Daniel Brigham 0 Posted February 28, 2014 Danny Mills and Grant Holt both stirred things up with Norwich fans this week. Daniel Brigham takes a look back. Two ghosts returned to haunt Norwich this week. They were only minor hauntings, more Casper than Blair Witch, but they did cause a stir in Norfolk. Both ghosts were former players, one a meh the other a great. First Danny Mills said some stupid things and got everyone fuming, then Grant Holt didn''t say anything stupid and still got some fans fuming. Let''s start with Mills (something Mike Walker rarely did). He’s done well for himself. First, a starting place at the 2002 World Cup. Then a cushy job in the media. Finally, an invite onto the FA''s commission into the future of English football, which is as sensible as asking Thomas the Tank Engine to sort out Britain''s railways. He''s achieved all of this despite being an average footballer. And not only an average footballer, but an average footballer in the most average of football positions. Every day, somewhere across the country, parents sit a child down to tell them they can aspire to something greater in life than playing at right-back. “Have you considered turning tricks for a living?” the dad wails, head clutched in his hands. “Or becoming Ben Fogle''s voice coach?” Being a right-back shouldn''t hold you back from becoming a good pundit though. Far from it. Two of the most insightful experts on TV, Lee Dixon and Gary Neville, are former England right-backs. Mills, however, is the worst kind. Boorish, charmless, angry, humourless; forever talking like he''s auditioning for a role as the long-lost Mitchell brother in Eastenders. On Sunday night he displayed all of these traits in a breathtaking display of Partridge-punditry: rabbiting on with utter conviction despite not knowing what his point was. He may as well have been talking about mashed-up Dundee cake for all it had to do with the match. Thanks to Mills, all we were left with was the impression that Norwich were poor for 45 minutes and Ricky van Wolfswinkel was dreadful for the entire game. Whether you’re a partial or impartial fan, that’s a pretty odd conclusion to take away from a match Norwich won against the team with the best away record in the Premier League. It was either embarrassingly ignorant or willfully misleading. Then came his Radio Norfolk outing, where the presenter decided to forego any pretense of neutrality by declaring to Mills that “I was agreeing with the vast majority of your criticisms”. Well, thanks for that. Mills went on to ask the admirable Edward Couzens-Lake, there to offer the Norwich defense, what was good about Norwich’s performance. Well, sorry Danny, but isn’t it the job of the handsomely paid BBC football expert to tell people what was good about Norwich’s performance? That''s exactly what he should have been doing on Sunday evening instead of bizarrely focusing in on Bradley Johnson and Leroy Fer pointing at other players, apparently because they were fearful of receiving a pass. All of the expensive technology available to Mills in the BBC studio and he uses it to highlight players pointing at other players, as if that doesn''t happen in every game that''s ever been played ever. Then, like someone overusing a long word because they think it makes them sound clever, Mills kept repeating his bizarre point that Wolfswinkel made only two tackles. He genuinely seemed to think that this was justification for his criticism. To everyone else it just sounded like another way of saying he hadn’t watched the full 90 minutes so instead had a quick look at Opta to help form his opinions. When MOTD2''s excellent host Mark Chapman perceptively asked Mills if Norwich’s team-mates or system were to blame for Wolfswinkel’s lack of goals he completely ignored it. Perhaps he was fearful of receiving the question so pointed to Kevin Kilbane to answer it instead. Let’s be fair to Mills for a moment. He''s a former footballer, better at not being picked at right-back by Norwich City than I ever was. His experience means he can offer greater insight than any of us armchair pundits. Plus he wasn’t entirely wrong about Norwich looking a little frightened of the ball in the first half. But every team in the bottom half of the table, perhaps with the exception of Sunderland, are playing with an understandable fear. Funnily enough, Mills failed to point this out.Which neatly brings us onto our second ghost, Grant Holt. In a relegation six-pointer (or a scrap for 12th place six-pointer), both teams tend to play with fear. Against Aston Villa on Sunday we have the additional, shuddering fear of Paul Lambert celebrating a Holt winner. And this week Holt caused a stir among some Norwich fans after an interview with the Birmingham Post. He will always divide opinion in Norfolk, but this time he said nothing wrong. Quite the opposite, actually. He was skillfully diplomatic, sidestepping the chance to call Villa a bigger club than Norwich, resisting any potshots at Chris Hughton and avoiding saying he would love to score against us. The controversy came from the rather sensationalist headline suggesting that Holt was “hoping to have the last laugh against Norwich”. Nowhere does he actually say this. We were expecting fireworks and all we got was a sparkler. However, if he does return to haunt us by scoring the winner – something he hasn’t managed since February 23 last year – remind yourself it could still get worse. Danny Mills could be blathering about it for MOTD2 later. Daniel Brigham is features editor of The Cricketer magazine.Follow him on Twitter: @cricketer_dan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TCCANARY 263 Posted February 28, 2014 I don''t think I''ve seen any City fans ''stirred up'' by anything Grant Holt has said this week, anyone else? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0 Posted February 28, 2014 "When MOTD2''s excellent host Mark Chapman perceptively asked Mills if Norwich’s team-mates or system were to blame for Wolfswinkel’s lack of goals he completely ignored it. Perhaps he was fearful of receiving the question so pointed to Kevin Kilbane to answer it instead."This gave me a little lol. A very good blog. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
William Darby 0 Posted February 28, 2014 I don''t think anyone actually fumed at Mills. It was more of a case of ''what a douche bag''. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Feedthewolf 4,846 Posted February 28, 2014 Really well-written blog. Authoritative in style, but still informal and irreverent enough to be able to use phrases like ''meh'', and to mention mashed-up Dundee cake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
K Lo 224 Posted February 28, 2014 IMO, Norwich City is to Grant Holt what it isn''t to Mills i.e. the step-up, the break, the massive way forward.Obvioulsy, Holt did an excellent job for Norwich in the four seasons with us and similarly Norwich did an excellent job for Holt. The two worked well and both succeeded massively well for it.Now Mills... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubai Mark 0 Posted February 28, 2014 A nice read, thanks. So anyone know exactly why Danny Mills has a problem with Norwich City, because he clearly has? As for Grant Holt, agree he seemed to try hard not to stir things up, soemthing our fans need to do also on Sunday, because as we know a wound up Grant Holt is NOT what we want to play against. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rustyboy 2 Posted February 28, 2014 For some reason Fanny Mills and Andy Townsend seem to dislike Norwich after they left us. I recall them getting some stick with their new clubs so guess that''s the reason or they could just be a pair of kn@bs! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Brigham 0 Posted February 28, 2014 Thanks for the kind words. Prince Randian - I think it was a bit of both; fuming and douche-bagging. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites