Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
The Great Mass Debater

What is stopping David Fox moving on?

Recommended Posts

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Yellow Wall"]When are people going to realise that if David Fox was as good as so many people keep making him out to be, he would have been transferred twenty times before now.

Yes he is useful .............. but not great. He is not a Premiership footballer (but still..... I didn''t think Aaron Wilbraham was either!).[/quote]I can understand that people will have favourite players, and that they may be nostalgic about seasons gone by, when they were vital parts of the team.But there come a time where you have to be objective.Its pretty rare that a manager will leave a fantastic player out of the side, for no good reason.[/quote]
It isn''t a question of whether he is a fantastic player or not, it is a question of whether the players keeping him out of the team are fantastic players. There are obvious weaknesses in Tettey, Johnson and Howson, just as there are obvious weaknesses in Fox.
That''s why you play to your teams strengths. Everybody says that Fox can''t tackle. Well when you are in possession you don''t need to tackle, so my retort is that Johnson and Tettey can''t keep possession.
It just sounds so silly to me. We can''t play Fox because he can''t win the ball back when one of our players who can''t pass gives it to the opposition. Hoolahan can''t defend either, that''s why Fox should be interchangeable with Hoolahan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember Lambert once saying "he has a knack of always finding a team mate with a pass" referring to Fox.

 

In my opinion that''s not particularly diffcult when you tend to mainly pass backwards or side ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Yellow Wall"]When are people going to realise that if David Fox was as good as so many people keep making him out to be, he would have been transferred twenty times before now.

Yes he is useful .............. but not great. He is not a Premiership footballer (but still..... I didn''t think Aaron Wilbraham was either!).[/quote]I can understand that people will have favourite players, and that they may be nostalgic about seasons gone by, when they were vital parts of the team.But there come a time where you have to be objective.Its pretty rare that a manager will leave a fantastic player out of the side, for no good reason.[/quote]
It isn''t a question of whether he is a fantastic player or not, it is a question of whether the players keeping him out of the team are fantastic players. There are obvious weaknesses in Tettey, Johnson and Howson, just as there are obvious weaknesses in Fox.
That''s why you play to your teams strengths. Everybody says that Fox can''t tackle. Well when you are in possession you don''t need to tackle, so my retort is that Johnson and Tettey can''t keep possession.
It just sounds so silly to me. We can''t play Fox because he can''t win the ball back when one of our players who can''t pass gives it to the opposition. Hoolahan can''t defend either, that''s why Fox should be interchangeable with Hoolahan. 
[/quote]Say what you like, and you are, of course, entitled to your opinion.But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.

Share this post


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

I remember Lambert once saying "he has a knack of always finding a team mate with a pass" referring to Fox.

In my opinion that''s not particularly diffcult when you tend to mainly pass backwards or side ways.

[/quote]
Think you must be talking about a different David Fox. 
But please tell Tettey, Johnson and Howson this as they seem to find it very difficult sometimes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But I hope the guy gets his move away because I''d like to be able to watch him kick a ball again. If he doesn''t want to give up a good contract and we aren''t going to play him, then perhaps he should get out on loan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hog"]Because he is seriously overrated, cost next to nothing from Colchester United and was hailed as a footballing messiah just because he could pass a ball. Doubt anyone would match his current wages so he is probably content to warm the occasional bench and play with the kids once in a while.[/quote]

 

He is not content to warm the occasional bench.  Don''t guess.  Perhaps he just wants to play football, careers are short and especially when it has taken time to get to a level you don''t want to pack it in after a taste.  

 

He can''t force a club to take him.   The transfer deadline rule has done this to footballers - the merryground might not start until the weekend.  For example....What happens if a premiership team take that young lad Will Hughes from Derby''s midfield at the 11th hour for silly money....Derby then need a replacement at the 12th hour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A club coming in for him is the answer to the original question.

We were by far the best team in that Championship season, and Surman, Tierney Fox, etc, etc were all fundamental to that.  They were all perfect fits for Lamberts formation that year.  And to be fair they were all getting a pretty good look in in that first premiership season as well.

 

Just because Hughton doesn''t rate them or more importantly they don''t fit his style, doesn''t make any of them rubbish. 

