He did run back about 50 yards to defend and made a tremendous block - Rudd gave him a goalie's "kiss" for that. It's difficult to judge on dodgy streams, but it looks like AN has instilled the desire to put in a shift for the team and not just for the position.
Quite a good article on yesterday's game from Gary Gowers - http://norwichcity.myfootballwriter...s-firing-saints-a-dose-of-their-own-medicine/
Agree with most of that. Vadis was excellent, i've seen him play before and he's got what we've been missing; a true attacking midfielder who isn't afraid to run at the defence. Defenders hate that, "take note Nathan Redmond"! This is where goals will come from, midfield creating for strikers.
No idea how valid this is, and can't be arsed to trawl through and verify it, but fantastic news if true @MikeySCC Liking #ncfc please log in to view this image survival chances when only 2 of 60 prem clubs to be relegated had as many points as we do at the same stage.
I would be very surprised if one wasn't our first relegation EDIT just checked JK's "I done a table" thread, and our ’95 relegation was definitely one of them. I don't think our ’14 relegation can have been though we might have had just one fewer
Tettey named in BBC team of the week. Shame the narrative talks about Saints issues rather than Tettey's performance.
I just hope that his knees hold up. He is fast becoming a lynch pin for our team. I thought that AN would rest him for one or two games in the festive season, but he has played them all. Guess Mulumbu will take his place in the cup though. At least I hope so.
Twas ever thus so. It's always the opposition playing badly (Liverpool, Man Utd, Saints) rather than us sticking to a game plan and executing it well.
Some very positive comments post-match about Vadis' contribution. Apart from the journo from the Daily Echo, who ended up looking like a right prat!! http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2016/01/0...ct-to-vadis-odjidja-ofoes-performance-again/?
The Guardian's (typically excellent) "Ten Talking Points" column also singled out Vadis for praise which was in stark contrast to the rest of the media's focus on Saturday's match between Koeman v Wanyama v Southampton v Mane. http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/jan/04/premier-league-talking-points-weekend-action
So, in this piece, Tony Cascarino 'grades' all the PL teams based on the weekend's performances and results...with one glaring, massive, hideous, unforgivable exception!! http://www.skysports.com/football/n...gue-grades-tony-cascarino-offers-his-verdict?
First and foremost, yes, Vadis was excellent against Saints. I absolutely agree with that. He looked very sharp, and like a lot of you on here, I certainly wouldn't be opposed to him starting against Stoke. However, I find it slightly odd that so many people (not necessarily on here) are talking as if he's "finally" been given a chance and has proved his worth. He played about 70mins against Spurs and didn't exactly look the part (yeah, yeah, nor did anyone else except maybe Rudd. And yes, he was playing in a different position to what he played against Saints). Maybe I'm just in a bit of a negative mood. I dunnno. I just hope we're not going to hype him up too much and be massively disappointed. Feel free to chastise me for my negativity. Fingers-crossed Vadis gets more game time for us and makes the most of it
Were Norwich originally missing? They've been added now. I'd agree with his rating of C. We passed. We didn't play brilliantly though. And his analysis is simple, but correct IMO.
Perfectly reasonable to disagree and an excellent point you've made to give balance. One swallow doesn't a summer make and all that - VOO needs to perform regularly like he did on Saturday.
So they have. Scroll down to the very end where the comments column is - I felt compelled to show my annoyance at our omission - especially after a valiant win
