For goodness sake, all this talk about giving the ball away easy, poor crossing etc eyc. And what do most of you pine on about, we need some pace upfront, another big man in case Holts out, get Garrido to cross more, practice the set peices. Whilst reading the aftermath of this dreadful game and your opinions I don't recall a single one of you has mentioned we sign some people who can pass the ball properly in midfield or a striker who's movement is good enough to receive a pass on the floor to feet and play someone in. Do none of you find that quite disturbing and wonder why quality English players are in such short supply, when all you demand from them is exactly what they give you, physical attributes. Why exacerbate our situation by increasing the reliance on this one dimensional and predictable style. What difference would it have made if we added pace up front, none, we already had it, and according to Pyjamas (certainly not me) we had someone who could handle the rough stuff. What we didn't have was touch and technique, pretty much throughout the midfield and most certainly upfront. Having the nightmare in crossing merely showed the real deficiency which was in passing, control and movement. It was awful. I'm genuinely not saying this to be provocative but are you all really that berift of ideas, because all I ever hear on this site is power, pace, aerial threat, size, big, powerful, crossing, yawn, yawn, yawn. The game has moved on from this. None of you EVER talk about bringing in players with good feet, excellent control, only as an afterthough when stating they are big and pacey, Its never the first thing you mention. Perhaps some of you do not do this but its always something which sticks out like a sore thumb to me. What I also don't understand is that I had a heated debate on here saying Jackson is incapable of playing upfront (prior to Newcastle) on his own because his touch and technique are terrible. On this debate pretty much everyone disagreed and I was talking apparent "pish" etc etc. I mentioned this debate to someone at work, who's a season ticket holder, has played football and has kids at the academy. Before I even gave my view he firmly interrupted and said "Jackson can't play on his own, his touch and control are dreadful". Its not even like he's a habitual moaner or that he's particularly pro short pass. Why is it the first person I mention this to in real life, agrees wholeheartedly? but out of all the people on here nobody agreed or chose to express the view(I think someone may have raised doubts, Beef maybe). Now I find that most strange and its certainly not the first time its happened to me. Theres an article on here about crossing and reference to Garry Birtles, I listened to Birtles (and while he is probably the last person I would want to have my views associated with) he essentially said that crossing was not difficult (and I think Birtles was a winger) because your hitting an area for the target to aim for "get it in there". I had another heated debate in which I essentially said the same thing that crossing a ball was pretty much one of the easiest things to do in football because your hitting bigger areas and the main point was that a short precise pass was a much harder skill. Again, howls of derision from everyone. I really don't get where some of you are coming from alot of the time.
I don't think anyone would object to bringing these type of players in at all, if it was the style of play we currently made use of. I don't like comparing us to Stoke, but here we go. Stoke have established themselves in this division by being very good at the back, and playing a style of football that gets results, even if it is ugly, and relies on long balls, long throws, etc. Now they are established, they're trying to bring in more creative players, and play more attractive football. Whilst we're not as bad as Stoke were when it comes to our style, this season we have tried to keep things tight at the back, and this has required the two defensive midfielders. In order to get this defensive solidity, it's required some sacrifice in terms of creativity, we rely on Hoolahan alone for this. To improve the squad as it currently stands, our current striker requirements are someone big, powerful, who presents an aerial threat, pace being an attractive bonus. Short term (this and maybe the next window), that's what we need. If we start trying to bring in players capable of intricate passing, neat midfield moves, etc, then we sacrifice the defensive solidity which this team is currently being built on. We can't revolutionise the squad in a single transfer window, and the sort of midfielder capable of offering the defensive strength and range of passing is currently out of our price range. To change to playing a more Swansea style of football would require probably 4 new players, and the time to teach the entire squad this new style. We don't have that time or money in January, so it isn't going to happen. Long term however, I'm all for a more passing style of play. It'll probably require a much better defensive midfielder than Johnson and Tettey, to allow us to play just a single DM, which free's up a midfield spot for a more creative player. As I said, currently a lot of our creativity goes through Hoolahan, so when he has an off day, we do too, as happened at the weekend. With this boss of a DM in place, the current 2nd DM can be replaced by someone more creative, who can combine with Hoolahan more, which should lead to a more creative style of play. At the moment though, we don't have the players, money or time to make a significant change to the way we play. Long term, it's something I'd hope we'd look to do.
