Mick Dennis article on Hughton on my football writer

[Waveney Canary 0]

Mick is a fanatical hughton inner. In his words if you have followed him he has looked to apologise for hughton at every turn. The damaging thing about his views are that he is close to the board and will be filling their heads with his apologist views.

Charlie Wyett of the sun is one of us and is much more balanced and has a more rounded view of hapless''s performance. Problem is he isn''t close to the board.

I know Mick occasionally reads this messageboard I hope he reflects and takes a more balanced view in the future.

Otbc

[morty 0]

I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/

[Waveney Canary 0]

[quote user="morty"]I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/[/quote]

No it''s not. Once again there is not a shred of he could and should have done better about it. Taking Wes off was made there were loads of moans and groans as he did and it not the first time this season his substitutions have been ineffective.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Thorpe end canary"][quote user="morty"]I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/[/quote]

No it''s not. Once again there is not a shred of he could and should have done better about it. Taking Wes off was made there were loads of moans and groans as he did and it not the first time this season his substitutions have been ineffective.[/quote]You''re entitled to your opinion[Y]

[Waveney Canary 0]

I meant mad

[Nuff Said 5,967]

[quote user="Thorpe end canary"]Mick is a fanatical hughton inner. In his words if you have followed him he has looked to apologise for hughton at every turn. The damaging thing about his views are that he is close to the board and will be filling their heads with his apologist views.

Charlie Wyett of the sun is one of us and is much more balanced and has a more rounded view of hapless''s performance. Problem is he isn''t close to the board.

I know Mick occasionally reads this messageboard I hope he reflects and takes a more balanced view in the future.

Otbc[/quote]We all realised long ago you''re a deluded troll but the idea of him reading your post and being influenced by it is your most fantastic  flight of fantasy yet.

[Dubai Mark 0]

Didnt Mick Dennis hit the nail on the head and the truth is hard to take?

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="morty"]I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/[/quote]Well, yesterday morty you said there was no such thing as unbiased journalism. And if you think that Dennis piece is balanced then you have a strange idea of equilibrium. The Outers are demonised thus:And so, as despondent home fans sloped home that evening, there was much ill-considered talk about how the substitution had cost us the match. The adjectives “negative” and clueless” were casually tossed in. Later, the deeply offensive picture of Hughton as a clown reappeared on Facebook.

The story of the game was rewritten with an almost Stalinist zeal by people whose minds are made up and closed. The “outers” are so convinced of their case that every event affecting our club is seen through the prism of that conviction. Every set-back is Hughton’s fault.How to plump us a weak argument? Throw the word Stalinist in there. Or an example from the idiotic fringe of the "social" media. Not a word about the closed minds of many Inners. About their increasingly desperate justifications. And nothing about the sensible Outer case; namely that under Hughton we are regressing from last season. Which is fact rather than an opinion. Unless something rather weird happens we will finish with fewer points than last season.

[William Darby 0]

I thought Uncle Joe was on our side. If that was the case does that mean Mick is a........?

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="morty"]I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.

http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/
[/quote]

Well, yesterday morty you said there was no such thing as unbiased journalism. And if you think that Dennis piece is balanced then you have a strange idea of equilibrium. The Outers are demonised thus:

And so, as despondent home fans sloped home that evening, there was much ill-considered talk about how the substitution had cost us the match. The adjectives “negative” and clueless” were casually tossed in. Later, the deeply offensive picture of Hughton as a clown reappeared on Facebook.

The story of the game was rewritten with an almost Stalinist zeal by people whose minds are made up and closed. The “outers” are so convinced of their case that every event affecting our club is seen through the prism of that conviction. Every set-back is Hughton’s fault.

How to plump us a weak argument? Throw the word Stalinist in there. Or an example from the idiotic fringe of the "social" media. Not a word about the closed minds of many Inners. About their increasingly desperate justifications. And nothing about the sensible Outer case; namely that under Hughton we are regressing from last season. Which is fact rather than an opinion. Unless something rather weird happens we will finish with fewer points than last season.

[/quote]

You only have to remember his "unbiased" reporting about "our Glen" to see where he sits.

It''s not the whole board he is in with just one or two!

[morty 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="morty"]I just read it myself, its a good, balanced article.http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter.com/2014/03/11/it-all-boils-down-to-expectations-and-for-those-who-think-change-equates-to-improvement-think-again/[/quote]Well, yesterday morty you said there was no such thing as unbiased journalism. And if you think that Dennis piece is balanced then you have a strange idea of equilibrium. The Outers are demonised thus:And so, as despondent home fans sloped home that evening, there was much ill-considered talk about how the substitution had cost us the match. The adjectives “negative” and clueless” were casually tossed in. Later, the deeply offensive picture of Hughton as a clown reappeared on Facebook.