 

Look at Hughton''s style, have replaced any ball playing centre half we had (that were fundamental to Lambert''s formation and philosophy) with old fashioned blockers and headers of the ball.  Fox and Surman comfortable on the ball, both cant get alook in because it is all about hunt and destroy centre midfielders.  If any of you think Johnson and tetty are good at passing you are mistaken - but that aint Hughton''s game.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.[/quote]
That proves that Hughton doesn''t want to play him, it doesn''t prove that your opinion is right and my opinion is wrong. If anything it proves that Lambert has a different opinion to Hughton, lets all play a game of state the obvious.  
Fox was benched, Tettey got football. For me that is a catastrophe. We can just agree to disagree, of course we can, but Tettey isn''t a Premier League footballer in my opinion.
Can''t think of many other managers who play two defensive midfielders, so not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.[/quote]
That proves that Hughton doesn''t want to play him, it doesn''t prove that your opinion is right and my opinion is wrong. If anything it proves that Lambert has a different opinion to Hughton, lets all play a game of state the obvious.  
Fox was benched, Tettey got football. For me that is a catastrophe. We can just agree to disagree, of course we can, but Tettey isn''t a Premier League footballer in my opinion.
Can''t think of many other managers who play two defensive midfielders, so not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football. 
[/quote]I have no interest in proving anything, your opinion, and mine don''t matter a jot in the grand scheme of things, the bottom line remains the same, Fox is not getting a game, and is very likely surplus to requirements at Norwich City.And there we go. What you''re essentially saying is that you are a better judge of a footballer than Chris Hughton.Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But it is not just what the manager of Norwich City, Chis Hughton, thinks about Fox it is aboutb what the managers of the remaining teams in the Premiership, the Championship and even League One think.

If they thought David Fox was worth a punt they would make a move for him.

Apart from one supposed flight to Manchester I have heard of no interest from any other club.

Does that not tell you that, perhaps, he is not as good as some suspect?

I personally wish him well and hope he gets a move and regular football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do we end up with childish squabbles on every post???Not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when

it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football.
Sorry LeJuge but Hughton is currently Norwich''s manager.  When it comes to judging players ability its the opinion of the manager and his staff ONLY that counts.  Not yours, not Morty''s, not mine.  And Hughton obviously believes that Fox doesnt offer enough to start, although its perhaps telling that he does feature on the bench quite often - so there is likely to be something there.I think you can argue til youre yellow and green in the face (refuse to use blue lol) which midfielders are fit for purpose which are not.  I dont think that either Fox or Hoolahan have much to offer Norwich going forward.  Both are knocked off the ball too easily and both rely on a different kind of movement up front to the direction we are currently heading.  Funnily enough I think the Wolf would relish service from a fit, confident Fox playing week in week out - more so than Hoolahan - but the Premier League is a very unforgiving place and whilst there was room to experiment with formations in League 1 and to a certain extent the Championship, there is none in the Premier League.  The fact that most teams play 4-5-1 or a variation thereof (eg 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1) shows that we have to do the same if we want to compete.  4-4-2 or even 4-1-2-1-2 is too rigid.  People have short memories - its only 2 or 3 years ago posters were calling on Lambert to "Ditch the Diamond" not realising that would mean the effective end of Hoolahan and Fox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Barclay hero"]Why do we end up with childish squabbles on every post???Not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when

it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football.
Sorry LeJuge but Hughton is currently Norwich''s manager.  When it comes to judging players ability its the opinion of the manager and his staff ONLY that counts.  Not yours, not Morty''s, not mine.  And Hughton obviously believes that Fox doesnt offer enough to start, although its perhaps telling that he does feature on the bench quite often - so there is likely to be something there.I think you can argue til youre yellow and green in the face (refuse to use blue lol) which midfielders are fit for purpose which are not.  I dont think that either Fox or Hoolahan have much to offer Norwich going forward.  Both are knocked off the ball too easily and both rely on a different kind of movement up front to the direction we are currently heading.  Funnily enough I think the Wolf would relish service from a fit, confident Fox playing week in week out - more so than Hoolahan - but the Premier League is a very unforgiving place and whilst there was room to experiment with formations in League 1 and to a certain extent the Championship, there is none in the Premier League.  The fact that most teams play 4-5-1 or a variation thereof (eg 4-4-1-1 or 4-2-3-1) shows that we have to do the same if we want to compete.  4-4-2 or even 4-1-2-1-2 is too rigid.  People have short memories - its only 2 or 3 years ago posters were calling on Lambert to "Ditch the Diamond" not realising that would mean the effective end of Hoolahan and Fox

