By using Norwichtalk.com services you agree to our Cookies Use and Data Transfer outside the EU.
We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, ads and Newsletters.

Norwich City v West Ham (Home) Saturday 13th February.

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fimbo

Member
It certainly felt like 2 points lost. But where I was sat there was quite warm applause at the end. Ending the drought was vital and still means that a win could put us on a point a game, pretty much the target for the season. It ain't over.
 
Gaffer

Gaffer

Active Member
with Sunderland winning I think things are pretty bleak.
If the score remains the same between Chelsea and Newcastle then we're out of the relegation zone. We're in a relegation fight but the 3 teams below us are extremely poor too so we have a fair chance now we're out of the dire run of losses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I

It's Character Forming

New Member
I agree it's not over but today was a great chance to get 3 points and be genuinely out of the drop zone rather than by a tiny margin of goal difference (as things stand).

up up next we have Leicester away then Cheksea.

knowing City we'll now pull a win out from one of those "harder" games.  But the problem is even when we're ahead in games, we can't close it out, which is making me pessimistic at the moment.
 
Dubai Mark

Dubai Mark

Active Member
I know what I am going to say will not be very popular,  but......I put the losing of the two goal lead down to AN not making the right tactical or substitute decisions once we were two up. I feel that as soon as that second went in we should have tightened up to contain them and used the first two subs immediately,  and also would have used Bamford rather tham Mbokani, why sign him? Instead we were leaving ourselves open by going for a third,  sure if you are Arsenal or playing a moderate Championship team, but we were playing a very good, physically strong and dangerous West Ham. Some better performance s out there today though,  Klose is clearly settling in and I thought Ruddy looked confident. Leicester will be interesting.......
 
K

Killiecanary

New Member
The manager picked the right team.  We were two up and West Ham weren't looking anywhere near like scoring.  Then they get a bit of a lucky break and score.  Suddenly our international footballers (which is what most of them are) looked utterly terrified to get the ball. That isn't the manager - as he said after the game he has tried to see games out by sacrificing Wes and when he does we concede.  It's a lack of mental toughness in players who should be able to organise themselves to see out the game.  I was interested in hearing Seb's post match interview when he lamented the teams lack of game management skills - he is spot on but is one of the worst offenders ffs! 

What i do,like is that unlike the last time under Hughton I go to CR and see goals...we score plenty and that might just be enough if we can concede a few less.  

I did like the defensive organisation we saw today...the holding of a decent line and better defensive shape was good to see for 70 minutes - which I guess I have to assume has something to do with Klose's arrival.  I also thought he was fouled in the build up to the first goal.  

Ollsson - a great way to settle the arguments about Brady at left back...RB might be better further forward but he will be at left back as long as Ollsson defends like a chicken what has had its head chopped off.  

Otherwise I didn't think we had too many poor performances today.  Redmond I'm afraid again hid for long periods of the game and didn't loom anything like a premier league footballer to me.  I really like Naismith's attitude - he never gives the opposition a seconds peace and get right in their faces - we don't have too many others like that.  

I still think it ll come down to the matches against Newcastle and Sunderland and Watford at CR and getting something from Swansea, west brom and Palarse away.  
 
L

Lavanche

New Member
Didn't see the second goal, but if Olsson didn't had anything to do with it he didn't make single error outside of one poor clearance where he clearly wasn't offered any passing routes so he just had to launch it and he did cover that one by himself. Also everyone else specially Martin and Bassong were today way too aggressive in defending situation against Payet and their other more skillful player where Olsson managed to keep them at bay by just being calm. The one situation in the box where he just standed ready front of Payet and frenchmen didn't suddently know what to do with ball. Wasn't good going forward today, but come on slating him about today's performance in defence.. I don't even know what to say. People are just again looking scapegoats as we have done so many times.

Brady's goal came from being forward and Naismith covering so he managed to press and after getting the ball he was high enough to make something out from that ball. Other than that in defence he was out of position more than few times and he was the one from the line that had problems to make offside trap. He can tackle if he manages to be at the right place, but he is nowhere near a being solid defender and provides us so much more by being higher at the field.

On the other hand outside of our goalscoring situations we didn't create much. Hoolahan had one chance to set Jerome against the keeper and we had few good crossing positions and even thought we dictated the game we looked nervy and some of our players were out of the game. Specially Naismith wasn't good as he has been this far and I think it was mostly because of his role. So did manager really pick the right team? First one of our goals came when we weren't positioned as we were ment to (as said Brady was still out of position because of previous situation) and second one was pure luck that Naismiths shot dropped just before Hoolahan. So neither of our goals game trough tactics. Also I have to agree with Dubai Mark that I would have done changes straight after we went 2 - 0 up by bringing Bamford and Olsson to Naismith and Jerome to just get fresh legs out there and get exhausted Brady a bit rest from defending and another tired player on the bench. He waited a bit too long with the changes and we lost the momentum because our energy dropped and they scored twice.

I think AN did ok today, but at the end small things depart good managers from average ones and I have seen AN do brilliant things. I think our tactic was okay today, but he picked players a bit wrong. Naismith should have been either Brady or Jarvis and Martin should have been Pinto or even Whittaker to give bit more support for Redmond. Other than that and subs I think he got it right and I don't really blame him for the draw and player can take equal share of blame.
 
G

GJP

Well-Known Member
 I really like Naismith's attitude - he never gives the opposition a seconds peace and get right in their faces - we don't have too many others like that.  
Naismith is a competitor but he was starting to tread water, struggling to get near people. Which is why he was hooked.
 
F

Fimbo

Member
On the negative side is the obvious panic after west ham's first goal. On the positive central defence looked better in first half. Being down the river end I didn't have a great view of the defensive positioning for the WH goals. But first half I thought bassong was a rock, stopping anything coming over the top. Klose played a more mobile role and there was clearly an A N instruction that Ruddy should use klose for distribution. By and large I could see this partnership gelling and thought bassong was back on form. Though I should say that some around me saw it differently. Brady made a couple of poor defensive errors first half and I'm not convinced by him at LB. But after seeing half a dozen failed attempts to even test Adrian, I forgave him everything because he could actually shoot. Our finishing had been woeful up til then. Thankfully so had WH' s. I didn't notice Martin so much and not sure that is a good thing. 

We do now need to get points from some very good teams. But we are capable going forward and if the defence can gel a bit more, we have a chance. 

Tactically I don't think it was far wrong today. We had to set up to play the ball. Yes, as others have said, we might have moved quickly to shut up shop when 2-0 up. But the real problem was the response to their first goal. 
 
Din

Din

Well-Known Member
Edit: Apologies for how long this is, once I started typing I couldn't stop and didn't really recognise that I was writing a short essay :D

For 70 minutes we did almost everything right. We played on the front foot and actually tried to take the game to West Ham, which isn't what we had done in any of our previous 5 games. At times in the final third though we did just lack that extra bit of quality, for example Wes' poor attempt to square the ball to Jerome when we were 2 on 1 against Ogbonna. Ultimately though we did take 2 of our chances and once we got the 2nd I was genuinely confident that we could see it out. We had even been pretty solid defensively up until that point, with Klose and Bassong looking assured at the back. However for whatever reason we dropped deeper and deeper and once we conceded one goal we went completely to pot. That's the 2nd time in 3 home games that we've had a 2 goal cushion and ended up losing it, and to be honest, it's pathetic. If we want to remain in this league we can't afford to do that.

There are certainly positives to take but to end up drawing the game in the manor that we did was so disappointing. I understand that as a team in the bottom 3 when you are trying to defend a lead it's quite natural that nerves are going to kick in a bit, and naturally players will drop deeper. But it wasn't just that, our whole shape and defensive organisation suddenly just vanished at around the 70 minute mark. It's so frustrating to watch because we've just seen the same group of players defend competently and quite comfortably for the majority of the game, and yet when it really mattered, when West Ham were applying a bit more pressure, we look clueless defensively, and it has cost us. The first goal is a poor one to concede, but the 2nd is just ridiculous. Not only do 3 players all run towards the ball to make a challenge, leaving Payet to receive the ball in bags of space in behind, but there are about 5 players all standing within about 20 feet of each other inside the box, yet nobody just outside the area either tracking Noble's run or closing down his shot. Tracking midfield runners is something that I got taught how to do when I was a kid, the fact that these are professionals and yet they can't seem to manage it is bewildering. I imagine in the usual way that would be Tettey's job, and we undoubtedly missed him today. 

On a more positive note though we were generally much improved today, particularly going forward. I really liked the positive team selection, and the positivity certainly paid off (for 70 minutes at least). Our front 4 really caused the West Ham back line problems. Jerome certainly offers us an extra dimension up front that Mbokani doesn't. He just gives us the option to knock it in behind, and his pace and strength was a constant threat. I thought he had a great game. Redmond was also so much more like the player we saw at the beginning of this season. He was actually running at players and trying to get the ball into the box, and he also provided a lovely little flick in the build up to Hoolahan's goal. He's still not quite at it yet but he's certainly better than he was. Hoolahan as well was excellent. Naismith wasn't in the game quite as much, though he did show the odd touch of class, particularly in the first half. He undoubtedly adds a little bit more quality to our attack.

