A lesson from Hull?

[Salopian 1]

I didn''t go to the match, and so far have not seen any highlights, but what emerges from press reports is that we lost the game in the midfield. Our main problem was that we were out-passed there by Huddleston and Livermore, and one or two colleagues. We struggled to present RvW with good chances against Everton, and we did not provide him with very much at Hull.

 

It has been like this for some little time with possibly our best creator, Wes, trying to be half a striker. I had some hope that Fer would provide some of what we lack, but the manager seems intent on playing him in the same way as Wes. We have relied on our wingers to provide most of the chances, but now we have lost one of our main threats for several months and another who played was not really fully fit.

 

Lesson:

Don''t try to play your only fully equipped midfielder as a back-up striker, and leave the centre midfield with players not known for incisive creativity, and if you lose one of only two rapid wingers, play the next best you have - the rapid wing back Olsson.

 

I am not calling for the resignation of the manager. With so many new players to integrate into the team we knew that it would take time. Everybody admired the signings made, often very cheaply, but they have to fit in. Many were calling for strikers, quite rightly, and others for defenders, and McN and CH did well with available funds. I was concerned about the central midfield creatively and moving forward, but I was relieved with the signing of Fer, - I even thought that he was potentially our best signing. He is adaptable, but we need him to create from the midfield, perhaps even alongside Elmander, who has played there during his career.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

There''s usually a game at least once a season where it doesn''t go for us, Fulham last year, Sunderland the year before. Hopefully we will be better next time out.

[SYG 0]

Lesson from Hull, it''s simple, our current squab will struggle and just might but be good enough

[morty 0]

[quote user="SYG"]Lesson from Hull, it''s simple, our current squab will struggle and just might but be good enough[/quote]You seriously believe that?

[SYG 0]

Yes

[morty 0]

[quote user="SYG"]Yes[/quote]Fair enough[Y]Personally I think its maybe a bit too soon to tell. I consider pretty much every player we have brought in to be an upgrade, so I remain hopeful.

[MyGodWeArePoorToWatch 0]

We have the players, we had them last year, but unless they are played to there strengths, they can be the best in the world and results will be poor.

He ( Hughton ) cant and wont change his ways, he is a coward, to scared to loose, resulting in just that, a squad, handcuffed to his negative approach.

The sooner a fearless manager comes in, the better.

I''am sick of him setting up our team week in week out, as if we are playing barcelona. Of course, there are occasions to play hughtons style, but not every match, home and away.

[Lavanche 0]

I missed the match so cant really tell this nor that what went to wrong, but just looking heat meters of players and our line up. I for a first time say that Hughton need to look long in to the mirror after this game.

I still trust he will do the job for us and I like his approach, but you really cant start a match with three middlefielders whose first position is defensive midfielder and one who is central midfielder and none of them are that well known about creative playstyle.

Sometimes I''m bit afraid Hughton reads these forums ^^ as he did exactly what most of people wanted here. Dropped Hoolahan for Fer and brought Tettey as a starter and didn''t drop Howson in process.

Ofc these risks sometimes pay off and what I have red Hull never really threated our goal except the penalty, so goal from the set piece or long shot could have done it for us, but lack of creativity oozes from that line up and if we struggled last season to create enough goal chances it is quite clear that Hull game line up will struggle too.

As said my opinion is only based on stats as I haven''t seen the game. But Howson seemed to have better game than against Everton, but Johnson was bad as against Everton. Tettey got people angry by sidepassing, but as some players in our squad have pointed out in certain Everton game, it really isnt that easy to keep pass tempo up at the bottom of midfield. So hopefuly in next game Johnson is dropped and Fer - Tettey will play at the bottom of our midfield and no more try outs for Fer as a attacking midfielder as he is wasted that way.

[SYG 0]

Just because we have spent a lot of money on a few players does not automatically mean they are good!

I do live in hope that that will come good, but I guess only time will tell

[morty 0]

[quote user="SYG"]Just because we have spent a lot of money on a few players does not automatically mean they are good!

I do live in hope that that will come good, but I guess only time will tell[/quote]I agree, but looking at the players that we let go that never saw a game last season, I definitely feel better about our overall squad.

[killiecanary 0]

Some excellent posts on this thread.

I will be really interested to see how Gary Hooper fits into things once he is fit. He has experience of playing as a false no 9 at Celtic and I would not be surprised if he plays there just off RVW with Fer then as a box to box midfielder like we all think he should be. Add Snoddy and Redmond to that mix and I think there is a potent attacking threat there. I don''t think we chased hooper for so long for him to be a benchwarmer!

[CDMullins 436]

[quote user="SYG"]Just because we have spent a lot of money on a few players does not automatically mean they are good!

I do live in hope that that will come good, but I guess only time will tell[/quote]

I trust you are aware that we had 5-6 potential first team players out over the last 2 games?

[Sussexyellow 55]

We are just two games into the season. 

We have yet to put out a team that is anything like our strongest selection.

We have a lot of new players that will take time for Hughton to work out how best to play them, and for them to develop an instinctive understanding as to how each other play.

We had only one natural wide player in the team at Hull on Saturday. He is young, inexperienced and playing only his second premier league game. Injuries led to the team not being well balanced.

Yet we as supporters still expect to see a well oiled machine from the get go. It is just not a realistic expectation.

We do have a stronger squad than those that set out on the last two campaigns. We need to be patient and allow time to allow the squad to gel.

