Hoolahan wants out (according to Talksport)

[morty 0]

Moan, whinge, moan whinge, whinge, whinge.....

[a1canary 0]

I would take this seriously if i were you Morty. First Holt, then Morison, now Hoolahan. Can you see the pattern? He''s boring our expressive, attacking players to death!!

I think Bradders probably loves him, the defenders probably love him too. Even if the others like him, they ARE going to get frustrated if we can''t score goals because of the way we play. And right now, and last season, that has been an inescapable fact. It can''t go on because it drains the life out of the players, undermines the positivity in the squad because we''re simply not scoring and winning enough.

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

I would take this seriously if i were you Morty. First Holt, then Morison, now Hoolahan. Can you see the pattern? He''s boring our expressive, attacking players to death!!

I think Bradders probably loves him, the defenders probably love him too. Even if the others like him, they ARE going to get frustrated if we can''t score goals because of the way we play. And right now, and last season, that has been an inescapable fact. It can''t go on because it drains the life out of the players, undermines the positivity in the squad because we''re simply not scoring and winning enough.

[/quote]Morison? Seriously lol?

[a1canary 0]

What''s your point? I''m talking about attacking players getting frustrated by Hughton''s approach, not passing judgement on their ability. Although if Lambert could get Morison returning 8-10 goals in the premier league and you think he''s not up to much, what does that tell you?

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]What''s your point? I''m talking about attacking players getting frustrated by Hughton''s approach, not passing judgement on their ability. Although if Lambert could get Morison returning 8-10 goals in the premier league and you think he''s not up to much, what does that tell you?[/quote]The style of play in the Premier league has changed in the last few seasons, and especially this season.You can get away with blitzkrieg football when you are first promoted, as you''re an unknown quantity, but sooner or later you''re going to have to adopt a more mature, thoughtful style.And thats it isn''t it really? Hughton isn''t Lambert in your eyes. Go take a look at the Villa forums and see what their fans think of our messiah''s style of play.

[morty 0]

You can also get away with "Attack, attack, attack" if you have a couple of hundred million to spend.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="morty"]sooner or later you''re going to have to adopt a more mature, thoughtful style.[/quote]You mean one where we concede virtually the same amount of goals, but score far less in the process...?If that''s what ''mature, thoughtful'' football brings then they can stuff it and I''ll go back to 4-3 thrillers instead thanks!

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]sooner or later you''re going to have to adopt a more mature, thoughtful style.[/quote]You mean one where we concede virtually the same amount of goals, but score far less in the process...?If that''s what ''mature, thoughtful'' football brings then they can stuff it and I''ll go back to 4-3 thrillers instead thanks![/quote]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?

[a1canary 0]

Thing is Morty, i accept what you say about "blitzkrieg" football - often you can''t get away with it (think Blackpool under Holloway), we did with Lambert but yes, you have to refine and advance your game.

But if Holloway/Lambert are at one end of the spectrum, Hughton is at the other end. I just want something in the middle, is that too much to ask? I don''t want Hughton to be Lambert but when we and the team itself is so starved of the positivity that accompanies attacking, exciting football, it is going to be impossible not to pine after the last person who gave us that. And if some in the squad are starting to do that, we''re in trouble.

I think this could be a tipping point because if McNally and Bowket see that''s what''s happening, and if it is happening, they will soon realise they have to act.

[Wiz 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

Thing is Morty, i accept what you say about "blitzkrieg" football - often you can''t get away with it (think Blackpool under Holloway), we did with Lambert but yes, you have to refine and advance your game.

But if Holloway/Lambert are at one end of the spectrum, Hughton is at the other end. I just want something in the middle, is that too much to ask? I don''t want Hughton to be Lambert but when we and the team itself is so starved of the positivity that accompanies attacking, exciting football, it is going to be impossible not to pine after the last person who gave us that. And if some in the squad are starting to do that, we''re in trouble.

I think this could be a tipping point because if McNally and Bowket see that''s what''s happening, and if it is happening, they will soon realise they have to act.

[/quote]

 

This.

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

Thing is Morty, i accept what you say about "blitzkrieg" football - often you can''t get away with it (think Blackpool under Holloway), we did with Lambert but yes, you have to refine and advance your game.

