It goes deeper than Becchio doesn't it.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

I agree with Ricardo that this is mere speculation. Becchio was brought in to replace Morison as a back-up to Holt and, as it turned out, Kamara. Had Holt been dropped to bring Becchio in, would many be pleased? Like hell they would. Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?

[Yellowbeagle 0]

[quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I agree with Ricardo that this is mere speculation. Becchio was brought in to replace Morison as a back-up to Holt and, as it turned out, Kamara. Had Holt been dropped to bring Becchio in, would many be pleased? Like hell they would. Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?[/quote]

Trouble is no one knows if he should play before those, I''d like to have at least seen him in a few games this season to make an informed decision even if it was just cup games, I''m sure a slight chance is all Becchio is asking for. To sign a player then not give him a chance to compete is poor management however it''s dressed up for a whole load of reasons.

[morty 0]

Jeez any excuse to bash Hughton!

As stated by the more common sense posters, managers do not leave form players sat on the bench, this is exactly the same as Fox, if you aren''t good enough you aint getting a game. Last time I saw Becchio was in the cup game against Bury, and he frankly looked like he couldn''t be arsed.

So if he plays on Saturday and plays well will it be "I told you so" or will it be the manager playing the right player at the right time?

I suspect I already know the answer.

[ricardo 7,445]

[quote user="Yellowbeagle"][quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I agree with Ricardo that this is mere speculation. Becchio was brought in to replace Morison as a back-up to Holt and, as it turned out, Kamara. Had Holt been dropped to bring Becchio in, would many be pleased? Like hell they would. Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?[/quote]

Trouble is no one knows if he should play before those, I''d like to have at least seen him in a few games this season to make an informed decision even if it was just cup games, I''m sure a slight chance is all Becchio is asking for. To sign a player then not give him a chance to compete is poor management however it''s dressed up for a whole load of reasons.[/quote]The thing is its not your decision to make its Chris Hughton''s and its his job that''s on the line if he''s wrong. CH has made it clear where he stands and that will be either proved right or wrong by the coming events.Lets wait and see how those events play out.

[Juggy 0]

"Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?"

We are three and a half months into the season and Hooper and RVW have each missed a month of it. Elmander has yet to score.

Hooper, RVW and Elmander have 2 goals in 23 collective appearances between them. One of those a penalty.

So if you are asking me whether I thought Becchio should be in contention to play more than 14 minutes this season then..... well, yes.

Hughton may well have brought Becchio in to be back up to Holt and Kamara, and kept him to be fourth choice, but it doesn''t look like he has made that very clear to Becchio does it.

[FCC 77]

I wonder if Becchio''s situation is impacting on Johnson, Howson and Snodgrass who Becchio will presumably have been friends with at Leeds - I am sure they would have expected him to get more opportunities if he discussed coming to Norwich.

[Juggy 0]

So you claim to have common sense but can judge a player in 15 minutes of football Morty?

I saw him against West Brom where he came off the bench to play a beautiful one-two with Howson for the final goal of the game.

We signed a player who scored 19 Championship goals in half a season. Can you even comprehend how many that is? You are considered a top Championship striker if you hit 20 in an entire season.

Iwan Roberts is a club legend after scoring 23 in one season and 19 in the next (in all competitions).

Becchio scored 19 goals in half a season, and we''ve given him two starts and a few 5 minute substitute appearances.

That isn''t the bad bit though is it, the mistreatment is refusing to let him leave in the summer. He has been shat all over.

[ricardo 7,445]

[quote user="Le Juge"]"Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?"

We are three and a half months into the season and Hooper and RVW have each missed a month of it. Elmander has yet to score.

Hooper, RVW and Elmander have 2 goals in 23 collective appearances between them. One of those a penalty.

So if you are asking me whether I thought Becchio should be in contention to play more than 14 minutes this season then..... well, yes.

