Reasons we are down

[Yellowhammer 95]

1 keeping chris far too long

2 playing one up front

3 swapping the team around constantly

Like to have seen us really go for it at Chelsea instead of playing safe should have played the wolf hooper and elmander up front Johnson howson and Redmond midfield with the back four as played like to have seen us play two strikers up front for most of season with settled team , 72 season we played with 11 regulars mostly who new exactly what each other would do and play , two strikers bone and cross who supported each other , support your strikers get the ball to them and you will score .

Stringer and Forbes were like a wall at the back again they could read each other like a book .

Lets go for it against arsenal and play three up front and see what happens .

[Canary On The Wire 0]

Yep it''s the one up front that''s the problem...not at all the tactical approach throughout the team tasked with creating goalscoring opportunities....

and football is exactly the same as it was in 1972...

Jesus.

[Hoolahans Left Foot 0]

One reason - Mr Christopher Houghton....................

[mrs miggins 0]

one reason- not getting enough points

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Playing one up front did not relegate us. There are many teams who use that system.

What relegated us is bad luck, poor management and under-performing players. Pretty much what relegated the other two teams, and also those just outside the zone.

Its not what you do when you go down, its how you respond when you get up again.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

WE DINT DO ENUF HIN TRAYNIN NEEEYUL!!!!!

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]one reason- not getting enough points[/quote]Lets be a bit more specific on this Miggo. In our matches against the other seven teams in the current bottom eight, there were 42 points on offer. We have taken twelve, yes twelve of them.That , in short, is the reason why we are going down.

[# 0]

No one listened to me until it was too late! [;)]

[swjf50 0]

the board didn''t recognise the problems we had last season under CH. Only 2 fluke results against Man City and WBA who weren''t bothered saved us from the drop.

OK so CH kept us up, just, but that poor form continued. This season we couldn''t score and were regularly leaking goals, which surely is a sign that we are or weren''t good enough. Little creativity and no attacking threat can be added to the list.

I also question whether the coaching staff were good enough. I think they were woefully short of ideas and inspiration. I think a good coach and manager would have got more out of the players we had. Look at Crystal Palace. I wouldn''t say that man to man they are any better than our team on paper, but put Pullis in charge and what happens, they get some terrific results.

We need a motivator, someone with experience who can inspire the team and coaching staff who have ideas/knowledge.

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

[quote user="swjf50"]. Only 2 fluke results against Man City and WBA who weren''t bothered saved us from the drop. .[/quote]

 

We could have lost both those games and we would still not have been relegated (sigh).

 

This year I don''t think it''s anything to do with playing one up front - few Prem teams start games with two up front.  The main problem for me is that we let Holt go and spent £13.5m on two strikers very different from Holt who needed the team to play in a different way to be effective.  Then we played in a way that was totally unsuited to them - the biggest signings we have ever made.  Also, we lost the defensive solidity which we''d had under Hughton the year before, especially away from home where under Hughton we lost 12 of 16 games.

 

Could we have changed the way we play to get the ball regularly to players like RVW and Hooper in goal-scoring positions ?  I''m damned sure Hughton should have known the answer to this before he spent the money on them, but clearly he didn''t.

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="72season"]1 keeping chris far too long

2 playing one up front

3 swapping the team around constantly

Like to have seen us really go for it at Chelsea instead of playing safe should have played the wolf hooper and elmander up front Johnson howson and Redmond midfield with the back four as played like to have seen us play two strikers up front for most of season with settled team , 72 season we played with 11 regulars mostly who new exactly what each other would do and play , two strikers bone and cross who supported each other , support your strikers get the ball to them and you will score .

Stringer and Forbes were like a wall at the back again they could read each other like a book .

Lets go for it against arsenal and play three up front and see what happens .[/quote]

We would have been slaughtered had we "gone for it" even with 15 minutes to go. Let''s face facts, even with the defensive strategy that NA played, time and time again Chelsea were unlucky not to have scored. Our players did play well but without doubt we also had a large slice of luck in front of our own goal. The revelation for me was how exciting we looked up front with Redmond replacing Elmander in the striker role, for the first time this season, with the result that we so nearly pinched all three points.