But if Holloway/Lambert are at one end of the spectrum, Hughton is at the other end. I just want something in the middle, is that too much to ask? I don''t want Hughton to be Lambert but when we and the team itself is so starved of the positivity that accompanies attacking, exciting football, it is going to be impossible not to pine after the last person who gave us that. And if some in the squad are starting to do that, we''re in trouble.

I think this could be a tipping point because if McNally and Bowket see that''s what''s happening, and if it is happening, they will soon realise they have to act.

[/quote]Of course you are making the assumption that Hughton is playing this way because he wants to? He wasn''t negative at Birmingham, was he?I said the team needed ten games to properly bed in this season, but the fact is Hughton has, at pretty much every point, had key players unavailable. I think that once he can pick his best team (or close to it) for 4 or 5 games, then you will start to see a difference.Now, if we get to the end of the season, and there hasn''t been improvement (I believe that Hughton will keep us up) then there should be a change of manager in teh summer.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="morty"]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?[/quote]Why? Because I don''t like watching the shitty football we''re having to put up with under Hughton?As A1 has just pointed out, there''s a big difference between ''blitzkreig'' and ''boring and negative'', all most of us want is something in-between (maybe with the odd flash of a gung-ho attack here and there), why is that so unreasonable all of a sudden?Maybe you can explain how Hughton is meant to be giving us a stronger, more modern approach, by seemingly making us not only weak in attack but without any major boost in our defensive abilities???Attacking me won''t change the crap football on display Morty...

[snake-eyes 13]

Why is it when anyone suggests or asks for a.more attacking way of playing they are described as wanting gung Ho or Blitzkrieg football?

I get the feeling that this is simply an exaggeration to support their position that CH is not negative.

There is a huge gulf between the way we play now and the extreme described by many!

it is so frustrating to hear such blatant exaggerated claims!

Morty there is only so long you can get away with defending deep and with numbers also. Both extremes will get you nowhere eventually. It is within these two philosophies where the most effective football is found.

Snake

[Wiz 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?[/quote]
Why? Because I don''t like watching the shitty football we''re having to put up with under Hughton?

As A1 has just pointed out, there''s a big difference between ''blitzkreig'' and ''boring and negative'', all most of us want is something in-between (maybe with the odd flash of a gung-ho attack here and there), why is that so unreasonable all of a sudden?

Maybe you can explain how Hughton is meant to be giving us a stronger, more modern approach, by seemingly making us not only weak in attack but without any major boost in our defensive abilities???

Attacking me won''t change the c.rap football on display Morty...
[/quote]

 

Nail on head time.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?[/quote]Why? Because I don''t like watching the shitty football we''re having to put up with under Hughton?As A1 has just pointed out, there''s a big difference between ''blitzkreig'' and ''boring and negative'', all most of us want is something in-between (maybe with the odd flash of a gung-ho attack here and there), why is that so unreasonable all of a sudden?Maybe you can explain how Hughton is meant to be giving us a stronger, more modern approach, by seemingly making us not only weak in attack but without any major boost in our defensive abilities???Attacking me won''t change the crap football on display Morty...[/quote]Sorry, but your constant whingeing is actually more boring than some of our football.

[a1canary 0]

That happens to every club every season Morty. It simply isn''t an excuse. One of the issues i have with Hughton is that he has a very precise idea about how he wants to play a game, and when he is able to deliver that, more often than not, we do get a result and we do play good football. Unfortunately, very often, we can''t play the precise way he wants to and he seems to have absolutely no flexibility in these circumstances. He found the way he wanted to play last year and it worked brilliantly for a period. But when Holt got injured, he tried to play the same way with different players and it all went horribly wrong. I think the players are relentlessly drilled in to playing how he wants to play and if circumstances dictate that they have to do something different, be flexible, play with freedom, they crumble.

In Lambert''s first season we had probably the most unsettled back four we have ever had. It was almost never the same from game to game and often within games! I''ll never forget the game, at Bolton i think, when we lost BOTH our centre backs in the middle of the game. Not only did we recover from that setback but we went on to win the game. Can you imagine that happening under Hughton?

[morty 0]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]Why is it when anyone suggests or asks for a.more attacking way of playing they are described as wanting gung Ho or Blitzkrieg football?

I get the feeling that this is simply an exaggeration to support their position that CH is not negative.

There is a huge gulf between the way we play now and the extreme described by many!

it is so frustrating to hear such blatant exaggerated claims!