The story of the game was rewritten with an almost Stalinist zeal by people whose minds are made up and closed. The “outers” are so convinced of their case that every event affecting our club is seen through the prism of that conviction. Every set-back is Hughton’s fault.How to plump us a weak argument? Throw the word Stalinist in there. Or an example from the idiotic fringe of the "social" media. Not a word about the closed minds of many Inners. About their increasingly desperate justifications. And nothing about the sensible Outer case; namely that under Hughton we are regressing from last season. Which is fact rather than an opinion. Unless something rather weird happens we will finish with fewer points than last season.

[/quote]Or perhaps you have become so polarised in your opinion that when common sense is spoken, you are unable to see it?And your last paragraph there certainly backs this opinion.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Dubai Mark"]Didnt Mick Dennis hit the nail on the head and the truth is hard to take?[/quote][Y]

[ron obvious 1,711]

One thing I really do not understand PC: who are the "closed minded inners"? I really don''t see any. All I see are some who think Hughton is not the worst manager in the world, whereas there are (or appear to be) many "outers" who are completely over the top in their hatred. I know you aren''t one of them, & there are many good arguments against Chris, but the Imbalance does seem ridiculously lop sided.

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="morty"]Or perhaps you have become so polarised in your opinion that when common sense is spoken, you are unable to see it?And your last paragraph there certainly backs this opinion.[/quote]My opinion is that Hughton''s flaws outweigh his virtues, as evidenced by the hard facts that we are accumulating fewer points per game than last season and than the season before, but that there has never been a time this season when it would have been sensible to sack him. That sounds pretty balanced and not at all polarised to me.

[morty 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="morty"]Or perhaps you have become so polarised in your opinion that when common sense is spoken, you are unable to see it?And your last paragraph there certainly backs this opinion.[/quote]My opinion is that Hughton''s flaws outweigh his virtues, as evidenced by the hard facts that we are accumulating fewer points per game than last season and than the season before, but that there has never been a time this season when it would have been sensible to sack him. That sounds pretty balanced and not at all polarised to me.[/quote]So who are these closed minded inners that you speak of (LDC doesn''t count)?

[wooster 134]

It does seem highly probable that Wes was tired after 3 games in a week, having played little up until that week and it is undoubtedly the case that Howson needed match time.  So the change was sensible at the point it was made.

 

With hindsight, it might have been better to play Howson from the start and then bring Wes on after the sending off, assuming everything else would have happened as it did. 

 

But it wouldn''t have done, emphasising the pointlessness of analysing decisions made in real-time after the fact.

[ron obvious 1,711]

LDC isn''t a closed minded inner. He''s a cock-eyed optimist, which is something different altogether, & cock-eyed optimism is something I rather admire.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]LDC isn''t a closed minded inner. He''s a cock-eyed optimist, which is something different altogether, & cock-eyed optimism is something I rather admire.[/quote]Damn, I always get those two mixed up.[;)]

[ron obvious 1,711]

For the avoidance of ambiguity, Morty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0DusO6ipLw

See, not a mention of Hughton anywhere.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]For the avoidance of ambiguity, Morty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0DusO6ipLw

See, not a mention of Hughton anywhere.[/quote]Very good![:D]

[CanaryOne 0]

The same Mick Dennis that gave his full support and backing to Glen Roeder , bloke is completely removed from reality and writes utter garbage like his Norwich will not sell Hoolahan to Villa under any circumstances that McNally put well and truly to bed in his interview.

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="morty"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="morty"]Or perhaps you have become so polarised in your opinion that when common sense is spoken, you are unable to see it?And your last paragraph there certainly backs this opinion.[/quote]My opinion is that Hughton''s flaws outweigh his virtues, as evidenced by the hard facts that we are accumulating fewer points per game than last season and than the season before, but that there has never been a time this season when it would have been sensible to sack him. That sounds pretty balanced and not at all polarised to me.[/quote]So who are these closed minded inners that you speak of (LDC doesn''t count)?[/quote]Oh morty, you are priceless. I am allowed to name anyone I like to justify my description apart from those who fit the description! Ok, I used closed minds to descibe the Hughton supporters because I was parroting Mick Dennis'' term of abuse against the Outers. It was a short-form.But there are certainly people who have grown increasingly desperate in their defence of Hughton, as with Dennis''s schoolboy vitriol here. And (although Dennis is not guilty in this case) have resorted to the false argument of saying Norwich fans had absurd expecations of the kind of improvement Bowkett demanded at the start of the season and so are unhappy it has not materialised.There may be some idiots who expected a top-ten finish, but - as said on several occasions - the sensible worry is not that we are not improving. It is that we are regressing rather than standing still.

[ron obvious 1,711]

Now then, PC, You''re a sensible chap so know the plain truth; we cannot keep improving year-on-year, it''s logically impossible (unless we join some pan-galactic super-league, perhaps located in hyperspace?? ... AARGH! no, I''m keeping clear of that one ....). We can, at best, bump up & down in this division, having good years & bad years; over decades, we may bump ourselves further up the table, so as to oscillate from, say, 5th to 10th.