I think we'd need alot more than 4 players to be honest. The thing I find so strange on here is that nobody talks about moving to that direction, nobody seems in the slightest interested in it. Or willing to admit we play a simplistic mostly mid - long ball brand of football.
But yeah, 4+ players of that kind of quality is more than our budget will stretch to, certainly this season with the £10m debt payoff. I think most of the time we talk on here, we talk about short-term goals and issues with the squad. When talking long-term, we tend to think about the aims (staying in PL, expand stadium, then maybe cups or Europa league), rather than how we go about achieving that on the pitch. A significant style change like you suggest requires PL stability, and investment. For the next 18 months at least, we need to make sure we're still in this league, and look to be less and less involved in the relegation battle. For now, that comes from our current style, and any squad improvements will need to be for players to play this system. At the moment, a lot of our threat comes from out wide, or from counter-attacks, we can hold the ball, but final balls still tend to come from out wide. The passing play is simpler, and further from the goal, it aims to draw players out of position to make room for someone to cross, rather than to split the defence open with a killer ball through the middle, or to pass through them with intricate one touch football. I assume the latter is more what you're after?
Your expectations are pretty low huh on the type of player we need carrabuh There is a difference between realism and optimism when it comes to ncfc, always has been
Nothing fantastical about passing a football. The Europeans can do it on less, Swansea done it, thats not so much the point I'm making. Its to do with people not even discussing the type of football, or wanting to have something a bit easier on the eye. I'm not asking for a Mata, or a Silva, I'm asking that we at least attempt to play more football and buy like minded players not just "get it wide and cross" because it will make us a better team. I've got no interest in seeing us morph into Stoke (which is gradually happening) just because its easier. Instead of moving away we seem to be getting closer to that modal.
For what it matters Carrubah I agree with you entirely and have consistently said on other threads that we shouldn't waste money on ' sticking plaster ' signings this month but should go for a massive clear out and reconstruction of the squad starting in the summer. The incident that stood out most to me on Saturday was when City broke away and we were 3 on 2. The ball from Hoolahan was poor and the pass back across goal was even worse but look at the running of the 2 players wide of Hoolahan. No intelligent thought whatsoever. If they had pushed wider then the 2 defenders had a problem - do they go with the wide men and leave Hoolahan with a clear run at goal or do they tackle Hoolahan and give the wide man a clear run at goal with a ball behind them. Our play is all based on getting it into the box by long balls from wide or midfield and I am sure Hughton goes along with this because of the players at his disposal. I am equally certain that he is the Manager to change our style to say ' a Tottenham ' approach to the game but it will take time, patience and resources all of which are probably in short supply at Carrow Road.
Swansea have been playing that style for years though, it's taken them all the way up the divisions, so every player at the club is used to playing that way, I suspect right down to youth level. And it's not like they haven't had investment either. The ludicrous bids for Allen (and Sinclair) brought in ~£23m, and were able to spend £6m and £5.5m on two players. To improve our squad all our bids were under £3.5m. Also, Swansea have a manager with experience in Spain, and who was a player known for his passing, so he has experience of that kind of play to draw on, Hughton doesn't. I don't think Europe is a fair comparison, because the entire style of play there is different. There are few, if any, big physical sides in the Spanish league for example, where that style of play is most prevalent.
Carrabuh which players in the current squad do you feel are good enough long term? If hypothetically we were to play a more passing game. I do agree we require a bit more technique and ingenuity in the squad and better movement. However I also feel we are trying to do the basics well (you could argue passing is a basic) and make ourselves competitive. Then the nexts step would be to inject a bit more invention which is the only way you can become a consistently good side in the top flight. The thing is with a passing game is that its higher risk. If you are not spot on with it you can look terrible and lose against poorer well organised sides. Look at Arsenal, yes they play nice football but when they are not at the races they look very poor and have no plan B. I guess like everything it is a case of having a balance although everyone's opinion on what that should be differs.
