Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Parma Ham's gone mouldy

The logic of Hughton's approach

Recommended Posts

The Southampton game was an excellent demonstration of what Hughton is trying to achieve in terms of pattern of play and approach. The control shown in possession was excellent and it should be noted that possession per se can be used in an attacking or defensive sense, though one may often lead to the other. There is a misconception in England that you must go forward to be offensive, that more players in forward positions ("2 up front") in intrinsically more attacking and positive, that getting the ball forward faster leads to more attacking chances and a more exciting game. All of these concepts are flawed.

Retaining the ball, without necessarily overtly attacking, is both an essential ongoing tool for pulling a defending team out of shape and creating spaces to exploit (in a later phase of play). It is also a wonderful defensive tool as retention of the ball absolutely ensures that the opposition cannot score (regardless whether you are "attacking").

With the predominance of structured 4231 and a desire to play fluidly, between these lines, in attacking phases and a disciplined 4141 in defence, most sides look for transition opportunities to launch counterattacks with the opposition out of this defensive shape. Therefore to "attack" more, faster in sporadic direct thrusts is far more risky than it has ever been. This has to be avoided and this we see relative prosaic group progression with the ball, a slower, less penetrative approach to the attacking third, with a focus a winning set pieces in dangerous areas and - this season - calculated (covered) risks with Redmond in specific scenarios. A Quagliarella 10 would have been the dream in segment, though a la Van Wolfswinkel, this will have to wait until we can get exactly what we want.

The truth is that we are definitively better than maybe 4 or 5 teams (generously) in the Premier League and this is a great achievement if one includes the likes of Sunderland or Stoke. Thus we are less good than the majority of teams that we play, who logically have better players than we do. Thus we must rely on repeated structures, a familiarity of style and an expectation of spending more time defending then attacking. It would be wise not to confuse "defending" with "being defensive". Preference does not come into it. Comparisons with periods of recent history when we were better than the majority of teams around us are misplaced. Of course you can attack more even you are superior, take more risks, provide less for what the opposition might do. You can also gamble when you have nothing to lose and any success (say the first year staying up) is viewed as a magnificent achievement.

The future of Norwich for a number of years will be characterised by not winning 50% of our games, winning something around 10 games a season out of 38, mostly playing teams that are better than us. If these teams play well, they will beat us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parma, I am convinced Hughton is channelling the spirit of Helenio Herrera at Inter in the sixties! And I mean that as a compliment. But I also think you have hit on a current problem that needs to be solved, which is that Hughton seems to be setting us up as if we HAD signed Quagliarella.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"] Preference does not come into it. Comparisons with periods of recent history when we were better than the majority of teams around us are misplaced. Of course you can attack more even you are superior, take more risks, provide less for what the opposition might do. You can also gamble when you have nothing to lose and any success (say the first year staying up) is viewed as a magnificent achievement.

The future of Norwich for a number of years will be characterised by not winning 50% of our games, winning something around 10 games a season out of 38, mostly playing teams that are better than us. If these teams play well, they will beat us.[/quote]

It''s nice to see that there are other people who understand the hard realities of a team like NCFC competing in the Premier League. It''s hard for some people to comprehend that the success of recent years stems from competing in leagues where we were either the biggest fish (League1) or a fairly big fish (The Championship). The Premier League will always be hard for a team like us and relegation will always be a more likely prospect than finishing in the top ten. We are by no means an established PL club yet as our all time Premier League position of 25th clearly shows. Hopefully we can improve on that but not being able to see that there are a dozen teams who will almost always be better equiped than us is willful blindness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But Ricardo, who is saying that we should finish in the top ten? The board have backed Hughton and he acknowledged pre season adding that it was now down to him get results.

The fact is we have a damn good squad of players and nothing has changed from last year. I wonder if the Wolf has had a word with Holty!!

Certainly our Chief Exec will not be impressed with this perceived approach, I am therefore happy that we are in good hands and that the next 5 or so games will be vital.

If a change of manager comes about, we do have a good squad ready to be coached properly:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bury Yellow"]But Ricardo, who is saying that we should finish in the top ten? The board have backed Hughton and he acknowledged pre season adding that it was now down to him get results.

The fact is we have a damn good squad of players and nothing has changed from last year. I wonder if the Wolf has had a word with Holty!!

Certainly our Chief Exec will not be impressed with this perceived approach, I am therefore happy that we are in good hands and that the next 5 or so games will be vital.

If a change of manager comes about, we do have a good squad ready to be coached properly:-)[/quote]

A lot of people seem to be taking it as a given if this board is anything to go by. Personally I don''t think it''s likely but I am open to the possibility that we might have an exceptionally good year. We have improved our squad on paper but we are not the only club who can make that claim. IMO spending £25 million a year in this league is merely budgeting to stand still. At this stage the only priority has to be maintaining Premier status, without that everything else is just dreaming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely disagree about the quality in other teams, there are at least 12 with a similar standard of players, and now with the massive injection of cash in the league, they are in little better financial situation than us either.

Aston Villa

Cardiff City

Crystal Palace

Hull City

Newcastle

Norwich City

Southampton

Stoke City

Sunderland

Swansea City

West Bromwich Albion

West Ham United

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]I completely disagree about the quality in other teams, there are at least 12 with a similar standard of players, and now with the massive injection of cash in the league, they are in little better financial situation than us either.

Aston Villa

Cardiff City

Crystal Palace

Hull City

Newcastle

Norwich City

Southampton

Stoke City

Sunderland

Swansea City

West Bromwich Albion

West Ham United[/quote]

 

We finished above 8 of them and with the other 3 filling the places immediately above us.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CJF, there are teams on this list who have significantly bigger turnovers than we do + richer financial backers. In addition, several have had longer to build up the overall quality of their playing staff. Now in our third year, this applies to us too over some of the list but not to the extent that remaining in the PL has to be our first objective, nor to the extent that we have any right to expect it to be easy.

We have over-performed for two years (three including the championship), perhaps raising expectations a little too high in some?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]I completely disagree about the quality in other teams, there are at least 12 with a similar standard of players, and now with the massive injection of cash in the league, they are in little better financial situation than us either.

Aston Villa

Cardiff City

Crystal Palace

Hull City

Newcastle

Norwich City

Southampton

Stoke City

Sunderland

Swansea City

West Bromwich Albion

West Ham United[/quote]That''s right Foggy but Villa, Newcastle, Sunderland, Southampton and West Ham are all placed higher than us in the all time PL stats. Financially at the moment there might not be a lot in it but there will always be one or two of them will offer a better prospect than us. Along with the top seven big boys this makes our task of getting into the top ten an event that only happens rarely.We have punched above our weight at certain times over the years but we are still a long way from top ten regularly. Facts don''t cease being facts just because you don''t like them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The logic of the approach also necessitates that we do indeed "encourage" superior teams to attack us. It is identified that these are our best odds of success as we are focussing on the moment when these teams are out if shape and we can profit from turnover transitions. It should also be noted that we are "designed" this way and are therefore fully prepared for it. That is carries risks is clear, that it carries less risk than risking your own shape to attack superior sides that can exploit the scenario better than you is the calculation. In effect we are therefore always in shape. Teams will have to overcome our game plan to beat us . If they are better than us, they will. If they are equal or inferior to us (or better than us, but underperform), the logic will be that the worst we will do in any of those scenarios is a point. It is a strategy for relentless, repeatable accumulation of points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]I completely disagree about the quality in other teams, there are at least 12 with a similar standard of players, and now with the massive injection of cash in the league, they are in little better financial situation than us either.

Aston Villa

Cardiff City

Crystal Palace

Hull City

Newcastle

Norwich City

Southampton

Stoke City

Sunderland

Swansea City

West Bromwich Albion

West Ham United[/quote]That''s right Foggy but Villa, Newcastle, Sunderland, Southampton and West Ham are all placed higher than us in the all time PL stats. Financially at the moment there might not be a lot in it but there will always be one or two of them will offer a better prospect than us. Along with the top seven big boys this makes our task of getting into the top ten an event that only happens rarely.We have punched above our weight at certain times over the years but we are still a long way from top ten regularly. Facts don''t cease being facts just because you don''t like them.[/quote]That doesn''t stack up at all Ricardo.You cannot compare what we or other clubs did years ago. There were different circumstances and conditions.It is irrelevant where we stand in some ''all time PL placing''. That has no more effect than how many times a ball last appeared in the lottery draw.Bar the top six (ish) there is no such thing as an established PL club. There are clubs who have had longer runs but as with Fulham last season that counts for nothing- and Bolton.. There never will a time when the ''rest of us'' will be established. We will just have to take each season as it comes.We have not punched above our weight either. Unless you are measuring our weight in purely income and crowd size. If that was the criteria then there would be little point in the league as those measurements could be worked out before the season.We achieved what we did by the performances of the players on the pitch. Something that is never determined simply by the worth of those players (see QPR). It is usually determined by the managing/coaching and motivation of those players.And that is where it appears to be going wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]Midfield is a key area, that dominates the majority of action in any game. [/quote]

 

Precisely Parma.

