mrs miggins 0 Posted November 6, 2013 Ahhh right, so it''s basically confirmation that they are not good managers, but fairly successful coaches, and grant holt doesn''t like one of them........as you werethought i might of got a good explanation Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted November 6, 2013 To the person who answered the thread question with ''Because they''re not Culverhouse and Karsa'' - what a weak response. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]To the person who answered the thread question with ''Because they''re not Culverhouse and Karsa'' - what a weak response.[/quote] Is it because I found you making things up that you can''t use my name? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0 Posted November 7, 2013 Perhaps there would be less dislike to the pair had their names been Paulos Trollopaldinio and Calcio Calderwoods. I''m sure their past would be ignored if their names were a little more European. Seriously though I think there was friction with Calderwood due to the Grant Holt thing at Forest. Holt being an Idol and Calderwood disliking him was never going to sit easy with supporters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RvWs 4 year contract 0 Posted November 7, 2013 Why has the "Norfolk people love a good moan!" stereotype been mentioned again?Should we be happy with the fact that:We didnt win any of our first 7 games when they started?Our form was abysmal from christmas 2012 until the end of last season?We get hammered every single time we play away from home against the best teams (oh and Fulham where we lost 5-0)?Our attack now seems incredibly predictable, slow and boring (despite spending big money on Hooper and RvW?!)Yep, no right to question or complain whatsoever.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bury Green 0 Posted November 7, 2013 Cambridge, what you''re saying is, for me at least, the managers greatest failing. He has, I think, a pretty good eye for a player, is very good with the media and offers the club a very nice perception in the footballing world in general. But and it''s a big but, you have to question the team he has chosen to be around him.Conversely I always felt that Lambert would be completely lost without Culverhouse but is wise enough to know this, Hughton I fear is not so fortunate.Both lack any sort of pedigree and let''s face it here''s plenty of evidence at the moment to support the claim that there''s something seriously wrong and there has to be a very good reason for our slump in fortunes.Watching the dugout on a match day is pretty painful, the wielding of an iPad and Hughton looking a very lonely figure, from the outside at least it certainly doesn''t fill you full of confidence so what about the players?He chose these two and perhaps this is his single biggest failing which could ultimately cost him his job. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,290 Posted November 7, 2013 According to Mick Dennis the I-pad business is them analysing stats from prozone as they come in during the game. I guess some might think its impressive we are using technology in such a way but for me this sort of thing is indicative of some of our problems. By all means lets analyse the stats post match but personally I would prefer my manager/coaching staff to make their changes/subs based on what they are seeing on the pitch and how they feel the game is going. I suppose technology replacing human nous/instinct is something that is happening in society generally. Perhaps we should just have a robot as our management. They should be equally capable of spending 15/20 minutes studying the prozone stats before making a like for like change that makes no difference! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="Jim Smith"]According to Mick Dennis the I-pad business is them analysing stats from prozone as they come in during the game. I guess some might think its impressive we are using technology in such a way but for me this sort of thing is indicative of some of our problems. By all means lets analyse the stats post match but personally I would prefer my manager/coaching staff to make their changes/subs based on what they are seeing on the pitch and how they feel the game is going. I suppose technology replacing human nous/instinct is something that is happening in society generally. Perhaps we should just have a robot as our management. They should be equally capable of spending 15/20 minutes studying the prozone stats before making a like for like change that makes no difference![/quote]Its not pro-zone, they''re playing Candy Crush. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reggie Strayshun 0 Posted November 7, 2013 Might be sending emails to their friends.Let''s face it ;there''d be time to write out "War and Peace" in between Norwich goals...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shankslad 0 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="Chunky Norwich"]As City 2nd alluded to, it could be perceived in some quarters that Calderwood arrived with a bit of ''baggage'' regarding Grant Holt and their time at Forest. Holt had scored goals for fun before Calderwood shifted him into a right winger, Holt lost form and goals and then went down to pastures new.Since Holty had been a phenomenal striker for us and then suddenly switched overnight since the new management team came in - drifting to the wings, looking peed off, trying to get himself sent off, *only* scoring 8 (which is beginning to look increasingly more impressive by the week!) - it''s probably one of those hindsight things where people are putting two and two together. [/quote] Holts days with Norwich were over as soon as Calderwood arrived! They are largely anonymous - Culverhouse was to be seen frequently in the tech area on match days being involved in what was happening on the pitch. I don''t even know what Calderwood and Trollope look like. First rate management usually employ first rate staff. Second rate management cannot survive with first rate staff (the staff usually take over - or leave). This thread is about Calderwood and Trollope not Hughton and I genuinely do not believe they they are right for Norwich - they are just not good enough at this level I always assumed Grant Holt would''ve been groomed by Norwich for some form of role or involvement on the coaching/management/ambassador side. His nous may be sh1te but his motivational and leadership skills invaluable. Russell Martin is another one who should be earmarked for future things. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yorkshire Canary 118 Posted November 7, 2013 Hate is not the word for me, more total lack of confidence. They all remind me of a group of X factor solo hopefuls who cannot make it on their own and some wag things they will perform better in a band. They are 2 failed managers rather than respected coaches Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4th floor 4 Posted November 7, 2013 To shed a bit of light on the management team, there''s a notable Spurs/Swindon connection with them.Paul Trollope''s father John and Hughton''s ex-Spurs colleagues Ossie Ardiles and Glen Hoddle were all former managers at Swindon. Trollope senior remained at Swindon as a youth team coach under Ardiles and Hoddle after stepping down as manager, while Trollope junior was a player under all three alongside Calderwood. Ardiles signed Calderwood for Spurs while Hughton was a coach there and Trollope junior played for Calderwood at Northampton.So the three of them probably decided to form a coaching team mostly because they''ve all worked together before and share many ties, with the successful coach becoming manager and the less experienced former managers doing the coaching. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="Shankslad"][quote user="Chunky Norwich"]As City 2nd alluded to, it could be perceived in some quarters that Calderwood arrived with a bit of ''baggage'' regarding Grant Holt and their time at Forest. Holt had scored goals for fun before Calderwood shifted him into a right winger, Holt lost form and goals and then went down to pastures new.Since Holty had been a phenomenal striker for us and then suddenly switched overnight since the new management team came in - drifting to the wings, looking peed off, trying to get himself sent off, *only* scoring 8 (which is beginning to look increasingly more impressive by the week!) - it''s probably one of those hindsight things where people are putting two and two together. [/quote] Holts days with Norwich were over as soon as Calderwood arrived! They are largely anonymous - Culverhouse was to be seen frequently in the tech area on match days being involved in what was happening on the pitch. I don''t even know what Calderwood and Trollope look like. First rate management usually employ first rate staff. Second rate management cannot survive with first rate staff (the staff usually take over - or leave). This thread is about Calderwood and Trollope not Hughton and I genuinely do not believe they they are right for Norwich - they are just not good enough at this level I always assumed Grant Holt would''ve been groomed by Norwich for some form of role or involvement on the coaching/management/ambassador side. His nous may be sh1te but his motivational and leadership skills invaluable. Russell Martin is another one who should be earmarked for future things. [/quote] Holt was always going to go back to Carlisle, I don''t think anything would''ve persuaded him to stay in Norfolk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Reggie Strayshun 0 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="JonnyH"]To shed a bit of light on the management team, there''s a notable Spurs/Swindon connection with them.Paul Trollope''s father John and Hughton''s ex-Spurs colleagues Ossie Ardiles and Glen Hoddle were all former managers at Swindon. Trollope senior remained at Swindon as a youth team coach under Ardiles and Hoddle after stepping down as manager, while Trollope junior was a player under all three alongside Calderwood. Ardiles signed Calderwood for Spurs while Hughton was a coach there and Trollope junior played for Calderwood at Northampton.So the three of them probably decided to form a coaching team mostly because they''ve all worked together before and share many ties, with the successful coach becoming manager and the less experienced former managers doing the coaching.[/quote]If there is an obligatory Swindon connection in this Jonny, then the answer''s staring us in the face.Sack Hughton etc and get Paolo di Canio in...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dj11 377 Posted November 7, 2013 At times the way Hughton stands forlornly on the touch line reminds me of Roeder, and I certainly do not want to be reminded of those times. We seem to be overly reliant on stats, zones and set plays. It is a bit like painting by numbers and has killed all flair and expressive play. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
City 2nd 191 Posted November 7, 2013 Chunky Norwich wrote:Holts days with Norwich were over as soon as Calderwood arrived! They are largely anonymous - Culverhouse was to be seen frequently in the tech area on match days being involved in what was happening on the pitch. I don''t even know what Calderwood and Trollope look like.Trollope in fact does not sit on the bench or venture into the technical area at all - his role is to take a position in the stands - in fact at CR he uses the TV gantry - to view the game from on high regarding player movement, set plays and defending. All which at this moment in time I would say are more than dire! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,290 Posted November 7, 2013 [quote user="dj11"]At times the way Hughton stands forlornly on the touch line reminds me of Roeder, and I certainly do not want to be reminded of those times. We seem to be overly reliant on stats, zones and set plays. It is a bit like painting by numbers and has killed all flair and expressive play.[/quote]Painting by numbers is a good analogy. That''s how we play and how the management seem to do everything. For what its worth i think they generally get the starting line up right far more often than Lambert did. he quite often got the starting line up wrong but was not afraid to change if when not working and seems to manage through pure instinct during games, doing what he thought would give us the best chance of getting that win. In fairness he was better at attacking changes than tightening up the defence and at the top level you will probably lose as many as you win doing that (won;t get away with 4 strikers on the pitch very often) because sometime it will come back to bite you) but it would just be nice to see just a bit of instinctive, creative management from the Hoot. That said last time he tried it he took Tettey off at Arsenal so maybe we are better off sticking with what the computer says! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0 Posted November 7, 2013 --- morty: Its not pro-zone, they''re playing Candy Crush.They may as well be given the management''s seeming inability to impact the direction of games. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunky Norwich 0 Posted November 9, 2013 City 2nd, that wasn''t me fella Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salopian 1 Posted November 9, 2013 "Hate" is not the right word. How can you hate someone you may know by sight but have never met or spoken to? All I can say is that some feel that at times team selection and tactics seem a little limited in thought or imagination. The conclusion is either that the other two give him good suggestions and ideas, and he ignores what they say, or alternatively as they are both failed managers they can''t contribute very much. Since CH himself is such a pleasant, likeable person, I suspect that many incline to the second view and so they ''demonise'' his assistants. The other problem is that the assistants followed Culverhouse, who seems to have been excellent in his contribution and greatly contributed to Lambert''s success, they suffer in comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drurys testamonials V 15 0 Posted November 9, 2013 I hold Calderwood responsible for our appalling tactics. He''s the 1 coaching them and clearly hasn''t got the talent of Culverhouse or other number 2s. Peter Grant was a better number 2 than he was manager. Trollope is related to some guy who wrote massive tomes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrs miggins 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="drurys testamonials V 15"]I hold Calderwood responsible for our appalling tactics. He''s the 1 coaching them and clearly hasn''t got the talent of Culverhouse or other number 2s. Peter Grant was a better number 2 than he was manager. Trollope is related to some guy who wrote massive tomes.[/quote]the words of truth and reason i''m sure Share this post Link to post Share on other sites