Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Matt Morriss

Chris Hughton is @#£%&#£ Clueless

Recommended Posts

I''ll keep this brief, the substitution of Wes Hoolahan today was the most inept display of football management I have seen since Carlton Palmer getting picked for England.

You do not take off the best player on the pitch, your most creative and attacking player, when your winning. Maybe on 85 mins. But not with 25mins+ still to go. This was worse than Hughtons West Ham decisions.

Absolutely clueless. He plucked a draw from the jaws of victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have made a bad mistake sticking with him , absolutely terrible manger and our chances of staying up would still be greatly improved if his sorry ass was kicked out tomorrow .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually think we''ll stay up, but it will be another crawl over the line again like last yr.

Too late to change now so I just hope McNally has made his mind up and will swing the axe in the summer.

Guy on canary call called it spot on. As the game wore on it would have opened up with Stoke pushing for the winner, Wes would have then exploited the open space. Taking him off nullified our attacking threat.

The guy learnt nothing from his West Ham mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the equaliser I meant, which they were seconds before we countered and Wes sent a sublime pass out to Redmond who mis controlled it out for a throw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK! I thought you''d really lost it this time...

 

It''s got to the point where any substitution made or not made would get this reaction. If I had my way Redmond would have been off at half-time and Hooper on for RVW soon after. But what do I know..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m sorry but there''s simply no excusing Hughtons decision to take off Wes. If anyone thinks that was the right move they just don''t know football full stop.

No manager in the league would have made that decision. Wes was having a great game, was fresh, wasn''t giving the ball away, was still instrumental in everything attack wise we did. His sub completely nullified our attacking threat, so much so that I''m quite certain we failed to muster a shot on goal after his sub, even against 10 men and with two strikers.

You do not take off your best attacking player, not only your best attacking player, but the best player on the pitch up til that point, when your winning. It was tactically inept and totally clueless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
If I had my way Hoolahan wouldn''t have even been allowed near the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job you don''t then isn''t it. We can all have our opinions on the transfer request and the not celebrating last week but fact is Wes is still the best player at the club and is still the same player that a certain ex manager recognised and built the team around that got us here in the first @#£%&£@ place!

Shame some fans and our joke of a manager can''t see this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Totally agree with the OP.

Not only is the best form of defence attack. We were sitting pretty, Stoke needing to come forward to achieve an equaliser & leaving themselves open for the counter-punch. We had them by the wrinklies.

Howson''s a good player so not unhappy he came on - but for Hoolahan so far from the finish line meant we wouldn''t be able to counter if Stoke was to score. With Bassong in our defence - the opposition scoring is very lightly.

Decision made to look even more a disaster when Stoke went down to 10 men. Hoolahan against 10 men is a Norwich fan''s dream come true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rather have Chris Hughton at the club than Wes now. At least until the end of the season. He is the manager and the team need to back him to survive relegation. Would only play Wes at Carrow Road against the ''lesser'' teams, where he is most effective. He also played 70 odd minutes for Ireland midweek, and may have been tiring, as he did against Villa. If you want to blame anyone for the point''s dropped from a winning position. It was Bassong''s fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry but the OP is clueless .

We did not win because of a defensive error and nothing todo with taking Hoolahan odd. Same as west spam.

You lot make up reasons to bash Hoots.

Sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you know that KeepTheFaith?

How do you know they would even have been in our penalty areas? How do you know that we wouldn''t have scored another goal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you know that if Hoolahan had stayed on he would not have made a couple of mistakes and cost us two goals????

It works both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes it does work both ways. But you are the one who claims that taking Hoolahan off didn''t influence the result.

I have not claimed the opposite, so it is you who thinks they have some sort of Mystic Meg superpowers.

I have no idea whether keeping Hoolahan on would have changed the result, but I do know that I don''t want to see Norwich trying to defend a one goal lead for half an hour at home to Stoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There should have been a competition each week run by Norwich City FC to select a couple of random fans to do the substitutions and change the on-field formation or tactics during the game.

Throughout the season it’s unlikely they would have done a worse job that Hughton and his assistants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="KeepTheFaith"]Sorry but the OP is clueless .

We did not win because of a defensive error and nothing todo with taking Hoolahan odd. Same as west spam.

You lot make up reasons to bash Hoots.

Sad.[/quote]

That.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny how we see things differently

We were talking about the game needing Howson''s ''thrusts'', and were saying that Hoolahan was the obvious choice for replacing, as he wasn''t getting forward enough to support RVW. The other consideration was taking off Redmond for Howson, but that would have meant a whole change of tactics.

The whole team was ''flat'' perhaps we have too may internationals in our squad these days! :)

Btw, no one had a great game yesterday. Stoke are the worst side I have seen this season, and were there for the taking. How on earth did they beat Arsenal?

We just were not sharp enough on the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Right angry kid lets spell this out for you. Last 3 games were Stoke and we were pretty shite and Judas Hoolahan played, Villa and we were pretty shite and Judas Hoolahan played,Spurs and we were great and Judas Hoolahan wasn''t even on the bench.

