It's hard to imagine a more testing introduction to a new club, new team mates, new league and new country than what Lukas Rupp has had to endure since signing for us in January. Yet he appears to have just quietly got on with it, even accepting seemingly inexplicable refereeing decisions against him with no more than a grin and shrug of the shoulders. Despite obviously struggling to adapt, not unusual for foreign players even in normal times (think Vrancic and Stiepermann when they first arrived), he has put in solid performances when asked. Against Man City last Sunday he was one of our best rated players, and the pass that put Pukki through was as good as any you will see. With all the new signings he seems to have been forgotten but, with so many young players likely to feature, Rupp's old head, calmness and experience could well prove extremely valuable. Myself, I think we'll see a lot more of him, and from him.
I agree that he certainly has had a baptism of fire since he arrived. It will be interesting how he and others adapt to the Championship. He is an enabler, working hard for others rather than a spectacular player and as such can be easily overlooked, but I think he will fit in well with a fresh start. We need to hit the ground running.
I think he showed a lot more of what he can offer and better performances when he was given the chance to play through middle. On the right he struggled to impress for me and that may be because he was there in place of Buendia, who at the very least offers excitement.
I was surprised that much of the time Skipp was further forward than Rupp, though they both seem capable of playing as a pivot (thus a double pivot). It'll be interesting to see how that partnership develops.
That was OK on Tuesday given how totally without ambition Brum were. But I really hope it isn't the long term plan. With Skipp playing as single pivot and Rupp dropping back when needed, we have been pretty solid, xGa averaging 1.1 per game.
Like all tactical decisions, the emphasis will vary according to the opposition. It may we'll stay the same with Wycombe, then revert to a single pivot against Brentford and Bristol City.
Even without the statistical evidence, I think we have improved defensively, but for me the chief reason is Gibson since he has been starting. He seems to be forming a solid partnership with Handley, only conceding one goal in 3 games (from a free-kick conceded by Rupp). The Rupp-Skipp partnership looks promising as well, but I think we've been far more solid since Gibson replaced Godfrey, with the added advantage of having a left-footed CB at last.
Of course. But the same goes for every opinion posted on here. Rick's hypothesis is that the defensive improvement is largely down to Gibson replacing Godfrey. It's another hypothesis to be backed by data. He has even fewer matches to go on! Funny how some people seem to think that an opinion based on using their eyes is somehow more than just one hypothesis among others!
Perhaps I didn't make it very clear, but my point is that it's seldom down to one player. Rupp played in a 4-1-4-1 earlier in the season, which is a very different role. His starts at CM/DM are similar to Gibson's, but defending is a team function with the CBs at the core. Since Gibson (and Handley, to be fair) came into the side we've conceded one goal in 3 games and that was from the free kick conceded by Rupp. It's early days to be sure, but the improvement looks promising.
I am afraid I have to disagree. Sure, where opinions are data driven they need to have a convincing number of comparable. Where opinions are based on watching style of play, risky passes, creative passes, good positioning and so on, yes those opinions are not as reliable as narrow pure metric ones, but in a game where data often stands corrected I think those opinions are valuable because they’re broader and they’re tried and tested. And they can be formed based on one match, even just ten minutes - you can quickly decide whether a player is “comfortable on the ball”. Now the opinion might be wrong, those ten minutes might flatter them (or the opposite), but you can do it. Current statistical analysis won’t tell me how comfortable a player is on the ball over 100 games. Statistics are useful, but this is not a game of just stats. Not even cricket works like that.
I agree that we've improved defensively and why you think this has happened, but for me I think it's more down to Hanley's returning than Gibson replacing Godfrey. If Godfrey was partnered with Hanley with Rupp & Skipp in front of them I still think we'd have improved. Even last season we looked better defensively when Hanley played part due I think to his performance, but perhaps more importantly his attitude. I really can't see him allowing the team to fold the way it did post lockdown, if he'd been playing. There's a reason why he's captain
I'm glad to see that I am not the only one thoroughly pissed off with meaningless stats. The game is simple - you pass, you tackle, you dribble, you shoot etc etc and you try and score goals. It doesn't matter how many times players ran 20 yards or how many passes a player made in his own half or how many times the keeper adjusted his balls in his jockstrap the only stat that matters is Norwich 1 Birmingham 0 or Norwich 0 Derby 1 . All the rest of the stats might be of interest to the coaching staff or stats geeks but are of no interest to me. I can see for myself who played well, who didn't and why we either won or didn't and on top of that I trust many stats as much as I trust Politicians! End of rant.