Have to wait and see who he signs, I personally think we'll be going the other way more. With the signings (whom I prefered to Lamberts first Prem season) I didn't expect the crossing to be ASAP, I thought we were going to be very narrow.
Who would you sign than carrabuh? Personally i would like biglia most, but he looks out of our price range. I think you sometimes forget who we are. Most technically talented players get snapped up by bigger teams, there isn't a lot of them about, or less than you think anyway.
Not sure that a mass clear-out and restructure is the best policy. (See the likes of QPR for what happens when you try to move too fast). We can improve the squad and how we play but its going to take more than a season and a half back in the prem.
Sorry, just realised I'd inadvertently brought a conversation into 2 threads: Spanish and Portuguese teams may play that style, but I'd say the overall quality of both leagues is much poorer. If you had a league consisting of the 10 worst EPL and La Liga sides, I think that 8 or 9 English sides would be in the top half. The other problem with picking from Spain is the physicality. The PL is much more physical, and so any player signed would have to be able to cope with that, and not get bullied off the ball easily. Whilst I don't know what kind of income La Liga sides have, I assume less than the PL, the current financial problems at several clubs might be an indication that their wage bills are too high. Whether this hints at high wages, or bargains for PL teams, I don't know. What's Michu's wage? Granted Fox and Hoolahan wouldn't be that expensive, but both are nearing or in their 30's, and whilst we want Fox playing at the moment, I don't think a Fox/Tettey or Fox/Johnson midfield would work as well as Tettey/Johnson did during our long run. I think it all comes down to the defensive midfielder position. If we can unearth an absolute gem in that position, it'll allow us to play with more creativity, and give us more freedom in formation, whilst more or less maintaining our defensive solidity. If you could be bothered (don't blame you for not being!) to go through some of my previous posts, I have at times speculated on what this elusive DM might bring us in terms of creativity and a more attacking formation. Certainly it would give us freedom to play Fox as a deep lying playmaker, with Hoolahan as an advanced playmaker, or perhaps give someone like Howson the chance to go really box-to-box, without being shackled by defensive duties.
The City Players I like are Holt, because he's got reasonably good feet and can turn a player and feed players the ball. Plus he scores and makes space for others Hoolahan, because he's patient, doesn't go for the immediate easy option, would rather retain the ball than lose it, always wants the ball and is brave. Snodgrass, he's fairly skilled with the ball at his feet and looks and is less reliant on others, passing not really part of his game however but he just does enough for me Tettey, he can break up the attacks and breaks with thought, not every opportunity, plays it reasonably tidy and easy, I'm not going to be put off by one lousy game. Fox, because he's neat and tidy and likes to keep the ball ticking over and wait for an opportunity rather than force it The rest of the midfieders are what I 'd describe as forward facing, one direction only, passing forward at every possible opportunity and a bit mindless, frantic and eager to give the ball away. I'll absolve Butterfield from this because he hasn't had the chance and might turn a bit special given what I've read about his ideas on how to play. Johnson just enjoys giving the ball away to much. With the exception of Garrido none of the defence can really pass a ball, but I don't see that as a massive issue.
The thing there though Carrabuh, is what you think we're missing seems to be a left sided player, and if you don't rate Johnson, then we'd need another DM to play with/instead of Tettey/Fox, because you couldn't rely on just those 2 for the whole season. If you like Garrido, then I assume you'd also agree with the people who want to tie him to a permanent contract. If you accept Holt is getting on a little, and will get injuries, etc, then you'd probably also agree that we need another striker to alternate, or a young player looking to usurp Holt as he improves. I also assume you agree with most of us that having Moro/Jackson lead the line for an extended period of time would be a worry. That gives a shopping list of DM, LW, ST, and Garrido, with your requirements being that the new signings can pass the ball a bit more. Very few on here will argue that those are positions that need targeting. Some may want a LW to challenge Pilks, not to outright replace him, and some may want a DM for his tough tackling and solidity than his ball playing, but other than that, what your asking for really isn't any different to the rest of us, you just perhaps want a little more passing ability.
