Change of strategy

Parma Ham's gone mouldy · March 15, 2014

Shakespeare might have said "methinks he doth protest too much".

5 changes to the side today was a dramatic departure from the prosaic, repeated patterns seen hitherto. Given the fluidity of the opposition, throwing the likes of Bennett and Whittaker an opportunity is such circumstances is an incongruous move in relation to what has gone before.

The narrow-focus strictures that have been drilled into the (mostly) preferred 11 are designed to see us (just) over the line and are part of the enduring pattern and process seen over the season.

Hughton is under pressure and his team line up today hints at an almost nihilistic throwing all the cards up in the air or even a belligerent (and unmanagerial) "see I am flexible, I''m not afraid to change". Replacing half the defence voluntarily is a revolutionary departure from Hughton''s norms.

It can also be observed that Martin and Bassong are major figures in a side lacking obvious 1st xi leaders. Shooting generals at this late stage could be construed as a temporary refuge of crumbling regime. If you jettison the methodology that has ground you points and that has been so meticulously and painfully constructed, what do you turn to and what message do you send to those who have followed you (perhaps even against their own desires and instincts)?

The irony is that for all the enduring criticism, the prosaic strategy and the impervious shell of "this is my way", it was rather abandoned on a day - and at a point in the season - when consistency of message was perhaps more important.

SwindonCanary · March 15, 2014

Seems to me it''s not who plays but how we play, so the change of strategy should have been in the instructions given to the players

BOO · March 15, 2014

I think he is panicking, that bodes ominously for the last few vital games of the season.

The Great Mass Debater · March 15, 2014

If Hughton knows he''s being replaced at the end of the season, as has been suggested, why does he care? Other than not having relegation on his CV, its not like he''s trying to save his job. Hughton is trying, no question, so I think the idea he knows he''s going at the end of the season doesnt hold water. He wants to keep his job

Alfie54 · March 15, 2014

Parma Ham''s gone mouldy wrote the following post at 15/03/2014 9:59 PM:

Shakespeare might have said "methinks he doth protest too much".

5 changes to the side today was a dramatic departure from the prosaic, repeated patterns seen hitherto. Given the fluidity of the opposition, throwing the likes of Bennett and Whittaker an opportunity is such circumstances is an incongruous move in relation to what has gone before.

The narrow-focus strictures that have been drilled into the (mostly) preferred 11 are designed to see us (just) over the line and are part of the enduring pattern and process seen over the season.

Hughton is under pressure and his team line up today hints at an almost nihilistic throwing all the cards up in the air or even a belligerent (and unmanagerial) "see I am flexible, I''m not afraid to change". Replacing half the defence voluntarily is a revolutionary departure from Hughton''s norms.

It can also be observed that Martin and Bassong are major figures in a side lacking obvious 1st xi leaders. Shooting generals at this late stage could be construed as a temporary refuge of crumbling regime. If you jettison the methodology that has ground you points and that has been so meticulously and painfully constructed, what do you turn to and what message do you send to those who have followed you (perhaps even against their own desires and instincts)?

The irony is that for all the enduring criticism, the prosaic strategy and the impervious shell of "this is my way", it was rather abandoned on a day - and at a point in the season - when consistency of message was perhaps more important.

pretentious, moi?

Graham Paddons Beard · March 15, 2014

I''m afraid various words spring to mind. Desperation, Uncertainty, Beligerence, and yes , Panic. We saw the start of this with Wes drafted back from the wilderness, when Howson or even Pilkington made more sense, given CH''s preferred system. Now 5 changes, players that clearly have not felt the warmth of CH''s affections , are back, and then a bizarre and deperate triple substitution from a gang of coaches who seemingly hate making subsitutions.

Nope, Mr H has lost the plot. He doesn''t know what his best team is, or what to do next. He even struggles with selecting a Captain.

morty · March 15, 2014

Funny how after the fact everyone disagrees with the changes.Lots of folk have been complaining about Bassong.Lots of folk wanted the return of Whittaker, and had been critical of Martin.And frankly, on paper, the substitutions worked.

Bill · March 15, 2014

"Shakespeare might have said "methinks he doth protest too much".but he didn''t

Houston Canary · March 16, 2014

Chaucer would have added that the draught of Hughton''s tactics hath percid to the roote of our team''s confidence. Our horse were good, but the results nat gae.

Bill · March 16, 2014

[quote user="Houston Canary"]Chaucer would have added that the draught of Hughton''s tactics hath percid to the roote of our team''s confidence. Our horse were good, but the results nat gae.[/quote]

You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately...
Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!

Parma Ham's gone mouldy · March 16, 2014

5 changes is a departure from the norm. In principle the benefits of a drilled methodology come at the point where others suffer as the tension rises. Under pressure players revert to the mean and their underlying faults are more likely to be expressed.

The repetitive approach is beneficial at such a time as it has rewired the base level and this level should be the minimum even under pressure. The calm demeanour and repeated press conference phrases are designed to reinforce this " nothing has changed, carry on as before (there is no pressure).

