Norwich City match report - part 1

Will I ever have the bragging rights here in Norfolk when the Super Reds are in town? It doesn’t look like it on the basis of my last five visits to Carrow Road with results: 0-0; 2-2; 0-0; 5-1; 1-0 and now 4-0. Add to that just one win out of four seen at Ipswich and it begins to get tiresome!

It is a short distance to the ground for me, so I arranged to have a pub meal with some City supporters before the game. They were very subdued, all thinking that Roeder had been sacked too early, even though their game against Charlton was appalling. I agreed with this, hoping that they would sack him after our win today – no such luck on either count. There was surprise also that Bryan Gunn had been called into temporary charge and that the coaches Paul Stephenson and Adam Sadler had also been dismissed, one of them after only a few weeks in post.

Both in the pub and on the way to the ground there was an atmosphere of haunted fear amongst City fans of what might happen today and in the weeks ahead. They were already talking about Paul Ince being chosen as the next manager, because they want someone who would be capable of getting them out of Division One next season – some confidence!

Well – ninety minutes and our abject performance changed all that. If we lose to Ipswich in our next game and Norwich beat Southampton at Carrow Road, they will be above us in the league – help!

In fairness, the crowds keep up at Carrow Road and they had the usual 24,000 plus there today, although the prices had been reduced (they start selling season tickets for 2009-10 next week) and it was a ‘kid a quid’ on the day. In fairness also, the City fans got behind their team right from the off – it would have been different with Roeder in the dug-out, for sure.

The following Reds team took to the pitch:

Muller

Van Homoet Moore Sousa Kozluk

Campbell-Ryce Hassell De Silva Leon

Macken Rigters

Subs: Steele; Odejayi; El Haimour; Butterfield and Potter

This was against a Norwich team of:

Marshall

Otsemobor Doherty Grounds Bertrand

Croft Clingan Fotheringham Hoolahan

Russell Cureton

Subs: Nelson; Bell; Lupoli; Pattison; Cort

For the first part of the first half, the Reds looked lively and had Rigters in particular looking bright. He had two early chances, the first showing his speed off the mark to nip in before Marshall could reach the ball, but his touch with the outside of his right foot carried the ball just wide of the post. His second was a good shot, which the keeper saved. Norwich blocked a further shot and then De Silva tried one, which again the keeper saved.

It is worth reflecting on this part of the game, because the balance changed from about fifteen minutes onwards to Norwich, a grip which they never lost, although not turning it into possible goalscoring opportunities until the second half. We passed the ball well and had a lot of possession in this time and Rigters and De Silva went close on the three occasions mentioned. Norwich looked, not surprisingly, like a team with a hang-over. Had we scored, their heads would undoubtedly have dropped and it could have been different. Problem for us already evident, though, was that Macken looked from the start as though he had forgotten to get out of bed. His first touch was poor, if he managed to get one at all; he looked off the pace and he couldn’t find a red shirt with a pass. The whole team gradually sank to that level!

As the balance shifted in the first half, we had some good defending in the form of blocks from Hassell, Moore and, almost at half time, Sousa, but, by this time, Norwich had remembered that they were a football team and they were starting to surprise themselves by how well they could play and how easily we were starting to let them in through our midfield colander.

 

RE: Norwich City match report - part 2

In the second half, the same pattern did not take long to re-emerge with Norwich re-establishing control and possession. Muller was forced into an early save. Finally, Norwich remembered how to score. Hoolahan was rumoured to be coming either to us, or to Leeds only a week or so ago, because Roeder wouldn’t play him. I am not saying that Bryan Gunn inspired the revival today, but players like Hoolahan and Cureton were clearly revelling in their respective recalls and were keen to impress. The Norwich passing was bound to come to something eventually and so it was that a good interchange of passes caught our defence too square and freed Hoolahan, who, although being forced by Muller to take the ball very wide to the right, still managed to get past the keeper and slot in from a tight angle. Not only had Norwich now got the possession they had enjoyed from the fifteenth minute, they also believed that they could get through our defence. We were just throwing possession away again and again. Typical of our profligacy was a free kick outside the Norwich box. De Silva took it and wasted it and Butterfield couldn’t do much with the follow up, but what was galling was that this immediately turned into the sort of counter-attack which showed that Norwich were very likely to increase their lead. Another such break ended with Norwich hitting the side-netting. It was almost written into the script that Cureton would score. Moore tried to shield the ball back to Muller, but this is where we need the predatory instincts and reflexes of a striker like Cureton. He waited his moment and nipped past Moore, judging the downward bounce of the ball on to his foot with perfection and lifting it over Muller, who might have done better, just getting a hand to it, but not being able to stop it trickling home. How we could have done with Cureton to do that for us. Admittedly, this was another counter-attack from Norwich and we were thin at the back because we were pressing forwards more, but it was an opportunist goal brought about by Cureton’s skill as much as Norwich’s passing. Norwich then became rampant into the last ten minutes and you just felt it might go from bad to worse and so it did. The penalty looked very soft, but Van Homoet was booked for the challenge. Our heads dropped further and Norwich were enjoying outrageously noisy support after the agony of their fans over previous weeks. No one really seemed to mark Russell that well for the final header and fourth goal – we had been thumped by then and three, or four didn’t seem to matter.

