A great game of football -exciting right to the last kick of the game. Norwich started solidly but were quick and dangerous on the counter attack. We were well and truly mugged in the first half and I was glad for the half time whistle. Swans made a great comeback in the second half - but the turning point was the disallowed goal. I was 20 yards away and saw nothing wrong with it - will check on MOTD tonight. The fourth Norwich goal killed the game, or so we thought. A goal in injury time set up an exciting finale. Gutted with the result - but a thoroughly exciting and interesting game of football
To me I think Michu made a fair challenge. The ball came out of the keepers hands when the keeper was coming down and the ball hit Michu's head and he let the ball go. I don't think that constitutes a foul.
Thanks to all Swans fans for a great sporting attitude.I didn't expect this result or scoreline,the match can only serve to enhance the reputations of both clubs.
Listening to the car radio after the game and Ian Walsh, perceptive guy, made exactly the same comment that I did in my post before I left the house. He criticised our lack of work rate in the first half, said that we LACKED URGENCY ALL OVER THE FIELD and that the first half cost us the game. I think we all saw that. To be honest, I am furious with our players. They were a disgrace in the opening period and swaggered about like a bunch of big time Charlies while Norwich got on with the business of winning the game. I don't want to dilute Canaries' well earned victory because I admire their organisation and work ethic BUT the second half showed the real difference between the teams. Does anyone think that Norwich would have won that game had we played two halves like the second? I don't!! We praise our team when they do well but they were appalling in the first half and deserve the brickbats they will now be getting. They let their manager down and they let us down. Laudrup has been preaching all week about the need to match the work rate of Norwich and his team didn't bother! Even we on this Board knew what was required and we had to watch as they strolled to a three goal deficit in 45 minutes. Ki had another bad game, sloppy passing, little tracking and he, along with Ash and Chico, totally lost Holt for the third goal. JdG, scored and his cross for Michu's header was sublime but he has to realise that he has to contribute with the nitty gritty stuff as well. Routledge's tracking was a joke as well. Yes, he did track the full back when he burst through for the opening goal but the idea is that you get a tackle in!!! Otherwise, what's the point of tracking? As for Ash, let's face it, Holt owns him. Hasn't Holt scored in his last three games against us prior to this one? Today he added another and won the free kick that won it for Norwich. Against Ash...... I bet he wishes he could play against him every week! I have been shouting LOUD and long for some more energy, industry and strength in midfield. If today didn't underline that, I don't know what will and I hope that such a player(s) is on Michael Laudrup's shopping list in January and, if I were him, I would get the players in for extra training on Sunday and get the players doing the running and the work they couldn't be bothered to do during the game. There were some exceptions including Michu and Dyer but I also want to mention Tremmel. I voted to keep starting him until his performances said otherwise, well today he did just that. He was beaten twice at his near post (shots which I believe the more agile Vorm would have saved) and he has to bear some of the blame for the free kick. The only goal for which he wasn't culpable, was Holt's header. He should have had heated words with his so called defenders about that one. That's my off the cuff take on today's game. I'm still boiling about it as must be obvious. Credit to Norwich for doing what they had to do but any hard working, organised team from the lower leagues could have stuck two or three on us in the first half. A game to forget? Oh, no!!! The whole lot of them want to remember that first half and vow there will be no repeat of it again this season.
Sorry it came over that way. I often express my appreciation of Norwich and have done so since we were together in the Championship. I was just making the point that our first half performance was so dismal that any hard working team could have beaten us. When our lot decided to play, it was a completely different story.
What a pathetic sour grapes post this is, merely highlighting how much more gracious most Swans fans are. There is no way you are streets ahead of us. Our defending was equally bad in the second half. If we had Tettey, Bennett or Turner and Ruddy playing we would have won 0-4. But that's not how it works. The table never lies. You are a point better than us. I suspect it will be pretty similar at the end of the season. Yes, you weren't great in the first half, but all three Norwich goals took considerable skill to accomplish- it's not like you passed the ball into your own net! I'll put this down to a bad temper and you'll see sense once you've calmed down. And the elbow in the face meant it was a definite foul on Bunn
Well played Norwich - especially in the first half where it looked a bit men against boys. Our players keeping possession, tickling it about, lose the ball, you guys bomb forward and score. Far more powerful and purposeful. It's odd that after losing twice to you lot last year we clearly underestimated you badly in the first half - odd as well because it doesn't stack up for this season. I'm very proud of what we have achieved but the run you lot were on was better than ours, we had beaten Arsenal but you'd beaten them and Man u, and we are both in the quarter finals of the league cup. There was no reason for us to think we were better than you. There's an argument that if we had come out with the right attitude then we'd have won but that's all ifs and couldas - if we'd have scored more goals we'd have won. Well, yes. Still, it was true that our disallowed goal didn't do anything worse than the Norwich one in the first half - but it was one that would go either way. Well played - and no sour grapes here... ...but keep Holt away from our Greggs, I'll need soemthing for lunch!
and another if for you - if Brad Johnson was half an inch lower on the 47th minute, the rest of the game would have been pretty academic. A point that seems to have largely escaped most people. As it was it was a scary 2nd half until Snoddy did what he does. Will be interesting if we are lucky enough to meet in the League Cup semi's
Well played Norwich is all I can say. We were'nt ourselves in the first half, I think our perormance showed that, and Norwich took full advantage. A good game, with the right result.
