I like Fox too, and do wish he'd been given a fairer crack of the whip, particularly when Tettey was injured and Howson appalling. However, having not seen him it's very hard to judge how he'd have got on. Johnson is limited, but in the formation we play he does the job he's asked to admirably. I'd have liked to have seen a Johnson-Fox partnership as it offers both tough tackling and passing, but clearly Hughton sees less in Fox than we do. You could argue he's made the decision that Howson is a bit of a compromise. When playing well, he passes better than Johnson, and tackles better than Fox. He doesn't seem to think Johnson is enough defensively in the middle of the park, and that extra contribution from Howson is what he feels is the correct balance. Obviously that in itself is up for debate. If we had an even more beastly midfielder than Johnson, would we have seen more of Fox? Who knows. If there was ever a Q&A with fans, I think the situations of Fox and Becchio would certainly be the first ones brought up.
I think yesterday proved that Howson has been asked to play in a role which really doesn't suit him. For me, another example of how Hughton tries to squeeze players into his system rather than adapt his system to suit his players. I'm not sure he has more than one string to his bow either.
A fair point in that Johnson is there for just one reason, but I would say he is a more complete all round player, yes. He is one of the best around at breaking up play and being disciplined, he has a serious engine, carries a goal threat (from the air and, albeit waywardly, from range) and, while his passing is rightly criticised, he actually isn't god-awful and at least produces some intelligent through balls (the lofted through ball for our 24 pass goal earlier in the season being the best example) though his execution isn't always perfect. In other words, he has the advantage that the one thing he is good at he happens to be very, very good (whereas I don't think Fox's passing is on the equivalent level) and the other parts of his game are adequate (also superior to Fox). I think Fox is something of a luxury. In that sense, I wouldn't be surprised if we actually end up seeing more of him if/when Hughton decides the defence is secure enough. No harm in being sentimental though . Fox deserves it.
Seeing as Hughton will perhaps look to add pace to the wings this summer I reckon Fox will fit into the system better. Hopefully with stronger fullbacks as will it will allow us to play with a more lightweight playmaker deep. Especially as he is capable of diagonal balls which could cause a bit of havoc on the break. Just look at the youth team.
Totally agree with this, nothing has changed my mind either. When he speaks about Norwich it is always with a condescending tone. The result on Sunday was because he was forced to change his tactics, not because he wanted to. ( could have very easily been to little too late) His man management skills are poor and the man lacks vision about how to change a game, there has not been any plan B. I think he is a stubborn and one dimensional character and it shows in his game plan. I sincerely hope he changes his approach next season. I know we will have another tough year but I want to watch football. I want to see us attacking, or at the very least counter attacking. I believe it is foolish to think Hughton will take a different approach next season, I fear it will be more of the same.
It's pretty tough to argue that point and he certainly does tend to regard every team as a serious challenge and a very tough game. Okay it is true up to a point as teams at the bottom end of the PL are all pretty much the same and it is a dog-fight, but I do wonder how much of what he says to the press and reporters etc is merely to "not rock the boat" and maintain his appearance of being Mr Nice guy. For all we know he might strip the paint off the walls in the dressing room when the fancy takes him. (Not sure that is the case mind)
I agree with the sentiments from Vietnam, the Mexican and Carrabuh! there's got to be a joke in there somewhere? I fear more of the same unless there is immediate success with a more attacking mindset (thats even assuming he tries) he will most likely revert to type. Hughton may buy new players of probably higher quality, but so will everyone else and then you will still have this negative rhetoric about how great and tough the oposition will be game after game again! All that said and having voted get rid, I am conflicted because stability is important and chopping and changing can be counter productive. I just think sticking with CH is sticking with the wrong one! Who's better? Not sure but Three of the 4 in the playoffs would bring about more entertaining football at least! Successful well thats anybodies guess? Bah!
It's interesting that when other managers comment on Norwich they tend to think, or at least say CH has done an excellent job this season, (maybe they are just saying it) and I think he is clearly building the team, there has been improvement in the last 6-8 games in the style of play, is it only me that sees this? And as others have said, there was some ****e played by the team under PL, two up front and hoof the feckign thing to the two of them, that was evident in a significant proportion of the games, People eulogised about the tactic at Man utd last season (we could have won if Pilk hadn't missed a sitter, we sat back and tried to hit on the break; when I watched that match we could have been 3 down after 15 minutes easily, same tactics at many other games, a draw at liverpool, they shoudl have stuffed us. Away games under PL were generally dull with one or two exceptions. There were many complaints about not beating certain teams at home and bemoaning creativity.
