Not good enough

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Fact is that some of our 'fans' loved it today. They can't wait to criticise and ignore the fact that we were the better team today despite our injuries. Their attitude reflects more on them and their empty lives than it does on the team or the vast majority of our fans. Thankfully these characters are few and far between although one of them was sitting too close to me today!
That said, Ched was crap. If Hanson had performed with such ineptitude he would be roundly slated. Sadly, I don't believe Evans will ever hit the heights again, not at this level. He is, as mentioned earlier, very much our 5th in line.
In short, Norwich 'did a job' today, but our performance confirms we'll have more good days than bad.

Next Sunday will be a good day...........
 



Budgie said:
Fact is that some of our 'fans' loved it today. They can't wait to criticise and ignore the fact that we were the better team today despite our injuries. Their attitude reflects more on them and their empty lives than it does on the team or the vast majority of our fans. Thankfully these characters are few and far between although one of them was sitting too close to me today!
That said, Ched was crap. If Hanson had performed with such ineptitude he would be roundly slated. Sadly, I don't believe Evans will ever hit the heights again, not at this level. He is, as mentioned earlier, very much our 5th in line.
In short, Norwich 'did a job' today, but our performance confirms we'll have more good days than bad.

Next Sunday will be a good day...........
Click to expand...
Ched put more top quality balls in to dangerous goal scoring areas today than Hanson has done in his career.

Oh how we needed a Sharp on the end of them.

UTB
 
Borbokisfreekick said:
That is called a switch of play via a long pass after you have overloaded one side of the field with short incisive passing. Its something Barca have done for years - now we're not Barca, and Coutts doesn't have the technical capabilities of Iniesta - which is why the ball occasionally will go out of bounds when he tries said long pass. Freeman and Steven's first touch and anticipation also has a lot to be desired at times.

Again, we made over 600 passes. There was plenty of short incisive passing.

Our average passes per game last season was around 550 - so we actually surpassed that in this game.

I accept we didn't do enough to win the game. But I disagree that we abandoned our footballing beliefs. We completely stuck to them in our style of play, we just didn't have enough quality up front.
Click to expand...

OK. I stand corrected. We changed our style of play to start switching switch play once we'd overloaded the other side - not something I've seen us do much before and despite Coutts hitting the balls often from the middle of the pitch. I bow to your greater understanding of the game.

I actually thought I was being positive in my original post but I'm out of my depth trying that approach.

I still don't think the tactic was as you saw it so lets agree to disagree. It's a game of opinions ;).
 
For me it was an entertaining afternoon with some good play. It was one of those days that just wasn't going to go our way. We put them under pressure and they put us under pressure. Felt like the lack of talisman Billy had an effect on the pitch but roll on next weekend. UTB
 
Really frustrating day but I thought we played well, gave the ball away too much at times but generally did well

We missed sharp badly ( and the don , Leon etc) there was quite a few really good balls into the box but no one there !
Personally as others have said if billy and the don had played I think we would of won or at least drawn that
 
Thought we just lacked in the final 3rd and took the wrong options in good ares or didn't move the ball quick enough..Ched only 60% fit according to CW.
Brooks was our biggest threat,should have scored,but made the chance brilliantly for himself with a great turn...would have been a great goal.
Norwich defended well to be fair and played on the break,but their timewasting was shocking...the 23 Maddison and the Keeper being the worst.
Frustrating,but deserved at least a draw for me.
 
Fulwood Blade said:
No it wasn't (IMHO) and the BBC stats on possession say the opposite. 68% to 32%

The problem was LACK of quality in the 18 yard box.

UTB
Click to expand...
That true mate, although it might also be down to lack of strikers in the 18 yard box in fact lack of strikers full stop. 5 out of 6 out and the 'fit' one only 70% are pretty extreme circumstances whichever way we roll it.
 
GrayBlade said:
That true mate, although it might also be down to lack of strikers in the 18 yard box in fact lack of strikers full stop. 5 out of 6 out and the 'fit' one only 70% are pretty extreme circumstances whichever way we roll it.
Click to expand...

Yep, accept that totally about the strikers - but for me it was the reason we didn't get anything.

