Is Wes Hoolahan a Norwich City Legend?

[Din]

This is one thing that always puzzles me. Hoolahan was as influential almost as Holty throughout the Lambert years. He's our longest serving player, on the whole has performed very well each season, and yet if you were to mention him in the same league as Holt, or Huckerby then you'd get laughed at. Yes he's had some problems here, but so did Holt.

For me Wes certainly is a Norwich legend. Perhaps not quite in the same league those already mentioned, but he's certainly on par with someone like Adam Drury in my mind.

 

[CanaryNath]

Yes, he is.

Simples

 

[eatonparkboy]

I don't think there are too many legends in anything and certainly very few in football and naturally even less at NCFC, I think it is overused and I blame commentators in sport who use the words "great", "unbelievable", "brilliant", "fantastic" and "legend" to describe the ordinary and mundane.

So for that reason, in this case, I have to put legend into Room 101.

 

[splutcho]

Holt and Hoolahan are the faces of our turnaround from one of the worst parts of our recent history to one of the best. So yes.

 

[Suffolk Canary]

I think the term legend is thrown around far too loosely these days.  I think the only genuine legends I've seen in my life time are Holt and Huckerby. Those are the only players i think in 30/40 years time, we'll still talk about.  

I still think wes is brilliant though.  I thought he was MOTM today 

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

It depends how you define legend really, If you say that every team has 10 players in their history that will be the 10 most successful or influential for that club and this is what you should be recognizing as 'a legend' then Wes is certainly one of those players in my opinion. ie you accept that Shrewsbury have as many legends as Man Utd - its not about the achievement level, its about the proportional influence on the club.

If however you define a legend as being what an individual has achieved with a club, then clearly a team like Man Utd will have many more legends than a Shrewsbury.

Its a bit like the wall/hall of fame. Every club has one - so is a legend simply a member of that select, or does someone have to do more than than to qualify?

Take Jimmy Glass for Carlisle (as I googled to ensure I got the details right - second hit was 'Jimmy Glass - Carlisle legend') He played only 3 games for Carlisle, but is considered a 'Legend' for having done something singularly memorable that achieved something important for the club. Contrast this with their player records, which state Jimmy McConnell has scored the most goals for them and Alan Ross has the most appearences. These two players are also considered 'legends' for the club, because of their long-term impact and service.

So we have 'legends' based on service, achievement, influence and special moments.

Huckerby is a legend because he was the catalyst to our promotion and for a long time considered our star player. Grant Holt was our captain and similarly inspirational, achieved a lot personally and for the team.

Wes has a more subtle role - he's not the one scoring the special goals or making the headlines, but anyone who has followed Norwich over the last 5 or so years will know how influential a player he is.

So for me he qualifies as a 'legend'. He hasnt just turned up and shown his face a number of times - he's made match winning contributions on a regular basis and was pivotal behind our promotions and our return from desolation. It would just sit a little easier with me if he hadnt called the club a 'shower of sh*te'...!

 

[Beauseant]

Wes was a huge part of our rise through the divisions but has largely been a bit part player in recent years. Given that Lambert, Hughton, and Adams rarely started him since we got back to the Prem I don't think he's a legend, just a very good player who's now probably past his best. For me consistency is a key attribute of a legend and Wes has never been consistent, hence his sporadic starts.

 

[morty]

Wes was a huge part of our rise through the divisions but has largely been a bit part player in recent years. Given that Lambert, Hughton, and Adams rarely started him since we got back to the Prem I don't think he's a legend, just a very good player who's now probably past his best. For me consistency is a key attribute of a legend and Wes has never been consistent, hence his sporadic starts.

Agree with this, but credit where its due, he was excellent yesterday.

 

[Beauseant]

He was, but I wouldn't start him at Charlton.

 

[morty]

He was, but I wouldn't start him at Charlton.

Agreed. Tettey to take his place perhaps?

 

[Beauseant]

I think so. Suspect that's why they didn't risk his groin yesterday. Same with Jerome. Lots of games coming up.

 

[eatonparkboy]

He was, but I wouldn't start him at Charlton.