Most of the players came across to applaud the fans and I noticed De Silva making gestures to apologise for the quality of the performance. Yes, Anderson, you are forgiven, but you must turn your contrition into a five-star performance against Ipswich and the rest of the season.

Overall match analysis:

The least effective component of the team today was midfield. Hassell was in a holding role in front of the back four. The other three seemed to have a roving role, maybe with the idea of giving them greater flexibility and making them hard for the opposition to find and mark. Problem was, as time rolled on, our own players couldn’t find each other either. You have to have some semblance of structure. At times, our midfield dissolved into a sort of amorphous jelly with no clear structure at all and players seemed unsure where anyone should be playing. At times De Silva appeared to be on the right and JCR in the middle. At times Leon seemed to be wide left, but, at other times, he was more in the middle. Most worrying was the performance of JCR and I do put this down to a lack tactical judgement on how to play him. He started on the right – best position, given the other three in midfield. Then he seemed to switch to the left, with Van Homoet giving width down the right. Then he seemed to be in the middle, which is where he gravitated to from about twenty minutes – note the link with our loss of control there! Trouble was, although he has super skills, they are those of a winger, not a central midfielder. He was constantly trying to run at Norwich down the middle. This meant he could be crowded out from both right and left and he was forever being caught in possession and dispossessed. When you stop and analyse Norwich’s counter-attacks, it was amazing how many came from break-down in our play when JCR had got nowhere down the middle. Give credit to JCR that he never stopped trying, but it looked to much like shadow-boxing. Anderson needed to be central and stay central. He did his best in many ways and some of our more promising forays came from his skill on the ball, but even he ran out of clear understanding of what shape the team was taking around him. Leon seemed determined to play the fancy stuff. This could be said of quite a few of the team today, but it was most noticeable in Leon. Two or three times he tried extravagant back-heels and flicks, when all that was wanted was a simple pass. One or two worked, but it too often led to his pass not getting to a red shirt and away went Norwich on the counter. At times, our midfield ‘shape’ was: no right-winger (he had wandered off inside); no left winger (he was trying delicate back-heels somewhere in the middle and not finding a colleague); a central midfielder who had wandered off to the right wing and a holding midfielder who was where he should have been in front of the back four, but looking totally bemused by the mess in front of him. Towards the end of the game, Hassell started to look more and more like King Canute, trying unsuccessfully to stem the flow-tide of Norwich pressure. It wasn’t his fault, although, apart from some good blocks and short-range passes, it was definitely not one of his better games.

I used to cringe hearing Jack Smith report on Barnsley games on Sport Spotlight on the radio in the sixties – he had a sharp, sardonic and sarcastic wit. I imagine him finishing his last Woodbine before starting the report. One of his best was ‘Barnsley’s defence was about as organised as the contents of a lady’s handbag.’ I know, you wouldn’t get away with it nowadays, but I remembered it today, as it described pretty well our midfield. What would dear Jack have made of today’s game – cringe!!! The lack of structure across the middle left holes, which Norwich eventually were able to exploit all too easily, as the midfield failed as a first-line of defence against counter-attack.

The back four looked alright in fact – well, as alright as you can when you are facing relentless pressure for over an hour. Moore and Sousa won a fair amount in the air, although it is characteristic of this Norwich team that they pass well and quickly on the floor and that rather found out our central two at times. Van Homoet did ok, as did Kozluk, although Croft had one of his better games against us and Kozzie wasn’t as effective as this game last season when, between him and Leon, they virtually played Croft out of the game.

