so, who led the dresing room revolt and ignored Hughton today?

[Buh 0]

City 1st just jumped the shark

He''s gone past binner, he''s like a "skip-er" or a "recycling centre-er"

Lying to promote your agenda and damage the club is treason. I''d ban you from carrow road for life, not kidding.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,577]

This dressing room revolt thing does make me laugh. "An unnamed source says they revolted" according to City 1st. It''s great having all these people ''in the know''.

You mentioned John Ruddy had criticised Hughton''s tactics. That''s wrong, he was criticising his team mates. If players are so dissatisfied, why did John Ruddy extend his contract this season after a season playing with Hughton at the helm? He''s one of our top handful of players, could have fought it out at Chelsea this year if he''d fancied. I fancy that he would have got game time there and given Cech a run for his money. Turning down that to work under a manager he had no faith in and had ''lost the dressing room''. Get real.

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

[quote user="grefstad"]City1st has many good posts in this forum, most of which I agree completely.

It happens to be that I am in my early 40´s, and claim to "know my football", although some of the spoiled brats in this forum seem to think otherwise.

So, when City1st says there is an unrest in the squad, mainly due to poor tactics, and also ignoration of fringe players, I believe him. SIgns have been there for a long time, at least since Feb 2013, maybe earlier.

A few lucky wins, like this WBA win, won''t change my perception of Hughton. He has, in my eyes, probably lost at least 50% of the dressing room.

Hughton "demanded a response" from the players in last nights game, and he got the result. He did not get the performance, however, and those of us who look a bit behind results will see this.

The 18-25yr olds in this forum don''t, all they see is a win, and thats it.

Long term we will have to see much improved play and game plans from our boys to get results. We will not be so lucky next time, and can not expect teams to not score against us when they have 64% possession and 27 shots.[/quote]

Well you and City 1st have shown yourself to be HOBNOBs

A few lucky wins? If our wins are lucky, then by definition, it implies that all our other results are unlucky! Not so - we have had our share of good and bad luck as well as our share of good performances and bad performances!

Let me put this into perspective for you two youngsters, this season compared to last season after 15 games. 5 wins vs 4 wins, 14 goals vs 13 goals, 17 points vs 19 points - so, we are 2 points worse off this season compared to last, got 1 more win and scored 1 more goal (and also had 5 thumped past us by Liverpool!)

Why don''t you guys get a reality check and stop banging the same old drum to the same old tune - I thought that youngsters today had a bit more "oomph"! Pathetic and incessant dribbling should be the purview of the very young and not the slightly more mature (as in age!)

[lake district canary 4,542]

City 1st is a complex character.  Appearing to know lots about the club, appearing to be a staunch supporter of long standing.  Appearing to be "in the know" about things that go on behind closed doors.  But he also appears to have a huge chip on his shoulder about the club.   Whatever it is has coloured your thinking about the club, hence the accusations of "binner" at you when you appear to have an agenda that is against the club, its staff or players. 

What was it City 1st, not get a trial for City when you were younger, got a trial but got turned down?  Your love of our club is clear, but so is that big chip on your shoulder.

[ncfcstar 292]

Don''t think I''ve read a more patronising post in a while, and it''s hard to split which one is worse (City 1st or Grestad)

Load of balls as well. Saturdays win was only fortuitous due to WBAs missed chances. We actually played very well in midfield/up top and I can only assume that you didn''t watch the game as no one has commented on the various half chances we had in the box too. I can think of two very good cut backs by Redmond (in a game where the majority of his final balls were poor) straight of the penalty spot where a more clinical striker than Elmander would have put them away.

If you honestly think a determined defensive performance such as Saturdays is the result of ''50% of the dressing room lost'' then you really have no clue about football - however much you claim you actually do. Anyone who went to The Hawthorns on Saturday would realise that was a team who put 100% in you only have to see the celebrations at the end to see that.

[Ray 111]

NCFCStar Said;

"If you honestly think a determined defensive performance such as Saturdays is the result of ''50% of the dressing room lost'' then you really have no clue about football - however much you claim you actually do. Anyone who went to The Hawthorns on Saturday would realise that was a team who put 100% in you only have to see the celebrations at the end to see that."

