As supers says, we're in a much better position than when PL was appointed. I agree we need results/wins, but our play is vastly different from last season's and I'm confident that excellent results are just 'around the corner' - starting tomorrow!
Well, I don't see how we are in a much better position, all the playing gains have been through financial means rather than through the coaching element which has undoubtedly had a negative effect to date. We're better because we have more money, not because Hughtons a good manager. Our style of play has certainly improved over last season, but the main flaws in our play I see coming from Hughton with the insistence on everything coming from the wings which I believe is wholly derogatory to creating decent chances. Wide deep crosses are about 20 years out of date.
Talk is cheap. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, if our recent performances against the top teams turns into points against the hammers, palace and Cardiff then I will start to have a bit more faith in CH and hopefully so will others. I've not been 100% convinced by him to be honest but I am willing to be and I want him to do well. Let's see where we are after the next 6 games, this will decide Hughtons future.
This statistic - http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/25...amStatistics/England-Premier-League-2013-2014 doesn´t exactly bear you out carrabuh, if you go down to PL Situational Statistics and click on Pass Types, you´ll see that only 5 teams have had less crosses per game on average than us, this season. Perhaps you´re still trying to compare him to Lambert, who, as you can see from this table, has A. Villa firmly at the bottom when it comes to crosses. But interestingly we´ve had 6 goals from open play whereas Villa have only had 4, so lack of crosses doesn´t automatically mean a glut of goals.
I said our penchant to attack from the wings is costing the team decent chances. When we cross it is from poor wide positions and with little in the box. The table you refer to mentions the amounts, not the success rates. Virtually all our final balls come from wide and poor positions. Villa and Lambert play long ball far more often than we ever have under Hughton.
Still think a rousing rendition With noise levels off of the scale, Would help us improve our position And make those red bluebirds feel pale
What those stats show quite clearly is that the shift away from over reliance on wide crosses and towards a narrower style of attacking play in which the wide midfielders come inside to supplement the central attackers in and around the penalty box IS actually happening. It may not yet have gelled but it is happening, as many of us have long been saying. To achieve what Hughton is looking for three things are needed: (1) the central midfield has to be sorted; (2) the wide midfielders have to become comfortable in their role; (3) all the midfielders have to learn to supply what our new strikers want. Everybody can see that there has been progress in the first respect; everybody can see that there is still a lot of further work needed in the second and third respects. There seem to me to be two sorts of critics of what is going on: first people stuck in the past who yearn for genuine old-fashioned wing play (of the kind that carrabuh apparently thinks Hughton favours but doesn't manage effectively); second carrabuh himself, who rightly rejects any reversion to old-fashioned wing play, but simply can't admit that Hughton agrees with him and is actually altering our attacking style in the very way he carrabuh advocates.
Just to play devils advocate - what other day would that have been? We don't look like scoring goals. While Marshall and the CCFC defence had a good day, we never really created that many chances where you were off your seat when the ball was struck.
TC - although we were attacking the Barclay end 1st half and my seat is in the N&P - to answer your question, yes I was 'out of my seat when the ball was struck' on several occasions in that half, as were a lot of the other fans around me!!!!
Your confusing our play with working the ball into good positions. The final balls are not worked enough, if they were we'd be creating good chances. That's simply a fact, we don't create many good chances and we don't score many goals because of where the ball is coming from. You say it yourself that the WIDE midfielders have to become comfortable in their role. We don't play wingers into good positions with any regularity because they rarely make that kind of run. Redmond and Snodgrass are very much old fashioned wingers in how they play because they cannot pass. Pilkington does at least make the better runs, Snodgrass will rarely run onto a ball in the area, the same with Redmond. I wonder what our percentages are for crosses along the floor into the centre, or from the byline in the area. Not very high I expect.
Its obviously very different watching it on my massive screen then I think there was one time when I got quite excited and thought - here's the chance but even then the shot was from well outside the box.
Was a great entertaining game of the 30+ shots only few were ever going to trouble anyone but that was a positive performance Was disappointed that Wolf was not given a longer run but happy with the positive play We will always struggle at this level just see how hard it is for the "great" MU to get a win!
Once again I was pleased with the performance, but disappointed with the result. That doesn't make me want to blame CH though. 31 chances, 9 on target doesn't reflect bad management to me. Cardiff had 6 shots, 2 of which were on target. City bossed the midfield even though Fer was under par on the day. Malky put on two defensive midfielders after half-time to try and hold on to a draw and it worked, but there was only one team in it today. The movement was good, the attacks were varied (contrary to Carrabuh's blinkered view) and the Cardiff defence was bewildered much of the time. They were lucky, more of this will see us right.
I'm not confusing the two at all. Working the ball into better positions and creating better chances is what our changed, narrower, style of play is all about. I agree that it isn't there yet, and I agree that Snodgrass is struggling in a way that Pilkington is not. What I don't understand is why you cannot just admit that there has been a clear change this season to a narrower style of attacking play which runs completely counter to what you have always said about Hughton's touch-line orientated approach to the game.
Dear me, so many people still happy clapping this muppet. You obviously won't be happy until it's toolate and we're heading for the drop. Still he is a nice man isn't he? His win record is atrocious and I'm fed up with hard luck stories he has to go now IMO. With the talent he has at his disposal it's just not good enough. And why should we always struggle at this level? Fed up with little Norwich attitude.
Why was Hooper taken off? He'd run himself into the ground. Why did Elmander come on instead of RvW? Because RvW's foot injury is not fully cleared up and it would have been better for him and us in the longer term if he hadn't come on at all.
Awesome stuff mate, keep it coming... Seriously, KIO, if you genuinely believe that, then you really need to get a grip on what's going on at the Carrot Patch these days... But don't let me stop you making a fool of yourself!