Hughton may well have brought Becchio in to be back up to Holt and Kamara, and kept him to be fourth choice, but it doesn''t look like he has made that very clear to Becchio does it.[/quote]All we see is what happens on the pitch during a game. The Manager and Coaches see what happens in training also. Are you seriously saying that you know more about the players than the management staff? If we play 2 up front Saturday then I expect he will go for Hooper and Elmander and that''s exactly the pairing I would go for.Fair enough for you to differ but you aren''t paid to make that decision and you won''t pay with your job if you are wrong. I''m happy to leave it to the Manager, it''s his job on the line.

[djc 0]

Its more down to the fact that Becchio has a proven goal scoring record (albeit elsewhere), and when we are chasing a game and need a goal the guy deserves a chance. If he aint good enough why stuck him on the bench at all?

2-1 down at Newcastle with 3mins to go Paul Lambert would have stuck Becchio on with the "chuck the kitchen sink at them" attitude which Hughton clearly lacks. It is better to lose by trying that just be resigned to losing without trying.

[ricardo 7,445]

[quote user="Le Juge"].

That isn''t the bad bit though is it, the mistreatment is refusing to let him leave in the summer. He has been shat all over.[/quote]Fer Chrissake, he''s a professional footballer on £20k a week, I think he will find a way to swallow it.

[morty 0]

So, hang on, decent Championship player steps up a level to the hardest league in the world and doesn''t quite cut it?

*Rubs chin*

So you can''t just buy a player from a lower league and he''ll be an instant hit?

Blimey.

 

[Juggy 0]

All four of our strikers have stepped up a level to the hardest league in the world, and none of them have yet proven that they can ''cut it''.

[Juggy 0]

You can''t buy a player from any league and expect them to be an ''instant hit'', even if you buy one from this league.

Neither can you expect any player from any league to make a huge impact after 2 starts and a few minutes here and there.

A couple of hundred minutes of football is what Becchio has had to try and prove he can cut it.

RVW, Elmander and Hooper have already each had far more and none of them have got anywhere near proving that they can cut it yet.

Would like to hear your argument to the contrary. The Championship seems as good a place as any to shop for a striker (why not ask Celtic how they got on buying from Scunthorpe. Dean Ashton didn''t do too badly for us did he).

[Yellowbeagle 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Yellowbeagle"][quote user="Yelloow Since 72"]I agree with Ricardo that this is mere speculation. Becchio was brought in to replace Morison as a back-up to Holt and, as it turned out, Kamara. Had Holt been dropped to bring Becchio in, would many be pleased? Like hell they would. Are people here seriously suggesting that Becchio should be played before RvW, Hooper and Elmander?[/quote] Trouble is no one knows if he should play before those, I''d like to have at least seen him in a few games this season to make an informed decision even if it was just cup games, I''m sure a slight chance is all Becchio is asking for. To sign a player then not give him a chance to compete is poor management however it''s dressed up for a whole load of reasons.[/quote]

The thing is its not your decision to make its Chris Hughton''s and its his job that''s on the line if he''s wrong. CH has made it clear where he stands and that will be either proved right or wrong by the coming events.

Lets wait and see how those events play out.
[/quote]

I agree it''s not my decision maybe I should have used the word opinion. But decisions have already been made by the manager to sign this particular player and without giving him a chance he''s opened himself up to criticism either way. Managers make mistakes, and maybe Hughtons and the clubs scouting research on this one was rushed by the January panic, but in that case get him loaned out or transfered in the summer.

[PurpleCanary 5,606]

[quote user="morty"]

So, hang on, decent Championship player steps up a level to the hardest league in the world and doesn''t quite cut it?

*Rubs chin*

So you can''t just buy a player from a lower league and he''ll be an instant hit?

Blimey.

 

[/quote]

I don''t think that is quite the point that is being made. Becchio may well be only a Championship-level player. From what little I''ve seen that is what he looks like. But from all I''ve read and seen it doesn''t seem as if Elmander is now any better than that. As I suspected at the outset, this looks like a season too far for him.

