Norwood

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

GuangzhouBlade

GuangzhouBlade

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2016
Messages
583
Reaction score
1,604
Location
Sheffield
Since promotion to the the premier league...

Games Norwood has started Played 35 Points 54
Games Norwood hasn't started Played 7 points 0

That seems too much of a coincidence, I get that we've spent a lot on Berge and he's been signed as the future "quarter back" for the side but surely with Lundstram's drop off in form and unwillingness to commit to a longer deal, playing Berge wider with more license to get forward is the way to go. The midfield looks so static and almost lost without Norwood dictating the play and leading. Berge is technically very gifted and a physical presence but is yet to develop the "game management" that comes with experience. We are asking an awful lot of Berge to break up play, drive the game forward and dictate the tempo let Norwood do the defensive stuff and unshackle Berge.
 

Norwood is slow - but he has passing ability second to none. We can’t afford the high performance athlete with Ollie’s passing ability, so Moneyball tells us that we build a team that uses his ability but covers for his inabilities. Similarly for Egan’s lack of pace.

When you can't afford to buy the best you build the best by assembling a team that overall has all of the right components.

Magic Days
 
I think we either need Norwood or Ampadu in the CDM spot and Berge on the right for now. Ampadu looked a class above on the ball against Leeds and I think him at CDM and Berge on the right would give us more composure, but I'm not against Norwood coming back either. I'm not in the Lundstram lynch mob, but did get frustrated with him today. Though CWAK obviously want Berge in the middle, with Fleck being out of form we need to take the shackles off him and I don't think he can play with freedom when he's asked to carry the whole midfield.
 
I don't see why we don't just persevere with Fleck-Norwood-Berge.

They are our best midfield 3. Lundstram and Osborn can't hold a candle to Norwood's passing and switches of play.

If Lundstram isn't scoring, he's not bringing much to the table for me.
 
Yep, it's absolutely clear that the midfield 3 should be Fleck Norwood Berge.

Osborn and Lunny are solid backup, but that's all they are. And in the case of the latter, his value must be plummeting this season and he'll be lucky to get the wage he's after anywhere. We should offer him out for a low fee now and put that money towards a loan fee.

All that said, it's the lack of the overlap from defence that's hurting us this season too.
 
There are a lot of questions to be asked right now and they deserve to be asked too.. this is one of them..

feel like a broken record but I really want to see a midfield diamond of

Berge
Fleck Norwood Ampadu

Ampadus drive and ability to break up play mirrors Flecks and Norwood central to spray the ball about then Berge in a free role in front of them and behind Brewster
 
GuangzhouBlade said:
Since promotion to the the premier league...

Games Norwood has started Played 35 Points 54
Games Norwood hasn't started Played 7 points 0

That seems too much of a coincidence, I get that we've spent a lot on Berge and he's been signed as the future "quarter back" for the side but surely with Lundstram's drop off in form and unwillingness to commit to a longer deal, playing Berge wider with more license to get forward is the way to go. The midfield looks so static and almost lost without Norwood dictating the play and leading. Berge is technically very gifted and a physical presence but is yet to develop the "game management" that comes with experience. We are asking an awful lot of Berge to break up play, drive the game forward and dictate the tempo let Norwood do the defensive stuff and unshackle Berge.
Click to expand...

I get your basis for argument, but the only have Norwood didn't feature in last season was Southampton away, so I'm unsure where 7 games has come from?

Edit - you said started. I looked at didn't feature at all.
 
It's an odd one with Norwood. He's been seen as the boss's favourite who would never be dropped regardless but suddenly seems to be second choice. The problem isn't as simple as bringing Norwood in. It has coincided with Fleck looking like a League 1 player and Lunny going completely off the boil.

Since Rodwell is only here for the blackmail money, we really need someone else in RCM and I can't believe we've just gone after Swift, given up, and then done nothing else. Seems strange.

If one of Berge, Norwood or Lunny get injured we have zero right footed midfielders to put on the bench. You can push bash forward but I'm not sure he's an ideal there. Tends to lose runners when playing further up the pitch. And that would potentially leave us thin at the back.

It's really odd since we want w players in each position but RCM is the one which we haven't.
 
GuangzhouBlade said:
Since promotion to the the premier league...

Games Norwood has started Played 35 Points 54
Games Norwood hasn't started Played 7 points 0

That seems too much of a coincidence, I get that we've spent a lot on Berge and he's been signed as the future "quarter back" for the side but surely with Lundstram's drop off in form and unwillingness to commit to a longer deal, playing Berge wider with more license to get forward is the way to go. The midfield looks so static and almost lost without Norwood dictating the play and leading. Berge is technically very gifted and a physical presence but is yet to develop the "game management" that comes with experience. We are asking an awful lot of Berge to break up play, drive the game forward and dictate the tempo let Norwood do the defensive stuff and unshackle Berge.
Click to expand...

These numbers are slightly off.

Since promotion Norwood has started 38 games, come on as a sub twice, and not played at all twice.

It is correct that we have not got a point out of any of the 4 games that Norwood didn't start.

There is such a thing as small sample size but I get your point.
 
We know what Norwood can do but I can also see why he hasn't been starting, his set pieces have been garbage for while now and he is liable to give the ball away under pressure but he has to start against Fulham. Osborn and Lundstram offered nothing yesterday, we can manage with one coming into midfield to cover for injuries but we can't have both of them starting games they simply aren't good enough to be regulars in this league. Running about a lot is not enough and never has been despite it being one of Wilder's first expectations. Fleck might be off form but he will have to play through it we have no one else with his quality for his position. Berge has to start on the right it might not be his preferred spot but he was getting better at it towards the end of last season.
The wing backs are my concern so far, if we are not getting the overloads out wide we have to have the wing backs that are going to take on defenders and get to the by-line what's the worse that can happen if they don't get a cross in we get a throw in or a corner. Lowe showed how it should be done at Burnley no messing about got the cross in early and we scored we don't do enough of that we are so slow and laboured in getting into crossing positions.
 
