Completely agree Robbie. Consistency from the players requires consistent tactics which have been found to work.
3-1 to us in that one. Martin, Idah and Yahyai(p) the scorers with Thorvaldsson and Adshead with assists.
Detailed tactical analysis of the Leicester game showing why Iheanacho came off after 39 minutes as they abandoned the wide diamond. https://totalfootballanalysis.com/m...ity-vs-norwich-city-tactical-analysis-tactics DF certainly won the tactical battle over Rodgers. Our defence operated much like that against ManCity with a few tweaks to make it even better. In attack, Buendia provided the vital pivot that we've been missing, outperforming Maddison with a 100% accuracy rating for his through balls to attacking players. On both defence and attack these are the kind of tweaks Robbie and I have been advocating and it could well have produced a shock away win. Hopefully we'll see something like this against Wolves.
Here's a remarkable stat from Squawka: Key stat: Teemu Pukki’s nine goals so far would be enough for him to win Norwich’s Premier League top scorer award in five of their eight previous seasons.
I remember Holty got 14 in the PL under Lambert and Huck's would be another. Did Ashton get 9 or more in his half season in the PL?
My biggest fear at start of season was that we would be kicked and bullied off the park. This sadly is now happening. We are not physically strong enough to compete for 90mins. 2 or 3 of Wolves players were built like rugby props,but also quick.We couldn't get the ball off them. As the game progressed,Wolves kept going,we fell away. Where our physical players are,I don't know,but the lovely one touch football we played in 1st half aint going to keep us up
Well, positivity reigns for now. Unless Watford score another 3 we won’t be bottom of the table at Christmas !! Happy Days !!
Christmas was clearly brought forward three days as far as David de Gea and Wan Bissaka were concerned
The lovely one touch football might well keep us up if DF didn't try to maintain it for 90+ minutes. We have stronger players on the bench -- Amadou, Stiepermann and Hernandez, for example -- but if they aren't used until it's too late they might as well not be there. Similarly, if there is no change of approach when we score first, on the principle that "a second will win the game", we will continue to lose games in which we take the lead. The starting eleven are quite capable of defending, if that's what they are instructed to do. But they aren't, especially at Carrow Road, unless we are playing Man City ........
Good point robbie. A more physical approach was certainly required in 2nd half on saturday. DF 's comments regarding "fresh legs" not needed as we were still creating chances was rather strange. 5mins on the park for all 3 subs was never going to change things. 6 points thrown away in last 2 home games
Physicality is an issue, but so is being 'street wise' when needed. A goal up at home, we should make it difficult for them by keeping our shape in defence and counter-attacking as they commit more players forward. This is the advantage of scoring first. Instead we keep plowing forward and play into their hands as they pick us off with counter-attacks of their own. Tettey and Trybull were clearly fading and that's surely the time to bring on Amadou, drop McLean back and bring Vrančic on. DF did eventually bring on 3 attacking players, but far to late to make a difference. We needed to counter Traore's pace and physicality as our players tired rather than wait until they went ahead and could then sit back. We've been mugged too many times in that fashion as other teams know well how to survive in the PL. Sadly, we don't.
I hadn't seen that comment budgie but it's very revealing. What it says to me is that it's not only the players who need to wise up about how to win games in the EPL. The interesting question is whether DF's reluctance to make the necessary adjustments to our approach comes from himself or from the brief he has accepted with its commitment to free-flowing, attacking and, above all, entertaining football. How entertaining is losing game after game that, with some adjustment, we might have taken something from?
It has taken me this long to comment on the game on Saturday. VAR is an absolute disgrace (I write this now without swearing as that was all I could do on Saturday night!). We won that game 3-2 fair and square. Big team bias is one thing but that hi-tech nonsense took things to a new level. Well done Norwich, we played well and both deserved and earned the 3 points. The referee was also lamentable.
A recurrent theme on here and from DF is the negative impact of the injuries to our CBs. While injury has prevented us fielding a settled CB pairing for more than six games at a time, of the 20 league games played, 8 involved a midfielder (Amadou or Tettey) alongside Godfrey at CB, while in the other 12 we have fielded various permutations of specialist CBs -- Hanley/Godfrey (3), Zimmermann/Godfrey (6), Zimmermann/Hanley (3). Comparing results, the 8 games with a makeshift CB pairing yielded just 4 points (1 W, 1 D) at an average of 0.5 points per game, and saw us concede an average of 2.25 goals per game. The 12 games with 2 specialist CBs yielded 9 points (2 W, 3 D) at an average of 0.75 points per game, and saw us concede an average of 1.8 goals per game. Can we then conclude that, if we get relegated, it will primarily be because of our injuries? If that is the conclusion you are tempted to draw, reflect on the fact that even a points yield of 0.75 ppg adds up to just 28 points over the season. If we had had the "luxury" of 2 specialist CBs every game so far, the same points yield would see us just 2 points better off than we are, with 15 points.
I see where your're coming from but the rationale is flawed as it does not account for factors, where the outcomes are less easily judged, for example, changes were almost constant, what outcomes would we have got if we had a consistent CB pairing at the heart of the defence, truth is no one knows. Also what about fitness on those occasions when we played with 2 established CB's, were they both fully match fit. When 2 established CB's were playing, but they knew if one of them got injury or sent off the impact would have been that we wouldn't have had 2 established CB's for following games did this consciously or sub-consciously effect their performance. What about morale, was this effected by the injuries, clearly we didn't fall apart, but even a small impact could effect outcomes considerably. Also what effect did Amadou or Tettey having to fill in have ! The truth is you can not just extrapolate the outcomes from when we did have 2 established CB's playing and say for example the outcomes would have been the same if we had had an established CB pairing for the whole of the season.
Well DF has outlined what we have to do to survive: https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-daniel-farke-premier-league-survival-plan-1-6445031 What he hasn't outlined though is just how we are going to do it.
Yes, the truth is indeed that nobody knows what effect having a consistent CB pairing would have had on our results. Maybe we would actually be even worse off, points-wise, than we are! My purpose, though, was not to simply extrapolate from the games where we were able to field two CBs, but to illustrate the scale of the improvement needed over and above that, i.e. to try to put our CB injury woes into perspective. My conclusion is that yes, it has been damaging, but not to the extent that some would like to think. Attributing greater importance to the injuries than is justified, simply serves to deflect attention from the tactical weaknesses that are the real explanation of why we are propping up the table. The frequency with which responsibility for goals conceded is attributable to failure, not of the CBs, but the midfield, is additional testimony, both to the limited damage from our CB injuries and those same failings. What is so sad (and/or irritating) is that our players have shown that they are perfectly capable of making the defensive adjustments needed, while still scoring goals, when sent out to do just that.