NCFCStar,

In my opinion you may be creating a correlation which does not exist. You say about the previous posters that they have no clue about football, now I am not going to go that far about you but I will say I think you may have drawn a conclusion that isn''t necessarily correct and you lack a certain amount of understanding of the human psyche.

Your conclusion that just because a team puts in 100% and celebrates a win means they are all behind the manager is flawed. They may all vehemently disagree with their manager''s tactics but out of respect to either him, or the position he holds, they carry on regardless. They also have their own prefessionalism to consider along with their own professional pride.

I know I have worked for managers I really wanted to see the back of but it didn''t stop me performing at my best, for my sake or my customers sake, which in the players position would be the fans and there have been times when the team''s dislike of their manager actually pulled them together and drove them on.

So, whatever the teams feelings about the manager are, it does not directly correlate to on field perfomance.

So in conclusion, the manager may have lost 50% of the team, he may not of lost anyone or he may have lost 100% of the team, this doesn''t mean it will be reflected in our on field performance.

IMO I think he has lost some of the team at the moment, but that''s just my opinion, which proves nothing to anyone other than me.

[ncfcstar 292]

[quote user="Ray"]NCFCStar,

In my opinion you may be creating a correlation which does not exist. You say about the previous posters that they have no clue about football, now I am not going to go that far about you but I will say I think you may have drawn a conclusion that isn''t necessarily correct and you lack a certain amount of understanding of the human psyche.

Your conclusion that just because a team puts in 100% and celebrates a win means they are all behind the manager is flawed. They may all vehemently disagree with their manager''s tactics but out of respect to either him, or the position he holds, they carry on regardless. They also have their own prefessionalism to consider along with their own professional pride.

I know I have worked for managers I really wanted to see the back of but it didn''t stop me performing at my best, for my sake or my customers sake, which in the players position would be the fans and there have been times when the team''s dislike of their manager actually pulled them together and drove them on.

So, whatever the teams feelings about the manager are, it does not directly correlate to on field perfomance.

So in conclusion, the manager may have lost 50% of the team, he may not of lost anyone or he may have lost 100% of the team, this doesn''t mean it will be reflected in our on field performance.

IMO I think he has lost some of the team at the moment, but that''s just my opinion, which proves nothing to anyone other than me.[/quote]If you believe that Ray, then why do so many people suggest that teams give up when the manager loses the dressing room?  It was a common claim whilst Roeder was in charge.  In fact it''s usually the first dig at a manager when they seem to be losing the plot, have a search on Fulham''s forum and I bet you''ll find numerous mentions of Jol having ''lost the dressing room''.My point on them ''knowing nothing about football'' was more of a sarcastic response to two posters who''d said exactly the same to others in this thread.You say I ''lack a certain amount of understanding of the human psyche'' - well I think that is just well worded gibberish, and rather condescending considering you know nothing about me.  It may be in your personality to work 100% for your managers, however you feel about them, but I wholeheartedly disagree that everyone does that - otherwise managers would never leave their positions (in any industry, not just football) and staff would always put 100% in, that''s just rubbish.  It''s commendable if you yourself do that, but naive to think everyone is the same.

[Ray 111]

NCFCStar,

Please note I use the words, may be, I believe, I think and in my opinion, none of which pronounce me to be 100% factually correct, in fact I end by making that point.

To anser your question why do so many people suggest teams give up when the manager loses the dressing room; who are these people, are they team members or outsiders like you and me? If outsiders then just like us they are guessing.

Thank you for complimenting me on my good use of the English language, even if you think what I say is gibberish and condescending, however in my opinion, no more condescending than you telling someoene else they know nothing about football!

Now let''s turn to what I do kow about you, you think a good team performance means the manager has not lost the team, that much I do know, I also know there are many exceptions to this, me being one of them (again thank you for the compliment of calling me commendable, it is much appreciated) and I agree it is naive to think everyone is the same and thank you for completing my argument. We are not all the same, so therefore it does not necessarily mean a good performance = the changing room is behind him, it could mean they 100% are not.