Surely giving credit to the opposition in post match interviews is just common decency, What matters is what he says to the players behind closed doors
To Carrabuh/Vietnam and the Mixican whose collective sense of doom is generally apparent I would suggest that you judge CH and the board by their actions over the Summer. Surely the breaking of the club transfer record on a young, quality striker is the statement of intent we all want and not the sign of a board wanting the manager to make do with what he has or a manager intending to make us the new Stoke. We have had a pretty mixed season with some good and some bad performances, much like last season. We do not have the quality and certainly not the depth of quality to play silky attacking football against the better sides in the division and win on a regular basis. We have survived, it may not have been pretty at times but we now have the opportunity to improve for next season in the knowledge that we will have no external debt and funds available to develop both the squad and the stadium. If the price for this is one transitional season then I think the majority of us will accept this but i completely agree that if we spend the cash and struggle whilst playing dire football the calls for CH to be sacked will be coming from all quarters.
Here here! I cannot believe some of the comments above, things will get better I am sure and the Summer will see a transition IMO. Onwards and definitely upwards!
Can anyone tell me where this belief in a Summer of transition is coming from. I don't mind people anticipating a change, but what is it that genuinely makes you believe this will be the case?
I usually agree with most of what you say Carrabuh but I fear that with Hughton you have put the blinkers on and cannot get them off. Lambert left because he felt that he had taken things as far as he could and the only way was down. In fact I will go as far as to suggest that he feared relegation and didn't want that on his CV - he even thought that Villa was a better bet of progress!! Hughton inherited that squad of players who had over performed and with little time and money was given just one brief by the Board - keep us up. Many people, myself included, thought it was an impossible task but against the odds he managed it so how can you reward him with the sack? It's like a Company who are losing money bringing in a Chief Exec to turn things round and, when he does, sacking him because you don't like how he went about it. I am sure that the brief from McNally this year will include an improvement in style and surely Hughton deserves the chance to try and move things on having got more time and money. No signs of this happening - really? Last summer his priority was curing a leaky defence and he concentrated on that. When he turned his attention to the front line he only had the time and money to get Harry Kane on loan. In Jan he tried very hard to sign Hooper and already he has now signed Wolfswinkel - surely that is some sign of intent.
Agree with this Nothing wrong with complimenting the opposition, in fact it is a good thing in many ways. What he says behind closed doors is much more important
He left to join a bigger club, not because he feared relegation with us. Which of these reasons do you really believe knowing what Lambert was like. How did he turn around a failing company exactly it was performing better before he came, its actually like sacking a chief exec who's profits fall which happens ALL the time. The points your are making bare no acceptance of what actually happened over the course of the season. Your reasons for keeping him are based on this assumption that McNally will tell him to improve the style.
hi carrabuh paul lambert left norwich because he had fallen out with the board, not because he thought we'd be relegated and not (necessarily) because villa are a bigger club (although they are). he would have gone pretty much anywhere to get away from norwich last summer. villa just happened to be the club who wanted him. had it been west ham or even drop a league with leeds (who i know for definite had talks with his representatives during last season, though i don't think they were very serious). we'll never know how he'd have fared this year with us because we don't know who he'd have signed.
Some very sensible posts and good debate. IMO, Lambert left us because he had taken us as far as he could and had the opportunity to manage a bigger club. I feel that had he stayed, we would be firmly entrenched in the bottom 3, as his record in the 2nd half of last season was quite poor – the Spurs and Villa results aside (Villa weren’t really interested to be fair!!!). I’m quite happy to be going forward into next season with CH in charge and am quietly confident that we will see more matches like against West Brom on Sunday and less than against Fulham/Newcastle/Saints (take your pick) at home. Carrabuh - I know you'd rather CH wasn't going to be in charge next season, but looks like you'll just have to accept it.
Again, why do you think this? What is causing this confidence, he had the players to play that way already. He chose not to and as a result we regressed in points and performances.
I think he deserves the '10' games people keep going on about. But the things i would like to see next season is A bit more squad rotation. Mainly for fitness or if we're on a bad run. Certainly didn't see enough in the second half of season when we needed it most. Subs certainly need to be made earlier if the game isn't going our way. Set up the way we did in the last game against lesser teams. Have a go at them. Better sides should be approached differently. Too many times this season we have been predictable.