[/quote]
I realise that Hughton isn''t going to play Fox, which is why I hope he gets a move away somewhere - I want to see him play football. 
I just object to the idea that Tettey or Johnson are better players than Fox. They are no better at what they do than Fox is at what he does. They do different things of course, but some make out that Fox doesn''t play because he isn''t good enough.
I believe that he doesn''t play because he isn''t suited to the system which Hughton wants to play at Norwich. Lambert had a few different systems and usually they evolved around fitting in Fox, Hoolahan, or Fox + Hoolahan. 
Fox is no less Premier League standard than Tettey or Johnson, and that is my only point. Of course he won''t get football here, and needs to leave, but he will be remembered as a great little player by me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.[/quote]
That proves that Hughton doesn''t want to play him, it doesn''t prove that your opinion is right and my opinion is wrong. If anything it proves that Lambert has a different opinion to Hughton, lets all play a game of state the obvious.  
Fox was benched, Tettey got football. For me that is a catastrophe. We can just agree to disagree, of course we can, but Tettey isn''t a Premier League footballer in my opinion.
Can''t think of many other managers who play two defensive midfielders, so not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football. 
[/quote]I have no interest in proving anything, your opinion, and mine don''t matter a jot in the grand scheme of things, the bottom line remains the same, Fox is not getting a game, and is very likely surplus to requirements at Norwich City.And there we go. What you''re essentially saying is that you are a better judge of a footballer than Chris Hughton.Lol.[/quote]
No, what you are saying is that you will rate a player because Hughton does. I am saying that I will rate a player because I do. 
That is the difference between somebody who forms their own opinion and somebody who relies on borrowing opinions from other people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think youre possibly right on Johnson and Tettey but it should also be remembered that we have come a long way very quickly - and even "New" players can get left behind very quickly.  If we recruited for where we want to be we would have an almost entire new team every season at the rate we''re going - and that takes money - lots of money - and is a big riskThe other point is that managers have favourites - as do we.  Its fine if the two are the same, theres conflict if theres not.  Hence why you and Morty dont get on, and why theres a lot of anti-Hughton sentimentMy own personal favourite from times past was Dave Phillips - it may be yellow tinted glasses but in my mind he was responsible for a lot of our rise to the top of the Prem in 92/93.  Certainly we werent the same side once he''d gone, although there may be other reasons that my mind refuses to remember.  Either way he fell out with Walker, got sold on and we were in Division 1 within 2 years.  What Im getting at is that in my mind Walker lost some of his shine at that time but ultimately he was the manager and because up to his departure he was so successful many other people thought he could walk on water.  Hughton had a tough act to follow and unless we end up winning a cup of finishing in the top 6 I think there are people that never will forgive him for not being Lambert - especially if their favourite players get sidelined

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Barclay hero"] I think there are people that never will forgive him for not being Lambert - especially if their favourite players get sidelined[/quote]
I forgive him for not being Lambert, but I want to see more Norwich City goals. 
I have very simple needs, I pay a lot of money travelling to games, paying for my season ticket, buying various bits of tat, burnt cornish pasties, sometimes flat Carling, and it would be nice if I got home on a Saturday having seen some good attacking football with a goal or two. 
May as well be honest, if I am as bored this season as I was last season then I may decide that £4000 a year is better spent on some amazing holidays or partaking in alternative forms of entertainment. The human brain has a need for entertainment and that''s why human beings invest some of their money into it. 
I''ve seen thousands of games, followed through thick and thin, had some great times and some less great times, but I prefer it when it gives me a fix of excitement or a bit of a buzz. 
One beautiful David Fox pass to Simeon Jackson a couple of years ago gave me enough excitement for an entire summer, I don''t get excited by Tettey. It is as simple as that. I want to see nice football. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The New Boy (Le Juge) wrote the following post at 28/08/2013 3:00 PM:

"Paul Lambert knew that he needed a David Fox at Villa, that''s why he bought Ashley Westwood. "

To play Lambert''s style I presume? It appears to be working at Villa as Westwood has a decent Assist record. Unfortunately Fox is nowhere as good and should hopefully find a home in the Championship; his natural level.

