Usain (great name by the way) - you may be on to something here! That is one of the best suggestions I have heard in this debate and worthy of ersious consideration.
I agree too! People often said that whilst Lambert was a great manager, Culverhouse was the guy that actually put the pieces together. But in that case who? Phelan?
Probably a non-starter anyway since it would require CH to accept the dismissal of Calderwood and Trollop. May be wrong but I don't see him doing that. They are a management team in his eyes I would think.
That may be true Robbie but something has to change and as you know, I am not one jumping up and down for CH's head. It does seem to me to be a sensible suggestion and one that would maintain a level of stability within the management structure.
I think I suggested before that I don't see why someone needs to be sacked to bring another in. There must be enough spare budget for an attack-minded coach to be brought in.
Not a question of budget -- taking on someone additional is a lot cheaper than doing that AND compensating someone else for dismissal. It's a question of the feasibility of partitioning the game into attack/defence. Goalkeeping coach makes sense; but does the goalkeeping coach tell the CBs how to defend corners? No, he coaches the goalie on how to react to this or that style of defending corners. Again, in rugby, there is a lot of sense in having a forwards coach, since scrummaging and line-out play involves a lot of specifics. What would an "attack" coach coach that wouldn't impact heavily on the coaching roles of Calderwood and/or Trollop?
doubt it would happen but i would far prefer to see a shake-up of the back room staff than the removal of the manager. but please, not stuart bloody pearce!!
I know Bielsa did it, to the point where often the defenders wouldn't see the midfielders for days! Arguably, our forwards could do with some as much time as possible dedicated to getting them working well together, so splitting the team up for training doesn't seem like too crazy an idea to me. If you're still about Cove, what are your thoughts on Henk ten Cate? On the limited amount of been able to find online, his Panathainikos side played a 4-2-3-1, with a key feature being the use of full-backs for width. To me that means you're playing narrower attacking midfielders which should help with link up play and supplying the lone striker, which sounds exactly like what we need. Seems well respected in some quarters for the work he's done in the past, and for being tactically pretty solid.
I fail to see why or how you can be so dismissive of the concept. Isn't it critical for the defence to know why Ruddy needs them in a certain position for set pieces and why? With a potential implosion affecting (virtually) everyone at the club, I'd have thought a remedial step like a coach specifically engaged to 'teach' the midfield how to track and link with the striker - and be far less selfish, is better than whatever anarchy is sat awaiting our next poor performance / result. And as regards your rugby analogy, cricket has different coaching staff for batting, bowling, fielding and wicketkeeping. And rightly so. It's only poor 'drinks carrier' Monty Panesar who misses out
I would really, really love it to happen, and I do believe he's out of work, but I really don't think his 'favourite' tactic would suit us at all, and I don't think January would be enough time to change it. 3-3-1-3 doesn't suit the players we have. Although someone like him I'm sure has more than one way of playing.
I think there is no real stand out candidate that is better than what we have and people are largely clutching at straws when It comes to a new manager. I honestly cannot think of an out of work a manager that would actually be interested in coming to us. Roberto Di Matteo? Yeah right, champions leagues winner. Gus Hiddink, get real. Pullis? Almost everyone appears to hate him. People like Bielsa....... In our dreams. This is Norwich a team if were honest will probably not win a major trophy. Or any trophy for years and have virtually zero chance of getting into Europe. These sort of people will want more than what we can offer, almost for sure.
He is available, managed Sparta Rotterdam the last two months of last season. I must admit I've never had the chance to seem him in action. He was manager at Ajax for less than a year and didn't do too well there. From what I've heard in the media and from players is that he is a very pragmatic person but he has his quirks. Like all Dutch managers does strive to set up attacking football from the core of the team with technical players. But I have never seen him create a side that really improved as a gaffer. But his stature is decent and he could be bothered to come to Norwich, unlike Hiddink.
It's morning here in Vietnam, and I was half-expecting to wake up to read that we didn't have a manager. I guess if nothing happened yesterday, the board is going to give him at least the West Ham game. OK, McNally has done a great job so far, so we have to accept and honour his decision and hope we can turn it round. West Ham are not the ideal opponents, though. They have conceded just one goal away from home in five matches, and Big Sam looks like the manager Hughton would like to be - when he plays for 0-0 (which is most of the time), he gets it. Sorry if I sound negative, but I can see us having possession for 89 minutes, still failing to score, and then conceding in injury time. As GM would say, 'Bah!'
but hughton hasn't been playing that way this season! perhaps if he did, we might have more points on the board. although i do feel if we go behind on saturday, the game will drift away from us because confidence is so fragile.