It is the non-use of Becchio while a non-performing Elmander continues to be given chances that appears odd.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

IMO, if City had signed Quagliarella this summer, Becchio would have moved on. I think it''s entirely possible another striker will be signed in January and Becchio will move on. As squads improve, some players inevitably move on.

[Juggy 0]

Yes pretty much Purple Canary.

Although for me it is mainly that most managers make better use of their squad.

It is a very physically demanding league, you get a maximum quota of players to register, we have very few under 21 who are good enough (unlike many other teams).

And yet we have a manager who believes he has room in a squad of 23 players to have several who he can consider surplus to requirements, even when three or four of those players are out injured.

It isn''t as if our other strikers are setting the world alight. We''ve seen glimpses of real quality from Hooper and RVW, but we have also seen games where they have appeared anonymous. We have also seen glimpses of quality from Becchio though, particularly in his final two substitute appearances last season (both victories, some very clever link up play).

If they were scoring goals and winning games then Becchio could have no complaints.

I think he is justified in his bemusement, particularly as he was given the impression that he was ''needed'' when Hughton clearly believes otherwise.

I just feel that other managers would be taking a punt on him and giving him opportunities in this squad. He is clearly better than Morison, yet Hughton would give Morison minutes.

Becchio would not have come here if he had known that he wouldn''t be given a real opportunity to show his worth (he hasn''t), and the fact that he was refused the opportunity to go and get football this summer (and given the impression that he was wanted here) makes it so much worse.

The way that he linked up with Howson against West Brom left many wondering what he could bring to the table in a team with Howson and Snodgrass. We will never get the chance to see.

I just feel really sorry for him, and he is justified in his anger.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

I feel really sorry for Becchio, too and he is justified in his anger. But it is the same for any fourth choice striker at any club, and as a footballer it is the way it goes. But you guys are using his frustration as yet another stick to beat Chris Hughton.

Carlo Nash is not getting many games, Hughton-out anyone?

[SeattleCanary 0]

I agree with you on everything you''ve said Le Juge. I want Hughton out. This all feels like a lesser version ill admit, but still similar to the Roeder era. There''s nothing nice about Mr. Nice anymore. He brings nothing positive on or off the field to the table.

[SeattleCanary 0]

Carlo Nash was recruited knowing he''d be an understudy. Becchio was signed at a time he was playing successfully and then almost instantly surplus here. Like it''s been said, yes he''s 4th choice, but when other strikers aren''t scoring or are injured why isn''t he played? If a Ruddy was injured/shipping goals would we play Whittaker in goal? Probably under Hughton.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

Ruddy is shipping goals.

So why aren''t we playing our third-choice keeper.

The logic is the same

[pablofarmer 0]

I would love to see Becchio given a go, but and it is a big but, I do not see him train everyday.

Maybe the OP is right and it is all down to a lost dressing room and manger without a clue, but maybe it simply because the manager p, who must of got a shot aim the premier league for some reason, just believes he has 3 (when fit) better strikers.

This is not because I am pro Hughton, trust me my bum is sore from sitting on the fence, but because he clearly knows more than I do, which is why he has made a successful living out of football and I alas have not.

[City 2nd 191]

jas the barclay king wrote the following post at 2013-11-28 11:52 PM:

Becchio isnt playing because he isnt good enough...

is he really better than RVW, Hooper and Elmander?? REALLY???

How are we expected to answer such a ridiculous quote - he doesn''t get game time, so who knows what he can do in the premiership - for sure no worse than the three you mention, and likely no worse than Holt, Jackson and Morrison (who also stated he was frozen out)!

[crabbycanary 2]

Whoever the Swedish manager is, get him out as well

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

[quote user="City 2nd"]jas the barclay king wrote the following post at 2013-11-28 11:52 PM:

Becchio isnt playing because he isnt good enough...

is he really better than RVW, Hooper and Elmander?? REALLY???