It was a contrast to last season’s game in many ways. In that game, we kept our shape (what on earth was our shape today?), passed the ball well, kept Norwich under control and deserved to get something from the game. Today, we developed little, or no shape, especially in midfield, allowed Norwich to run through the middle with ease, once they realised that there was no obvious structure there, and deserved nothing from the game.

Macken just looked right out of sorts from the start. He did have one shot on target, which was blocked by Doherty in the second half, but otherwise – he did get the occasional pass to a red shirt, but most he didn’t; he didn’t win many headers; he didn’t get into good spaces down the flanks to attack the Norwich defence. Rigters looked bright and quick early on, but he seemed to be injured and went off. Had he not been injured, it should have Odejayi for Macken on 60 minutes. Butterfield could not be faulted for effort and it was right that Davey brought another midfielder on, as that was the source of our losing our grip on the match.

 

RE: Norwich City match report - part 3

Player analysis:

Muller 5: no outstanding saves, but he did ok. Could have done better with Cureton’s goal, although you might argue that he did well to get a hand on it anyway.

Van Homoet 5: lively on the break, but we didn’t get the ball to him in good enough positions. Had to take up the right-wing duties vacated by JCR’s migration into the middle. This was also another reason why we were torn to shreds by Norwich on the counter. Van Homoet was pushing too far forwards, so the back four started to lose shape.

Moore 5: would be six, but for his misjudgement with Cureton’s goal. Won most in the air and got some good blocks in. Not at his best against quick attackers such as Cureton and Russell (do you think Cureton tipped off Gunn and that influenced his team selection? Probably not, as their only reasonable alternative was to play 4-5-1 and the only different style striker was Carl Cort, who is not match-fit).

Sousa 5: similar to Moore and, apart from the Hoolahan goal, looked sound enough, but he does worry me when he goes walk-about, which he did again today. He seems suddenly, like a lad in a school yard game, to want to show what he can do in midfield (actually, today that was understandable). As counter-attack was Norwich’s greatest threat, this was not a good idea. It did not actually cost us, but today he did seem to lose concentration and awareness at times and drift out of position.

Kozluk 5: given a fair run-around by Croft, but not entirely so. At least he didn’t go wandering forward like Van Homoet and deserves credit for playing in the face-mask with a fractured cheek-bone.

Campbell-Ryce 6: and that is only on the basis of giving him a brownie-point for effort. He must play as a winger. I know the argument will be that the opposition can isolate him there by putting two players on him, but, on the other hand, at least that is another opposition player tied up for the ninety minutes. He looked, frankly, lost when he came into the middle. He huffed and puffed and tried and ran, but always into blind alleys. In rugby terms, he reminded me of some of the latter-day performances of Jason Robinson as England full-back. The opposition had worked out that, if they stood off him and let him dance his merry dance with his feet, he would eventually side-step himself and they could tackle him. JCR reminded me of that today. It also worth remembering how effective Robinson was as a winger. So is JCR – get him there and make sure he stays there – I don’t mind which wing, or both!

Hassell 5: did his bit and got in some good blocks, tackles and passes, but was eventually overwhelmed by the unrelenting Norwich pressure. At least he stayed in position in front of the back four. I don’t know what would have happened if he had copied the rest of midfield and gone walkabout!

Anderson 6: tried hard throughout the game and did show some good skill in taking on multiple defenders and beating them before, inevitably, running out of options. He must be played in central midfield, because he is at his best when he is at the hub of our play. He got the wandering habit from about fifteen minutes or so and that was another reason we lost control of the middle. Unlike two of the other midfielders, at least he did not over-elaborate. He was contrite in front of the fans at the end. I think that I admire him for that, but he needs to put that right with good performances from now on. Stay in the middle, Anderson, you are hopeless out wide.

Leon 4: if he was not fit, then he might have some excuse, but, more than any other reds player today epitomised an aspect of what was wrong. If he thinks that he is in the shop window for a transfer, then that influenced the way he tried to play. He seemed determined to try the extravagant to show off his ball-skills, when a simple tap-pass to another reds shirt would do fine. This seemed to suggest that he had a mindset to play for himself and not the team on the day. Maybe that was true. Maybe he just wasn’t quite fit.