Morty there is only so long you can get away with defending deep and with numbers also. Both extremes will get you nowhere eventually. It is within these two philosophies where the most effective football is found.

Snake[/quote]Because there are people with such a limited understanding of football, that believe if we''re not scoring 4 goals a game, theres something wrong.CH is playing the game according to the players available.You think we might see something different with a fit Bennet providing decent crosses, and a fit Pilkington joining in with the attacks, supporting the lone striker?People need to have a bit of patience, and more importantly, have a bit of perspective.

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

That happens to every club every season Morty. It simply isn''t an excuse. One of the issues i have with Hughton is that he has a very precise idea about how he wants to play a game, and when he is able to deliver that, more often than not, we do get a result and we do play good football. Unfortunately, very often, we can''t play the precise way he wants to and he seems to have absolutely no flexibility in these circumstances. He found the way he wanted to play last year and it worked brilliantly for a period. But when Holt got injured, he tried to play the same way with different players and it all went horribly wrong. I think the players are relentlessly drilled in to playing how he wants to play and if circumstances dictate that they have to do something different, be flexible, play with freedom, they crumble.

In Lambert''s first season we had probably the most unsettled back four we have ever had. It was almost never the same from game to game and often within games! I''ll never forget the game, at Bolton i think, when we lost BOTH our centre backs in the middle of the game. Not only did we recover from that setback but we went on to win the game. Can you imagine that happening under Hughton?

[/quote]Yeah I get it, Hughton isn''t Lambert. Perhaps you should realise this too.And you actually have access to the inside of Hughtons head, how he thinks and wants to play the game? And you consider having some of our best players out an excuse? Our squad is THAT strong, is it?

[a1canary 0]

Again Morty, you are accusing people of demanding more than they actually are. Who is saying they want 4 goals a game? Absolutely no-one. You just can''t pretend that we have don''t have serious problems scoring.

The facts are simple - £14 million or so investment in strikers, no improvement in the GF column (actually, i haven''t checked but off the top of my head i think we''ve our goal scoring has deteriorated vs the same stage last year). What''s your answer as to why that is?

[Wiz 0]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?[/quote]
Why? Because I don''t like watching the shitty football we''re having to put up with under Hughton?

As A1 has just pointed out, there''s a big difference between ''blitzkreig'' and ''boring and negative'', all most of us want is something in-between (maybe with the odd flash of a gung-ho attack here and there), why is that so unreasonable all of a sudden?

Maybe you can explain how Hughton is meant to be giving us a stronger, more modern approach, by seemingly making us not only weak in attack but without any major boost in our defensive abilities???

Attacking me won''t change the crap football on display Morty...
[/quote]

Sorry, but your constant whingeing is actually more boring than some of our football.
[/quote]

 

I''ve noticed this alot about you Mr Morty, when you start to lose an arguement you start insulting the poster.

 

Bad form Sir.

[snake-eyes 13]

I just don''t see that Morty. With players available there is still much more positive way of playing.

Many of us have been very patient but whilst I understand the change in the Prem way of playing I don''t believe it is right or necessary.

We are not asking for 4 or more goals a game but clearly with the way we are playing 1 is not enough when your defence is constantly under pressure and generally conceding more than that.

snake

[morty 0]

[quote user="Jimbo_Canary"]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="morty"]Have you considered finding another team to "support"?[/quote]Why? Because I don''t like watching the shitty football we''re having to put up with under Hughton?As A1 has just pointed out, there''s a big difference between ''blitzkreig'' and ''boring and negative'', all most of us want is something in-between (maybe with the odd flash of a gung-ho attack here and there), why is that so unreasonable all of a sudden?Maybe you can explain how Hughton is meant to be giving us a stronger, more modern approach, by seemingly making us not only weak in attack but without any major boost in our defensive abilities???Attacking me won''t change the crap football on display Morty...[/quote]Sorry, but your constant whingeing is actually more boring than some of our football.[/quote]

 

I''ve noticed this alot about you Mr Morty, when you start to lose an arguement you start insulting the poster.

 

Bad form Sir.

[/quote]If someone is convinced that they don''t like Hughton, and want him gone, nothing I can say will change their mind. So theres no point trying.Hope this helps.Oh and its "debate" not an argument, by the way.

