Ohhhh Wesley.

[mrs miggins 0]

Yeah he had a good game today and should start the next one.

''Open your eyes!!''

seriously wtf are you on?

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]Yeah he had a good game today and should start the next one.

''Open your eyes!!''

seriously wtf are you on?[/quote]

You need to check what your on I''m afraid. To say wes hasn''t taken his chance this season when given the opportunity is stupid.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

Wesley was crucial to our success today. As well as his overall workrate, his unique way of playing as a left sided midfielder (lots of darts to the right of the pitch and generally occupying a central position) meant that there was a lot more variation to the attack and that more complex passing options were available in the final third. One of the people that was vital to Wes''s success today was Olsson. To have a full-back with enough energy and speed to cover an entire side of the pitch by himself essentially allowed Wes to play as he pleased, meaning we got to see the best out of him as he darted around the pitch towards the ball. I''m still slightly concerned with his defensive positioning, Wes is far better at pressing defensively then sitting back, and he sometimes left Olsson too exposed, but when you have the majority of possession (as we did today) it is far less of a concern than usual.

[mrs miggins 0]

No i think he''s been inconsistent. For a player like wes, we can''t really afford that. Whenever he''s been given the opportunity to have a run of games, he''s been ineffective. Whats stupid about that idea when we have some great players sat on the bench.

How can you say he''s been good when he''s played this season, he hasn''t been all good. Today he was good, against man u he was good etc etc, but he has also been lazy, ineffective and frustrating in others.

Just because he had another good game today (and hopefully he''ll be good in the next game), don''t let that mask the fact that he has also warranted being on the bench after some of his games he has played.

[mrs miggins 0]

Agree with phillip.

[GJP 79]

Hoolahan has his games when he doesn''t really doesn''t make too much happen.

 

But the problem we''ve often had is that when we do leave him out we struggle to produce any decent football.

 

Today the midfield was packed with players who are mobile and full of ideas on the ball.

[Phillip J Fry 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

Hoolahan has his games when he doesn''t really doesn''t make too much happen.

 

But the problem we''ve often had is that when we do leave him out we struggle to produce any decent football.

 

Today the midfield was packed with players who are mobile and full of ideas on the ball.

[/quote]

The fact that Howson and Tettey were able to dominate the centre of midfield despite being 3v2 in that area is incredibly impressive. It also highlights just how much we have missed Howson. His ability to drive forward, control the ball in tight areas and pass the ball quickly, along with a phenomenal workrate and defensive discipline makes him an invaluable member of the team. He has to start whenever he''s fit.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Phillip J Fry"][quote user="GJP"]

Hoolahan has his games when he doesn''t really doesn''t make too much happen.

 

But the problem we''ve often had is that when we do leave him out we struggle to produce any decent football.

 

Today the midfield was packed with players who are mobile and full of ideas on the ball.

[/quote]

The fact that Howson and Tettey were able to dominate the centre of midfield despite being 3v2 in that area is incredibly impressive. It also highlights just how much we have missed Howson. His ability to drive forward, control the ball in tight areas and pass the ball quickly, along with a phenomenal workrate and defensive discipline makes him an invaluable member of the team. He has to start whenever he''s fit.

[/quote]

Exactly.

 

Howson is the best player we''ve got.

[E I E I E I O 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]Long Drives Home wrote:

God you talk ***, does snodgrass or bas song have to do this???

--------

Well snodgrass has been playing as much as he has mainly because of other players injuries as well as the fact that you know what your going to get from him (unlike redmond who is inconsistent and pilks who either looks like he doesn''t care, or is great for one half and then anonymous the next). With Bassong, on his day he is without doubt our best CB as well as performing better than the likes of Bennett when he (Bennett) has had the chance to play a few games in a row.

Yet we are talking about Hoolahan, a luxury player who has been pretty poor when given the chance, just like any of the other players given a chance to shine when they''ve been on the bench in the previous game. In what way am I talking $hit? I think you undervalue the likes of snodgrass and Bassong and don''t look at the real picture thats there. The reason why we''ve played Bassong and Snodgrass so much is also to do with the fact that they fit into a more rigid system that Hughton has[/quote]

The team played well against Man city without Snodgrass. Pilks had a great game. This was during a period when Snodgrass was not playing well. The week after he brings snodgrass straight back and we were absolute awful, as was Snodgrass. What does this say to Pilks? I would imagine he is pretty P***** off. Snodgrass has been in and out form wise this season, however he is rarely subbed or dropped. Your comment was that players need to give a Manager a reason to play them. Well Pilks did and his reward was to sit on the bench and watch Snodgrass play awful. Therefore why has Wes been treated this way when we have been so pants! 7 starts as per the original posters thread is criminal. With hughton preferring to set up to stifle and break up play rather than attack with meaning. Hence he is negative 9 out of 10 games!

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="Long drives home"][quote user="mrs miggins"]Long Drives Home wrote:

God you talk ***, does snodgrass or bas song have to do this???