 

We were outnumbered there on Sat,  as well as being outclassed  -onlywhen elmander was withdrawn did we start to compete.    When we have fewer and lower quality bodies in the key area AND we then end up using the ball poorly and playing well below our best (none of snodgrass, BJ, Fer or Redmond played anywhere near their best) its no surprise we struggled.     Our successes last season came when that unit functioned - and it will again.

 

Spurs dont play us every week and our players wont be so poor again.    

 

Bring on Villa at home..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]Midfield is a key area, that dominates the majority of action in any game. [/quote]

 

Precisely Parma.

 

We were outnumbered there on Sat,  as well as being outclassed  -onlywhen elmander was withdrawn did we start to compete.    When we have fewer and lower quality bodies in the key area AND we then end up using the ball poorly and playing well below our best (none of snodgrass, BJ, Fer or Redmond played anywhere near their best) its no surprise we struggled.     Our successes last season came when that unit functioned - and it will again.

 

Spurs dont play us every week and our players wont be so poor again.    

 

Bring on Villa at home..

[/quote]

 

Isn''t that the point? Of course individually the Spurs midfield is better than ours. But we exacerbated that difference in class by trying to fit a square striking peg (Elmander) into a round midfield hole. I am repeating myself, but Hughton doesn''t seem to realise we didn''t sign Quagliarella, or even Toivonen. At home against Southampton that line-up had a chance of working, and did, but away against Spurs? It was reminiscent of some of Lambert''s suicide-note formations.

Share this post


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

[quote user="Parma Hams gone mouldy"]Midfield is a key area, that dominates the majority of action in any game. [/quote]

 

Precisely Parma.

 

We were outnumbered there on Sat,  as well as being outclassed  -onlywhen elmander was withdrawn did we start to compete.    When we have fewer and lower quality bodies in the key area AND we then end up using the ball poorly and playing well below our best (none of snodgrass, BJ, Fer or Redmond played anywhere near their best) its no surprise we struggled.     Our successes last season came when that unit functioned - and it will again.

 

Spurs dont play us every week and our players wont be so poor again.    

 

Bring on Villa at home..

[/quote]

 

Isn''t that the point? Of course individually the Spurs midfield is better than ours. But we exacerbated that difference in class by trying to fit a square striking peg (Elmander) into a round midfield hole. I am repeating myself, but Hughton doesn''t seem to realise we didn''t sign Quagliarella, or even Toivonen. At home against Southampton that line-up had a chance of working, and did, but away against Spurs? It was reminiscent of some of Lambert''s suicide-note formations.

[/quote]

 

I totally agree with that - I mentioned in a thread in the build up to the game I''d like to see a midfield of Tettey, Johson and Fer (and even Pilks for Redmond due to Tottenham always attacking more down the right) but was greeted with a chorus of ''don''t change a winning team''. It seems many of those posters are now moaning how Hughton got it all wrong by not changing a winning team.

 

I think the Tottenham game was always going to be a write off, the moment they lost to Arsenal I knew Norwich were in for trouble as a reaction was coming. Also the fact that Tottenham played a completely different way on Saturday as they had done for the other 3 games this season showed that Hughton''s pre-match plans were thrown out of the window in seconds.

 

I feel the CH and his team are still looking for the best system to get the most out of their players. A lot of changes have been made over the summer and a little inertia has struck - the Hull game was perfect example where I have rarely seen a team look more like a bunch of strangers. I don''t agree with all of Hughton''s tactical decisions, but he has proven me wrong as many times as I have felt vindicated (very similar to Lambert who would occasionally go to 3 at the back and watch as Norwich would be torn apart).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post Beth. The line up and formation was the one popularly requested on here. I wonder if Hughton would have changed his mind with hindsight too. It takes time and 4 games isn''t enough time. Tacking on last season to make those 4 games more makes little sense to me. We had different players last season.

