Just because someone doesn't play the full 90 minutes doesn't mean they haven't had a good game - how many times does Wes play 90 minutes? Or Aguero, Mata, Suarez etc? Benno actually started more than half the games last year, and played a part in almost all of them so not quite sure what you're on about, yet another bollocks argument by the sounds of it Anyway, I think Elliott more than showed his worth today - he was absolutely brilliant from start to finish. "Dead wood"? No bloody chance!
Well I did say playing further up front would benefit him. It must be his anonimity in games because all I ever remember is him getting subbed or coming on as sub and doing bugger all, just an extra person to pass to. Bennett gets subbed because he's not doing anything of note. Besides the majority of those starts came in the first half of the season and when covering for injured players, not because he was playing so well as not to be dropped. No-one can say he ever hit a purple patch of form where he was good for more than one game, 2 at a push maybe. If he played to better standard more cosistently then I wouldn't have a problem with him, but being "absolutely brilliant" against a team in the relegation zone which his teamates helped dominate is not consistency at a good level. After the first 7 games last season he was subbed 10 out of 15. The players you mention in the same breath get subbed because their managers realise how important they are and don't want them injured when the game is well won. Totally different reasons and a naive comparison. I do hope Hughton does give him the chance to carry on up front because we do need that type of player up there, it might spark him into life and develop him because presently he's just standing still and being overshadowed by players who are probably inferior to him technically.
From what he showed today - albeit against lower Champ oppo, he could dep for Wes in the later stages of a match no problem. Benno and Jacko today were class. Both need to feature more in league matches, when tiredness or poor form creeps into games.
I'd prefer to see Bennett even further forward than Wes and playing alongside Holt. I really do think he might allow us to pose some interesting questions of opposing defences that we presently can't. None of the other midfielders we have could play up front, but he might be able to pull it off. I think there are definite benefits to playing midfielders up front in the modern game and I believe the trend will be developed over the next few years by teams.
At the risk of seeming flippant, didn't we try that with Daryl Russel under Roeder/Gunn Joking aside, Bennett was a menace on both flanks, through the middle supporting and up front today. If there's no shake up to personnel and formation against Newcastle next week I'll be surprised - and really disappointed.
...and I remember him putting in a man of match performance against Bolton last year when filling in at right back. He's a great lad as well, very down to earth, seems happy here and is a popular member of the dressing room, a big part of the squad so he is a huge asset to us which would surely make any suggestion to cast him aside as deadwood as entirely, and utterly ridiculous
I suggest the only person on the planet who won't be impressed after Benno's performance today is Anthony Pilkington.
That was one of our best defensive performances last season, with injuries to both Whitbred and Ayala throughout the match I believe. We ended up with a back four of Drury, Naughton, R Martin and E Bennett!
Wouldn't be surprised to see Bennett get the nod for Pilks. I have been a bit unimpressed with Pilks this year, I know he has more goals but not been as good as he was last season in my opinion and generally think Bennett is as good attacking as he is defensive. Think criticism is unfair on him, he is a very solid player, the sort of player we need at this level. I think he is actually pretty consistent and never ever loses the ball in silly areas or rarely loses the ball to be honest. He might not be Messi or Ronaldo but for us Norwich he fits right in. The players I would consider "deadwood" although I don't like that phrase are: Barnett Lappin Chris Martin Elliot Ward See I consider dead wood to be players who are not good enough to challenge for a first team spot, I think it's just them 4 myself. (I may have missed someone out) The rest are reserves at the moment who are very capable to stepping up into the first 11. That's the way I see it anyway, course if we are looking to improve the team than deadwood and reserves are in danger of being sold to balance the books. I know it's semantics but that's my take on it.
I didn't label him deadwood, I said he hadn't performed well enough to warrant regular football and so we might as well get rid of him and get someone who is. We have an abundance of midfielders and I presently have him at the bottom of the pile based on his performances since he's been here. I hope he does do the things he can more regularly because I do think he's a better all round player than the rather one dimensional Pilkington. For me, he's just not done it anywhere near enough so hopeully a more forward central role may bring it out.