PS: Johnson has double the Assist rate of Fox. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.[/quote]
That proves that Hughton doesn''t want to play him, it doesn''t prove that your opinion is right and my opinion is wrong. If anything it proves that Lambert has a different opinion to Hughton, lets all play a game of state the obvious.  
Fox was benched, Tettey got football. For me that is a catastrophe. We can just agree to disagree, of course we can, but Tettey isn''t a Premier League footballer in my opinion.
Can''t think of many other managers who play two defensive midfielders, so not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football. 
[/quote]I have no interest in proving anything, your opinion, and mine don''t matter a jot in the grand scheme of things, the bottom line remains the same, Fox is not getting a game, and is very likely surplus to requirements at Norwich City.And there we go. What you''re essentially saying is that you are a better judge of a footballer than Chris Hughton.Lol.[/quote]
No, what you are saying is that you will rate a player because Hughton does. I am saying that I will rate a player because I do. 
That is the difference between somebody who forms their own opinion and somebody who relies on borrowing opinions from other people. 
[/quote]No, what I am actually doing here is deferring to Hughtons greater football knowledge, I am quite happy to hold my hands up and admit Hughton knows more about football than I ever will, and knows the Fox situation better than any of us.How about you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote]But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the fact is that David Fox is sat gathering dust, and not starting in the Premiership.[/quote]
That doesn''t really prove anything at all though does it. 
[/quote]Well yes, it really does.It proves that whatever your opinion, if the manager doesn''t rate the player, he ain''t getting a game.[/quote]
That proves that Hughton doesn''t want to play him, it doesn''t prove that your opinion is right and my opinion is wrong. If anything it proves that Lambert has a different opinion to Hughton, lets all play a game of state the obvious.  
Fox was benched, Tettey got football. For me that is a catastrophe. We can just agree to disagree, of course we can, but Tettey isn''t a Premier League footballer in my opinion.
Can''t think of many other managers who play two defensive midfielders, so not sure that holding up Hughton''s opinion has too much weight when it comes to judging the quality of a footballer who can play football. 
[/quote]I have no interest in proving anything, your opinion, and mine don''t matter a jot in the grand scheme of things, the bottom line remains the same, Fox is not getting a game, and is very likely surplus to requirements at Norwich City.And there we go. What you''re essentially saying is that you are a better judge of a footballer than Chris Hughton.Lol.[/quote]
No, what you are saying is that you will rate a player because Hughton does. I am saying that I will rate a player because I do. 
That is the difference between somebody who forms their own opinion and somebody who relies on borrowing opinions from other people. 
[/quote]No, what I am actually doing here is deferring to Hughtons greater football knowledge, I am quite happy to hold my hands up and admit Hughton knows more about football than I ever will, and knows the Fox situation better than any of us.How about you?[/quote]
I''m happy to hold my hands up and admit that Hughton didn''t want to play David Fox because he is the only manager in the league who liked to play with two defensive midfielders last season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Joanna Grey"] PS: Johnson has double the Assist rate of Fox. Just saying. [/quote]
''Assist Rate'', what is this the MLS? May as well just start calling our sport soccer, it is going to happen one day.
Bradley Johnson: 71 appearances, 7 assists
David Fox: 74 appearances, 14 assists
Just saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="morty"]And that Chris Hughton knows more about football than you ever will?[/quote]
Will you admit that Nile Ranger and Michael Chopra know more about football than you ever will, or will you accept that fans are able to form their own opinions about the players that they pay their own money to watch without having to worship anybody who has ever kicked a ball and has an opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="morty"]Yup, thought so.[/quote]
You are creating a paradox in your mind. You want me to say that Hughton knows less about football than me because he is a football manager. You think that this in some way confirms that Hughton is right about Fox and I am wrong about Fox. But your logic is highly flawed. This is why:
Morty watches Norwich highlights on Match of the Day. He thinks that Bassong has an excellent game against Newcastle, he is looking forward to seeing what the Match of the Day Pundits have to say about Bassong. 
  1. Mark Lawrenson says that Bassong was excellent
  2. Alan Shearer says that Bassong had a terrible game and his marking was terrible
  3. Roy Keane says that Bassong was average.
Morty agrees with Mark Lawrenson but has now created a paradox because all three pundits know more about football than him. That my his own definition means that he must agree with Lawrenson, Shearer, and Keane, because he bows to their superior football knowledge. But holding all three opinions would be contradictory, so he has to choose one. Does he:
a) Go with his initial opinion that Bassong had an excellent game and agree with Mark Lawrenson.
b) Try and work out which one of Lawrenson, Shearer and Keane knows the most about football so that he can steal their opinion.
c) Hire a mathematics graduate to create a complex formula to make all three opinions possible at the same time. 
So my answer is ''yes'', Chris Hughton knows more about football than me. My question to you is...... what relevance does that have to my opinion of David Fox and if ''none'' then why are you asking the question? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"]Yup, thought so.[/quote]
You are creating a paradox in your mind. You want me to say that Hughton knows less about football than me because he is a football manager. You think that this in some way confirms that Hughton is right about Fox and I am wrong about Fox. But your logic is highly flawed. This is why:
Morty watches Norwich highlights on Match of the Day. He thinks that Bassong has an excellent game against Newcastle, he is looking forward to seeing what the Match of the Day Pundits have to say about Bassong. 
  1. Mark Lawrenson says that Bassong was excellent
  2. Alan Shearer says that Bassong had a terrible game and his marking was terrible
  3. Roy Keane says that Bassong was average.
Morty agrees with Mark Lawrenson but has now created a paradox because all three pundits know more about football than him. That my his own definition means that he must agree with Lawrenson, Shearer, and Keane, because he bows to their superior football knowledge. But holding all three opinions would be contradictory, so he has to choose one. Does he:
a) Go with his initial opinion that Bassong had an excellent game and agree with Mark Lawrenson.
b) Try and work out which one of Lawrenson, Shearer and Keane knows the most about football so that he can steal their opinion.
c) Hire a mathematics graduate to create a complex formula to make all three opinions possible at the same time. 
So my answer is ''yes'', Chris Hughton knows more about football than me. My question to you is...... what relevance does that have to my opinion of David Fox and if ''none'' then why are you asking the question? 
[/quote]We''ll just say you''re right, its easier that way.You''re right, Fox is amazing and its a travesty of justice that he''s not starting games[Y]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"]Yup, thought so.[/quote]
You are creating a paradox in your mind. You want me to say that Hughton knows less about football than me because he is a football manager. You think that this in some way confirms that Hughton is right about Fox and I am wrong about Fox. But your logic is highly flawed. This is why:
Morty watches Norwich highlights on Match of the Day. He thinks that Bassong has an excellent game against Newcastle, he is looking forward to seeing what the Match of the Day Pundits have to say about Bassong. 
  1. Mark Lawrenson says that Bassong was excellent
  2. Alan Shearer says that Bassong had a terrible game and his marking was terrible
  3. Roy Keane says that Bassong was average.
Morty agrees with Mark Lawrenson but has now created a paradox because all three pundits know more about football than him. That my his own definition means that he must agree with Lawrenson, Shearer, and Keane, because he bows to their superior football knowledge. But holding all three opinions would be contradictory, so he has to choose one. Does he:
a) Go with his initial opinion that Bassong had an excellent game and agree with Mark Lawrenson.
b) Try and work out which one of Lawrenson, Shearer and Keane knows the most about football so that he can steal their opinion.
c) Hire a mathematics graduate to create a complex formula to make all three opinions possible at the same time. 
So my answer is ''yes'', Chris Hughton knows more about football than me. My question to you is...... what relevance does that have to my opinion of David Fox and if ''none'' then why are you asking the question? 
[/quote]We''ll just say you''re right, its easier that way.You''re right, Fox is amazing and its a travesty of justice that he''s not starting games[Y][/quote]