As for why we have been relegated, it is clearly down to the fact that our Board, having appointed Chris Hughton in the first place, clung too long to the hope that he would come good, and vindicate their faith in him. He should have been sacked long before the Swansea away game but most certainly within minutes of the final whistle of that match. I went and it was the most abject, abysmal performance I have ever personally witnessed from a Norwich team. Hughton should have gone after Cardiff away and failing, that , after Southampton away. He''s the reason we went down but the ultimate responsibility is the Board''s. Having survived the first two seasons in the PL it was criminal that we failed to consolidate our position in the third season.

[ZLF 335]

We were on the road to safety until the all round calamity that was west brom at home.    Draw that we retain confidence and west brom are under real pressure.     Win it and we would be all but safe.

 

But in addition our failures were, in order for me

• Inability to play to our strikers strengths & the woeful creativity from midfield.
• Performances from our strikers
• Inability to retain possession in midfield - the persistent picking of players who both gave the ball away and were unable to win it back
• 2 managers who always seemed to think we would pick up points tomorrow, rather than in the current match.
• Bizarre fixation by both managers at swapping around / disrupting the back 4 (while leaving the front 6 unchanged) as if that was the problem area - bassong was not the reason we got relegated - it was the front 6.
• lack of squad harmony
• lack of self belief
• Obessission of appearance of effort over actual ability
• Selected team not playing to their full potential.    Too many (and not just BJ) players had matches where more than a third of their passes were to opponents - thats basic incompetence.

[Since 1980 27]

We know why we are down. WE DON''T NEED POSTS TELLING US WHY.

[Salopian 1]

I think that we overestimated the ability within the squad, and in the end they were just not good enough. The signings seemed mouth-wateringly good, but really only Olsson in the end justified his reputation.

The "not good enough" would include strikers who couldn''t, defenders who struggled with pace,and players who lost effectiveness or couldn''t be bothered. Above all, passes were error strewn, and players (through fear?) were not prepared to run into space to receive the ball. We scored fewer than virtually all other teams, and conceded more goals than most other teams. However you look at it, we were not good enough.

We shall see what players are sought by other Premiership teams, but it is likely to be only two or three. The remainder of the squad are either just about Premiership quality, or not up to it. We lacked an outstandingly good player who could turn a game round with his own ability. I thought that Fer might become this, but he didn''t.

I don''t think that playing one striker in itself contributed. I think it was more that we lacked a quality striker, and this was reinforced or created by poor service. Neither do I think that the team was swapped too often - for a long while Hughton was accused of having favourites in his unwillingness to make changes, and he did have both strikers out for long periods.

Mourinho criticised us for parking a bus. It was really the case that he wanted us to attack, because the pace of his attackers would have cut our defence to pieces. Adams recognised this.

I do agree with the suggestion that we kept Hughton too long. With all apologies to the few who are still insisting that if the manager had stopped to the end of the season he would have saved us. We were a poor and predictable side from January onwards, and he overstayed his effectiveness.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="Salopian"]. We were a poor and predictable side from January onwards, and he overstayed his effectiveness.[/quote]If only that were true Salopian. The rot set in LONG before that. Last season, to be precise. Surely you remember some of the dreadful displays in winter/spring last year ?We got lucky and stayed up by the skin of our teeth last year. This time our luck ran out. Me ? I''d have replaced Hughton last summer. Failing that, after the Man C and Liverpool fiascoes in autumn.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="mrs miggins"]one reason- not getting enough points[/quote]Lets be a bit more specific on this Miggo. In our matches against the other seven teams in the current bottom eight, there were 42 points on offer. We have taken twelve, yes twelve of them.That , in short, is the reason why we are going down.[/quote]

 

I keep seeing this said but it''s not true. Sunderland were just as bad against these clubs. If we''d won two more games against anyone we''d be ok. Too many things are taken as read on here. Like the ridiculous claim that we''d have got more points if we''d sacked Hughton earlier. We may have done. Or we may have got less. I guess we''ll never know. But nothing that happened since suggest we would have got more.

 

 

 

 

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="mrs miggins"]one reason- not getting enough points[/quote]

Lets be a bit more specific on this Miggo. In our matches against the other seven teams in the current bottom eight, there were 42 points on offer. We have taken twelve, yes twelve of them.

That , in short, is the reason why we are going down.
[/quote]

 

I keep seeing this said but it''s not true. Sunderland were just as bad against these clubs. If we''d won two more games against anyone we''d be ok. Too many things are taken as read on here. Like the ridiculous claim that we''d have got more points if we''d sacked Hughton earlier. We may have done. Or we may have got less. I guess we''ll never know. But nothing that happened since suggest we would have got more.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

But could it have been any worse than it''s turned out?

Our record for the season  sees us where we deserve to be, someone else might just have improved the performances and thus the points tally.

It''s all supposition but as I said, could we be in a worse position.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="mrs miggins"]one reason- not getting enough points[/quote]Lets be a bit more specific on this Miggo. In our matches against the other seven teams in the current bottom eight, there were 42 points on offer. We have taken twelve, yes twelve of them.That , in short, is the reason why we are going down.[/quote]

 

I keep seeing this said but it''s not true. Sunderland were just as bad against these clubs. If we''d won two more games against anyone we''d be ok. Too many things are taken as read on here. Like the ridiculous claim that we''d have got more points if we''d sacked Hughton earlier. We may have done. Or we may have got less. I guess we''ll never know. But nothing that happened since suggest we would have got more.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

But could it have been any worse than it''s turned out?

Our record for the season  sees us where we deserve to be, someone else might just have improved the performances and thus the points tally.

It''s all supposition but as I said, could we be in a worse position.

[/quote]No

[It's Character Forming 1,204]

It''s a ridiculous argument really.  If you''d done something different, you can never know for sure if things would have turned out better.  But on that basis, however disastrous things turn out, you''d never conclude you made a mistake. Most of us don''t need convincing mistakes have been made and this season could have been better !

 

I think the key mistakes were made in the changes to the squad last summer - the manager never had a proper plan to get the best out of the squad he assembled at great cost.  Hence the paradox that the team we had this season was arguably superior (or at least equal) in all positions on an individual basis compared to the last two seasons - yet has performed far worse.

[king canary 8,757]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"]

[quote user="swjf50"]. Only 2 fluke results against Man City and WBA who weren''t bothered saved us from the drop. .[/quote]

 

We could have lost both those games and we would still not have been relegated (sigh).

 

This year I don''t think it''s anything to do with playing one up front - few Prem teams start games with two up front.  The main problem for me is that we let Holt go and spent £13.5m on two strikers very different from Holt who needed the team to play in a different way to be effective.  Then we played in a way that was totally unsuited to them - the biggest signings we have ever made.  Also, we lost the defensive solidity which we''d had under Hughton the year before, especially away from home where under Hughton we lost 12 of 16 games.

 

Could we have changed the way we play to get the ball regularly to players like RVW and Hooper in goal-scoring positions ?  I''m damned sure Hughton should have known the answer to this before he spent the money on them, but clearly he didn''t.

[/quote]

This for me is bang on. We tried to use RVW as a target man which obviously didn''t suit him, played with inverted wingers all season when he looked like he could be a threat from crosses. With Hooper we built play too slowly and didn''t give him someone to slip passes in behind.

We looked the most effective when we had Hooper playing with Snodgrass, Fer and Redmond all getting forward to support him quickly but we didn''t see this anywhere near enough.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

It is a ridiculous argument ICF.NN above says'' if we''d won two more matches against anyone''...etc.But he completely misses the point . If we''d won just one more match (the home one v WBA ) we''d be almost certainly safe .The mistakes were made from an early stage by not gaining points v lower ranking sides. I know some folk reject it, but the pattern/standard was set in our failure to get anything v 10 man Hull in August.

[Yellow Wal 315]

Why did we go down?

Because the team was far less than the sum of the component parts.

We have some good players.

[SwindonCanary 457]

The reason we went down was due to the period from 2nd March to 12th

April when all the teams we played we could have beaten instead out of

the 7 matches we took one point from a possible 21

[Ketts Rebel 0]

I have thought and talked about this for long time but for me, in a nutshell, it was mostly due to a lack of motivators;

You need a motivator on the side line (manager) and a motivator on the pitch (captain).