Hi Thai - apologies if it wasn't clear. The bit you highlight ("There's an argument that if we had come out with the right attitude then we'd have won but that's all ifs and couldas - if we'd have scored more goals we'd have won. Well, yes."), I was trying to highlight how flippant it is saying "if everything was different then the result would have been different", hence why I say "Well, yes" at the end - the fact you could say that about any game we lose. There are so many things that go towards winning a game (goals, clean sheets, possession, performances etc etc) that you can't just say "if we'd have played better, we would have won". If we were at it from the start, then Norwich would have played a different way and who's to say that would have been any less successful? I've not liked it in the past when opposition have said "oh, if X had passed there we would have won" because it dismisses the opposition's reaction. Besides, it ignores the fact that part of why we played badly is due to the opposition. We should learn, though, that everytime we play Norwich, Newcastle, Everton this happens and we should develop our game accordingly.
I never saw an elbow by Michu perfectly legal jump!! How about Holt's one in the first half arms all flaying yet Webb never gave a free kick for this one. Not sour grapes, but refs need to be consistent. Norwich deserved to win as they went about there jobs in a professional manner not like us where I think some players felt they only had to turn up for the points, and we all knew that you have to be on your A game to get a result off Norwich.
I have watched the incident loads of times, close up and still not totally sure if there was an elbow in to Bunn's throat or not. The elbow was raised for certain, just not sure what contact there was. If there was any real contact it was with the body but I can easily see why the ref may have thought it was an elbow (if indeed that is what he blew up for). With regards to the Holt one in the box, I don't know but I could see, certainly in the first half, he was trying to keep the game flowing. Perhaps he played the advantage, who knows.
At least the second half was thrilling (for both sets of fans I'm sure). If we were in it for the first half then it could have been different but at the end of the day Norwich deserved something. I think a draw would have been fairer but thems the breaks kids. Well played Norwich, I was very impressed by the fact that you look just as tight and organised as the pre-Houghton team but with a little more drive and purpose breaking forward. You (like us I hope) will be fine this season.
And what a pathetic, ill argued post you have presented. Where did I say we were streets ahead of Norwich? Did I not congratulate them on their work ethic and organisation? I suggest you read posts properly in future before writing such inaccurate tripe. And why bring up the players you were missing? I didn't but, seeing as YOU raised the subject, we were missing Vorm, Pablo Hernandez and our midfield heartbeat, Leon Britton. Oh, and Neil Taylor has been missing for most of the season. I think it's fair to say that the calibre of those players far exceeds the ones you mentioned. But that's academic. None of them played. Had you read other threads and posts on the game, you might have noticed that I happily paid due respect to your team. I did so before the game and I did so after the game. In fact, I had many good things to say about Norwich when we were rivals in the Championship and frequently posted that we were lacking a number of qualities that they possessed. What you have to understand, is that the accent of my post, quite understandably, concentrated on what went wrong with US. You do appreciate that I am a SWANSEA fan and there is a good chance I might do that. Other than wishing Norwich to stay up because I do happen to like them, I don't give a flying fcuk what happens to them for the rest of the season. But I do care about Swansea City and my post reflected my thoughts on their performance. Sorry if that didn't meet with your approval. As for your comment about the so called "foul" on Bunn, I find that derisory and laughable coming from the supporter of a team that plays Grant Holt up front. Good God, man, that player has made a career out of battering keepers and defenders. As it happens, when I played (a far lower, semi professional standard) I had a similar outlook, so I have no issues with it. However, I notice that you took great care NOT to mention the views of the MOTD team. The incident was replayed in slow motion and the pundits' verdict was quite clear - it was a legitimate goal but one that some referees might disallow. Webb was one of them but I won't labour the fact that he found nothing wrong with a similar challenge by Holt. Of course, Bunn rolling about on the floor trying to disguise his gaff, might have influenced the decision. All keepers do that these days and it's pathetic. In summary, Norwich deserved their half time lead after a thoroughly professional performance, helped by a pretty awful showing from us. In the second half it was, for the most part, end to end stuff - from our end to your end. Any quibbles with that? It was a great game and both teams deserve credit (half a game from us) for putting on a show that did the Premier League proud. Nevertheless, I still feel that we shot ourselves in the foot to a large degree, which disappointed me a great deal. That is my prerogative as it is yours to disagree.
