Most predictable team in Prem

[Paul 0]

We are the most most predictable team in the premier league, we play the same each week, week in week out.

When we get to the final third we panic, and slow down to a walking pace, eventually the ball will go back into midfield or defense and we will lose it or put in a crap cross.

From where I sit at the top of the N&P we get a good view of the structure of the team and I could coach a sunday league team to defend against us.

The crowd don''t help because as soon as the ball goes backwards the idiotic majority start to moan, doesn''t matter that we still have possession.

We need to have more pace from the wingers and more intent from center midfield. Other teams have come to carrow road this season and hit us with pace and intent and created chances.

The strikers are good proven strikers in other leagues, and given the right service will score goals. Snodgrass has been lamentable this season and needs to be dropped, Redmond has glimmers but his final product is poor 95% of the time. Pilkington is too injury prone and if we get an offer of £4m plus take it, and what is it with Garido playing in the midfield the last few games.

I do wonder what we practice on the training ground because it can''t be attacking.

[Warren Hill 0]

[quote user="Paul"]...I could coach a sunday league team to defend against us. [/quote]

 

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

Yeah, of course you could....is that just after you beat Usain Bolt in a race...?

 

 

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Justify ''most predictable''I think your Sunday League quote intimates that your answer is probably going to be hilarious

[vlad666 207]

Lack of movement giving players an option to pass is our biggest problem. Probably the worst team at keeping possession in the league.

[Paul 0]

The way we play. As I have said we lack pace and power going forward.

The ball will be passed around the back and midfield sideways, and opposition teams will sit with two banks of four.

The ball will go out wide to martin/whitaker/snodgrass, or Olson/redmond then they will try to go forward with it and it will either fizzle out with a poor cross or end up going backwards.

If you set up with a solid 5 in midfield and 4 in defence, and just press us, we haven''t got a clue how to get round the back. We lack the pace and quick passing that other clubs have to break down a setup like that.

We are appalling in the final third.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Nope, we''re actually fifth worst, with average 45.5% possession.Cardiff 45.1%West Ham 43.6%Hull 43.2 %Villa 42.4%Palace 39.1%It really isn''t hard to find the data if people bother to research before making claims. Apathy seems to rule. Pity.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Sixth worst *

[lappinitup 629]

"I could coach a sunday league team to defend against us""I do wonder what we practice on the training ground because it can''t be attacking"Why don''t you offer your invaluable services? [:^)]

[Paul 0]

It''s not how much possession you have it''s what you do with it when you have it.

You could have 75% possession in a game and not have a shot and lose the game.

Stats don''t tell the whole story.

[Paul 0]

Also this isn''t about me coaching a sunday league team, comment on the post and if you think we are great going forward and create lots of chances and don''t play the same mind numbing boring football week in week out, say so and back it up and I will respect your opinion.

[vlad666 207]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Sixth worst *[/quote]

Now that isn''t the same thing is it? I said we were the worst at KEEPING possession. Ball retention. Those stats don''t judge that.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Funny how no team we have played this season has set up with a ''solid 5'' in midfield against us then! Obviously you know more than every Prem manager.we find ourselves most often up against a 2-3 in midfield,and we set up 4-1-4-1 or 4-4-1-1 most games. The former gives Howson or Fer room to move past the central two, and the latter gives Hoolahan room between the lines in which to operate. The problem is actually that we find ourselves outnumbered 3 v 2 in midfield when playing 4-4-1-1 by teams who play 4-2-3-1, so why we haven''t used that formation this season puzzles me, matching teams and going man to man pressing them off the ball would be a good move in light of the fact that we are quite poor at keeping it ourselves.4-1-4-1 is a lot more suitable to matching the 4-2-3-1, but then there''s precious little penetration as it relies on box to box bursts or wing overloads to support the lone frontman, and as we don''t get much ball we are quite poor at both- Howson has no final ball when he does burst as exemplified by his poor key pass/assist stats, so we are reliant on the inconsistent Fer too much in a 4-1-4-1. No Tettey also means we play Johnson as the holding mid, and he gets dribbled past like there is no tomorrow as much as he can''t be accused of not trying.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

So where are your ball retention stats?Average possession implies the ''possession we have kept over the course of the season''How exactly is that different to ball retention? As ball retention is ''the art of not conceding possession, i.e KEEPING possession''

[the bristol nest 0]

Despitethe petty responses about Sunday league or whatever, I think that the OP has a valid point. The media theme when discussing us is all about predictability and lack of intent.

Quibbles over stats does nothing to address this. What does CH need to do to change it?

[vlad666 207]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]So where are your ball retention stats?Average possession implies the ''possession we have kept over the course of the season''How exactly is that different to ball retention? As ball retention is ''the art of not conceding possession, i.e KEEPING possession''[/quote]

You could have the ball for 45 minutes each (50% each) but we could give the ball away more in that time.