As for the rest of the team, Klose and Bassong looked pretty solid on the whole, the latter in particular. Both were great in the air and Klose looked comfortable in possession as well. Brady was superb again, and scored a wonderful goal which came through him pressing well high up the pitch. Although it would be nice if he could hit the target when we get free-kicks within shooting range. Great to see Ruddy back and playing impressively as well. Made some really good saves and definitely inspires more confidence in the back four than Rudd does. Howson was alright but wasn't able to impact the game too much. I think he's at his best when Tettey's alongside him and he's allowed a bit more freedom. Decent performance though. O'Neil for me was a bit of a much of a muchness. Didn't really do anything significant and West Ham's midfield often found space in behind him. Martin was better than usual, but still poor. Hopefully now though once Tettey comes back in we will start to get a more settled, consistent team.

I don't think Alex Neil really could have done a lot more. Set the team up the right way and I think at 2-1 the change to sacrifice Naismith for Olsson was the right one, it was just unfortunate that a minute later West Ham attack down our other flank and equalise. Ultimately it was the 'game-management' as Bassong called it that let us down. 

Nice to hear Neil say after the game as well that he'll set us up to be on the front foot and more offensive in every game from now on. That's certainly the way to go. At the end of the day I think we just need to accept that the defence and their 'game-management' isn't good enough, and therefore just go into each match with the intention of attacking and simply aiming to out-score the opposition rather than set up defensively with the aim to keep them out. If we go down then obviously it'll be a great shame, but at least we would've given it a real go and played to our strengths. Ultimately though, going into this game, I was expecting a loss to be honest. The point that we got today has lifted us above Newcastle out of the relegation zone. If we're in this exact same position come the end of the season then we would've achieved our main goal. 
 
K

Killiecanary

New Member
Naismith is a competitor but he was starting to tread water, struggling to get near people. Which is why he was hooked.
he was subbed because he was knackered according to AN.  I agree he is a competitor and we need a few more of those.  Too many go missing when it gets tough for me
 
ZLF

ZLF

Well-Known Member
I am a bit concerned that Naismith still cant last as long as wes a month after signing.

The defence and lack of tracking late midfield runners remains frustrating,  its not going to improve now,  esp at full backs.   Losing two points frustrating and this habit of conceding post sub now beyond an irritating loss of concentration.

Positives?  Finally stopped the losing streak and moved upnthe table.  finally had a game where we had a chance of winning,  bright going forward with the front 4 linking well.  And bassong klose starting to look like a partnership, stick with it.

Another 10 days to train and drill some discipline and tettey to come back.   Small glimmers of hope and so many more twists.  It's firmly in our own hands.
 
Dubai Mark

Dubai Mark

Active Member
Had we played like that vs Vanilla then we would be three points better off, such a shame, I was thinking maybe that the virus that went round the club was worse than they let on? Villa are so shocking it had to be! 

Agree ZLF there are some glimmers, any chance of a point at Leicester after the Abu Dhabi break? 
 
L

Lavanche

New Member
With yesterday's display we won't get anything from Leicester. I mean that high line and trying to maintain posession for long times in risky areas is will not work against best countering team this season. 

If we drop the line and play Tettey with O'neil and base our own game for quick counters by playing Jarvis/Brady left, Hoolahan middle, Redmond right and Naismith/Bamford as striker I think we could even win that game, but at least make it very uncomfortable for the opposition.

If we again play one of our target strikers and try to do hold up plays, Huth and Morgan will have pleasant day. Both Naismith and Bamford are very comfortable with countering tactics so we should use them. 

Dicipline and patience is the key.
 
Dubai Mark

Dubai Mark

Active Member
Lavanche agree with that, I believe the ONLY way we stand a chance, plus the effort of the West Ham performance, 
 
Canaryboy

Canaryboy

Well-Known Member
Had we played like that vs Vanilla then we would be three points better off, such a shame
Villa had actually been in much better form than us leading into that game, and keeping clean sheets.

Their thrashing is welcome news for me though because I wondered whether we could even finish 20th, and that looks much less likely now at least, small consolation I guess.

Its a shame that Leicester lost because I think that actually makes our game with them harder, they've shown all season that they respond well to defeats, would rather they have beat Arsenal and then come into our fixture with a little bit of over-confidence or complacency. Can't see us getting anything there unfortunately.

With Chelsea suddenly looking like the old Chelsea again too its difficult to see us picking up enough points  :(
 
ZLF

ZLF

Well-Known Member
Cant see much chance of a return from the leicester trip;  but oddities do happen.  

I suspect that tettey will solidify the back line with O'Neil.  

I cant see jarvis getting into the starting line up -his defensive contribution makes redmond look like kante - as I thought the front 4 all worked hard defensively and attacked well (confidence the biggest issue) so none deserve dropping. 

Chelsea are a different side away to the home one so it is more likely to deliver a point than leicester - but the focus should be on the following games - they will be the ones to make or break our season.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top