If we end up 17th this year it''s neither here nor there. Football is such an amazing game that with we could end up in the top half with only minor improvements (strikers hitting higher proportion of chances for example).

So does this mean Hughton is the best man for us? Not in my opinion. He cannot instill the necessary self-confidence in his players. He is a bit like an over controlling parent. But is he the worst? Not by a long chalk. It''s the Board''s responsibility to find a better one, & that''s no easy task.

We live in interesting times.

[Guest]

Purple, why do you believe we are regressing? The end of last season was utterly abysmal in terms of performances and results - we frequently had matches where there were no shots on targets.

If you take the current unfinished season and compare it to last season, then yes we have 4 points less this season than last. But factor in our injury troubles and it''s not surprising that we have found it difficult to find the same level of consistency.

I also believe that the number of clean sheets we have kept has improved markedly, and the style of football has improved a small amount.

I am not suggesting that our performances this season are acceptable, or that we are improving to any great degree. But I''m not sure where the evidence of a regressive trend comes from.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"]Now then, PC, You''re a sensible chap so know the plain truth; we cannot keep improving year-on-year, it''s logically impossible (unless we join some pan-galactic super-league, perhaps located in hyperspace?? ... AARGH! no, I''m keeping clear of that one ....). We can, at best, bump up & down in this division, having good years & bad years; over decades, we may bump ourselves further up the table, so as to oscillate from, say, 5th to 10th.

If we end up 17th this year it''s neither here nor there. Football is such an amazing game that with we could end up in the top half with only minor improvements (strikers hitting higher proportion of chances for example).

So does this mean Hughton is the best man for us? Not in my opinion. He cannot instill the necessary self-confidence in his players. He is a bit like an over controlling parent. But is he the worst? Not by a long chalk. It''s the Board''s responsibility to find a better one, & that''s no easy task.

We live in interesting times.[/quote]Great stuff Ron[Y]

[LostTheFaith 0]

Very balanced article.

Unlike this board which is dominate by a noisy minority who think they represent what almost all city fans want.

They do not . Hoots is on course to keep us up and keep his job.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

[quote user="KeepTheFaith"]Very balanced article.

Unlike this board which is dominate by a noisy minority who think they represent what almost all city fans want.

They do not . Hoots is on course to keep us up and keep his job.[/quote]

what makes you think it is a noisy minority on this board? Because you say it is?

at the minute i cannot think of one person who sits around me in Carrow Road, on coaches & trains to games or in bars before and after games that has said he is the right man for next season - although not many believe he should be sacked at this minute. So maybe it is not just a noisy minority on this board?

[morty 0]

[quote user="Rogue Baboon"]

[quote user="KeepTheFaith"]Very balanced article.

Unlike this board which is dominate by a noisy minority who think they represent what almost all city fans want.

They do not . Hoots is on course to keep us up and keep his job.[/quote]

what makes you think it is a noisy minority on this board? Because you say it is?

at the minute i cannot think of one person who sits around me in Carrow Road, on coaches & trains to games or in bars before and after games that has said he is the right man for next season - although not many believe he should be sacked at this minute. So maybe it is not just a noisy minority on this board?

[/quote]You are talking about two different things there though.The question as to whether or not he is the man for the job next season should be asked once this one is done, and we can reflect accurately on where we finished.So if all these people want him out, where are the "Hughton out" chants on matchdays?

[Nuff Said 5,967]

[quote user="CanaryOne"]The same Mick Dennis that gave his full support and backing to Glen Roeder , bloke is completely removed from reality and writes utter garbage like his Norwich will not sell Hoolahan to Villa under any circumstances that McNally put well and truly to bed in his interview.[/quote]Maybe there is other stuff I haven''t seen, but from what I remember of the article Mick Dennis wrote that got so many people up in arms, it was  an attempt to illustrate the fact that there was a human aspect to the situation, as well as a football one. He wrote about being in a room at Carrow Road with Roeder and members of his family while a sizable group of people chanted for his removal outside. While I think most of us wanted Roeder gone, his article made a decent point that there are people involved as well as NCFC, some who are only there by accident, and they don''t deserve to be the object of a baying mob.Of course I could be wrong, in which case I''m sure you''ll post some evidence to back up that Dennis "gave his full support and backing to Glen Roeder." Or withdraw what you said.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

So we no longer have inners and outers. We now have have the inners-til-the-end-of-the-season''ers as well to add to the party, which i think is where the majority of fans lie. Many have people have said that''s when it will be looked at - it may be that they stick, twist, or stick with CH but change the backroom staff (i think that could be just as good as twisting all together)

as for hughton out chants on matchdays, well what exactly will that do when most people on the inner and outer divide can see that change now would be disasterous?