--------

Well snodgrass has been playing as much as he has mainly because of other players injuries as well as the fact that you know what your going to get from him (unlike redmond who is inconsistent and pilks who either looks like he doesn''t care, or is great for one half and then anonymous the next). With Bassong, on his day he is without doubt our best CB as well as performing better than the likes of Bennett when he (Bennett) has had the chance to play a few games in a row.

Yet we are talking about Hoolahan, a luxury player who has been pretty poor when given the chance, just like any of the other players given a chance to shine when they''ve been on the bench in the previous game. In what way am I talking $hit? I think you undervalue the likes of snodgrass and Bassong and don''t look at the real picture thats there. The reason why we''ve played Bassong and Snodgrass so much is also to do with the fact that they fit into a more rigid system that Hughton has[/quote]

The team played well against Man city without Snodgrass. Pilks had a great game. This was during a period when Snodgrass was not playing well. The week after he brings snodgrass straight back and we were absolute awful, as was Snodgrass. What does this say to Pilks? I would imagine he is pretty P***** off. Snodgrass has been in and out form wise this season, however he is rarely subbed or dropped. Your comment was that players need to give a Manager a reason to play them. Well Pilks did and his reward was to sit on the bench and watch Snodgrass play awful. Therefore why has Wes been treated this way when we have been so pants! 7 starts as per the original posters thread is criminal. With hughton preferring to set up to stifle and break up play rather than attack with meaning. Hence he is negative 9 out of 10 games![/quote]

Exactly this. You can''t expect Hoolahan or Pilkington to be consistent when they get one game to shine before being dropped again. And anyway, in that one game they usually do shine, as pointed out with Pilks performance v Man City.

Hughton has an issue playing with Hoolahan. Every commentator, pundit, ex pro etc, that watch Norwich City, constantly praise Hoolahan and fail to see why Hughton selects other players and systems over him.

[morty 0]

This is cringeworthy.

[barclay_boy111 0]

I can''t see how after both Howson and Tettey''s performance today you guys pick out Hoolahan as our key player?

Howson and Tettey is who we have missed in the midfield this season and they showed their mustard today.

I think some people like him a little to much and think everything he does is amazing when simply he''s light weight and an average passer

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="barclay_boy111"]I can''t see how after both Howson and Tettey''s performance today you guys pick out Hoolahan as our key player?

Howson and Tettey is who we have missed in the midfield this season and they showed their mustard today.

I think some people like him a little to much and think everything he does is amazing when simply he''s light weight and an average passer[/quote]

I think as all four midfielders worked superbly well today. It''s nice to see Hoolahan and howson start together, many thought it had to be one or another.

[hazza9 0]

Hoolahan was brilliant and only furthers my belief that he''s our most creative player and one of our best. Should definitely be one of the first names on team sheet. The way he can just find little spaces on the pitch and make something happen is great.

If he was played more which he should have been, there is no way he would have put in a transfer request which is obvious.

Hughton needs to be better with his tactics and know when to play Hoolahan where he''s going to find spaces in midfield and know when to play combo of Tettey, Fer and Howson.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

mrs miggins wrote the following post at 22/03/2014 11:00 PM:

"

No i think he''s been inconsistent. For a player like wes, we can''t really afford that. Whenever he''s been given the opportunity to have a run of games, he''s been ineffective. Whats stupid about that idea when we have some great players sat on the bench."

Pretty much all of our players are inconsistent, thats hardly suprising for a lower third Prem team. But the point with Wes is even if he is having a poor game he still has the ability to do something special and create a chance. IMO he should have featured much more for us this season, either staring or coming off the bench.

[mrs miggins 0]

But what i''m saying is that because wes is more of a luxury player in midfield, when he has a bad game he doesn''t produce that piece of magic and he doesn''t help defend (when he''s having a bad game), so he''s totally ineffective.

Snodgrass for example has been pretty poor this season (although coming into form now), but you know he''s always gonna work hard and at least do the dirty stuff when he has to.

[hogesar 9,657]

Miggins, i think perhaps you''re underestimating Wes''s work rate. For the last 3 years Wes has been a luxury player apparently - but look at our results and goal tally with him, as opposed to without him in the team. Like i keep saying, it ain''t a coincidence.

I can fully understand him not starting every game, that''s not the issue. But even of the bench he should have been used far more often than he has been.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Exactly hogesar

[mrs miggins 0]

Agree with hog as well. I don''t think i am underestimating his work rate. I would say under lambert he could be seen more as a luxury player, but under hughton, especially last season, his work rate was phenomenal considering his style beforehand; he was the best we could expect from him and he had a great season. This season, although he should have started more games than he has as it would have helped the team, I can totally see why Hughton hasn''t used him in a long run of games.

[Herman 9,754]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]You we''re superb. Is it just a coincidence that BJ wasn''t playing today and we produced superb football? We need wes to start every game. How can anyone disagree?![/quote]

 

[H]