Just seen what the national press thought of what happened at the Brittania on Sat. I can't bring myself to refer to it as a football match!!! http://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwic...wich_city_0_what_the_nationals_said_1_1227700 I think they sum it up pretty well.
a_skwared I thought the fact u guys pitched up and came for a point at nearly all costs made for a an average game .. shame really i expected more after some reports given over the season... but blaming stoke is ollox ! We had 2 wingers on, two front men and we had no quality ... bit harsh me thinx considering we tried to make all the runing but Norwich defended well !! Thats football aint it !! Dont get too caught up in what the morons with a pen say... Anyway gl for the season Norwich have done enuff .
I think it's a misunderstanding of Norwich's team selection and the way you played which probably made it seem like we were playing for a draw. Considering we have never played for a draw- not at Man City, Utd or Chelsea, it would be very odd to think we would go to the Britannia only going for a draw. No, what happened was Lambert selected a team that he thought could confront your boys and try and beat you at your own game (like he did against Swansea). Lambert will have honestly thought we could win this and the team selection with Bennett, Pilkington and the new boy Howson reflected an aggressive line-up. This went badly wrong for a few reasons: your guys were fired up, there's no doubt about that and to a man played hard and aggressive, never giving our players time on the ball until we brought on our best passer Fox when it was too late; the wind played a big part in disrupting this choice of tactic- we tried to do the long ball and no passes found anyone, Holt was quite anonymous courtesy of being on his own and your defenders cleaning up; because of the team selection and formation it was difficult to try a passing game, especially as your players were so fired up they were on top of it all; finally I know it's probably annoying but the ref played a big part- being real fans you lot were probably at the stadium, but time and again the commentators were saying how your players weren't booked despite the Nth little tackle etc. We tried to play this game, but our players weren't good enough and inevitably got booked. As for whether this was a terrible game- I think independent commentators made it quite clear it was awful, not just Norwich fans. It really was awful to watch. But I don't think that takes away from the fact that what little good football there was, 90% came from Stoke. Again, it sounds like a lame excuse but the wind obviously had a massive part and punished both teams- neither of us could find a way through because long balls were going wayward and just being kicked out, throw-ins were impossible to be accurate. Anytime that either team tried to play it on the floor, a foul came in and the ref didn't clamp down on it enough. Fact is, you were the much better side and yet only won 1-0, which clearly shows how bad the conditions were for both sides All in all, I don't think any Norwich fan can blame your lot exclusively for such a terrible game to watch, especially as we played so badly, but neither team really helped the spectacle. Ultimately, you were very good value for the win and it never looked in doubt. I just hope we put up a bit more of a fight next year, because honestly we are better than that. I also think with better weather we would have better chances from BOTH teams that would make a more exciting (and closer) match. Also, I hope I speak for all Norwich fans in saying we look at what Stoke have achieved with great respect and it's something we aspire to in our own way- real fans for a real club getting success. Any Norwich fans who think we can just turn up and beat Stoke because we perceive our way of football as "better" are either naive or have very short memories
we didn't play for a draw, we just never played! thats down to the way stoke pressed us into mistakes in our own half. stoke pressed really well but had we played anywhere near our best we'd have just played around them. it didn't happen for us on saturday and the game was absolutely awful to watch. worst game of football i've seen for a decade, maybe more
I mostly agree with the above. The only thing I say, as others have, is that it did appear that we were playing for a point. When stoke had a corner it made sense for Holt to come back and defend but to then leave a tiny player up front, and hit the ball long only meant we'd give possesion away cheaply. I think the team has improved so much over the course of the season that we can play more to our strengths, and probably don't need to consider the other teams strengths as much as we sometimes seem to.
agree longsight although we didn't begin like that. it was just a very poor performance overall. lambert made mistakes with his selections (with hindsight) and too many under performed. stoke pushed us back, made us make mistakes... it was just a bad day really and the match as a whole was a big, damp squib. one thing i would say is that whenever lambert has made mistakes against sides, he tends to correct them the next time we play them. i would put money on us winning at the britannia next season
It was a very poor performance, and yes with hindsight, the two most recent away games when we didn't perform, we didn't start with Fox who I think in both games could have provided the team with more composure and allowed us to begin to play. His role in keeping things ticking over could have be integral to better performances, of course he's not going to do it every game, but he does it more often than not.
not just fox, but holt up front alone hasn't ever really worked. morison can do the sole striker role better but is out of form.
I can keep hearing and reading that Morison is out of form so he won't play - but how is he supposed to get back on form when he's not picked or brought on as a sub. Why not give him a reserve game at least.
We never came looking for a draw, it's just we always gave away possession as soon as we entered the Stoke half.
I agree super and as we have also agreed on, Morison should be the lone striker in a 4 5 1 formation, not Holt. Some puzzling selections going on in the last 3 games for me that I cannot quite get my head around!Still we move on to Wigan!
it won't be the last time lambert baffles us with his selections either!! i don't think i've ever predicted a starting line up correctly under his stewardship!!
Totally agree - I watched a rerun of the highlights when the Swans came to Carrow Road and Morison created havoc in the Swans defence. He'll be back and I've seen Rooney have a 'lean spell'. Also what about Carroll/Crouch/Long - all cost considerably more then Morison, but have scored fewer goals!!!!
U guys sound good guys to me ...... I think we av to put in perspective whats at stake here !! I think we both know our teams are safe but its these games that will now prove pivotal to both clubs .. The prem aint easy and u can simply find yourself on a real sticky run and wonder where the next point is coming from ! before u know it there is a prob .. but i think this yr there is simply 3 from 5 falling throo the trap door ! I think u might find it harder next yr but hey thats next yr ... celebrate this yr and all that comes with it .. lol try 40 mill lol Gl fellas see ya next yr
I just don't like it when we play one up front, no matter who the one up front is. It looks horrible and it is horrible. We're a far better team when we play 4-4-2/diamond, with the ball players in midfield. ILD OTBC
i think it depends on who is in midfield more than how many are up front. when we play 'workmanlike' players in the middle and only one up top it doesn't work. when we have some flair like hoolahan and surman and two out and out wingers like bennett and pilks it works fine, though holt is not as good up front on his own as morison is. having said that, most of our success has come with two up top