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

Again Morty, you are accusing people of demanding more than they actually are. Who is saying they want 4 goals a game? Absolutely no-one. You just can''t pretend that we have don''t have serious problems scoring.

The facts are simple - £14 million or so investment in strikers, no improvement in the GF column (actually, i haven''t checked but off the top of my head i think we''ve our goal scoring has deteriorated vs the same stage last year). What''s your answer as to why that is?

[/quote]Are you conveniently ignoring my point about available players?

[morty 0]

[quote user="snake-eyes"]I just don''t see that Morty. With players available there is still much more positive way of playing.

Many of us have been very patient but whilst I understand the change in the Prem way of playing I don''t believe it is right or necessary.

We are not asking for 4 or more goals a game but clearly with the way we are playing 1 is not enough when your defence is constantly under pressure and generally conceding more than that.

snake[/quote]I don''t disagree.But to totally ignore two of our best attacking players being injured, and long periods out for both our main strikers has had an effect on how we have to play, is just daft.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

I''ll never forget the game, at Bolton i think, when we lost BOTH our centre backs in the middle of the game. Not only did we recover from that setback but we went on to win the game. Can you imagine that happening under Hughton?

[/quote]

 

 I think we finished the game with a back 4 of:

 

Tierney    Drury    Naughton     Martin

 

Wasn''t that our first clean sheet of that season?

 

[a1canary 0]

Of course not - i''ve made the point that availability of players is not the reason that Hughton''s Norwich is so poor at scoring goals. One could maybe accept this if we had a great defensive record. We are more solid when he is able to put his perfect team out - but when we''re not, which is often, our defensive record is as bad as anyones.

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Morty, a lot of the time I agree with your NCFC opinions.But I really think the big problem is that Hughton DOESN''T play the right way for the players available. In Howson and Fer he has two players capable of carrying the ball through midfield and creating a lot of pressure in central areas.....so we give the ball to Olsson/Whittaker and hit Elmander in the channels.....what?Hughton is not a poor tactician in terms of actually knowing different methods and approaches, but he is a poor tactician in terms of hammering square pegs into round holes.Where he got it right was against United, benefiting from the fact that there was no Rooney dropping deep to playmake as he does and moving the ball as quickly as possible to Hoolahan who could then work some cute passes into the area or bring the wide men into play, giving the full backs time to get up and support the wingers.I believe if we''re going to play our game, with our best strikers both being poachers (not at all in agreement that we should play them together) then we should continue the United approach and get the ball into the feet of Wes and use his control in tight areas as a means by which to hold on to the ball and park the midfield high up the pitch.I don''t believe, long term, that Chris Hughton and his coaching staff have quite enough tactical nous to be inventive enough in creating approaches that will allow us to score goals regularly.I like him as a man and I certainly don''t want us to twist mid season now. Give him January to show that he can bring the right players in to make things happen in the final third, or we need to cut our losses if we want a more comfortable innings in 14/15.

As for Wes. We need him. He''s not going anywhere. I believe we need to replace him with a more creative AM, as useful as Wes is with his ball control he just doesn''t create enough and is often wasteful when he gets into the box (the reason we didn''t put United to the sword). Either way i''d want him around as he definitely has his uses.

[morty 0]

[quote user="a1canary"]

Of course not - i''ve made the point that availability of players is not the reason that Hughton''s Norwich is so poor at scoring goals. One could maybe accept this if we had a great defensive record. We are more solid when he is able to put his perfect team out - but when we''re not, which is often, our defensive record is as bad as anyones.

[/quote]So which is he, too defensive and negative, or just not good enough.Or both?

[snake-eyes 13]

Sorry Morty it is not daft.

We have more attacking options available to us than defensive ones. Just because Howson and EB are out should not mean you just shut up shop.

We are not asking for the team to attack with 8 men forward but when you have the players with really attacking ability why not use them in this way instead of asking them to play to their weaknesses?

I just don''t get it?

[morty 0]

COTW- The square pegs into round holes goes hand in hand with not having the players available though, and the changes are enforced. Whilst our squad is stronger than it has been for many years, its quality in depth really isn''t still great. Take a few quality players out of our team, Pilkington, Bassong, Tettey, E Bennett and we start to look quite limited.Now if when we have more of our quality players available, and things haven''t improved, then I agree with you, a change may be needed.