Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.
AND
Semedo is not a footballer.
SCIAGNorfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.
The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.
VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.
I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.
The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.
Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.
Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'
Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'
Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'
Mum: 'Oh.'
Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?
Norfolk RoyalSCIAGNorfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.
The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.
VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.
I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.
The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.
Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.
Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'
Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'
Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'
Mum: 'Oh.'
Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?
Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.
Norfolk RoyalSCIAGNorfolk Royal Agree with most other comments. Given the personnel we had available that was about the best we could do.
The obvious problem without Joao and Meite was that we did not occupy Norwich's back four allowing them to push up and press us high which led to the first goal.
VAR may have ruled out their pen but we would have wanted it at the other end so swings and roundabouts on that one.
I find it shocking that we do not possess a single full back in the squad deemed good enough to deputise for either Richards or Yiadom, a big problem which must be addressed in January. I thought before the game that Arrons would get joy on the right for Norwich as he is a top young player who likes to attack and is quick. So it proved.
The difference between the squads was illustrated when Norwich brought Cantwell and Hugill off the bench, two players who would be first choice in any other championship team with the possible exception of Bournemouth.
Love to see young players getting a chance but bit too much last night. I really hope Jayden Onen does well and has a good career but you can imagine the call he had with his mum last night.
Jayden: 'Hi mum, I played for the first team tonight for the first time ever.'
Mum: 'That's fantastic, I'm so proud of you. How did you get on?'
Jayden: 'I got booked by the referee before I touched the ball.'
Mum: 'Oh.'
Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?
Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.
South Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.
Snowflake RoyalNorfolk RoyalSCIAG Araruna looked like a useful deputy for Yiadom, good delivery. And Holmes has largely done well, while neither Gibson nor Esteves have been disastrous. Three or four specialists seems about normal?
Esteves wasn't chosen last night, neither Holmes or Gibson are full backs, and Araruna was billed as a defensive midfielder when he joined. So as it stands we don't have a specialist in the squad in full back position deemed good enough for the first team, as I said.
That's a bafflingly one sided look at it.
Araruna came as a midfielder who could play RB and has since made virtually all his appearances at RB and looked good there.
Holmes, the odd mistake aside, has done really well. Gibson, the odd mistake aside has done well too and we brought him in primarily as LB cover (hence McIntyre getting the nod at CB ahead of him initially when Moore was out).
We have no dedicated fullback cover beyond Esteves, precisely because we have such good utility options to come in there if needed.
In fact our one dedicated fullback cover has probably been our worst player at fullback this season.
HoundSouth Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.
Think this is where I disagree. You hoof the ball up field towards Baldock, and they hammer a header back at our defence - thats more dangerous than us keeping possession imo.
You can play a longer ball game if you genuinely have players who will win the ball and hold it up - Joao can sometimes, but otherwise you are likely just giving the ball back to the oppo, and often in our own half.
I dont think either of the CBs lost possession often tbh. They actually hit some nice long balls as well, from a position between our box and the centre circle - as a result of passing it out.
South Coast RoyalHoundSouth Coast Royal Maybe with goal kicks we will start to go long-it's far less dangerous giving the ball away in the opposition half than it is in and around our box-after all, what tends to happen is that we fiddle around for a while and then Morrison or Moore still hits the ball long and we lose possession having run the risk already of giving it away close to our own goal.
So, from a safety aspect let the keeper hit the ball long.
Think this is where I disagree. You hoof the ball up field towards Baldock, and they hammer a header back at our defence - thats more dangerous than us keeping possession imo.
You can play a longer ball game if you genuinely have players who will win the ball and hold it up - Joao can sometimes, but otherwise you are likely just giving the ball back to the oppo, and often in our own half.
I dont think either of the CBs lost possession often tbh. They actually hit some nice long balls as well, from a position between our box and the centre circle - as a result of passing it out.
In principle I agree with you but in practice we are dodgy as per last night, other square passes in previous games and the keeper's aberration at Bournemouth.
What I would like to see much more is Laurent and Rino picking up the ball and moving forward quickly and for the whole defence not to be so negative -Rino got into trouble by having negative thoughts.
StrandedRoyalBlueSCIAG I don’t see why the Norwich player would dive when he had a clear shot on goal. If you’re being generous then maybe he slipped, but it’s hard to argue that Moore didn’t cause the slip. T
Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.
To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.
RoyalBlueStrandedRoyalBlue
Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.
To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.
Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.
Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.
RoyalBlueStrandedRoyalBlue
Watch the replays, particularly the one behind the goal which shows that he clearly launches himself into the air. Why did he do that rather than shoot? Because he had taken a poor touch and was struggling to get the ball back under control in time. Also Rafael was well positioned.
To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.
Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.
Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.
Jagermesiter1871Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.
AND
Semedo is not a footballer.
Think thats harsh on Semedo - he's not a lone striker or wherever he was played as last night and where he's been played since being here. He's a half decent footballer but I personally wouldn't be playing him as much as Pauno is. He seems to see him as a real utility player - I think he's far more limited.
Lower WestJagermesiter1871Zammo Forgot to add, I have no idea why Aluko was hooked off so early.
AND
Semedo is not a footballer.
Think thats harsh on Semedo - he's not a lone striker or wherever he was played as last night and where he's been played since being here. He's a half decent footballer but I personally wouldn't be playing him as much as Pauno is. He seems to see him as a real utility player - I think he's far more limited.
Rather like Alkuo I'm struggling to justify his inclusion in the team. All round contribution is lacking. Nor does he seem to command a settled playing position within the formation.
ZipRoyalBlueStranded
To play devil's advocate and mentioned elsewhere - there were few complaints from the team and Moore could be clearly seen on one close up saying "Sorry boys" as they set up for the penalty. He knew he had screwed up.
Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.
Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.
Yep he stays down clutching his shin and appearing to be in agony. Blatant cheating. He should have been carded. Very frustrating. Luck has not been on our side over the past few.
Snowflake RoyalZipRoyalBlue
Didn't see that but it looks like Moore and the team may have been conned by the cheat too.
Both Sky and Quest questioned the penalty in their analysis. Consensus was that if there was any contact it was minimal and not enough to bring the player down and/or justify a penalty. All seemed to think we were hard done by and that the player had effectively conned the ref. On Quest Michael Appleton pointed out that Aarons made a big issue of holding his shin in pain in view of the ref despite the fact that if there was any contact at all it was a 'brush across the top of the foot' and nowhere near his shin. i.e. it was a blatant act of cheating which pretty much exonerated the ref who had to make a decision in real time.
Yep he stays down clutching his shin and appearing to be in agony. Blatant cheating. He should have been carded. Very frustrating. Luck has not been on our side over the past few.
Players have been doing that for decades with or without contact. And the useless refs do nothing to stop it and plenty to encourage it
See plenty of fouls not given because a player stays on their feet even though they've been impeded.
The refs make it so you've got to play act to get a decision half the time
Users browsing this forum: From Despair To Where?, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 197 guests
