never said we were found out last season and have never said we would have been found out this season. Whether we''d have been found out or not is an unknown. What is also unknown is whether we''d have been above or below where we are if we''d have had continuity or even Lambert had stayed. So those of you who are on your high horse about those posters who do think we''d have been found out are doing exactly the same thing by saying we wouldn''t. Your putting your faith into an unknown and your opinion has no more substance than those who oppose it.

 

 

[/quote]

 

I''m putting my faith in our players being good enough Nutty. Lose faith in them and we''re in deep trouble.

 

[waggers 0]

I enjoyed reading the blog and found myself agreeing with most of it.

His thoughts about getting rid of Morison and replacing him with the same quality of player mirror my own views. I believe Moro was to a certain extent driven out my the attitude of some of our fans. The incident in the Gun Club couldn''t have been enjoyable.

I didn''t enter the poll as I have no interest in putting all my details in the hands of ......yeah we''ll who exactly? I would have voted to keep CH unless we get relegated then review after 10 games.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

I''ve never said we were found out last season and have never said we would have been found out this season. Whether we''d have been found out or not is an unknown. What is also unknown is whether we''d have been above or below where we are if we''d have had continuity or even Lambert had stayed. So those of you who are on your high horse about those posters who do think we''d have been found out are doing exactly the same thing by saying we wouldn''t. Your putting your faith into an unknown and your opinion has no more substance than those who oppose it.

 

 

[/quote]

 

I''m putting my faith in our players being good enough Nutty. Lose faith in them and we''re in deep trouble.

 

[/quote]

 

So am I. So if we both our then I can''t understand why I keep being invited to answer points made. Perhaps we''re putting our faith in different players then? I don''t know otherwise. But I guess I would have more faith in Bassong and Turner than Bennett and Ayala. But who knows... another manager may have signed players I''d have more faith in! I''ll tell you what though.. my faith in Holty and Wes has never never wavered. That would put me in the minority on here.

 

 

[Bury Yellow 2]

Psst Has Nutty come back from his roast yet? Oh!!

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

So am I. So if we both our then I can''t understand why I keep being invited to answer points made. Perhaps we''re putting our faith in different players then? I don''t know otherwise. But I guess I would have more faith in Bassong and Turner than Bennett and Ayala. But who knows... another manager may have signed players I''d have more faith in! I''ll tell you what though.. my faith in Holty and Wes has never never wavered. That would put me in the minority on here.

[/quote]

 

I haven''t invited you to answer anything Nutty. Hughton''s signings have by and large been good, I don''t think any of this is really about that, well not from my point of view at least. It''s about how they''re being played, but we''re going round in circles now.

 

I think whatever our view on Hughton''s tactics we hope that Chelsea do the business agianst Villa and we do the same tomorrow.

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Oh f**k.

[Rivvo 257]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]Forgive the pun here, but Ron - you''re missing the obvious in what we''re saying.

Nobody is advocating that we should have gone "gung-go, ba**s out, kamikaze attacking football", what we''re saying is that there was a balance available between how we played under PL and how CH has us setup now that would have been ideal, but instead Hughton missed the opportunity to go down that route.

We DID need better defenders and we DID need to add more defensive play to our game, the contention is that this been focused on far too much, especially when you see how badly our attacking play has been removed in the process.

All we really needed was to add the defensive element that we''ve brought in, along with a good midfield playmaker and a strong striker to compete with Holt, and we could have adopted a much more balanced approach that would have kept things tighter, but without sacrificing our entire attacking threat.

Instead we didn''t sign the striker or midfield playmaker, we let Vaughan go out on loan who could have added more to the squad than Harry bloody Kane, and Hughton set us up in what may as well be a 6-3-1 whilst totally shackling all offensive play from our wingers and full backs!

We are advocating BALANCE Ron, not keeping the same play as under PL which may have been too offensive this season, but BALANCE...
[/quote]

 

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[Rivvo 257]

Meant to add that I think limited finances have lead to Hughton adding to the squad piecemeal in what he sees as his priorities, being an ex defender I guess defence would always come first. I am sincerely hoping (and praying) that more attack minded and better quality players will be added in the Summer and consequently our style will become more expansive.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="Rivvo"]

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[/quote]

 

Pretty sure McNally has stated on Twitter that RVW was signed from this seasons budget.

[Baracouda 47]

I find the whole argument that because players have played at a level for one season they are that level astounding.

Why didn''t Geoff Thomas carry on playing for England, why did Jeffers disappear from the radar.

The players might keep their ability, but in order to play to the same level the players need to adapt as opponents understand them, and adapt/change game plans for them.

If our players have failed to adapt the game to opponents adapting their game, their performances will degrade.

