2) Why are Norwich so boring? Watching Norwich City can be a forgettable experience, especially away from home. The treacherous conditions at Selhurst Park contributed to the lack of quality in their 1-1 draw with Crystal Palace but Chris Hughton should surely be getting more out of his players. While he argued that they were the better side in open play, the fact is that other than Bradley Johnson's fine goal, which was down to an error by Danny Gabbidon, Norwich created only one proper chance in the match, which Nathan Redmond could not take. There are talented players at Norwich â Leroy Fer, Robert Snodgrass, Redmond and Gary Hooper â but too often they are set up negatively by Hughton and, although they look as if they have just about enough to stay up, they are unlikely to give their fans too many thrills along the way. Jacob Steinberg It's becoming official folk-wisdom - we are the ugliest, most boring side in the Prem. And when you consider that Pulis manages Palace, and there are West Ham and Stoke as rivals, that is quite an achievement. Or do people feel the author is unfair/simply wrong?
I think it's an article trying to spark debate Can be negative, not always. I think a lot of sides are negative away from home and play for a draw - Cardiff at carrow road spring to mind?
Yeah it was already highlighted on one of the other threads. That's written by a Norwich reporter and is designed to gain hits to the Guardian website and therefore advertising revenue. You only have to trawl through the comments to see that all opposition fans disagree - it's only Norwich fans that think this. So I wouldn't get too excited - it's deliberately inflammatory (as evidenced by you posting it) in true Daily Mail style. That's not to say it isn't true, we are quite forgettable to watch away from home.
Modern journalism strikes again. It's all about hits. Play their game if you want to, but I'm not rising to the bait.
3) Why are Crystal Palace so boring? Watching Crystal Palace can be a forgettable experience, especially at home. The treacherous conditions at Selhurst Road contributed to the lack of quality in their 1-1 draw with Norwich City but Tony Pulis should surely be getting more out of his players. While he argued that they were the better side in open play, the fact is that they created no proper chances in the match, other than the penalty which was entirely the fault of the Norwich player, Leroy Fer. There are talented players at Crystal Palace – Jason Puncheon, Marouane Chamakh, Glenn Murray and Dwight Gayle – but too often they are set up negatively by Pulis and, although they look as if they might just about have enough to stay up with Pulis's tactics, they are unlikely to give their fans too many thrills along the way. Canary Rob. 4) Why are Manchester United so boring? Watching Manchester United can be a forgettable experience, especially away from home. The poor conditions at Carrow Road contributed to the lack of quality in their 0-1 win with Norwich City but David Moyes should surely be getting more out of his players. While he argued that they were the better side in open play, the fact is that they created no proper chances in the match and the goal was a complete fluke, though the opportunity was taken well by Danny Wellbeck. There are talented players at Manchester United – [enter player names] – but too often they are set up negatively by Moyes and, although they look as if they might just about have enough to qualify for Europe, they are unlikely to give their fans too many thrills along the way. Canary Rob. I could go on.
It's hardly a one off occurance to justify moaning about the journalist. Besides, try doing the same on an entertaining game which is where the comparison should be made.
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Yes, I was being facetious for effect. We are dull to watch, especially away (although your interesting stat suggests that actually we are quite effective away this year, barring against the top sides). But I definitely don't think we're worse than about 5 or 6 other teams in the division and we've had several entertaining games (let's face it, I imagine the thrashings we've been handed, while horrific for us, were pretty entertaining for the opposition!) But equally it's true that their Norwich journalist is just trying to stir up debate. I'm not moaning about him, that's his job, I'm just saying it should be taken with a pinch of salt that there is some sort of world wide view that we are the beige of football because the comments from opposition fans below the article suggest opposition fans think otherwise.
Dull to watch away, I think i've been entertained many times by some superb football away this season, in fact I've seen 24 goals, admittedly only 4 were scored by Norwich, but still it was entertaining in a way
Interesting but not easy to answer. Too many people equate ' going for it ' with success but that is not usually the result unless your name is Arsenal or Man City. Blackpool ' went for it ' and ended up back in the Championship. Holloway ' went for it ' at Palace and ended up bottom with 3 points. Pulis came in, got them organised and got them out of the bottom 3. I am still fairly certain that they will go down but they obviously have a better chance of staying up with Pulis than they had with Ollie. Doesn't that tell us something about the tactics that need to be employed away from home by us smaller Clubs? To stay up you have to accept that anything, home or away, against the top 8 is a bonus - in many cases it boils down to damage limitation - and you have to get your 40 points from the rest especially in your home games. Away from home I would suggest that any point is a good point and represents a good performance and I would put the Palace game in that category. If we had gone for it and lost, say 3-2, would people have been happier with CH? Honestly? Really? Trouble is that CH is prone to taking it too far. The tactics employed away at Hull will long remain in my memory as a blot on the landscape and he has to ask for several other offences to be taken into consideration including a few home games as well. One of the greatest matches involving City that I have ever seen was under Lambert when we played Man City but before I get too carried away somebody had better remind me of the final score. When Cardiff nearly got a point at Arsenal by adopting the same tactics as they employed here I heard it described as a testimony to the discipline and organisation brought to the club by Malky. Do we really want to replace CH with someone who is just a bit better at parking the bus? Do we really want to risk a change of approach especially at this stage of the season?
Welcome back 1950, your time in the Aussie sunshine must have definitely been good for you as you have returned as one of the more positive and realistic posters on here - who would have thought it No, seriously welcome back - I'm guessing you didn't get to any of the Ashes tests or you probably wouldn't be anywhere near as postitive!
Cheers Munky. As I mentioned before I spent all of the time in South Australia and was there during the Test Match in Adelaide - not the happiest time for a Pom to be in Adelaide. I came across a group of the Barmy Army in a bar one night and I can assure you that if we could fill our ground with that lot anything would be possible. Having witnessed a humiliation all day they were all sun burned - one had only been released from Hospital an hour before following sunstroke - they had suffered copious quantities of awful, freezing, gas filled beer every night for the previous month and yet they were still singing their heads off convinced that against all the odds the tide was going to turn for their team the next day. Don't know how they ever got that pissed as their glasses could never have got as low as half full!
Yeah, I just meant that you were wrong. Certain articles, absolutely...anything with the rubber faced Katie Hopkins - but I Can't imagine a few thousand clicks from norwich fans does anyone too many favours in the grand scheme of things...
Well in that case you'd be wrong. Actually it makes the Guardian quite a bit of money - see that advert at the top of the page? Visits mean money. More evidenced visits mean the Guardian has more negotiating power with other advertisers and gets more money. Controversial comments which encourage readers to read the next column means yet more hits and more money. Katie Hopkins is just the tip of the iceberg.
Is what he said really that controversial? Doesn't it merely reflect what a sizeable percentage of Norwich supporters actually feel?