Norwich punished us for our poor uncharacteristic defensive play and for our poor finishing by Danny in the first half and won 3-0...The second half was much better and a good move taking off Danny as we were a far better team and an error by ash cost us the game as we won the 2nd half 3-1 plus we had a disallowed goal which i don't know for certain if the ref made the right decision....an entertaining game for everyone abet different half's
how about the bit where you said "the second half showed the real difference between the two teams"? <slaphead> yes, with more than a hint of "oh, they're the talentess school kid, but they try hard". Other than Michu and Hernandez, i dont think there are any players that would definitely get in the Norwich first team. on a side note, a combined Norwich/Swansea team would be pretty awesome, and cheap! Edited for accuracy. AAaaaand the award for the most spectacular misunderstanding of the point goes to... Yes, that's right, Ivoralljack!!!!!! Lets give him a big hand for not realising I was quite clearly highlighting the stupidity of the what ifs arguments!!! Hernandez, yes. Vorm last year is a close call, but given Ruddy's pre-injury form this year (he was being mentioned, and not just by Norwich fans... as possibly taking Hart's England spot) so I'd say a solid no- ruddy has won us an obscene number of points. Tettey and Britton are very different players, but I'd say they're of equal importance. Put it this way, I think most Norwich players are in agreement that Tettey is the single biggest reason for the improvement in our defence (and its not surprise to me that his absence means you are the first team to put more than one goal away against us since Chelsea). You have restored my faith in your ability to understand English. I must be honest, I thought you were the one jack who was shouting before the game about how you were going to smash us 3 or 4 nil. If I've made a mistake there, I honestly do apologise. as highlighted above, it was the suggestion that your team are somehow that much better than us. I must admit, I think you are a touch better. Approximately one point after sixteen games type better. I'll happily admit that. But I think if we play at our best we'd beat you, unless you played at your best in which case it would be a draw, and vice versa. You see, we have different styles and I know with all the media praise you get it's probably difficult to believe that there is another "right" way, but I think we've got it. It's not as attractive, but it can be equally successful. There's even a third, unspeakable way. The way of Wham and Stoke. That works too. I think most Norwich fans,myself included, feel the same way. It was your derisory opinion of our team and the utter conviction, despite the evidence of the game, that had you somehow played better you definitely would have won that irked me. You were unlucky that we played very well in the first half. We were lucky that you didn't play quite so well, otherwise I suspect it would have been a draw. None of that equals a god-given right for you to win just because you believe the media hype. We're actually quite a good team, in case you hadn't noticed... A mixture of swan-tint and spectacularly missing the point here. And for added curdle, the weakest argument in history (he did it so you cant complain when we do it...) Holt's was a foul. Holt fouls a lot. In fact, he has the most fouls of any player in the division. I'll readily admit that. I don't see how that can possibly mean we therefore can't be allowed to complain about a foul on our team. That's not how it works... As for the challenge.MotD actually said that there was no difference between that and the Holt challenge, which I wholeheartedly agree with. The Holt challenge didn't lead to a goal though. What they said was that, given the first foul wasn't given, it was "harsh" that your one was given. If you actually look at the referee guide, you'll see they recommend any form of raised arm when jumping for a header, if there's contact, should be a foul (Michu's arm was raised). They also recommend that if a keeper gets two hands on the ball, the benefit of the doubt should be with the keeper. That's policy due to keeper safety. Especially since Cech's injury, these rules have been very keeper friendly. So in summary, the ref got it, by the book, spot on. What he got wrong was consistency (an accusation which you should have levelled at him, but MotD did). What should actually have happened was that he should have given the foul earlier on Holt. As they said on MotD. I suspect this was a dual case of you hearing what you wanted to hear and seizing on the oh so easy opportunity to blame the ref. I concur. I never said it wasn't.