 

 

Share this post


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

Good post Beth. The line up and formation was the one popularly requested on here. I wonder if Hughton would have changed his mind with hindsight too. It takes time and 4 games isn''t enough time. Tacking on last season to make those 4 games more makes little sense to me. We had different players last season.

[/quote]

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing Nutty and people who were calling for that line-up, a popular choice as you so rightly say, don''t have to deal with the consequences. I''m sure everyone would love to see a Norwich team who play fluid exciting football and pick up scalps of bigger teams, but in reality which club in Norwich''s position has ever really done that? Swansea managed it and the massive amount of press attention and column inches shows that it is by no means a regular thing. I''ve seen people saying Norwich are similar in size and squad to Newcastle - Newcastle being a team in the top 20 wealthiest in the world with a squad full of French internationals - that level of expectation is unreal.

 

I feel sorry for Hughton, he gets a lot of unwarranted criticism (and some warranted too) and is still struggling to win over some fans due to who he isn''t, rather than who he is, but it isn''t uncommon for managers who have to follow very successful managers having a rough time (I''m sure Moyes and Hughton will be able to have some very sympatheic coversations with each other in the not to distant future).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At last, a thread for the grown ups. After all the running around in circles shrieking that the sky is falling in, we have a refuge from The Henny-Pennies and a sensible adult analysis of what is going on.

 

I agree with Parma and Bethnal''s comments. This is a team still coming together and we have to play to our strengths. it does seem that we are a couple of players short of the kind of midfield we ought to have and we will always be vulnerable to better teams. No doubt January will move us forward. We know from Toinoven and Quaggy that Hughton understands what we need.   In the meantime, it is ironic that the team which beat Southampton is not now considered the right team to start against Spurs.

 

Parma and Bethnal have got it right.  All I can add is that sometimes you have to try things to see what works best.  Now is not necessarily the future.  Remember Martin played the first few games of last season and then disappeared forever.   It would not surprise me if say Johnson was to suffer the same fate as Hughton establishes what works best for him.  It will be very interesting over the next few weeks. 

 

And bye the bye, the sky is probably not falling in.  It was just an acorn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missed two points.

 

I also agree with Zipper''s response to Parma.  Midfield is key and it is now our weakest area.

 

The team selection was not negative.  What would have been negative but with hindsight would have made greater sense was to play Olssen instead of Redmond.   That would have blocked Tottenham''s right and might have given us a foothold.  Imagine this board if Hughton had done that and still lost.  He truly cannot win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never understood why teams often set up different regarding home or away. Generally we''ve done quite well at the Carra, but terrible away. Does the home advantage make such a massive difference that the teams need to set up different, if not in personnel, but in tactics?

The more successful teams seem to play the same style home or away, so why are we so different away since Mr Hughton''s tennure? (and Worthy''s)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Dr. Ink"]

Never understood why teams often set up different regarding home or away. Generally we''ve done quite well at the Carra, but terrible away. Does the home advantage make such a massive difference that the teams need to set up different, if not in personnel, but in tactics?

The more successful teams seem to play the same style home or away, so why are we so different away since Mr Hughton''s tennure? (and Worthy''s)!

[/quote]

 

It''s a long asked question, especially now with teams flying everwhere so ''tiredness'' after the journey can''t be blamed.

 

There is certainly a change in mentality for pretty much every team when playing home or away - it''s possible to see that in an instant when looking at the league table and comparing home form and away form.

 

Why this happens is much harder to work out - obviously the fans play a huge part and they will urge their team on to attack more, and will grumble if the side try to just defend (hence it is generally harder for home teams to play on the counter). There is also some physical advantages at times - Stoke would place towels around the pitch to help Delap, and also make the pitch as narrow as possible; teams like Barcelona make their pitch as big as possible and keep the grass short and watered to make the ball move faster - back in the day Cambridge would allow the grass in the corners to grow longer so any long balls into that area wouldn''t run out of play as quick as a visiting team might expect. Theirry Henry said he could perform better at Highbury than other grounds because he could use physical landmarks around the stadium to get his bearings quicker, meaning he wouldn''t need to look up as much.

