Five weeks is the worst case scenario and he should be able to do running and light training before returning to the squad. It's a relief that all of our players are out of the Euros now.
What about Krul and Braithwaite? Krul will definitely come on in any penalty shoot out, and Braithwaite is a dead cert to sign for us.
Interesting to read some of the City blurb on the new Joma supplier: “When we took the decision to survey the market, we met every supplier with four key objectives we wanted to achieve: complete creative control of design, an outstanding commercial agreement in line with our self-financed model, a brand with a firm track record within football, and a partner who wanted to support the wider Norfolk community. We met every brand and Joma were by a long way the standout – we’re thrilled to be working with them." Sounds like we won't be getting generic template designs.
Interesting that the t-shirts they're showing off in the launch video seem to have the "new" badge style again, minus the crest and castle elements.
@RiverEndRick You have been suggesting this for about 10 years https://www.pinkun.com/sport/norwich-city/should-ncfc-try-playing-three-at-the-back-8120330
That line up certainly lets us defend better against the better teams so long as the personal are adept at playing in that formation. But it should be used with two wing backs who have good offensive capabilities. If Max leaves and Byram replaces him for instance it would become lop sided. Bryan is not a natural wing back, though he is a very good defender. With Hanley central we would have left footed Gibson and right footed a.n.other either side of him, giving very good balance.
Not quite 10 years, Dunc, but I would like to see it as an option, especially against the bigger teams away from home. IMO, the 4-2-3-1 depends heavily on Buendia's creativity and he's gone now. Rashica isn't a replacement as he's right-footed and has a different skills set. At Werder Bremen he played in a 3-4-2-1 formation using WBs to alter that to a 3-2-4-1 in attack. When the ball is lost the WBs pull back into a 4-4-1-1 to form an 8 man low block protecting the goal. The result is greater strength in attack, especially counter-attacking with Rashica's pace the new weapon, while also being stronger when defending. If we add Ajer, who can also play as a DM, he could tweak the formation by moving forward from the back 3 when we have the ball and dropping back when we don't. The other advantage is that Chelsea also uses a 3-4-2-1 and Gilmour is ready made for that system, as he showed in his MotM performance against England where Scotland used a 3-4-2-1. Why are we recruiting players suited to that formation if we are going to continue with a 4-2-3-1 minus Buendia?
That line up certainly lets us defend better against the better teams so long as the personal are adept at playing in that formation. But it should be used with two wing backs who have good offensive capabilities. If Max leaves and Byram replaces him for instance it would become lop sided. Bryan is not a natural wing back, though he is a very good defender. With Hanley central we would have left footed Gibson and right footed a.n.other either side of him, giving very good balance.
Very strange GE - a new dimension in double posting! Going back to your post about Byram, he could hold back in midfield while Giannoulis goes forward. That way, when the ball is lost he can drop back into a back 4 while Giannoulis recovers his ground to defend in a 7 or 8 man low block with Rashica and Pukki ready to counterattack when the ball is gained. The other option is Mumba as a WB, which would have better balance.
Another option is Sam Mcallum who I believe played Wing back on the left side mainly but has also played as RWB
Just you wait and see! Yes, McCallum would be well suited to the deeper WB role and Byram is also able to play on either side.
Liverpool could be without 5 star players for opening game at Carrow Road according to report from the Liverpool Echo due to Euro 2020 & Copa America as Klopp is keen for players on interational duty at those tournaments to have a minimum of 3 weeks rest. 4 weeks off would see them start pre-season training a week before the match at Carrow Road. So hopefully by the time we come to play them at the start of the season, half of the team will be unfit to play https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/spo...-could-be-without-five-stars-for-ncfc-8123226
Interesting MFW article looking at the potential impact of Billy Gilmour on how we set up to play: https://norwichcity.myfootballwrite...rrival-change-the-dynamic-of-how-city-set-up/
If DF is going to persist with the same possession-based approach, shifting from 4:2:3:1 to 3:4:2:1 will make not a jot of difference. Our vulnerability derives from our trying to emulate much higher quality teams while lacking the players to implement the approach successfully at the higher level. The most obvious manifestation of this is the necessity to over-commit resources in attack, leaving us vulnerable to the inevitable counter thrust. It's simply a matter of numbers. Even at Championship level, we rely on committing 6 outfield players to attack (2 FBs, 3 AMs, Pukki), leaving a defensive shield of just 4. Shifting to 3 at the back would simply alter the make-up of the defensive quartet (3 CBs + 1 DM, as opposed to 2CBs + 2 DMs). Just like two seasons ago, our EPL opponents will be rubbing their hands in anticipation of exploiting those wide open spaces behind our full backs. Do we have a shinpad sponsor? I'll be watching out to see if the entire starting eleven run out Grealish-style with their socks around their ankles -- but, on second thoughts, I guess that would be against the sock sponsor's contract ......
