The 2019-2020 season.

The gulf in class between Championship and Premier League is evident and vast. We conceded heavily in the Championship but were free scoring at the same time thus our runaway success. However, due to the aforementioned gulf in class scoring in the PL is not so apparently easily achieved (despite our early successes) and therefore if we continue to concede as we have done and not score so freely as we did last season the conclusion will be what we see now.

It is hoped that the return of Hoadley and Zimbo will offer some defensive improvement and putting Amadou as the defensive shield should tighten us up, but to expect the same kind of "we'll score more than you so it doesn't matter if we concede" adoption in the PL is sheer folly imho.

Bah !

 

I agree OCF. Perhaps I should have said being more secure shouldn't involve 'that much compromise'. With Hernandez back, we should be able to counter attack more effectively and that's the Plan B I'd like to see. When we work the ball forward with pass after pass we confront a well organised low block defence which neutralises Pukki's talents.

Look back at our second goal against ManCity where we soaked up pressure and then countered through Buendia's excellent through ball to Pukki who drew the defence then laid it off to Cantwell for the goal. We need to do more of that. We don't have the players to break down set PL defences - we need to catch them off guard. The other key is to not give away the first goal. When we score first, we win. When we concede first, we lose. That's where being more secure comes in.

 

You might want to look at the clip again. Yes Godfrey was taking the ball up the left channel but I fail to see this as the issue, that is what you expect when you encourage CB's to play out from the back. The reason why Buendia was in the position he was in, was because when Godfrey went forward, he came back assumidly to cover for Godfrey going forward. This is clearly a team play and Buendia was moving back well before anyone got even close to potentially tackling Godfrey. Although Godfrey lost control of the ball Watford never gained possession (it was in transisition) and Pukki (I think) played the ball back to Buendia. Buendia was closed quickly by the Watford number 7, but I would expect a player of a lot lesser quality than Buendia to deal with the situation all he had to do from a defensive point of view was protect the ball with his body and either play it back to Krul or retain it until team mates had recovered (There were plenty trying). Alternatively if he wanted to be braver he could have passed it through a gate in the Watford midfield to Steipermann. What Buendia tried to do was be clever & take the ball past the Watford player. Wrong option in wrong circumstances and very poor decision making on Buendia's part. Even still we should have still been able to deal with the situation better than we did. Trybull did reasonably well in slowing up the attack (Delay) and appeared to be attempting to deflect the ball wide, Tettey less so. The Watford 37 made a good run which intitialy Tettey tried to cover (which is probably not what an experience CB would have done) which left the gap in the middle. When the shot is taken the only player of the makeshift back 4 in a poor position is Tettey.

 

Perhaps so canario, but is it really necessary for Godfrey to carry the ball over the halfway line and be caught out of position when the ball is lost? To do that when we are playing with a makeshift defence just seems to be asking for trouble.

 

Well that depends on the teams playing philosophy. So if Godfrey had been instructed to operate in the way you seem to want us to play in, then the answer is no.

However everything I've seen from DF to date and the way Buendia covered the space left by Godfrey suggests Godfrey & Buendia were trying to play how DF has asked the team to play. Godfrey makes plenty of mistakes, which we should all expect from someone learning their trade, but in my view not on this occasion. Buendia clearly made a mistake (he is also learning his trade) which was the catalysis for the goal. Tettey also made a mistake (not unexpected for someone playing out of position). I would suggest that the player who has most to learn from this is Buendia.

With modern day football players are expected to be able to interchange positions during a game, whether the players we have currently are capable of this is questionable, but they will never get to that point unless they are brave and try to put into practice what they are learning in training into games. That's player development, sometimes it'll work sometimes it won't.

 

This ^

There are 20 teams in the EPL. From what I've seen, the vast majority take a similar approach to us when winning the ball in their defensive third; they all try to play out from the back, retaining good possession until in a position to attack the opposition penalty box. Burnley are the one team who don't subscribe to this, preferring to pass long out of defence to physical forwards who hold the ball and bring a bevy of advancing midfielders into play. I haven't seen enough of Leicester to say how much of their Vardy-centred counter-attacking style remains from the Ranieri days.
But while the majority of teams play out from the back, I see very few examples of this being accomplished by CBs in advanced positions; one of the full backs yes, but not both and certainly not the CBs. Sheffield Utd are the exception, with an approach based on the CBs doing exactly that -- with defensive cover in place behind them accordingly.

Watch the Man City CBs, watch the Liverpool CBs; they hold the defensive line until the whole play has moved into the opposition half; at that stage, in possession, one or other CB may make a run forward with the ball. But there will still be a back line of three covering behind them. If both FBs are pushed on, the CBs stay back. I don't believe for a moment that DF expects more offensive involvement from his CBs than Guardiola or Klopp expect of theirs.

 

Spot on Robbie. It's about holding the line as we move forward. If Godfrey pushes forward there needs to be cover behind him. Often Tettey or McLean will provide this with the remaining CB and FBs. Against Watford, however, there wasn't a remaining CB, only Tettey playing as a CB. Had Zimbo been holding the fort it'd have been different as Tettey could slot in as cover in the absence of Godfrey. We weren't playing as if we had a weakened back line and Watford took full advantage.

