First interview with Ben Knapper sounds good and his tactical view sounds very similar to Wagner's: "Ever since I was a kid, the football that I've enjoyed watching is attacking, proactive football where teams try and control the game with the ball. They'll be the protagonist in the game, and want to go to win the ball back high and be aggressive and try to entertain and score goals. That's what excites me as a fan, that's what I think is the best way to approach the game. I think that it's important to acknowledge regardless of playing style or philosophy people may or may not like, it's important to have consistency and have a team that's identifiable. I want to make sure over time, we can build something that people understand exactly what a Norwich team looks like. It's important that when people come here to watch us play, they'll understand what they're going to see, and they can expect to see some common themes, and what represents a Norwich City team. Whether that's men's senior team, women's senior team, or any of our academy teams. That's something that will take time, but ultimately for me it's aggressive, proactive and attacking football." https://www.canaries.co.uk/content/knapper-interview
Sorry to carry on this discussion on another thread but I look at it differently. Apart from a 5 game spell the reign of Wagner has been a debacle so I just cannot agree that to get 9 points from 5 games involving only one side in the top 10 and 2 in the bottom 3 shows he has turned the corner. If he doesn't get enough points out of these games will we get the argument that we cannot change Managers during the transfer window and so on. As with everything it is a matter of opinion but I am firmly of the belief that Wagner refuses to change a system that no longer works at this level and which his players still don't fully understand - especially their individual roles in that system. Bite the bullet and give up on him now!!
I've been questioning why Batth can't get a game as Duffy & Gibson become the division laughing stocks , & only through them being unavailable he plays & we win . Wagner will no doubt drop him as soon as his favourites return . Worst defense in the league & he refused to change it since September. I think Wagner should be told that if he doesn't get 3 wins from the next 5 he's toast
A discussion usually involves people with differing views 1950, so no problem there. I can't see that the transfer window is a major factor as we have no money to spend. The quote from Knapper's first interview above suggests that he and Wagner are seeking the same approach so a change would seem to suggest a new coach using the same tactics. My view is that Knapper needs to decide whether he and Wagner can make the system work as players return from injury or there's a need for change now or in the near future for a 'new manager bounce'. Given that Knapper's view is similar to Wagner's, my guess is that David gets another chance.
It's too expensive to keep sacking managers we are still paying Farke & Smith's contracts off . There should be a bare minimum expected results though. If Wagner loses another 3 on the bounce then he has to go, minimum of 9 points from next 15
I agree about the cost Dunc but in my opinion, and I agree this opinion is not universally shared, neither Farke or Smith deserved the boot as much as Wagner does. I can see the argument that on economic grounds we have to give him more time but in my view he is incapable of turning it round and we could then lurch into a bigger financial crisis. Whatever his system is, he is not getting his players to understand their role in it leaving a situation, as an example, of unmarked attackers scoring and the defenders looking at each other as if to say ' who was supposed to pick him up'. I just can't see things improving until he goes. He will now win the next 5 games on the bounce leaving me looking, as usual, a blithering idiot!!!
The transfer window is two way Rick. We have got to sell players and cut the wage bill substantially as well and any outs have to be replaced with cheaper ins.
I'm blindly hoping Batth is the miracle cure to our embarrassing defence & we'll improve with him in central defence. Eventually Hanley will return & Barnes & Sargent come back then we'll improve, centre backs playing on the half way line hasn't really paid off so hopefully Wagner will try & address that
I think that was part of playing Placheta and Fisher at FB, with one staying on the high line to cope with counterattacks with Stacey and Giannoulis coming on to provide more threat in the second half while still covering counterattacks. Stacey in particular seems to have been running out of steam late in games.
Maybe with the lack of pace at the back we should push up further leaving more space so the opposition get confused and fluff 1 on 1s
Surely our current wage bill has been budgeted for this season so I can't see the need to sell unless we sack Wagner before January. Our current most valuable players are Sargent, Sara, Rowe and Gunn. Selling any of those would seriously weaken our small squad which is further depleted by injuries, even if we bring in cheaper replacements, who would also need time to adjust. There were calls for Farke to be sacked after we finished 14th in his first season. Wagner won't have the equivalent of a full season until late January. Knapper coming in will be a key factor, but the owners and directors will also have their views on whether Wagner should stay or go. My guess is that they'll give him another 5 games until mid December with the expectation that we will be mid table or above and then make a move if we aren't. Three of those 5 games are at home and a win over QPR at CR could lift us to around 12th place with two consecutive wins building the players' confidence. With Barnes back and Sainz available, our attacking options are improving and hopefully, as Dunc says, Batth will improve us defensively.
Our defensive frailties can't be rectified by bringing in one player, or even two, or three players. We'll continue shipping goals, whoever plays, unless "the structural issues out of possession and in defensive transitions" (Ben Lee, Cardiff v Norwich) are addressed.
I said improve, not solve all of our defensive problems Robbie. Ben's full summary puts that into perspective: "It would be hard to deny there were a few positives to take from Norwich’s performance on Saturday; in possession, their patterns were good. But the structural issues out of possession and in defensive transitions remain." Balancing attack and defence in this tactical approach is always a challenge, as was also true under Farke. Smith made some improvement in defence but too often at the expense of attacking effectiveness. How Knapper sees this will be interesting.
You might have added Alex Neil in there as well Rick, and Hughton along with Smith. Given that this failure to strike a successful balance has been such a constant theme, it will, as you say, be interesting to see if Knapper can come up with a solution.
It's an interesting question as to when we last constantly got that balance. Farke's second promotion season? Or do you have to go back say to Lambert or even Worthington for our last successful balance
I’d say Farkes second promotion season was the most balanced side we have had for sometime, a lot of that came down to Skipp being such a crucial part of the defensive structure. It was less exciting but we had a better defensive unit whilst still being able to score goals
It's interesting that Skipp has never really made the step up to Spurs. He's had 1 start and 6 sub appearances this season with a rating of 6.07 on WhoScored. He was very good defensively for us but contributed very little when we had the ball and moved forward, but perhaps that's true of many DMs.
Max is apparently having a mare at Bournemouth & Omobamidele still hasn't started for Forest, don't think he's even played yet.
Balance surely doesn't depend on having this or that particular player, e.g. that you have Skipp where previously you had Tettey? Isn't balance to do with overall approach, playing strategy and tactics? Those will determine what type of player you need. How good those players are at delivering what is needed from them is another question. Also, lack of balance may be concealed by opposition deficiences, which I think applied under Farke. What Championship sides lacked the quality to expose became brutally evident once promoted.