We had motivators with Lambert and Holt. We had fighting, never give up attitude...inspired by them.

In the Premier League what you lack in spending power you must make up for in attitude, work rate etc. This is driven by motivators.

When Hughton came in, and then when Holt went...we lost that.

Simples.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"][quote user="mrs miggins"]one reason- not getting enough points[/quote]Lets be a bit more specific on this Miggo. In our matches against the other seven teams in the current bottom eight, there were 42 points on offer. We have taken twelve, yes twelve of them.That , in short, is the reason why we are going down.[/quote]

 

I keep seeing this said but it''s not true. Sunderland were just as bad against these clubs. If we''d won two more games against anyone we''d be ok. Too many things are taken as read on here. Like the ridiculous claim that we''d have got more points if we''d sacked Hughton earlier. We may have done. Or we may have got less. I guess we''ll never know. But nothing that happened since suggest we would have got more.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

But could it have been any worse than it''s turned out?

Our record for the season  sees us where we deserve to be, someone else might just have improved the performances and thus the points tally.

It''s all supposition but as I said, could we be in a worse position.

[/quote]

 

Of course we could. We could have been relegated weeks ago and finished bottom. Isn''t that worse? It''s true we are where we deserve to be. It''s always true. It was true last season and true all the time we remained out of the bottom three. As has been said we''d be virtually safe if we''d beaten WBA in Hoot''s last game. Most people, even the Hoot''s most avid critics, believed we''d win that game.

 

 

[jaemae2 0]

[quote user="GC"]One reason - Mr Christopher Houghton....................[/quote]

One reason- Each of our strikers is absolute garbage......................

We managed to score 28 goals (fewest in the league and not close, no I don''t count 4-5 goals as close). Our defense was actually middle of the road and we''d have been safe if Hooper, RvW could actually play at this level which they can''t.

[jaemae2 0]

[quote user="swjf50"]the board didn''t recognise the problems we had last season under CH. Only 2 fluke results against Man City and WBA who weren''t bothered saved us from the drop.

OK so CH kept us up, just, but that poor form continued. This season we couldn''t score and were regularly leaking goals, which surely is a sign that we are or weren''t good enough. Little creativity and no attacking threat can be added to the list.

I also question whether the coaching staff were good enough. I think they were woefully short of ideas and inspiration. I think a good coach and manager would have got more out of the players we had. Look at Crystal Palace. I wouldn''t say that man to man they are any better than our team on paper, but put Pullis in charge and what happens, they get some terrific results.

We need a motivator, someone with experience who can inspire the team and coaching staff who have ideas/knowledge.[/quote]

We "leaked" goals like a mid table team no worse than that at all. The defense wasn''t the issue. If the team had scored more we''d have been safe, it wasn''t the defense.

[jaemae2 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

We were on the road to safety until the all round calamity that was west brom at home.    Draw that we retain confidence and west brom are under real pressure.     Win it and we would be all but safe.

 

But in addition our failures were, in order for me

• Inability to play to our strikers strengths & the woeful creativity from midfield.
• Performances from our strikers
• Inability to retain possession in midfield - the persistent picking of players who both gave the ball away and were unable to win it back
• 2 managers who always seemed to think we would pick up points tomorrow, rather than in the current match.
• Bizarre fixation by both managers at swapping around / disrupting the back 4 (while leaving the front 6 unchanged) as if that was the problem area - bassong was not the reason we got relegated - it was the front 6.
• lack of squad harmony
• lack of self belief
• Obessission of appearance of effort over actual ability
• Selected team not playing to their full potential.    Too many (and not just BJ) players had matches where more than a third of their passes were to opponents - thats basic incompetence.

[/quote]

all of this is 100% correct.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

We didn''t attack well enough as a team and we didn''t defend well enough as a team. That combination got us relegated. I''m not confident changing the manager earlier in the season would have improved that. I''ve seen nothing to suggest it would.

 

 

[Kidderminster Exile 0]

Only 2 reasons

Bad Management and bad luck