We actually got behind them numerous times - probably more than normal and especially as they "camped" in their own half in the 2nd half of the game.

What all our fans should realise is that the championship has been like this for a few years - you get games where you don't deserve to lose (as we did today) but issues/situations just go against you.

We're in good shape despite losing today.

UTB
 



Fulwood Blade said:
No it wasn't (IMHO) and the BBC stats on possession say the opposite. 68% to 32%

The problem was LACK of quality in the 18 yard box.

UTB
Click to expand...
This. A few have said final 3rd but it wasn't even that. It was in the box that we didn't finish it today. Not having a fully fit striker at the club was clearly a factor in that
 
Brooks was like a one-man-team at times, such a lot of potential in the lad.
 
blade67 said:
This. A few have said final 3rd but it wasn't even that. It was in the box that we didn't finish it today. Not having a fully fit striker at the club was clearly a factor in that
Click to expand...

yep - we got behind them loads of times - more so than Brentford and Derby put together.

We (sadly) didn't have a striker with the nous today - totally understandable.

This may be our problem going forward this season - the S6 lot have 4 strikers all on between 40-52K per week - something that we just can't even get near.

UTB
 
FinchleyBlade said:
Slightly OTT, Norwich put everyone behind the ball and without our best strikers available we found it hard to break them down.

We're going to lose plenty of games this season, last season we would probably have been able to get something but not at this level.
Click to expand...

There's always some melt who forgets it's your first season back in Champ for 7 years.
 
him behind you said:
OK. I stand corrected. We changed our style of play to start switching switch play once we'd overloaded the other side - not something I've seen us do much before and despite Coutts hitting the balls often from the middle of the pitch. I bow to your greater understanding of the game.

I actually thought I was being positive in my original post but I'm out of my depth trying that approach.

I still don't think the tactic was as you saw it so lets agree to disagree. It's a game of opinions ;).
Click to expand...

True, the beauty of the game is the debate.

I'd recommend rewatching the game - we all make snap judgements and remember things that aren't as they were due to the emotions of the game. That's why some stats are good to look at to get a more objectice view.

If Norwich sit deep, and we don't have pace to stretch behind (if brooks is deeper) you have to switch it more to unbalance the opponent. I personally think that's what coutts was trying to do.

He makes about 65 passes per game and 60% of those are forward, his average range of pass is 20 meters, so to get that average distance out of 65 passes, quite a few are going to be long passes, so it's a common trait of his.
 
Borbokisfreekickpost: 1454084 said:
True, the beauty of the game is the debate.

I'd recommend rewatching the game - we all make snap judgements and remember things that aren't as they were due to the emotions of the game. That's why some stats are good to look at to get a more objectice view.

If Norwich sit deep, and we don't have pace to stretch behind (if brooks is deeper) you have to switch it more to unbalance the opponent. I personally think that's what coutts was trying to do.

He makes about 65 passes per game and 60% of those are forward, his average range of pass is 20 meters, so to get that average distance out of 65 passes, quite a few are going to be long passes, so it's a common trait of his.
Click to expand...
I'll watch for him doing it more often but just to point out that stats don't always tell a true story, I could counter your thought that to get an average of 20 meters from 65 passes with 65 20 meter passes equals an average of 20 meters as does 33 15 meter and 32 25 meter passes. :confused:;)
 



Two chances in the game, one for them, they scored and one for us that the keeper saved. That was the difference. Other than that the game was similar to the last few seasons with the opposition taking there chance and putting 10/11 behind the ball, although looking much quicker on the counter than our L1 opponents. How Norwich sat back is a sign of how far we have come from this time last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maurice Maurice
We need a new defence!
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
diplomat
diplomat
B
Never forget…
Replies
0
Views
244
Bladesman101
B
Coolblade
A few observations from the stats (Boro)
Replies
6
Views
870
Dnblade
Dnblade
FMBlade1
Barry and Bindon: Not good enough.
3 4 5
Replies
142
Views
12K
SwissBlade
SwissBlade
Maurice Maurice
Excellent performance
Replies
21
Views
2K
loyalblade95
loyalblade95

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom