That Tettey has overcome his knee issues, and evolved into a player who can operate in the Premier League is a testament to his character and coaching. That we still need to rely on Tettey is a failure of recruitment. Fundamentally, he's the only midfielder we have with the defensive discipline, tackling and interception skills, etc, to provide a shield to our defence. Nobody else in our squad breaks up an attack like him. And whilst he's improved at finding the simple pass, and making himself available as a passing option, he achieves ball retention and not ball progression. Hopefully between Mumba, Sorensen and Sitti we find someone who can do the same shielding job, and get on the front foot themselves and instigate moves.
20 Norwich P38 W5 D6 L27 GF26 GA75 GD-49 Pts21 If that isn't failure of approach, strategy, tactics and coaching, I don't know what is.
DH makes a good point, but I noticed yesterday that this was also true of ManCity much of the time. Our passing wasn't bad much of the time and much of the time Citeh's passing was similar - don't go forward unless it produces an advantage. The main difference was that their players needed only one touch to move the ball on and they are better at creating advantages. Tettey was at his best when playing alongside Leitner last season. Leitner's ability to provide an outlet and then make a telling pass upfield was a big part of our success, but something has gone wrong between him and DF so he's out of the picture. McLean can make a good pass and is better defensively, but too often of late he's struggled to make any impact. One reason is the skill of opponents in the PL. Citeh players were anticipating our passes and intercepting. The more that happened the more we went sideways as the score went up and our confidence went down. The key aim now is to work that confidence back up so we can get a run going early and keep it going. One of our main weaknesses this year has been the lack of experience in the line-up. The new players are all in their early 20's, so Tettey's experience in the centre becomes even more important to keep things on an even keel.
If Krul stays then I think that along with him our defense should be Byram, Zimmermann, Hanley and one other with Aarons being sold. Godfrey could move to DMF with perhaps Tettey being on the bench. Our defense has been very poor in PL and in Championship and as we are unlikely to strengthen it to any great extent, then this for me is the best formation. A replacement for Aarons, if sold, should be sought from a experienced player from the highest level who may not be at his peak (cheaper) but would still put in a good shift. Klose looks like he is still carrying his long injury and may be used as a sub next season.
But we tried and failed. It is hard to imagine that we would have been worse this season with the loss of anyone but Krul or the early Pukki vintage, but Tettey was one of our better players again, he was also instrumental in getting us promoted. For these reasons and the ongoing failure to find a replacement, he still looks a critical player for us. Like you i'd love to see an improvement arrive and leave him a useful squad player. but until it happens, he remains important and phasing him out premature. Every season the need gets greater? You could say that of every player and position if you can improve them. But from a playing perspective he is not as sacrificable as many in our squad. Because of his age of course it has to be increasingly important, but I think he could have at least one more good season in him. Bah!
You're not wrong, but the strategy may prove to have been correct in the long term. IF we can bounce back better equiped to stay up. Bah!
What this season has done, especially since the re-start, is turn that "IF" into "IF", due almost entirely to question-marks over DF's ability to adapt. It is no good pinning faith on "better" players and fewer injuries, etc. if the shortcomings are in how they are being coached to play. Farkeball proved solid enough to win the Championship, with Pukki's stellar season compensating for a fragilel defence. That it isn't solid enough at the higher level was evident even before the season was suspended. What evidence has there been since the re-start to suggest that DF has any clue as to how to "equip" us better to stay up, or even to maximise our chances of getting up?
In fairness I dont think the only question mark is over Farke and his ability to adapt. Another is over our ability to finance a PL side. Another is, is Webber's vision possible with either Farke or the finances? I think you sell the team short in painting it as some oneman Pukki goal show, there were many valuable contributions, they created all those chances for himas well as weighing in with plenty of midfield goals. I agree that with the time off, I am rather disappointed that Farke had the team respond so poorly with still an outside chance of staying up. He is rightly now under serious pressure to perform. This will be his third championship season, with parachute payments and a good squad for the championship, we are not in the mire we were when he arrived and anything short of 6th has to be seen as failure. A poor start even and the pitchforks will be being sharpened Bah!
I really do not think that last seasons failure relates to tactics or systems - it is completely down to the ability or lack of ability of the players. In our promotion year DF tried numerous systems in the early games without success and it was only when he found a system that suited the players in the squad that we mounted a challenge for promotion. A decision was made at Board level to not spend money in a probable futile bid to stay up so DF was left with the squad that got us promotion so he had to stick to the same system. What was the point of trying systems that had not worked in the Championship? You can change systems as much as you like but if the players are not good enough nothing is going to work especially in the Premiership where the backroom teams of the Clubs soon work out your systems and players. IMO none of our players were good enough as individuals to be up to Premiership standard and, whilst I hope I am proved wrong. I cannot see any of our players attracting the attention of any established Premiership Club. Take CB's for example. Were any of ours up to Premiership standard? I don't think they were and therefore it did not matter whether we played 3 at the back or 4-4-2 we were going to leak goals. If all of the players kept losing the ball in their own half no system or tactics would cover that. When our most consistent player was a 30 something DM with dodgy knees you can understand the problem. The squad was not up to Premiership standard and will be overhauled and, in all probability, the system might have to be changed to accomodate arrivals and departures. I really do go along with the philosophy that the game is as complicated as you want to make it.
Well, that has been DF's own refrain from even before the start of the season; the side was built to play one way, and couldn't be expected to play any other. Except that, come game No. 5, DF himself sent them out to play a different way, resulting in a famous victory. Thankfully he did the same yesterday; I shudder to think what the scoreline would have been if we'd gone out to play Championship-style Farkeball. If he'd sent the team out with a similar game plan to yesterday's in the other 36 games, I genuinely believe we could have survived. Ask good players to make an unsound system work, and they soon appear poorer than they are; a sound system, on the other hand, can enable quite moderate players to enjoy success (Burnley, Sheffield United, for example).
Robbie, you are not still harping on about the Man city game !!! That game proves nothing. apart from the fact that we fortunate that all 3 of our meaningful attacks resulted in goals . Some of your criticism of Farke I get and he certainly has a lot to prove during the first half of next season . Sttiepermann is clearly rated by yourself and you feel he should have started more games than he did. Fair enough, that is your opinion, but to me , he has looked out of his depth nearly every game that he started. It is a shame because I rated him as he was such a force in the Championship. But sadly, he has not being starting many games for a reason. And even when he does play and has a poor game or does something wrong , in your eyes it is not his fault but down to poor coaching ! You couldn't make it up !
Forgive me for asking but did we actually have a POTS vote? Genuine question. Best of a very poor showing for me: Gold = Krul, by a country mile. Silver = Cantwell Bronze = Tettey. The rest can divi up the wooden spoon between them.
Damning indictment of our "season" https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/matt-howman-post-manchester-city-1-6765592
No, I was, firstly, pointing out that we didn't in fact stick to "how we played in the Championship" and showed we were quite capable of gaining points by setting out to defend and play on the counter as opposed to engaging in Championship-style "on the front foot" Farkeball; and secondly, I was disputing your assertion that "last seasons failure" was entirely down to quality of player, not tactics or systems. I genuinely believe that our players were quite capable of doing better had DF approached every game as if we were playing a top of the table team. We were relegated because we lost to the Villas, Watfords and West Hams of the EPL, i.e. the teams DF thought we could beat by "imposing our game". As regards the Burnley and Sheffield Utd players, I don't believe they are man for man that much better than ours. The primary reason for their success is because of how they play, not because they have an array of top quality players.
I've only "harped on" about the Man City win for what it showed from a tactical point of view. And I've repeated it in commenting on Sunday's game, despite the different result. My point has always been that if DF had shown proper, Man City-type, "respect" to every team we played, rather than trying to pretend we were good enough to force them into submission playing "our game", we wouldn't now be surveying the total wreckage of our season One of the most striking things our games this season have demonstrated is the contrast between our ability to "press", "mark" or "cover" opponents with the ball, and their "pressing", "marking" or "covering" our players when we have the ball. It can be summed up very easily: numbers. It is common to see opposition attackers one on one with a Norwich defender; It is uncommon to see a Norwich attacker one on one with an opposition defender. Standardly, our attackers find themselves out-numbered by two or often three opponents, not standing off, or just getting between the player in possession and the goal, but actively "hunting the ball", trying to block and dispossess. This is down to coaching (and of course fitness levels). Single Norwich player v de Bruyne is no contest irrespective of who the Norwich player is. Stiepermann was doing exactly what he'd been coached to do in such a situation: he didn't dive in, he shut down the direct route to goal, he kept de Bruyne from penetrating the penalty area, and left him with the least good option of an angled shot from distance. But being de Bruyne, he did what de Bruyne does, he fired it into the far top corner. Brilliant from de Bruyne, that's all.
