Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tetteys Jig

Hughton lost us that today - the negative setup is sufforcating us

Recommended Posts

"He wasn''t a bad leader because he made bad decisions. He was a bad leader because he made no decisions."
This sums Hughton up nicely for me, after the initial set up, if things don''t work out then he seems to not know what to do, he lacks any form of decisiveness and almost begrudgingly makes changes in the final few moments because he doesn''t know what else to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d go along with most of that.A midfield three who sit and barely move.  We kept the ball well for periods but lets be honest never did anything with it.  Hooper spent most of the game without a City shirt within 30yards of him.  If we are keeping Johnson in front of the back 4 then Howson and Fer need to be breaking their necks to get up with the play and in support of our striker.Newcastle were comfortable and after we scored stepped up a few gears and to be honest should have had a third.Substitutions are a tough one to call but the complete stubbornness to change the formation bewilders at times....Elmander on the right wing?  If Pilks had to go off then it was crying out for Elmander to support Hooper down the centre.  Sure one of our central three would have to go off or perhaps over to the wing but the decision was almost made for CH and still he preferred to keep a shape that wasn''t really working and play a striker as a RM.  As pointed out on commentary we had three in midfield against Cabaye and Tiote and yet they controlled the midfield!If it''s set-up, comfidence, ability or aspects of all three who knows but the side is not right.  The final third of the pitch we were by and large utterly clueless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
threads like this anoy me. Not because I disagree but more because we have known this for almost 8 months now. Whats the point in moanind, stubborn Hoots will continue to slowly throttle the life out of our team. And we will lose people in January and deffinatly the summmer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="......and Smith must score."][quote user="ricardo"]sorry but I can''t go along with that. If we could ever get to half time without being behind we might have a chance.[/quote]Of course but can we ?Same old stuck record every week. Surely it''s time for a change ?[/quote]We needed a central defender but didn''t get one. Also Martin has been very poor this season. Personally I would give Whits a chance. Not only that but John Ruddy is also going through an indifferent patchYou keep complaining about a defensive set up yet we continually concede away from home. Seems to me we need to be a bit more cautious in order to give ourselves a chance . There is a lot of difference in a game where a team has to come on to you away from home to one where they merely have to protect a lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waiting at a very chilly Newcastle station; a typical away set up and performance from our management team. And some argue that a victory against Crystal Palace is not a pre-requisite of standing a chance of PL survival?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Highland Canary"]Waiting at a very chilly Newcastle station; a typical away set up and performance from our management team. And some argue that a victory against Crystal Palace is not a pre-requisite of standing a chance of PL survival?[/quote]

Its vital, because our away form is so poor.We are conceding nearly 3 goals a game on out travels and no matter how many strikers you play you are not going to pick up many points with a porous defence like that.Oh to still be in with a chance after 80 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty cautious to have a central 3 in midfield against 2!However, who picks up who?  If Johnson is sat in front of the back 4 then he should be on Cabaye.  Howson and Fer to keep Tiote covered and be available for when we get the ball back.  There doesnt seem to be any plan in the centre of the park.  Players dont seem to know when to go forward or when to cover their team mate.The inability to close the opposition down is incredible!  Lost count of the number of times Toon players were allowed space to have a dig from 25yrds out.  Fortunately it was mainly Tiote who has about the same range of shooting as Tettey!!Actually a little worried about Palace now, i thought we should roll them over 3 or 4 nil, they really arent very good!  However if we are going to play a striker with no one near him then it could well have 0-0 written all over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the board persist in this ridiculous charade of failing to sack Hughton, then the heat will be turned on them. That will be interesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still in Newcastle. Staying the night. On a phone so won''t post fully.

We are so boring away from home. Our build up play is predictable, we don''t get forward quick enough, yet when a team counters with pace we look all over the place.

Regardless of how we are set up the management is getting something seriously wrong if we can''t defend or attack. At least the previous two seasons we done one or the other. It''s as if Hughton is trying to appease the fans but also stick to his fundamentals and it''s affecting both parts of our play. At times it''s painful to watch. Hooper definitely isn''t a lone striker, unless he gets support v v quick. He made it clear this week he prefers a strike partner so he can press from the front. I agree. Second half Howson started to do that. Elmander right wing was almost taking the piss, although he had an alright game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="kick it off"][quote user="clarkey1972"]Can''t agree im afraid. I thought we played well today, yes two blunders allowed the goals but they are individual errors. I thought our shape was good and we bounced back well from the early setback and had a go. We seemed to move the ball a bit quicker for me today as well. Thought we deserved a point.[/quote]


If you were watching the same game, I think you might be in a very small minority of one that saw the game like that today.


We were terrible, and looked entirely toothless. The only reason we "had a go" was Newcastle took their foot off the gas second half. Even then, our version of "having a go" consisted of creating pretty much nothing in terms of chances, and just watching Newcastle clear it comfortably every time we got within 30 yards.


We really zipped it around along our back line but as soon as we got near the centre circle it was more of the same plodding away doing nothing with the ball.


I don''t think we deserved a point or anything close to it. We got exactly what we deserved and the scoreline flattered us if anything.

[/quote]

Totally agree

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be absolutely fair to Hughton (and I am hugely in the Hoot Out camp) we were just undone today by two very poor bits of defending and Ruddy should have done better.

That said I also think it has to be noted that there is not a single player he inherited from Lambert who is playing as well as they did under the previous regime except maybe Bennett. That for me is a pretty damning indictment on his managerial ability and with some (such as Martin) you really notice it because if they are not at the very top of their game they really struggle at this level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"]

The first goal was a defensive nightmare and the second not much better. That has nothing to do with the way the team is set up.

 

 

[/quote]

Please tell me you are joking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting chat with some Crystal Palace fans who joined our train at Doncaster - they viewed Pullis as their only hope and thought it was a good time to be playing us next! Can''t argue with that.

My disappointment with the management team is borne of its apparent lack of tactical ability and general negativity. However, we now seem to have achieved what I would argue is less than tactical perfection combined with weak defending and absent attacking. Why the management team was not upgraded last Summer I still fail to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooper is simply too small to play alone up front in the Premier League. When Redmond or Pilks (pre his injury today) got down the line, they often didn''t even cross it any more, it''s as if they know there''s no point as Hooper won''t win the header (and they''re right). Our multi million pound strikers have scored once between them from open play in 12 games, which says it all, and that was RvW in the first game, when he headed in a mis hit shot that accidentally set him up. On several occasions we worked an opening to cross, but seemed to decide "No, better not, no point" and sent the ball back, and it ended up going all the way back to Ruddy, which produced endless cries of "Forward, bloody hell, forward!" from the chap behind me.

Neither RvW or Hooper are the kind of striker who flourishes with wingers hitting crosses in. Surely 12 games has proved that. If we''re going to persevere with wingers and no midfield playmaker we need to try Elmander up front, or Becchio. Remember him? Or find another target man. If on the other hand we''re going to persevere with fast strikers who like to play on the shoulder of the last man and run in behind them, then we need to find a midfield playmaker to thread the balls through to them. There''s a chap who did that for the Republic of Ireland the other week (and, of course, Martin O''Neil can spot a midfielder) but who isn''t getting game time with his Premier League club. Perhaps we should bid for Wes Hoolahan? Or, no, wait......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

The first goal was a defensive nightmare and the second not much better. That has nothing to do with the way the team is set up.

 

 

[/quote]

Please tell me you are joking.

[/quote]

 

No I''m not joking. Where is the joke in that statement. Do you think the goals were not defensive nightmares? Or do you think we were set up wrongly and that produced the goals? If so please explain because from what I saw the goals were down to awful defensive mistakes and not down to the way we were set up.

 

This is getting too monotonous. We are stuck with Hughton until the board decide otherwise. The same people repeating the same old mantra about us being set up to lose doesn''t make sense anymore. If you believe we were set up wrongly please explain it to me in words I understand. And please also explain how being set up differently would have prevented the two goals. Especially the all important first one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4-4-2 with a big man would give us more presence in the final third, lift the pressure off the defence and give the opposition something to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Jimmy. You prefer 442 but I was more than happy with the way we set up today. Especially with the players available. I think 442 would have invited more pressure and I don''t think the wide players who were fit would have been a good 442 fit anyway. But it''s all about opinions. However I don''t see how setting up with 442 would have prevented the mistakes that led to both goals. Especially the first one.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

The first goal was a defensive nightmare and the second not much better. That has nothing to do with the way the team is set up.

 

 

[/quote]

Please tell me you are joking.

[/quote]

 

No I''m not joking. Where is the joke in that statement. Do you think the goals were not defensive nightmares? Or do you think we were set up wrongly and that produced the goals? If so please explain because from what I saw the goals were down to awful defensive mistakes and not down to the way we were set up.

 

This is getting too monotonous. We are stuck with Hughton until the board decide otherwise. The same people repeating the same old mantra about us being set up to lose doesn''t make sense anymore. If you believe we were set up wrongly please explain it to me in words I understand. And please also explain how being set up differently would have prevented the two goals. Especially the all important first one.