[mel0 0]

[quote user="Canary On The Wire"]Nope, we''re actually fifth worst, with average 45.5% possession.Cardiff 45.1%West Ham 43.6%Hull 43.2 %Villa 42.4%Palace 39.1%It really isn''t hard to find the data if people bother to research before making claims. Apathy seems to rule. Pity.[/quote]

He didn''t ask for possession stats. He said we''re ''probably'' the worst at keeping possession. Which we try and fail to do. When you take away the teams that don''t want to keep possession and just get the ball forward as quickly as possible so West Ham, Palace, Villa and until last week Cardiff then he''s not far wrong. Save your pretentiousness.

[vlad666 207]

iwansnorwich : Exactly mate.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Surely by the law of averages, a 50-50 split in possession implies that if we give the ball away x amount of times, so on average we must tackle successfully + in receipt of a misplaced pass  ''x'' times.a 45.5% possession average suggests that if we gain possession x amount of times, we must be giving it away + being tackled (x * 0.22) times.What you are essentially doing is factoring out the situations in which we have given the ball away/been given the ball. Which would be fair enough, but as it is a factor of the overall possession stat, neither can you ignore tackles won/lost in this scenario, so my stat trumps yours in this case.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

We do not try and keep possession. We have one of the lowest passes attempted tallies in the league:we are 14th for number of attempted short passesand 5th for number of attempted long balls.Yeah, we really try and keep possession.Save your er....being wrong.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

And yes, while the teams you mention attempt even fewer short passes than us, this follows as they have less possession on average as I have shown.Whereas only Cardiff attempt more long balls. We''re really not a possession team either, and we''re STILL not the worst at it.

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="the bristol nest"]

Quibbles over stats does nothing to address this. What does CH need to do to change it?[/quote]Then why use them as a prop for your argument if they don''t hold water?

[Paul 0]

I never used stats and it''s turned into a stat debate. I wanted to start a discussion at how inept we are as a team in the final third and how boring and predictable our play is.

Jesus it''s turning into OPTA on this thread.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="the bristol nest"]

Quibbles over stats does nothing to address this. What does CH need to do to change it?[/quote]Then why use them as a prop for your argument if they don''t hold water?[/quote]

 

He didn''t mean THOSE stats.....

 

It''s the other stats[:|]

 

 

[Canary On The Wire 0]

You can''t make claims about our play, not back them up, and then attempt to control the variables of the discussion.As our scientific knowledge of the game increases, so too do the validity of stats in terms of analysis of the game. All top teams use the ProZone system or variants thereof to validate/support their analysis of matches/players etc.Stats do not prove anything on their own, but certainly they provide more of an insight than a standalone claim, and they are useful for this.If you don''t want it to ''turn into OPTA'' don''t make claims you can''t substantiate.I don''t enjoy our style of football under Hughton- but neither would I make vague claims related to us being more or less boring/predictable than other teams, unless I had a factual means by which to support my argument, i.e a stat

[Paul 0]

Stats are always reliable. I have seen games where a team has had the majority of possession more shots on goal, more shots on target and on paper those stats would say that team should have won the game, but they lost.

We are a boring team to watch, that is a fact I go to every home game and most away games. it''s not a vague claim at all.

Here is a stat for you. I have been bored at most of the Norwich games I have seen this season.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

statistic: a fact or piece of data attained from analysis of numerical data.So, ....no, it isn''t a statI didn''t say ''we are a boring team to watch'' was a vague claimI said ''more boring than'' was a vague claim, and one you really haven''t backed up at all, it is just sensationalism for sensationalism''s sake.

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Paul"]Stats are always reliable. I have seen games where a team has had the majority of possession more shots on goal, more shots on target and on paper those stats would say that team should have won the game, but they lost.

We are a boring team to watch, that is a fact I go to every home game and most away games. it''s not a vague claim at all.

Here is a stat for you. I have been bored at most of the Norwich games I have seen this season.[/quote]Fair enough, that''s a valid opinion but I think you rather invited a comeback with the Sunday League coaching claim.No doubt boredom can become a problem. There is a pleasant panorama of the City from the N&P stand. I recall entire second halves when watching that was more exciting than anything on the pitch.

[Paul 0]

Ok, hows this. I prefer watching every other team in the premiership than the team I support at the moment.

It''s not sensationalism at all. Are you a ST holder, have you seen our games this season. Have you been excited by the way we play our football under our present manager?

[the bristol nest 0]

I got your point Paul...

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Yes, yes, and no.I said that!I just said that you have not backed up your claim that we are more boring/predictable than the teams around us in any way. So yes it is sensationalism to say we are more boring if you can''t back it up at all.