 

Teams from top to bottom will change their plans whether home or away, if you know your opposition are going to sit back and defend you can''t set your team up to counter and vice versa. The differences are however smaller the higher the team finishes up the league as they will look to dictate the game rather than react to their opposition (although every team, no matter how big will always make adjustments depending on the opposition).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely a lot of it is purely down to expectation? Teams are expected to win at home, and the largely partisan crowd at home will let them know that.Interesting point about Terry Henry though[Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your common sense, and therefore no need for me to compose

my own thread on the topic.  I completely agree with aspects of Parma, Purple and Bethnal''s posts.The people complaining on here about Saturday''s result are the same who moaned last season that we didn''t play too recognised strikers.  Well on Saturday we did, although Elmander wasn''t in his natural position and look what happened.  We were outclassed by a better team, there''s nothing embarrassing about that.It seems to me that people have suddenly got it in their head that we should be competing with teams in this league week in week out.  They can''t accept that Norwich will always be a team fighting for a spot somewhere between 8th and 20th, with maybe the occasional foray into the top 7 (if extremely lucky).  This season we might finish 14th, but actually feel as if we''ve performed better than last season, next season we might finish 9th and wonder how after the way we played.There will be teams in this league who are always going to finish above us, some seasons we might beat them, in others we might get turned over by them.  Look at the results against Man City last season and compare them to our results under Lambert.  There is no shame in losing to a Spurs team who will be in and around the top of the league this season.  Many teams will go to WHL and put in performances better than ours and lose 4 or 5 nil.  Some might play even worse than us and pick up a point.For anyone to suddenly start thinking that we should be winning more often than not, or putting in gung ho performances is pure delusion.Hughton always had an impossible task in following Lambert, and they''ll always be a % of fans who compare and contrast.  All I know is we had far worse performances under Lambert than the Spurs match on Saturday; Blackburn away, Portsmouth at home  anyone?  Yet these seem to be forgotten in the midst of hysteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ncfcstar"]Thank you for your common sense, and therefore no need for me to compose

my own thread on the topic.  I completely agree with aspects of Parma, Purple and Bethnal''s posts.The people complaining on here about Saturday''s result are the same who moaned last season that we didn''t play too recognised strikers.  Well on Saturday we did, although Elmander wasn''t in his natural position and look what happened.  We were outclassed by a better team, there''s nothing embarrassing about that.[/quote]

 

A great deal was made of Spurs needing to gel, and to work out the best way to utilise a large number of new players. But the same applies to Hughton and Norwich, particularly as there is this question over the (mis-) use of Elmander. There may well be some tough decisions to be made now, in terms of dropping to the bench players who have come in with a big price tag and/or a big reputation.

Share this post


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

I feel sorry for Hughton, he gets a lot of unwarranted criticism (and some warranted too) and is still struggling to win over some fans due to who he isn''t, rather than who he is,

[/quote]this sums it all up perfectly... we could have appointed Jose Mourinho... but he isn''t Lambert... so the fans will never take to him regardless what he does...there''s smacks of Rafa Benitez at Chelsea with whats happening with Hughton atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree Purple (and with your earlier posts).  I made the comparison with Chris Martin.  I think we will see some players disappear with a "You''ve had yours chance and didn''t take it" tag as he did a year ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Given the absence of a Quagliarella, the 10 role is indeed our missing strategic link PC. It would be my view that - given our chosen methodology and pattern of play - that Redmond should play this role as something of a default option.

Given that we have have selected a repeatable, low risk, controlled counter- punching style, Redmond''s tactical callousness actually causes us structural problems that will be exploited by better sides (a la Huckerby). Thus in chess terms, you can lose more than you gain (even though fans will only remember the exciting, attacking forays).

At the level we now find ourselves it is about trying to manufacture ourselves into a 51-49% equation (or better), thus you maximise your strengths (the bits the fans like to see) and minimise your weaknesses (the bits that fans are less able to empirically identify). Given that we choose to probe for transition and counter-attack opportunities from a solid, structured defensive shape, we do lack penetrative pace to make this work in an optimal way. Given that we soak pressure, Redmond will be forced to do more defensive work, particularly in a positional sense, than he is used (or able) to do. To this end the logical step is to shore up the midfield with a ball retainer that can shoot (pilkington) and continue to exploit Redmobd''s gifts further - without the compromise in the chosen playing method defensively - and allow him a relatively free 10 role that can also include running beyond RVW, something we rarely do currently.

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  

×
×
  • Create New...