Macken 4: looked as though he was sleep-walking and never got much better. He seemed unable to hold up the ball; made few runs into the channels as a target for passes from our wonderful midfield and kept missing reds shirts with passes. I thought he had just made a bad start, but, sadly, he did not improve. It must be a bit demoralising when your manager, followed closely by the fans, keeps saying we need another striker.

Rigters 6: looked lively and much sharper than when I have previously seen him play, Could have had a couple of goals, but eventually faded and seemed to go off injured – another striker down, then!

Butterfield 6 and my man of the match, even though not coming on until fifty-one minutes: he looked up for it, got his foot in and tried hard. It is a bit of back-handed compliment to the rest of midfield that I nominate an inexperienced teenager as man of the match. He didn’t try anything fancy, but stuck to the basics and, although not succeeding quite (he just missed the post with a shot), he was a model to others of how to keep it simple.

Odejayi 5: again I recall last season, when Kayode was brought on around the same time and with us a goal down. On that occasion, he won everything in the air and also forced defenders into mistakes and conceding corners. Today, he won next to nothing against Doherty – pity that a late cross was just too high for him at the far post. He mad one opportunity in the box late on, but it would have involved either a bicycle, or a scissors-kick to score and it was beyond him.

So, there you have it.

At least the answer seems relatively simple – keep a clear shape and structure in midfield in order to provide better first-line defence when our play breaks down; be first to the loose ball, not second, as happened increasingly through the game; midfield players not to go walkabout, leaving holes all over the place; use the wide players to exploit the full width of the pitch - oh! And bring in a striker, otherwise we will play well and lose (like Southampton) and play badly and get thumped (like today).

The psychology behind recent remarks of the manager may not have helped some players today. If we are willing to listen to offers for any of our players, is that because a few of them don’t want to play for us any more? Does it encourage them to perform to any attending scouts in a way that is in their interests, rather than that of the team? Do we risk losing some good players over the next fortnight and not replacing them? Does it work every time to improve strikers’ performance if they know you are looking to bring in new players, or does that just make some of them start to feel their age a bit more and think that their career is nearly over? Whatever the reasons, we were not at the races for over an hour today and, worryingly, some players did not seem to want to raise the pace to be first to the ball and win back the balance of power in midfield. Not good enough, but at least the manager and the players know it.

Keep the faith!

 

hit the nail with the midfield floating system, it's garbage, no one knows where they are playing nt

 

Thanks

 

Thank you for taking the time to write those posts

Very much appreciated, mate.

 

Thanks for that mate !! nt

 

spot on report mate.

 

Could do with thomasevans as manager at oakwell he seems to know more about the way the team should be set up and the tactics to use than Davey,and I am not being sarcastic

 

Well - I am semi-retired and looking for work.

 

Thanks for that

Whenever you watch MOTD and they analyse a team who has given a good away performance they always mention the two banks of four breaking down the opposition's attacks. Barnsley on the other hand are playing the stupid diamond formation with the midfield all over the place. Carry on with this formation and relegation will be a formality.

 

Put this post on the wall in the dressing room!

I wasn't at the game myself yesterday so really appreciate the time you've taken to review the match and give us your take on the performance and the potential of the team. Thanks a lot.

Davey should be commended for taking risks with different midfield approaches. Hassell has been excellent up there in some games for example, not every manager sticks their neck out and tries something new. But (and it's a crucial But) you have to have a plan B when those risks aren't working out. Sometimes you just have to fall back on doing something simpler really well.

Maybe Davey had some other agenda yesterday; to let JCR sink or swim in a free role for example. Maybe Davey was thinking about his own ego in front of other scouts, wanting it show off his own 'clever tactics' who knows. I like Davey enough to trust him with these decisions, but I do expect him to have a plan B.

Getting my realism head back on, we were embarrassed by them but I think we were never going to win this game anyway because of the timing. This result has been shaped by the change of back-room staff at Norwich more than by any other factors.

 

RE: Norwich City match report - part 3

Amazing post mate, it's brilliant to read something so intelligent on this board. Thanks for the hard work

 

Spot on mate. We fell part in the second half. We need to get back to 4-4-2 with JCR out on the wing. But we need a couple of strikers pronto.