But what about who to sign? I agree with your analysis on our players you like. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a mix, like our current squad, of technical and physical players. It makes us more adaptable depending on opposition which i think is important as a team looking to survive. I think Hughton should exploit the depth of squad more and would like to see Fox playing most good games. Players I would like us to sign: Nicklas Helenius Lucas Biglia Although they could be out of our price range
The big problem with the midfield is we rely on Hoolahan too much, he is the only player in that area capable of seeing the game differently. We need one of the central midfielders to have vision to spot the pass and distribute the ball around I'm afraid Johnson and Tettey can be a little bit route one for me, not that their dreadful players we just need someone in there who has a superb passing range and a good footballing brain. Forward situation I could rant on all day but I made my point this summer about it and I still think we've had an absolute mare. We need to seriously splash the cash and that Jimmy Bullard lookalike and that donkey at West Ham are far from it. I'm sure there are people working behind the scenes on this but I hope they are looking at the right calibre of player.
OK I consider myself to be reasonably knowledgeable about players in the wider European environment, although not to the level some of the other guys here are. I agree that the best value for money is, theoretically, in low La Liga, Eiredivisie, and to an extent Ligue 1 and Bundesliga. Serie A seem to have worked out that British clubs are made of money, and other leagues either tend to lack quality, or tend to have a squad of players earning 100k. The reason I say theoretically is exactly what others have said - physicality. If anyone can point out to me a team of 'bruisers' a la Stoke, West Ham, or even to an extent ourselves (Tettey, Johnson, Bassong, Barnett, Holt, Morison) in La Liga, you may change my mind. So, with that in mind, where should we look? Say, for arguments sake, we intend to sign a ST, DM, and a left sided utility player (im more of the opinion that they should be competition for Garrido than Pilks, but there we go). Your Defensive Midfielder has to come from one of the more physical leagues. Absolutely vital. Traditionally that has been France, and I trust Hughton to be aware of every French-African player in existence. M'Vila and Biglia (not French-African, Anderlecht, Belgium) are almost certainly out of our price range with Arsenal and QPArse sniffing around, so we will be looking at someone who hasn't been mentioned. I'm not a Ligue 1 fanatic so I can't help you there. But I would trust Hughton to know what he's doing, and we're probably looking at a minimum £5m spend here if we were to move in January. Left sided, I would hope that we were looking for someone with a bit more pace so that we could put them and Elliott Bennett on the pitch at the same time. Pilkington and Garrido show flashes of great movement and ability, but aren't consistent. Let's get them some cover. Left sided players come at a premium, as always. For me, Dodô of Roma would be worth a look on loan - not getting a sniff there yet - but we probably need a permanent player. Johnny Russell of Dundee United could be an attacking option, but he wouldn't compete with Garrido. Again, I can't think of any who would cost less than £4-5m. (Herita Ilunga is on a free, but I doubt he would have the quality seeing as West Ham and then Doncaster let him go.) So, for the striker. We do currently need someone who can play our system (unlike some appear to think), because when we have a suitable forward (Holt) the system works. Unfortunately, most European countries don't produce Holt. I imagine this has something to do with talent being recognised earlier, and moulded to fit the European style. Have a look through here - http://eurorivals.net/top-scorers.html most of these players are shorter than I, and I'm not even 6 foot. Wilfried Bony is the obvious exception but never in a million years would he come here. From that list, we may be able to afford some players in the less strong leagues (ie Philipp Hosiner of Wien, as we spoke about last week). Problem with that is they have no experience at a level even close to this - it's a risk and probably an expensive one. I would imagine that a striker of the quality we want would set us back a good £6m+ in January. That goes for Hooper, Hosiner, Berg, and almost anyone you care to mention. So, basically, as DHC has said elsewhere, we're looking at a minimum £15m spend assuming we can even find these players. Norwich do not have that money. So, we are just going to have to keep going. Maybe we will get one in - my priority would be a striker. What I don't believe we should do is purchase stop-gap players such as CMS or Murray (maybe even Mulenga falls into this category), and spend what little money we do have on players who will need replacing within a year. Is that enough content for you Gossy?