 

Not just about holding the line as we move forward though Rick; it's a question about the point at which the CBs can safely leave the back line to venture forward. carrowcanario was suggesting that Godfrey and Buendia were executing a "DF approved" gambit and that this was all part of how DF wants the team to play. But that is not actually how the CBs have operated in general, either this season or last. They have played much as I described the Man City and Liverpool CBs playing, and virtually every other CB in the league too, bar Sheffield United's. Of course, Godfrey moving into an advanced position and Buendia dropping in behind him as cover, may indeed be rehearsed; the issue is when and where it is executed.

 

https://readnorwich.com/2019/11/12/these-norwich-fans-react-to-sheffield-united-ticket-sales/

 

Bit of sense from Paddy Davitt; the Archant scribes too often seem to bend mindlessly to the social media winds.

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/canaries-paddy-davitt-column-1-6372341

 

Bit of sense also from our sporting director who is far more pragmatic than his predecessor - who flung nearly £9m and obscene wages with no relegation clause at an aging, misfiring Naismith instead .....which still failed to keep us afloat in the top flight

https://readnorwich.com/2019/11/13/...to-become-an-established-premier-league-club/

 

Worth a listen

 

Nothing wrong with the Webber quotes, but what about the readnorwich "verdict"? Deserves at least x 3. Why do they bother? Is it some sort of ego trip for the "writers"?

 

I can see the sense of looking long term and keeping the same Farkeball approach:

"Webber is the kingmaker now. The Canaries' sporting director has made it clear publicly there is no emotional attachment to Farke that would preclude him from triggering a change - if such a scenario was ever required. But the factors that might prompt such a major decision encompass far more than a weekly quest for three points or even Premier League survival this season. Farke was anointed by Webber in 2017, and then handed a new, improved deal last season, because he understood the direction of travel, he knew the tight financial parameters woven around a newly-created role and the attendant need to develop young talent.
He has delivered on every measure and engineered a remarkable promotion into the bargain. To reiterate, well ahead of schedule."

All of that is true, but does that rule out tweaking the system according to the parameters of a particular match. We were at home against Watford and so sought to dominate the play. One mistake in the third minute and we were then on the back foot for the rest of the match. Had we kept our defensive shape and balanced attack and defence, it might well have been different.

Away to Everton I hope we'll be more pragmatic with defenders defending and attacking players attacking. Paddy is right that fans are getting restless about the way we're conceding goals while scoring very few. Most fans are willing to look long term, but they also need to see that immediate problems are being addressed. If we do that and show that we can compete at this level (as we did against Newcastle, ManCity and Bournemouth), then the fans will stay on board and support the long term aims.

 

If we can see what's needed Rick, I'm sure Webber is perfectly capable of seeing it too. He talks to DF every day and the question of tweaking the system must be a topic for them. But, apart from Man City and Bournemouth, any tweaking remains invisible, at least to me. What I infer from this is that Zimmermann's return (or failing him, Hanley's), is viewed as the essential ingredient for whatever tweaks are being planned. The pudding should be proven in the next couple of matches ........

 

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/melissa-rudd-post-watford-1-6374468

 

As Melissa says:

"Emi Buendia may have been responsible for losing the ball to Gerard Deulofeu, but the whole passage of City's play was error strewn, from centre-half Ben Godfrey marauding to the left touchline initially, to Tom Trybull's reluctance to attempt to tackle and Alex Tettey following the run of Roberto Pereyra which cleared the way for Deulofeu's shot. It was horrendous to watch from a defensive perspective, and it's becoming a weekly occurrence. With almost a third of the season gone, City find themselves rock bottom and four points adrift of safety. Is that long enough to establish that these players are not good enough for the Premier League? There is such a huge disparity between how they collectively perform at their very best compared to their very worst that it's impossible to tell."

I don't think that "these players are not good enough for the Premier League". It's the tactics that need tweaking to balance defence and attack. It may be that some changes, like Byram for Aarons might make a difference, but for me we're trying to play tactics that go against players' strengths. Why does Godfrey need to push over the halfway line when he's the only CB playing and Buendia then has to drop back.? We're weak at the back, so we weaken it more by doing that? It just doesn't make sense. There are plenty of ways to work the ball forward without weakening the defence.

 

Thanks for posting Melissa's comments Rick and they make interesting reading.
#pullingnopunches

 

And before you can say 'on the ball city' we're be playing like we did under Hughton. What you are advocating RER is the start of a very slippery sloop.

 

No - what I'm advocating is a balance between defence and attack, where the defence keeps its shape as it moves the ball out from the back. The CBs (when we have more than one) take the ball from Krul and advance it to either the midfielders or the FBs on the flanks, who then play it through to the attacking players. I'd like to see us do that more quickly before the opposing defence is set in a low block cutting out space.

We did this against Newcastle and ManCity, but of late the movement has been too slow and deliberate. Let's play to the pace of Hernandez, Pukki and Buendia instead of trying to play the ball through a packed defence. Krul and the defenders can push forward in a high line, but one which can close down the space when we lose the ball and have to defend. No 'slippery sloop', just playing to our strengths with a balance of defence and attack.