Realistically Hughton is not going to change his spots instantly. Our playing style is likely to evolve gradually, it is not going to be a dramatic instant change.

If 12 to 15 games into the season we are still not performing and dishing up turgid stuff then let the whining begin. But until then let''s give the players a chance and give them our full support.

OTBC

[killiecanary 0]

If this board had a +1 mechanism that post would have been given one...

Couldn''t agree more. Very well put.

[PortlandCanary 0]

Hull was such a calamity of errors that it is best to just forget it all together. Lets just all agree on a lie.

No, Norwich didn''t play this weekend. Game was canceled due to Arab Spring...or so I heard.

[Badger 2,405]

I thought that these stats provided quite an interesting insight:

http://squawka.com/news/2013/08/26/analysis-norwichs-lack-of-finesse-costs-them-as-hull-sweat-out-first-premier-league-win/2013082618808?

The conclusions reached are as follows:

"Despite losing Chris Houghton’s men still had the best of possession, 56% compared to 44%, had more shots (as mentioned above), completed 84% of passes while Hull only managed 79% and won five corners while Steve Bruce’s boys only won one.

It appears that the Canaries did everything they needed too to win the match, except score goals. They dominated parts of the match and had the most impressive statistics but somehow could not overcome the ten men of Hull." ...

"The key stat for this encounter is surely the fact that Norwich City had 13 shots but failed to score. Just four shots were on target, in other words just under a third, two were blocked and a massive seven were off target.

New-signing Nathan Redmond had four of those shots but £8m man Ricky Van Wolfswinkel only managed a couple of shots, one of which hit the target and one of which did not.

Their lack of clinical finishing in front of goal is ultimately what cost Chris Houghton’s men from taking anything from their second game of the season."

Certainly we had more clear cut chances than they did, both before and after the sending off - imo just one of those days and far to early to read great significance into events yet.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

--- Squawka said: "Their lack of clinical finishing in front of goal is ultimately what cost Chris Houghton’s men from taking anything from their second game of the season."

Until you consider 10 shots of the 13 were long range punts from outside the penalty area.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

A lesson from Foghorn...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MGBEbo1gmA

 

[;)]

 

 

[Snoddys Jockstrap 0]

Saturday was an exercise in tactical insanity.

Howson on the right, a box-to-boxer playing off the striker, two CDMS against a newly promoted side. Our two best attacking players on the bench. It was genuinely ridiculous.

What concerns me is not that the team haven''t gelled or that we failed to create chances, it''s the tactical inflexibility that never deviates from the two banks of four away from home.

This inflexibility, which was the hallmark of last season, will mean we''ll end up in the exact same situation if a major tactical overhaul isn''t ushered in.

I''ve never been a Hughton out guy, and I''m not becoming one anytime soon, but I have to say my patience is wearing thin at a rate of knots.

[Wishbone 8]

I don''t really buy into this ''working out how best to play a new signing'', esp positionally. Surely, Hughton knew which areas of the pitch needed strengthening. It doesn''t take a genius to observe we were overrun in central midfield on a lot of occasions last season. So, Fer (with his physical attributes and eye for a pass) was surely bought in to influence the game from the middle of the park (esp as we lack other cultured midfielders). The attempts to sign Quagiarella / Toivonon also suggest we were trying to get a specific number 10. Sometimes, this ''working out where best to play a footballer'' implies a manager hasn''t worked out what they''re trying to do (Hoolahan on the wing under Roeder springs to mind)!

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

The early sending off ironically worked in Hull''s favour. It removed any obligation for them to attack, particularly after getting an early penalty. 10 behind the ball and defending for their lives maximised their odds.

Like many I will take a keen interest in the pattern of play v Southampton. Clear signs of development - or of a progressive structure designed to generate chances from midfield possession - would be welcome.

[JC 0]

A lot of conclusions from people generalising who didn''t go to the match and admit to have not seen any highlights.

I went and sat in the Hull end as I couldn''t get an away ticket

So, in a nutshell we conceeded a penalty, first instinct I looked straight at the ref as from me was a pen, replays show it a little soft but in all reality Turner put his arm on Sagbo and asked for it to be given. Before this we looked really good (first 15) Hull looked awful. Fer had a header just wide (on MOTD highlights) if that had gone in we would have had a very different scoreline.

Hull never threatened, pen and one other chance of a well worked move but poor defence, off target.

Whilst some of our shots were from distance, in the second half two shots from Howson (from outside the box) really tested McGregor and RvW had a header well saved.

I was in the Hull end for the match and I can tell you they did not enjoy the game. They were under almost constant pressure from us in the second half but placed two banks of four in front of goal which made it really hard to get in behind, prior to the penalty there was a lot more space on the pitch and we created openings (not great chances). Without the red card we would have scored as Hull would not have gone ultra-defensive. Whilst you might argue that "it was only Hull", they are still in the Premier League on merit and they are not idiots, an organised outfit can see out a game.

I read an interesting statistic in the pre-match program, last season Hull (in the league) had 16 clean sheets and failed to score in 12 matches, NCFC 10 clean sheets and 13 failed to score. The match was never going to be a goalfest

So, easy conclusion, we are in the Premier League and we will not get a game where we have 20+ shots or 5+ glorious chances so when they come we need to take these. There is no need to hit the PANIC BUTTON

I for one believe we have the players that will score these and I take heart from the RvW goal in the first game. We also really missed Snoddy in the first half, Howson whilst trying his best really isn''t a right midfielder and came into the game massively in the second half once he played centrally