The world of sport is littered with people who have disappeared for no apparent reason. Why haven''t Man City played the same as last season, why have Barcelona tailed off in Europe.

Why is the history of premier-league littered with promoted clubs having a double digit striker like Holt''s, Lita''s, Earnshaw, Stewart in their first season, and never to repeat it?

[BOO 0]

If our players have failed to adapt the game to opponents adapting their game, their performances will degrade.

Are you saying that that''s what has happened?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Great post from Baracouda. There you go Vin and CUSDP the guy''s joining date was 2011. Totally blowing out of the water your ridiculous claims about present posters. Mind you Bury''s been around a long time and I''m not sure what to make of him...

 

Brownie... I was repeatedly asked to respond to your point. I''m still not 100% sure what it is so hope I have answered it.

 

Now I have a question for you. Have you kept that unwavering faith in Holty? Or is that reserved for the players Hughton doesn''t pick?

 

 

[Rivvo 257]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"]

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[/quote]

 

Pretty sure McNally has stated on Twitter that RVW was signed from this seasons budget.

[/quote]

I wasn''t aware of that but does that mean just the down payment or the whole lot?, you can never tell these days with all the spin that gets put on things!

In that case I''ll accept it on face value, but if we had all that money I''m even more surprised that additonal strikers weren''t bought last summer, unless he just couldn''t find anyone available.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Now I have a question for you. Have you kept that unwavering faith in Holty? Or is that reserved for the players Hughton doesn''t pick?

[/quote]

 

Holt''s ability for me has never been in doubt, I still think he''ll score 10+ next season given the right service and played in the right position. I think he''ll score tomorrow given the right service and played in the right position in fact.

 

The only criticism I''ve ever had of him was during the period when his frustration got the better of him and he looked like a red card waiting to happen, and that was never wbout his ability.

 

Not sure what to make of your last comment. What''s that all about? I think you have missed the point Nutty, because essentially that is it, our players are good enough for this level.

 

 

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="Rivvo"][quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"]

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[/quote]

 

Pretty sure McNally has stated on Twitter that RVW was signed from this seasons budget.

[/quote]

I wasn''t aware of that but does that mean just the down payment or the whole lot?, you can never tell these days with all the spin that gets put on things!

In that case I''ll accept it on face value, but if we had all that money I''m even more surprised that additonal strikers weren''t bought last summer, unless he just couldn''t find anyone available.

[/quote]

 

The whole lot as far as I''m aware. We obviously had money, but couldn''t get a player that Hughton felt would have been an improvement on what we had.

See what happened in January with Hooper, not worth £8m in anyone''s book.

 

[Rivvo 257]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"][quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"]

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[/quote]

 

Pretty sure McNally has stated on Twitter that RVW was signed from this seasons budget.

[/quote]

I wasn''t aware of that but does that mean just the down payment or the whole lot?, you can never tell these days with all the spin that gets put on things!

In that case I''ll accept it on face value, but if we had all that money I''m even more surprised that additonal strikers weren''t bought last summer, unless he just couldn''t find anyone available.

[/quote]

 

The whole lot as far as I''m aware. We obviously had money, but couldn''t get a player that Hughton felt would have been an improvement on what we had.

See what happened in January with Hooper, not worth £8m in anyone''s book.

 

[/quote]

 

I agree, providing we stay up then we have a good transfer kitty for the summer, I look forward with excitement to see who we''re linked with.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="Rivvo"][quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"][quote user="Mr Brownstone"][quote user="Rivvo"]

Mate, did we have the money to do this, it would seem we had enough to pay Kane''s presumably limited wages, and in January put a down payment on RVW and buy Becchio (but with Morison as a make weight) and not much else, unless you know different?

[/quote]

 

Pretty sure McNally has stated on Twitter that RVW was signed from this seasons budget.

[/quote]

I wasn''t aware of that but does that mean just the down payment or the whole lot?, you can never tell these days with all the spin that gets put on things!

In that case I''ll accept it on face value, but if we had all that money I''m even more surprised that additonal strikers weren''t bought last summer, unless he just couldn''t find anyone available.

[/quote]

 

The whole lot as far as I''m aware. We obviously had money, but couldn''t get a player that Hughton felt would have been an improvement on what we had.

See what happened in January with Hooper, not worth £8m in anyone''s book.

 

[/quote]

 

With the debt repayed and the new TV deal we''ll have a budget the likes of which we''ve never seen before. Hopefully we get the job done tomorrow and we can start looking forward to it.

 

I agree, providing we stay up then we have a good transfer kitty for the summer, I look forward with excitement to see who we''re linked with.

[/quote]