You should try reading the posts properly. The words I used indicated quite clearly what I wanted to say. Any interpretation you put on them is yours and yours alone. When I congratulated Norwich for their hard work and organisation, I meant just that. Nothing more. Anything else is a product of your own imagination. Did I misunderstand your point about your missing defenders? I don't think so, buddy. You say nothing about highlighting any points. What you did do was state a fact by saying that if those defenders had played you WOULD have won 4-0. Really?????? I responded with my own "what if". Fair enough? I won't bother to debate the merits of the players involved, or not involved. That is subjective but I know which ones I'd prefer in my team and so, I suspect, would most neutrals. And now your reference about my ability to understand English. Yes, I think I can lay claim to that as a published author, stringer sports journalist and contributor to BBC television. But I am so pleased to receive your esteemed approval, though, it means SUCH a lot. Yes, you were wrong about me spouting off about the result beforehand. Getting to be a habit isn't it? As I said to you, try reading the posts properly before sounding off. And I do accept your apology in the spirit it was offered. I don't see the point of your response to my comment about me being concerned only with the performance of my own club so I shan't labour it. But, again, your imagination is at work. I did not suggest that my team was that much better than yours. Had you bothered to read other posts before reaching for your keyboard (which you evidently did not), you would have realised that I made several references to this being a tough game, with historical results on your side. Hardly any condescension there. As for styles, I much prefer ours but happily accept that there are several ways to play this game and what works for one team will not work for another. It's the beauty of the game. Finally, for this part of the saga, I do not judge the respective merits of teams at this stage of the season. The final table will show that but my only concern for the time being is that we achieve 40 points. If and when we do will be the time we can think about how high we can finish. Next one, sigh...... can you not READ??????? What derisory opinion? Have I not stated clearly and categorically that I admire the way Norwich play. Did I not say that when we were in the Championship there were many of their qualities I wished we possessed? And you think this is derision!! Be thankful I haven't indulged in some real verbal surgery is all I can say. In the context of the game, we had a pretty bloody awful first half which you guys took full advantage of playing some fine football. In the second half, you were hanging on like grim death for the result. If you saw anything different then I've wasted an awful lot of time on you. At long last we approach the end, the argument about the disallowed goal. Let's just agree to differ. My view is that your keeper made a cock up and got away with it. The fact that Michu's arms were out means sod all. Just how many players have you seen jumping for the ball with their arms glued to their sides? Ever tried it? The arms have to be out for balance. The question is, were the arms used to strike or impede the keeper? I saw no evidence whatsoever of that and I have watched it many times in slo mo replay. The MOTD pundits concurred. No doubt you will see it differently. Oh, and I actually do wish you luck in all but one of the rest of your games this season.
But you still don't want to explain what you actually meant by the phrase "the second half showed the real difference between the two teams"... No, because I imagine it no longer suits you... Oh, and lest I forget before it's too late, there was the "lower league" jibe to boot! Err, yes you did. Twice. Even after I've explained it... It is quite clearly in the context of you saying if you'd played better you would have won. The secs half showing the true difference etc., etc. Of course we wouldn't definitely have won 4-0 (well, we might have!)if those players were playing <slapsheadhardenoughtofalloffchair>. I would have thought the illogicality of that statement would have been understood as clear exaggeration by such an esteemed author as you... That was actually my attempt to be nice and agree with you in a joking way. Good to see you've maintained your sense of humour. And your humility. And your modesty. And your dignity. Now where's my Warwick Prize gone when I need it to strongly back up my entirely unrelated argument? Don't you know I conquered the Roman Empire? I must be right! Ironically, I was actually meaning the apology sincerely. Difficult to come across on a chat forum, but I actually meant it. Then again, I would have assumed such an esteemed television personality and all round damn fine chap like yourself would have had the good grace to take the apology at face value. I might be really mature and retract it. You don't get it you say? Such an esteemed author as yourself doesn't understand. How odd. What was the mature and witty phrase you used? Ah yes: "getting to be a bit of a habit isn't it?" I'll explain the point: it was your patronising take on our game play and your flagrant attempt to blame the referee (who, as you so carefully have not mentioned, was pretty lenient with a Chico and Williams tackle or two... but I'm sure that was just Howard not falling for Holt's diving when he's nearly been kicked in the head!) you don't see it do you? You need to listen to yourself a little more often. The "hard working" little pat we get. Not the brightest spark in the plug are you? Oh, I can read. It wasn't even subtext. As noted above- quit the patronising attitude. Just accept you got beat and actually we play quite decent football. Actually no, fe! Indulge me in some real verbal surgery, I beg! I believe you have failed to read what I wrote. I'll repeat it in the vain hope that you might actually try to engage this time. MotD decided that there was no difference between what Michu did and what Holt did. They decided the Michu decision was "harsh" on that basis. It was the lack of consistency point. They got that right. You are choosing to hear what you want to hear,rather an actually engaging what they said. Surely such an esteemed television personality as yourself can do better? However, if we examine the rules, we see that Howard Webb got it spot on. Refs are instructed that keeper safety is paramount. Any raising of the arm in an attempt to jump, where contact is made,is also instructed to be a foul. The incorrect decision was therefore the Holt challenge. You may not like it, but "dose dem roolz"... Good to see you've dropped the pathetic Holt fouling point earlier. We'll just assume I got that one. Quelle chance! Un petit victoire against such an eminent author! For all the verbal sparring, and much as your post suggests you won't believe me, I honestly wish you likewise. I like Swansea, I like their football and i like the way they're managed. There's only one Swansea fan who has come across as truly disgusting, and that was the mental racist one on the other thread, who I can only assume was actually a Cardiff fan. And as sour grapes go, you lot have a long way to climb before you get to the likes of Arsenal!