Midfield and Goalkeepers are definitely 2 areas that don't need an overhaul. Both are quality departments with plenty of competition for places and the likes of QPR or Reading would be more than happy to take any of them. If anything it is defence (halfway there, but still have Ayala, Barnett, Tierney and Ward to ship out and replace with better) and strikers (Chris Martin and Vaughan...and if they can be replaced by someone like Graham, then Morrison and Jackson fall into this group, as he would clearly be an improvement) I just don't get your obsession with E.Bennett needing to be booted out, it's very surprising, and at odds with EVERYONE else on this Norwich forum. If there are any two areas that need improving, its LB (Garrido needs to be permanent and a new LB to replace Mad Marc), replacing those outgoing CBs (I count 3), and 2 new strikers minimum.
...you may not have used the word "deadwood" carrabah, but by listing him with the others named you have implied it. just about the most stupid post i have seen on here.
I'm not obsessed with him, he's just the player others have picked out to keep that I thought we should look to move on. You rightly state (as have I) we have plenty of midfielders available and few srikers. So a) why do we need a "versatile" midfielder when we have so many. b) we have barely any strike force c) He's unable to get himself a regular start So, my solution is, either try him up front, or sell him and free some space for a striker. If it works then keep him and one problem will at least be partially solved. I don't get the reaction to be honest, seems quite a clear and thoughtful solution.
I feel Fox, E Bennett and Jackson have proved that they deserve a starting place or at least are good enough back up. Hughton has said that after yesterday's game some players may be competing for a starting place. So that would indicate Jackson, E Bennett and Fox
You say we've got lots of midfielders, but really, we have a fair few central midfielders, we're still probably missing a wide man. If Snodgrass is first choice on the right, and Pilks on the left, then really Bennett is the only wide cover we've got, because Surman won't stay wide (I'm probably missing someone else here). For that reason we need to keep Bennett, and probably look to bring in a left winger, ideally to challenge Pilks or as a young understudy. If we get rid of Bennett now, and Snodgrass picks up an injury, we suddenly look very short of width. Up front, whilst I like Jackson as a pacy option, in our current preferred formation, he can't hold the ball up so well as Holt. Morison doesn't seem to be performing at the moment, and whilst Kane looks promising, he isn't ours, and Spurs are unlikely to sell him cheaply. With Holt out injured, I've got a lot less faith in our front line, which is why I think we need another striker. If we brought Graham in, we've then got the option of rotating him and Holt, or ready-made cover should one get injured long term. If we basically swapped Morison for Graham in our squad, we've then got 2 in-form strikers, with Kane as back-up, and Jackson as an alternative. Beyond that, I'd like us to either start using Fox more, or bring in another holding midfielder, and as others have identified, a LB and a CB would be helpful, but both can probably wait until the summer, and Ayala may fill the CB slot.
I knew I'd forget someone! Whilst he's versatile, I don't see him playing as a winger, and I think the lack of cover for the left wing when Pilks isn't playing may have forced Hughton's hand slightly with regards to the formation we played yesterday. I'd have thought getting all our players used to a formation would have been the best idea, but with the absence of a winger, we were playing with a flatter midfield than normal. (I could be off the mark here, it's just what I felt from the stream I had)
See , the point is, (in my eyes) Fox and Surman have made far more telling contribution to a midfield which is plentiful over the last season. So if we have a lot of midfielders Tettey Johnson Fox Pilkington Hoolahan Snodgrass Butterfield Howson Surman Bennett Thats 4 players who can play behind the striker, 5 on the wings, and probably all can play in the centre except Pilkington. Do we need that amount, because I'd bet at least one, maybe two, will be gone at the end of the season. I would say that Surman will be the more likely, but presently, I would get rid of Bennett because he's rarely bossed a game whilst the others have done it more frequently.
I'd be totally amazed if Hughton sees it that way. Even before an (undisputed?) MOTM performance yesterday, we all knew he (Benno) has far more in the locker than has been seen this season, but as CH is not 'the tinkerman' like Lambert, he very rarely gets a chance to show it No single player could have given more to the canary cause yesterday than he did - assisted by assured performances from Fox, Jackson and a few others.