 

 

[/quote]I realised this a few weeks ago. No matter what we post on here or get het up about, it''s out of our hands. I thoroughly enjoyed the win 2 weeks ago and was disappointed with the result today. I don''t believe Hughton the man to take us forward, but screaming and writing til i''m blue in the face is going to get us nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Empty Mirror"]Neither RvW or Hooper are the kind of striker who flourishes with wingers hitting crosses in. Surely 12 games has proved that. If we''re going to persevere with wingers and no midfield playmaker we need to try Elmander up front, or Becchio.[/quote]We should have either put Elmander or Becchio on for Hooper and the other on if we were still trailing near the end, or put one of them up with him. Hooper wasn''t getting a sniff at 2-0 down which is unsurprising given Newcastle were often sat back in two banks of four.  Our cautious possessive game clearly needed a bit of aerial ability in the second half in order to break them down, instead Hooper was a virtual spectator for much of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely agree with empty mirror.

RVW and GH need Wes.

Elmander and Becchio need wingers.

Or at least Hooper needs to pick up the knock downs from the latter two.

Remember under Lambert when we were greater than the sum of our parts? The opposite now is the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Watching the goals back this morning on MOTD, what struck me most was how little pressure Newcastle were under again. Worst thing about the man city game for me was that their players were given so much time and space to deliver their crosses and pick their passes, with us just letting them do it. Lessons have not been learned. Watch Newcastle''s second goal and look at martin Olsson. No pressure on Remy, backs off, gives him time to wait for cisshoko, who then arrives and dawdles on the wing. Olsson again backs off, gives him time and just lets him cross when he feels like it. Thought both fullbacks were awful to be honest. Im big fans of both, but poor from both yesterday. Martin arguably at fault for both goals too in conceding an unnecessary corner and a poor aerial challenge. Players are underperforming. Not sure if cabaye''s challenge on Olsson unsettled him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the set-up, Dean Sturridge on the commentary said toward the end of the game ''Norwich have lost the midfield battle today''. Surprised to see the motd stats that we had 51% possession. Setting up with 3 in central midfield vs their 2, we should have bossed the midfield, even away. If playing an extra man in central midfield doesnt gain you this advantage, then what is it supposed to do. Today is a bookmark for all those who say noone plays 442. Newcastle did, and oh look, they won. Not saying this means we should line up 442 every week, but I think this proves the 442 line up isnt herecy requiring anyone who suggests it to be stoned...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve never been one of the ranting and raving crowd wanting the manager out at every opportunity but it seems fairly obvious now (hopefully to the board too) that he is unable or unwilling to change things to try and make a difference.We are not scoring goals so why on earth does he not give Becchio a try? Surely he has nothing to lose by doing that?I''m not sure changing to 4-4-2 is necessarily the way forward because if you do that with teams playing 4-5-1 you are suddenly outnumbered in midfield again but i don''t think we get enough players into the box when we are attacking. That doesn''t have to mean a change to 4-4-2 but it does mean midfielders have to get themselves in the box more often and more quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He is Clueless hapless useless and needs to go. I was there and when we had a string of corners near the end the ironic cheers from our fans tells us that he has even lost the most loyal of fans the away supporters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what personnel would have played this 442. Is Garrido fit? If so I could see him at left back with Ollson in front in the flat midfield four. Perhaps Whitaker in front of Martin. What would the reaction been if Hughton had named that team with Pilks and Redmond on the bench? And how would that have prevented the shambles that was Newcastle''s first goal?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(="Jimmy Smith"]Time to go i''m afraid, our players showed today in the last 20 minutes that they can play.

4-5-1 with Johnson in the team was absolute suicide. Elmander and Hooper had to start.

Time to get a manager in who has a bit of spontineity and a bit of excitement, we have a few players who with the right guidance can provide that, Hughton clearly isn''t the man.

Very true I''m afraid!

The Toon were there for the taking yesterday!

Newcastle while being adequate going forward are poor at the back but they got away with it cause we didn''t pressure them with our negative team set up!

The two best chances in the first half wern''t converted cause we didn''t have enough bodies in their box, they both only needed poking in!

I don''t see where the extra man in midfield is beneficial unless Tetty is involved cause Johnsons not good enough to do the holding role. We''d of been better of defensively with Elmander supporting Hooper upfront cause the ball would have stuck upfront for longer which would have restricted Newcastles own attacking intent!

I really don''t want to see us get rid of Hughton cause it would be a gamble but his negative approach will I fear see us at best only just cling onto to Premiership safety by our fingertips!

I heard a guy yesterday say the truest thing I heard all weekend regarding our fortunes this season. He said the players are good enough but the managers tactics are stifling us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh and playing Redmond on the left frustrates me cause we''ve all seen what he can do on the right where he is so much more effective!

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  

×
×
  • Create New...