So what is your take on our new system then? Personally I like to see a manager identify his best players and the best players to fit into the style he wants to play irrespective of the opposition.

So do you think AN is going to pick a side based on the opposition? We know Wes is inconsistent but if he was so good yesterday, wouldn't it be better to let Charlton, not a form team, worry how they will cope with our front five?

 

[Beauseant]

So what is your take on our new system then? Personally I like to see a manager identify his best players and the best players to fit into the style he wants to play irrespective of the opposition.

So do you think AN is going to pick a side based on the opposition? We know Wes is inconsistent but if he was so good yesterday, wouldn't it be better to let Charlton, not a form team, worry how they will cope with our front five?

 

[Beauseant]

I thinks it's horses for courses. Charlton are quite a big physical side who will offer more going forward than Blackpool. We need a holding midfielder and Tettey is the best we have in that role.

 

[Dandy Mountfarto]

He should be the first name on the team sheet imo. Better a 'lightweight' and 'inconsistent' player with flair, invention and ability than a midfield full of players who can win the ball back but have absolutely no clue what to do with it.

We've seen for years now that 9 times out of 10, when Hoolahan doesn't play, we look completely guileless.

 

[Personal Trainer]

From the brief cameo we saw on Saturday I can see Tony Andreu taking over the Wes role. Tricky and picked some good passes but looked stronger driving into the box.

And yes, I know it was only Blackpool and we were 3-0 up

 

[morty]

He should be the first name on the team sheet imo. Better a 'lightweight' and 'inconsistent' player with flair, invention and ability than a midfield full of players who can win the ball back but have absolutely no clue what to do with it.

We've seen for years now that 9 times out of 10, when Hoolahan doesn't play, we look completely guileless.

Thats not entirely true though, is it?

These days Wes has one good game in three, he also has the ability to frustrate, and become a liability.

When you play Wes something always has to be sacrificed, and basically his share of the defensive work needs to be picked up by everybody else, they all have to work that bit harder to leave him to do what he does best. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but there is always a risk.

If he is playing like he did during the promotion year, where we played a system that was developed so we could shoehorn Wes in, then all well and good. But he isn't a central midfielder, and he isn't a winger and he isn't consistent enough to be picked, week in, week out. He was fantastic on Saturday, but unfortunately performances like that are getting rarer and rarer.

 

[Beauseant]

Spot on Morty. I get frustrated by this "but he's our most creative player" argument. He's lightweight, painfully one footed and has a marked tendency to over elaborate which, when he's not at his best, is highly disruptive.

Against poor sides who won't get much possession I'd start him, but for tough away games the first rule is make yourselves hard to beat. I agree that Andreu (and/or Dorrans) may be the answer. Andreu had more shots on target in 25 minutes on Saturday than Wes has had all season, and therein lies the rub: he just doesn't contribute enough in terms of an all round game, which is why no one other than Lambert has ever expressed an interest in buying him from us.

 

[Dandy Mountfarto]

Only three players have created more goals than Hoolahan this season, and all three have them have played nearly double the minutes he has. There isn't a player in the league with a better assist to minutes ratio than Wes.

Obviously he's not going to be doing a massive amount of defensive work but he's a playmaker what do you expect? Should players like Coutinho and Ozil should be dropped from their respective clubs?

The end result of picking players based on their defensive qualities is Hughton-ball and I never want to see that again.

 

[morty]

Only three players have created more goals than Hoolahan this season, and all three have them have played nearly double the minutes he has. There isn't a player in the league with a better assist to minutes ratio than Wes.

Obviously he's not going to be doing a massive amount of defensive work but he's a playmaker what do you expect? Should players like Coutinho and Ozil should be dropped from their respective clubs?

The end result of picking players based on their defensive qualities is Hughton-ball and I never want to see that again.

Lol, "Only three players have created more goals than him" is the same as saying "He's the 4th most creative player" really though, isn't it? Just depends which way you're spinning!

He's a unique player, and I wish these debates could somehow finish in the middle ground of "When he's good, he's great, but very hard to fit consistently into systems, and when he's bad, he's anonymous, he doesn't have average games"