The problem with Norwood and Berge playing together is that neither of them is good at the defencive side of the role, particularly picking runners up. So Fleck ends up doing all the defending, which isn’t his best role. Look at the work that Osborn did yesterday compared with Berge or what Norwood would have done - we would have been completely overrun. So it’s a question of how and when you use them
 

Far better in possession with Norwood playing...we create far more and he moves the ball far quicker and knits it all together.. Play Berge and Fleck either side.. Ampadu can slot in there if we need to change.
 
Dnblade said:
Far better in possession with Norwood playing...we create far more and he moves the ball far quicker and knits it all together.. Play Berge and Fleck either side.. Ampadu can slot in there if we need to change.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree with this more. Norwood is so, so crucial to the way we play.
 
You saw the best and worst of Norwood Saturday. The intelligent pass back to Baldock for the goal was excellent. The wasted opportunity he had on the break, where he needed to deliver a simple pass on the ground to Lowe and opted for an inaccurate floaty ball that Lowe had to move back to control with his chest, needlessly killed what was a great chance for a break. Our sloppiness on the ball is what’s largely contributing to players that receive it having to take several more touches – even passes just slightly off slow us down, make players go for safe options when they’ve recovered the ball etc. And unfortunately Norwood, be it due to rustiness or whatever, is part of that issue. The best performance I’ve seen a player in that role for us this season remains Ampadu at Liverpool, and I suspect we may return to that in the next game.
 
I don't think it's a coincidence that Wilder has mentioned the need for mobility just as it looks like Norwood might be slowing down a bit. At the moment, I'd say Ampadu is CW's clear first choice at CDM and Norwood is back up.
 
cooperblade said:
I don't think it's a coincidence that Wilder has mentioned the need for mobility just as it looks like Norwood might be slowing down a bit. At the moment, I'd say Ampadu is CW's clear first choice at CDM and Norwood is back up.
Click to expand...
That's the unfortunate reality for Norwood now is that he's one of these who given time and space can put the ball wherever he likes but he simply isn't athletic or dynamic enough to keep up with the pace and we're starting to see why Brighton and Fulham didn't keep hold of him after promotion.

Lee Tomlin for example is a fat lad but can do anything with the ball but at the top level doesn't have the fitness to keep up so never lasted the course in the Premier League at Cardiff or Bournemouth either.
 
Agree...it’s always been about the physical/ dynamic side for Norwood......something that on a normal day is Lunny’s strength.

Basically regards Norwood....if we’re seeing a decent amount of possession and approach games in a positive manner....then just give the ball to Norwood so that he can pull the strings. Norwood was impressive 1st half against Fulham where we dominated. He also played well in the 1st 20 minutes against Chelsea.

However when we’re on the back foot and sitting deeper...then Norwood virtually dissapears...it’s like having 10 men.
The Fulham game summed him up....so classy and influential 1st half....however 2nd half it felt like he’d been subbed off...he hardly touched the ball.

Play Norwood in the Championship or against the weaker PL teams and he’s able to show his best...on his day one of our best players.

The issue is that last season up to Christmas we did a great job at controlling possession/ taking the sting out of games. We seem to have lost that style/ ability we practiced in league 1 and Championship and for some reason we go into damage limitation mode over relying too much on the long ball.

Maybe it’s just a confidence/ attitude issue.
In the past we were so confident we showed little respect and genuinely believed we could match any team.
Now it’s as though we look at the opposition team sheet and think a 0-1 defeat would be a decent result.
 
Last edited:
I’d still play Norwood.

this has similar vibes when wilder would try and replace Duffy every 6 months for some unknown reason only to have to revert back when it was obviously not working.

he’s only player who can keep the ball at least.
 
This debate is getting old now. If we want to play the attractive style of football we all came to associate with SUFC, then we play Norwood and McGoldrick when they're available. If we're looking to impose our play on the opposition and play for wins, then we stick by these two. The only time I would move away from this is against the "top 6" teams when we're likely to be starved of possession and playing to contain the opposition - this is when we should be playing Ampadu as the CM to protect the back line.
It baffles me that Norwood is held in such low regard by some of our fans given how important he is to us playing well. Yes, he has some shortcomings but he is way down on our list of problems at the moment and offers much more than we lose by having him in the starting lineup
 
Norwood was the evolution of the QB in the Tufty Ball System from a No 10 (Duffy) moving further back in the formation to a deep lying midfielder.

I assume Tufty wanted to evolve the formation further where everyone is a QB a la City, Liverpool and saw Berge, Fleck, Lundstram being a midfield that didn't need a QB.

Sadly that strategy hasnt/isnt working and needs a rethink...
 
I still haven't seen anything from any of the other CDM options that makes me think Norwood should be dropped. He's pivotal (literally) to our style of play and he's still easily the best option we have, if we want to have any attacking play whatsoever.

He's definitely not perfect and at some point he will have to be upgraded if we stay in the Premier League, after all he's hitting his thirties. But for now that's way down the list of priorities.
 

Dnblade said:
Far better in possession with Norwood playing...we create far more and he moves the ball far quicker and knits it all together.. Play Berge and Fleck either side.. Ampadu can slot in there if we need to change.
Click to expand...

Norwood makes us tick and switch play.

That is why we need to sort the left side out because they are not getting forward enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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