Re. Holt, immediately after he signed his new contract and was interviewed and pictured along with Butterfield and Whittaker (I think it was them), everyone was commenting about how fit and "slimline" he looked. OK, you can put weight on over a couple of months, but the idea that he hasn't prepared properly for the start of the season strikes me as ludicrous, and the suggestion that he is not so concerned, having got his contract, even more ludicrous. We all know he has to work at keeping his weight under control, it's a constant battle for him, and PL acknowledged it in his end of season speech at the club dinner. I am with Beefy on this. Holty wouldn't have achieved what he has done by being weak willed or not determined to do his best. As Beef and other have said, he has started slowly every season. If CH isn't happy, Holt will be benched.
I think the fat lad accusations have got out of hand its true. But the inescapable fact is that Holt doesn't look worth his place at the moment IMO. If CH sticks with him, then fair enough, but this talk of slow starters is not on. We finished mid table last year because we could score goals not stop them. Now the defence appears tighter, albeit against toothless attacks in the last 3 games, we aren't scoring. 38 0-0 draws might not be enough over a season.
IMO what we are witnessing is a process of adjustment, to new players and CH's preferred style of play. That does take time, and Holt is as much involved in the process as everyone else. If PL was still in charge, probably Morison would have been starting and Holt on the bench. But there were many of us calling for a Holt/Jackson partnership when the season started and that's what we got. These first 4 games are not going to be representative of the season as a whole -- any more than for Liverpool's season, or Tottenhams, or Southampton's etc. However, all of us can see one huge plus so far: the improved defensive play. That's the foundation on which the attacking play will prosper, as it surely will.
Saw the game on tv and thought it looked like a Championship game with no real quality. Must admit due to work and family commitments can no longer get to many games so have to rely on Sky (unfortunately). Thought Snodgrass looked threatening and pleased with both center halfs however thought our full backs struggled somewhat and lacked support from our midfield. Holt looks like a spell on the bench might be in order to get him geed up and firing (like last season) and thought Surman was particularly poor. Again only see the team play now and again so if anyone can shed any light on previous performance be much appreciated. To sum up we looked flat and devoid of any real shape and purpose. Was this a case of bad day at the office or is this typical of our performances? Thoughts appreciated.
I think we have it within the squad to not worry about our position after 38 games. But whether that involves the current strikers is another matter. This myth about slow starting is an excuse by those who don't think Holt can do any wrong. In his first season for us he scored a hat trick in his second game! If CH thinks he has more time before tinkering then we have to back him. But its very frustrating to watch so many chances go begging. With better finishing we could easily have had 9 points.
Ok we could easily have scored.In that pinball session in the first half it looked harder not to but I don't think West Ham were that impressive in defence and we will get some far harder nuts to crack.What worries me though is the emphasis on defence.To be honest I will happily accept the kind of scoreline we had against Man City last year to see us win a few.If you compare our fixtures so far this season we are already four points down on last year.On the other hand it could be worse,we could support Ipswich.
Agreed both Manchester clubs can thrash us as long as we win home games against teams as appalling as QPR and WHU. Thats not always possible of course but one win and three defeats would have produced the same amount of points. We have to have faith that the chances will be taken and we will start winning.
hughton has come out with words backing his captain, so expect him to start on sunday. i would like to see morrison start instead with jackson, but then i'm not the manager also in midfield please can we see David Fox again, he can really spark some good distribution for us. hopefully elliot bennett will be back as well. i also wonder when we will see Alex Tettey - wasn't on the bench on sat although the reason for that may be tactical rather than injuries.
Welcome wilder1983. I've seen all 4 games so far and leaving the Fulham defeat out of the equation, this was a pretty poor perormance - especially when compared to the feast that was served up at WHL a couple of weeks ago. Surman isn't a natural replacement for Pilks or E Bennett, so I thought we missed having a natural winger and will be good to see either or both fit and available for selection. Also, the team is going through a transition phase with the emphasis on defence, but CH has admitted that we need to create more of a threat in front of goal, so my interpretation of what he's saying is - 'Be patient' and results will come.
I think we missed Pilks a lot, he is a consistent threat on the ings and contributes very well, I want him back as soon as possible, and of course his natural replacement is Bennett, not Surs, who I've always fancied as a more central midfielder. That, coupled with Howson going missing in the second part of the second half, lead to the head tennis and the general loss of control of the game. It's time for Hoolahan now, Newcastle can be the game for him to shine, but he's a marked man remember, Newcastle will know what he's capable of. I think Johnson did okay but the only change I'd make is Howson for Hoolahan. Making it work is the key. Have we we ever played Hoolahan in the center of a 4-4-2? People assume it wouldn't work but it may do, it would just require discipline.
A Norwich fan just said on Talksport it looks like Holt has eaten Wes Hoolahan! Do you respect that view then , you bumpkin nut?
IMO there is absolutely no point in simplistic comparisons of results against team X this season with the result against that team last season. In what sense was the QPR team we played a fortnight ago the same team as the one we played at Carrow Road last year? Only that they were QPR. In what sense were either we or Tottenham the same teams as played at WHL late last season, other than it was NCFC v THFC? It's a nonsense. Also a nonsense is to talk about an "emphasis" on defence. Was there any lack of attacking play in the Spurs game? Or the QPR game? Or Saturday's game? Could anyone really say that in those three games we played to avoid losing rather than to win? You might say that of the WHU team in the second half, but not us. Four games is far too early to draw any meaningful conclusions -- and that goes for pretty much every team in the league.
That's a pretty stupid thing to say, and I can't agree with it, but I'm guessing it ranks pretty low compared to some of the stupid ****ing things QPR fans say Like "we're going to stay up"
Beef, I hope you ain't condoning Honey-Monster Holt eating by little Irish friend? Now that really would show you in a bad light!
The biggest shock for me watching MOD was Holt.....god he looks terrible and his weight has blown him up to double the size he was....So why is your manager playing him as his fitness level looked like he was pub player. What is the matter with him as he was brilliant last season...
