and that, Ladies and gentlemen, is why the board have got it wrong....

[Syteanric 1]

defensive football, defensive substitutions and 1 shot on target all game.we were outplayed from start to finish by a team who were 2 divisions lower than us last season. it was obvious at half time our formation and the front 5 weren''t working yet it took a red card and 2 defensive substitutions to even get half a foot hold on the game.Why was Lafferty not bought on earlier? when olsson was sent off why did we take a midfielder off and bring a full back on instead of taking Whittaker off and bringing a centre back on and go 3-4-2?why was Tettey bought on? A defensive midfielder when down to 10 and a goal down?I thought we''d sacked Hughton.. clearly he wears a Neil Adams disguise now...its going to be one of those seasons....

[Highland Canary 76]

It was always going to be a disasterous appointment. We wasted the preseason. If we get Lennon in today rather than wasting the next 10 games we might manage to stay in the race.

[im spartacus canary 0]

i think the tettey substitution was arranged after the sending off to tighten things up but before the goal was conceded

[Bury Green 0]

The easy accusation will be one of a ''knee jerk'' after just one game, but it''s not, far from it.

It''s old news being given just five games at the end of last season but at any point then or today have the team looked remotely positive, we have carried on where we finished off.

Again the body language looked pretty suspect, Michael Turner looked like he''d downed an entire bottle of Diazepam, where was the leadership, the hunger, the desire in display today?

I''m just as convinced today as I was back in May that Adams was the wrong appointment, nice guy that he is as just can''t see how he''s going to reignite the fires at Carrow Rd.

Like most of us I really want him to succeed, obviously I wanted him to keep us up after the whole sorry saga of Cashmere Chris but I remain convinced he is doomed to fail and the sooner the board acts and brings in a manger with ''experience'' the better.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Totally agree BG

The by product of all this are threads stating it''s McNally''s fault.

I despair. This is not a knee jerk reaction as we all want Adams to do well but this game was far more disappointing than anticipated and strains my positivity which is indeed painful !

5 more games and if there is not a massive improvement I hope that Bowkett/McNally can convince the owners that their choice has to be relieved of his position.

[Bury Green 0]

If we had a League Cup 1st Round fixture away to Yeovil followed up by Exeter away I''d be feeling a whole lot more confident that the Chief Exec and Chairman would be tightening up their Bovver Boots.

But alas not, as already identified elsewhere the balance in a the Boardroom has undoubtedly shifted and here we are, witness to yet another insipid offering.

Dare I say it, in thirteen days time I wonder if there might be a whole lot more of us clamouring for the Board to make the change?

[65Vintage 5]

That''s it then - Conference football very soon!Reading the posts on here it''s quite clear we are totally doomed.Bought my season ticket, as I have for the past 28 years, but from what I''m hearing on here I don''t think I''ll bother turning up - waste of time as we''ll never win or score aparently.Perhaps someone will be kind enough to let me know when it''s worth turning up to a game - although reading everyones comments I assume everyone will be following my example!Anyone planning to turn up for our games?

[The Judge 0]

[quote user="Bury Green"]The easy accusation will be one of a ''knee jerk'' after just one game, but it''s not, far from it.

It''s old news being given just five games at the end of last season but at any point then or today have the team looked remotely positive, we have carried on where we finished off.

Again the body language looked pretty suspect, Michael Turner looked like he''d downed an entire bottle of Diazepam, where was the leadership, the hunger, the desire in display today?

I''m just as convinced today as I was back in May that Adams was the wrong appointment, nice guy that he is as just can''t see how he''s going to reignite the fires at Carrow Rd.

Like most of us I really want him to succeed, obviously I wanted him to keep us up after the whole sorry saga of Cashmere Chris but I remain convinced he is doomed to fail and the sooner the board acts and brings in a manger with ''experience'' the better.[/quote]

Spot on re lack of leaders. It was clear to nearly everyone last season we lacked any leadership on the pitch when things were going wrong - holt was our last leader on the pitch - someone who leads by example. Normally this should be your captain (but doesn''t have to be - Martin is certainly no leader) The success of lamberts signings in league 1 and the championship was that he picked hungry players looking to achieve, players that had been voted fans player of the season at their previous clubs ( and you get those for working your backside off not swanning around the pitch disinterested). On paper we should have a good enough team but those players need the motivation and leadership on the pitch to drive them forward. We must go all out to purchase 2 or 3 of these players to lift the rest of the squad who are in a depressing rut of knowing how to lose games rather than win them. Need to get on the phone quick - it''s not that we don''t have the money.

[Bury Green 0]

Spot on, from the first whilst to the final whistle I didn''t see anything to convince me there''s a real hunger and desire in the team.

Holt would dive, kick, annoy and generally get right up the noses of the opposition and their supporters, it wasn''t just the goals.

But what of today? Timid, meek and generally insipid.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Bury Yellow"]Totally agree BG

The by product of all this are threads stating it''s McNally''s fault.

I despair. This is not a knee jerk reaction as we all want Adams to do well but this game was far more disappointing than anticipated and strains my positivity which is indeed painful !

5 more games and if there is not a massive improvement I hope that Bowkett/McNally can convince the owners that their choice has to be relieved of his position.[/quote]As you must have been in the boardroom or have seen the minutes of the meeting can you just give the voting figures? Obviously Smith and Jones voted for Adams, and presumably Bowkett and McNally voted against, since it is an article of faith in your crackpot religion that any bad decision is down to the owners and anything sensible is achieved by the chairman and the CEO when the Stowmarket Two are at home playing scrabble. But which two (or was it all three?) of the other directors sided with Smith and Jones?PS. I won''t even bother to ask you to explain away a post of yours in July when you said the choice of Adams was a bad one that looked as if it might just come good. There is almost a touch of genius in that piece of cynical bet-hedging and trying to make sure that it if did work then you would be able to avoid giving any credit to S&J.

[Dubai Mark 0]

Now NA was not my choice...BUT...please...one game and a narrow away defeat is no time for such over the top reactions.

Sure we are all disappointed, but give the new set-up a decent period of time please.......perhaps 6 games is not enough, but that will give us some idea.........

[Mr Jenkins 0]

Usual suspects going over the top after one game, a 1 nil defeat away from home playing with ten men for a long period in the second half.

The usual pant wetters and one or two who should know better sadly having a little stir and persuing their own agenda.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

But when we lost to 10 man Hull last season, people argued it was because 10men are hard to play against.

Today we had 10men and lost, and people are saying it''s a contributing factor? Surely we should have been hard to play against?

So what is it?

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Rogue Baboon"]But when we lost to 10 man Hull last season, people argued it was because 10men are hard to play against.

Today we had 10men and lost, and people are saying it''s a contributing factor? Surely we should have been hard to play against?

So what is it?[/quote]because last season we needed a stick to beat hughton with... this season its defend Adams at all costs

[Cheap Cheap Cheap Canaries 0]

[quote user="Jenkins"]Usual suspects going over the top after one game, a 1 nil defeat away from home playing with ten men for a long period in the second half.

The usual pant wetters and one or two who should know better sadly having a little stir and persuing their own agenda.[/quote]And all the usual suspects who told us not to wet our pants because Hughton would keep us up are now getting behind what will turn out to be our worst managerial appointment ever . Adams has looked like little boy lost since day one , really would be far better to put him out of his misery now before he ends up as hated as Hughton .

[Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . . 0]

[quote user="Jenkins"]Usual suspects going over the top after one game, a 1 nil defeat away from home playing with ten men for a long period in the second half.

The usual pant wetters and one or two who should know better sadly having a little stir and persuing their own agenda.[/quote]

I''d suggest it''s the ''head in the sand'' types such as yourself who should know better. How did your ''keep the faith'' ''pant wetters'' ''adams will keep us up'' ''white flaggers'' guff work out last season?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Rogue Baboon"]But when we lost to 10 man Hull last season, people argued it was because 10men are hard to play against.

Today we had 10men and lost, and people are saying it''s a contributing factor? Surely we should have been hard to play against?

So what is it?[/quote]because last season we needed a stick to beat hughton with... this season its defend Adams at all costs[/quote]Nobody should be ''defending Adams at all costs''.He will be judged by his record on a game by game basis.And he''s made a rather inauspicious start, to say the least.