Lambert had faith in him and he performed. Hughton has no faith in Fox and therefore there is no point in Fox being here or playing. But we don''t have an upgrade on Fox, because Hughton doesn''t want an upgrade on Fox.
There is no room for a player of his mould in a Hughton team, and I don''t really see why you can''t see and agree with that point. It has nothing to do with whether Hughton knows more about football than me (or Paul Lambert). It has everything to do with Hughton playing a different style of football. 
If Lambert walked into the club tomorrow and couldn''t sign a single player then I would expect Fox to get some football again and I doubt that you really disagree with that point, you just want to turn it into a simplistic ''good enough'' or ''not good enough'' argument, which to be honest says more about how little you know about football then it does about how much Hughton knows about football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"][quote user="The New Boy Le Juge"][quote user="morty"]Yup, thought so.[/quote]
You are creating a paradox in your mind. You want me to say that Hughton knows less about football than me because he is a football manager. You think that this in some way confirms that Hughton is right about Fox and I am wrong about Fox. But your logic is highly flawed. This is why:
Morty watches Norwich highlights on Match of the Day. He thinks that Bassong has an excellent game against Newcastle, he is looking forward to seeing what the Match of the Day Pundits have to say about Bassong. 
  1. Mark Lawrenson says that Bassong was excellent
  2. Alan Shearer says that Bassong had a terrible game and his marking was terrible
  3. Roy Keane says that Bassong was average.
Morty agrees with Mark Lawrenson but has now created a paradox because all three pundits know more about football than him. That my his own definition means that he must agree with Lawrenson, Shearer, and Keane, because he bows to their superior football knowledge. But holding all three opinions would be contradictory, so he has to choose one. Does he:
a) Go with his initial opinion that Bassong had an excellent game and agree with Mark Lawrenson.
b) Try and work out which one of Lawrenson, Shearer and Keane knows the most about football so that he can steal their opinion.
c) Hire a mathematics graduate to create a complex formula to make all three opinions possible at the same time. 
So my answer is ''yes'', Chris Hughton knows more about football than me. My question to you is...... what relevance does that have to my opinion of David Fox and if ''none'' then why are you asking the question? 
[/quote]We''ll just say you''re right, its easier that way.You''re right, Fox is amazing and its a travesty of justice that he''s not starting games[Y][/quote]
Lambert had faith in him and he performed. Hughton has no faith in Fox and therefore there is no point in Fox being here or playing. But we don''t have an upgrade on Fox, because Hughton doesn''t want an upgrade on Fox.
There is no room for a player of his mould in a Hughton team, and I don''t really see why you can''t see and agree with that point. It has nothing to do with whether Hughton knows more about football than me (or Paul Lambert). It has everything to do with Hughton playing a different style of football. 
If Lambert walked into the club tomorrow and couldn''t sign a single player then I would expect Fox to get some football again and I doubt that you really disagree with that point, you just want to turn it into a simplistic ''good enough'' or ''not good enough'' argument, which to be honest says more about how little you know about football then it does about how much Hughton knows about football.
[/quote]When did Fox last appear in a first team game? Was it in the cup last season, where he had a shocker?If Fox is half the player you seem to think he is, why is he either 1) Happy to languish in the background, never getting first team football, knowing full well that he doesn''t fit into Hughton''s plans (If its so obvious to you then I assume he knows too) or 2) Finding himself another club?I mean he sounds like a real bargain, the clubs must be tripping over themselves trying to sign him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
--- The New Boy (Le Juge): But we don''t have an upgrade on Fox, because Hughton doesn''t want an upgrade on Fox. There is no room for a player of his mould in a Hughton team, and I don''t really see why you can''t see and agree with that point.

Hughton wants players who can tackle, not players who can pass. Hence signing Fer and trying to play him behind the striker. It is why the Hoot is a defensive manager. Anyone who thinks we are going to become more ambitious in our play is living in cloud cuckoo land.

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  

×