How are we expected to answer such a ridiculous quote - he doesn''t get game time, so who knows what he can do in the premiership - for sure no worse than the three you mention, and likely no worse than Holt, Jackson and Morrison (who also stated he was frozen out)![/quote]

Can you see from your island in Thailand what happens at Colney? The manager knows better than any of us. If he doesn''t get results he will pay for it with his job.

Third and forth choice players are always going to be unhappy. Should we be playing our third-choice keeper given our goals conceded tally?

[Buh 0]

I think Hughton will be gone soon but, my god, I hope lambert has put out some restraining orders on some of you. Obsession much? Like a beaten wife pleading for their husband not to get arrested, pretty pathetic.

Fact is, and this isn''t celebrated much, lambert left for the money. Money for him and money to buy players at a club that he considers a bigger prospect. He bottled the job here because he knew he''d get us relegated, we would have been found out.

Good luck to him, but he''ll always be a bottler to me.

[Brightside 0]

Unfortunately now there are no longer reserve teams and reserve team games and a league there are going to be players who don''t play. It''s the managers decision what he does with these players.

In my opinion this is another big mess up from Hughton. I actually think Hughton is scared of a gamble and trying something new and has far too much belief in what he believes is safe. He said as much about the Newcastle game that he didn''t make any changes because he thought what he had was good enough. Whilst this is his attitude players like Bechio will never get a look in. This is the way Hughton has chosen to manage those players he believes are not good enough.

[CambridgeCanary 0]

The logic of this thread is that Hughton has his job hanging by a thread with the fans turning and results making his task ever more difficult but that he chooses not to play someone who could change things.

That is so daft as to not bear scrutiny. If Hughton thought for one moment that Becchio would improve things and thereby help keep him in a good job, then he would play him.

I am perplexed. I was telling family and friends we should sign Becchio for a year before we did. I like the player. But, to suggest Hughton would wreck his own career by not playing him is ridiculous. Hughton is not playing him because he does not consider him to be up to it.

[Tumbleweed 106]

Lambert is oft-mentioned because he is the last incumbent and managed many of these players. It is therefore valid to compare this regime with that. Rather than an obsession, it is somewhat more relevant than comparing Hughton to John Bond. Or Dave Stringer.

It is generally felt that a motivated squad pulling in the same direction is an important part of premier league viability. Those with internal divisions do seem to struggle more.

Hughton has had plenty of chance to give Becchio game time. 1 league goal from open play from those in front of him does not suggest that they on fire so much as to exclude another proven goalscorer. There have been many occasions when he could have been given decent pitch time.

Some of the rather complacent views on this thread do suggest limited appreciation of the dynamics of a squad.

But the bottom line is that Hughton signed the guy and it is a fundamental part of a manager''s job to deal with those fringe players and keep them committed and ready to step in when, or if, they are needed. If Hughton is not playing him because he isn''t up to it, then it merely underscores a different failure- that of signing a guy and using up a valuable squad slot on someone he didn''t think good enough. That would be even more extraordinary.

[Jim Smith 2,365]

In fairness Becchio does say that Hughton told him he would not be likely to play much and on the Becchio front I am personally of the view that i''ve not seen anything to suggest that he''s good enough but I do have sympathy for Becchio in that he''s really not been given a chance at all and i also agree the wider point is a concern.

Under Lambert anyone who came into the team generally managed to fit in and do a job whenever we need them. Even players who were not regular starters knew they would get some game time, and looked match fit and motivated when they did get on the pitch. in my view he was very skillful in the way he maintained the interest/involvement of the whole squad. The way Hughton works is different. Thats fine to a degree and having a settled team brings benefits of its own. The problem seems to be though that once they find themselves outside the starting 11 then, particularly given Hoots reluctance to make early subs, players get no game time and in many cases not even a sniff of getting on the pitch, Even those that do such as Wes are getting 3 minutes here and there with no opportunity to get into the game or make any impact. It would be no surprise if many of them found this demotivating and their morale was suffering a bit.