Yes Bassong made mistakes and might need a refocus week. Yes Whittaker is more adventurous than Martin.

Yes Howson needs game time.

Yes Pilkington has a goal in him from outside the box (where we have opportunities with our style)

Yes Hooper for RVW is reasonable.

But all 5 in a key game? A hitherto rarely seen triple substitution?

Having followed a repeated methodology, what might the players now be thinking..?

Graham Paddons Beard · March 16, 2014

Posters not favouring change should re read this post. It''s not about slagging off CH, it about a fundamental change in way beyond anything we have seen before. Is it through a dawning of change of intent ,if you will a change from a psychological and behavioural path, or blind panic?

Parma Ham's gone mouldy · March 16, 2014

Observation is not to be confused with opinion, though analysing a methodology - and endeavouring to explain the rationale or theory behind an approach or theory - inevitably highlights departures from the pattern.

Some evidence is more instructive than others. The Stoke performance was archetypal of some of the sterile adherence

to a process above and beyond the actualite'' of circumstances. Whilst understandably frustrating for some to watch, there is a fixed and distinct coaching logic to it.

It is therefore a legitimate question to ask what changed between Stoke (a fairly extreme example of ignoring circumstances to further drill and rely on the methodology - even against 10 men if highly limited ambition, defending deep, with no pace on the break) and Southampton (a fluid side, with a tendency to over commit)?

The 5 changes and the triple substitution do indeed highlight an inconsistency of purpose at the very point when it is required. Any analysis offered on occasion during the season was to explain the thinking behind a strategy, approach, coaching technique or managerial device, not necessarily an endorsement of it.

The departure from a clear methodology at such a critical juncture, particularly when simultaneously undermining hitherto trusted and defended major personalities, is incongruous and will trigger questions that do not have obvious immediate answers. Did Hughton decide of his own volition to make such a dramatic departure from the norm? Did he feel pressure to seen to be doing something? Did he truly find out he would be replaced in the summer and throw a few cards in the air?

The odds remain that Norwich will (just) survive. The nerves are beginning to show in the wrong places though. Even if the approach was frustrating for some, it was a clear message and structure that the players could revert to and take familiar comfort in when the shells of pressure were landing. Having spent a season deflecting pressure in a prosaic, but consistent way, why is this a good time to change?

basil brush · March 16, 2014

The personnel isn''t that important under CH. His tactics are the problem and some of the national press have been on to that for some time (The Guardian being the most critical of CH).

Rock The Boat · March 17, 2014

Looking at the big picture Hughton''s tactics are understandable. You need about one point per game throughput the season to survive, make a few one-nil wins and you can make the magical 40-point mark over the course of the season.

This requires you to play tight and not concede a goal. It may not produce pretty football but it achieves the objective.

The problem with this approach is that it does not account for the dynamics of any particular game. There are times when you need to abandon the cautious approach and just go for it. If you''re 1-0 down at the hour mark, for example you have to make an assessment. Do you change this around to be more attacking knowing that you might concede a second?

It is a risk and a gamble but that is what managers are paid to do, and the best managers are those who know when to stick and when to twist.

I think Hughton does not show these characteristics. Perhaps he doesn''t read a game particularly well, perhaps he is adverse to risk thinking that in the long-term his big strategy will be successful. This is perhaps his biggest weakness and for fans it is more obvious because the previous manager was very good at reading a game and making tactical changes and substitutions to win late in a match.Remember how we used to be known for scoring in the final quarter time period of games?

There''s another point to twisting instead of twisting and that is, it re-invigorates a match when things are changed around and a crowd can feed off that, increasing excitement levels, so that at the ninetieth minute there can still be a buzz around the ground. Whereas if you are still playing the same rigid unexciting structure at the death, perhaps trying to kill the game you''re drawing, then it can drain the excitement out of a match as everybody can see you''re grinding out another bore draw.

In conclusion Hughton doesn''t have a plan B when one is needed. Substitutions are usually made late in the game and are like-for-like players. There''s no gambling on ''going for it'' and the spectacle becomes a pretty dull affair.

We''ve had the current manager for two seasons and in this time I think he has proved he can keep a side in the Premiership but it is always likely to be hanging on to survival. If survival is enough for the club then they may well continue with the current manager into next season if we can stay up this season, because in their eyes he has fulfilled his remit.

And there''s the disconnect between the club and the fans. It seems that the club is happy enough if we avoid relegation and they budgeted for a sixteenth place finish which backs up their expectations. However, the fans want more than just survival, naturally enough they want to see their team competing and not just grinding out a one-nil in a rigid, defensive structure.

So if the club wants the team to develop to the next level they will need a manager with the skills to know when to stick and when to change the structure, both for dealing with different opponents and during the dynamics of a game itself.

The irony is that the previous manager had those skills in abundance, and we need to be looking for someone with similar qualities.

PurpleCanary · March 17, 2014

[quote user="Rock The Boat"]Looking at the big picture Hughton''s tactics are understandable. You need about one point per game throughput the season to survive, make a few one-nil wins and you can make the magical 40-point mark over the course of the season.