So to make the point unequivocally as you did (in fact you did use the words "anyone who went to the Hawthorns on Saturday would realise", a tad patronising don''t you think) in my opinion shows a lack of a certain amount of understanding of the human psyche, however you are not alone, as I too am still learning.

Once I consider myself ripe, the finished article, I will start to rot, whist still green I am still growing.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,577]

Can I just restate my question from before that got glossed over? Why did John Ruddy, an extremely talented goalkeeper with Chelsea chasing him last transfer window, choose to extend his contract with us at the end of last month, well into the season, if he''s working for a manager that he has no faith in and with players around him that have no faith in the manager?

[Ray 111]

Little Yellow Birdie,

Perhaps will will never know, but he was probably only wanted as a temporary stand in until Courtois is recalled from A Madrid, probably at the end of this season. So he would likely have been second choice behind Cech and then second choice behind Courtois, which of course does nothing for his longer term future and earnings.

Also CH is very persuasive and is incredibly well liked as a person, so that may have played a part, plus of course the decision was made in the summer, when we were making ''stellar'' signings and all in the garden looked rosy.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,577]

Ray:

"Little Yellow Birdie,

Perhaps will will never know, but he was probably only wanted as a temporary stand in until Courtois is recalled from A Madrid, probably at the end of this season. So he would likely have been second choice behind Cech and then second choice behind Courtois, which of course does nothing for his longer term future and earnings.

Also CH is very persuasive and is incredibly well liked as a person, so that may have played a part, plus of course the decision was made in the summer, when we were making ''stellar'' signings and all in the garden looked rosy."

It''s a good point on the personality front, but the point I was making was that John Ruddy actually put pen to paper for the extension at the end of last month when we definitely weren''t enjoying the best of results and many had been saying ''Hughton''s lost the dressing room'' for some time. A player of Ruddy''s undisputed calibre doing that to work under a manager who has supposedly lost credibility with his players makes no sense to me.

[Ray 111]

Little Yellow Bird,

Must admit I forgot about the xtension, may be just didn''t want to play second fiddle or is expecting a new manager or as you say he is entirely happy with the current one!

Either way, glad he''s still here.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,577]

Amen to that.

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

[quote user="littleyellowbirdie"]Amen to that.[/quote]

I was re-reading what City 1st wrote, and in particular "If you naively belief that there isn''t disagreement from the players over Hughton''s tactics then why have Holt, Snodgrass and Ruddy openly spoke out about the problem ? Why did Fer chose to avoid Hughton when he ran the to the touchline to celebrate his goal against WHU"

For somebody who claims to be in the know, this beggars belief. Holt spoke out about his difficulty in adapting to a different way of doing things (I notice he is hardly the most prolific scorer for Wigan having scored twice this season - compared to Leon who has scored 5). Neither Snodgrass nor Ruddy have "openly spoken out" about "the" or "a" problem - and as LYB astutely observed, why would Ruddy sign a contract extension if he had a problem with the manager? As for Leroy Fer''s celebrations after his 1st goal - I don''t see CH going into gyrations, group hugs or any other kind of celebrations normally reserved for the younger set. I did notice his handshake with RM and LB before they went out on Saturday - maybe that was his version of the "high five".

So in conclusion, it appears that City 1st is mischief making - he could be on a deliberate wind up to see how many people change their views towards CH. Alternatively, he could just be mischief making - plain and simple

[Holtcantshoot 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]surely they will be given credit for the win?we only win when they ignore him it seems?I await a reply from the usual "enlightened"[/quote]It was probably John Terry, it''s normally him.

[Buh 0]

Just look at the whole Zaha/Moyes Daughter thing at Man U right now! When certain people don''t like the manager or player they make stuff up.

It is literally the saddest thing you can do. Norwich have done it in recent years and it makes me sick.

They need help

[Syteanric 1]

I agree with many points on here.. a lot of the vitriol directed at the management has been made up by people who want to fuel an arguement with pure fantasy and to feel "special"

 

no one rebelled, no one is trying to oust hughton from within. the players on his side, the board on his side... it''s time for some fans to swallow their pride and accept it.. Chris hugbnton is the future of Norwich city and things will certainly be better for it.

[Syteanric 1]

clearly that should have said Hughton!