There is a bad apple upstting the apple cart and he needs to left sitting at home wan king over Lamberts picture.

Are you getting it yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Wes looked pretty tired to me. Hadn''t he played 2 full games in the previous 6 days, having not played much recently? I thought he was having less and less influence as the match went on, and I think in the absence of Fer Howson was the obvious choice for this match.

Also, Wes was hardly having a blinding game. The way you drama queens talk he was on a hat trick or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
[quote user="NodgeFan"]Hoolahan came on as a sub against Spurs[/quote]

I apologise you''re right. Scrub that to should not have been on the bench then. [Walks away to hide]...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Inchy..... I admire you conviction.... But tone it down a little!? You have formed your own connection and scapegoat for the dire performances.... IMO: your suggestion wes is to blame is so daft it makes me laugh... But each to their own, no? Or is it a case of "if you dont agree with me you know nothing about football"? I hate seeing that ... Even if it''s something I agree with... Like the OP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CH is clueless when it comes to team selection and substitutions however I compleatly agreed with the wes sub, he was getting out muscled at every opportunity stoke is not the sort of game in which to utilise hoolahan.

Howson is a lot more physical and can pick out a pass at will when used in the right position behind the strikers however when he came on he was told to sit back now that''s my issue!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never discard out of hand what any poster has to say. However I didn''t see us sit back after the substitutions. Howson is as much of an attacking threat as Wes. Just different. Fresh legs who probably would have started if fully fit.

 

There is an element of seeing what we want to see about the Wes substitution. Back in August at Hull we brought Wes on for the last 20 minutes against 10 men but that old magic didn''t have a field day or in fact create anything of note.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was always Hughton''s plan to bring Howson on with 20 to play in order to get him some game time after coming back from injury. I fully expect Howson to start from now on with Fer injured and Wes will drop back to the bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who would be a manager? We have been slating Hughton for making his substitutions too late. Now we are criticising him for making them too early.

I don''t know why he took Wes off, perhaps we never shall, but it would not surprise me if he was back in the "sneak a goal and then defend like mad" mindset. I''m slating him again!

Hughton has the endless capacity to make decisions which annoy or bemuse us. Whether these are his decisions or ones made by him with his assistants, somehow they seem to get them wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that if you want to raise the tempo of the game Howson for Hoolahan is a good choice.

Howson may not have the individual skill of Hoolahan and the momentary brilliance, but I think he is a better all round team player. He never seems to stop running and tries to keep passing. He''s more physical as well.

I didn''t think it was a bad substitution. I don''t even think it was risky, and don''t feel it lead to the goal. It''s not like the formation changed.

And by the way I thought he got that spot on. When they went down to ten men he knew the space would open up out wide so threw on two strikers. It nearly paid off, but it didn''t.

After the first half I don''t think you could really question taking anyone off, it wasn''t like anyone was having a particular blinder apart from maybe Ruddy.

If I''m honest, looking at Redmond, I would have started with fresh legs and had Pilkington out on the wing. Redmond coming on for the last 20-25 would have really taken it''s toll on tired old legs.

Although saying that I guess you could have kept RVW on and brought Pilkington on out wide.

As for Snoddy, he gets a lot of stick but the reality is at the moment he is one of the few players looking likely to create a goal-scoring chance or to score himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"]I''ll keep this brief, the substitution of Wes Hoolahan today was the most inept display of football management I have seen since Carlton Palmer getting picked for England.

You do not take off the best player on the pitch, your most creative and attacking player, when your winning. Maybe on 85 mins. But not with 25mins+ still to go. This was worse than Hughtons West Ham decisions.

Absolutely clueless. He plucked a draw from the jaws of victory.[/quote]

and yet he''s a professional football manager and you are just someone banging away on a laptop...

So he cant be more clueless than you or I.. can he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Salopian"]I don''t know why he took Wes off, perhaps we never shall, but it would not surprise me if he was back in the "sneak a goal and then defend like mad" mindset. I''m slating him again! .[/quote]Well if you are slating him, most of the Sunday press journalists are doing the same Salopian. Because I''ve read a good selection of them over lunchtime, and they all pretty much say the same thing. Cautious, conservative, negative, are just some of words used to describe his efforts yesterday.I''ve criticised Wes over his antics over the past couple of months, but he was, by some distance, our most creative player yesterday, and quite why Hughton saw fit to remove him when he did is anyone''s guess.It was no coincidence that when Norwich had a man advantage coincided with the time we looked most clueless, predictable and toothless. OK , I know Stoke put 10 men behind the ball almost immediately after Walters saw red, but if you have pretensions of being a Prem manager, you forsee that sort of thing, and have a number of plans up your sleeve. On the strength of what I saw in the final half hour, I simply cannot see where, with Hughton''s mindset, we are going to score the goals that will garner the remaining points to guarantee survival. We cannot keep relying on set-pieces to sneak the odd goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...