If you could bring one player from at their peak with Norwich City into the team, who would it be?

[The Great Mass Debater]

If you could take one player from their best period with us (ie you have to ignore what they might have done at other clubs) and put them in the team to 'give the lads a hand' who would you choose?

 

[Canaryboy]

An easy question considering our lack of left sided players.... Darren Huckerby.

 

[morty]

An easy question considering our lack of left sided players.... Darren Huckerby.

^^^ This.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

Yeah to be honest after I re-read it Huckerby is the obvious choice considering our current inbalances.

Dave Phillips anyone?

 

[Beauseant]

Martin Peters. No one has ever made such a big impact on the club. Lucky enough to play against him a few times, it was like he was on a different planet.

 

[Tomasz Blazak]

Hucks for me too.

 

[Yellow Fever]

Peters was a classy player, but we could really do with Hucks right now.

 

[Canaryboy]

Martin Peters. No one has ever made such a big impact on the club. Lucky enough to play against him a few times, it was like he was on a different planet.

That would probably be my dads choice, he used to rave about Martin Peters when I was a kid.

What would the equivalent signing be for us in 2015, signing Frank Lampard perhaps?

 

[Din]

An easy question considering our lack of left sided players.... Darren Huckerby.

This this this this this this this.

This.

 

[Monty13]

Yep they've all nailed it, Hucks would be a godsend in this team.

 

[eatonparkboy]

I was out of the country during the Peters era so never saw him play for City apart from some highlights on NZTV.

Obviously he would be in the frame as would Huckerby and I would be happy with either of those.

But the OP was to give the lads a hand, And as I consider CB is the real weak part of our game, I couldn't choose between some of the top CB's we have had in the past. Watson, Bruce, Forbes, Stringer, Butler to name a few.

But I can think of one player whose guile, passing ability, flair and nuggety attitude are the things missing in our midfield at the moment and that is Tommy Bryceland.

 

[Brian Fantana]

An easy question considering our lack of left sided players.... Darren Huckerby.

Yep, Hucks all the way! 

 

[dj161]

Drury.

 

[mustard gas]

I go for Peters also. Loved Hucks but Peters had so much class and skill. Played for 5 years for us, 206 games, which surprised me, and 44 goals from midfield.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

I was out of the country during the Peters era so never saw him play for City apart from some highlights on NZTV.

Obviously he would be in the frame as would Huckerby and I would be happy with either of those.

But the OP was to give the lads a hand, And as I consider CB is the real weak part of our game, I couldn't choose between some of the top CB's we have had in the past. Watson, Bruce, Forbes, Stringer, Butler to name a few.

But I can think of one player whose guile, passing ability, flair and nuggety attitude are the things missing in our midfield at the moment and that is Tommy Bryceland.

How do you think those players would fair in the modern game? Would they still be as good as you remember them do you think? Or has the game moved on and would they now struggle?

 

[eatonparkboy]

How do you think those players would fair in the modern game? Would they still be as good as you remember them do you think? Or has the game moved on and would they now struggle?

That is an unanswerable question but a great topic over a pint or two. And of course the memory is very selective when remembering the past and trying to make a point in any discussion.

I think there is no doubt that football is played at a faster tempo meaning the players are fitter and technically better on the ball. And tactics play a much bigger part in a players instructions and movement.

The training and conditioning they undergo is far more scientific. They don't go straight to the bookies after training and then to the pub for a few bevvies. And their BMI is monitored to make sure they follow the nutritional advice they are given.

The equipment they are provided with is far superior and they are pampered with freebies and promotions to enhance their lifestyle.

But having said all that, I have no doubt that many players from any era would have been better had they had the same privileges. I don't say all because it just wouldn't be true. But the good ones would, I believe be just as good now.

The game was different. Stanley Matthews was very good but it has to be tempered with the realisation that once he put a bloke on his backside, the bloke just sat there. Today, they get up and chase back. However, I do believe we got better value for money and the entertainment was better.

In the case of Tommy Bryceland, my choice, he was a cultured passer of the ball. He was putting balls inside of full backs for others to run onto in a time when the ball was played to feet when passing. He was happy to mix it even though he was little bigger than Wes and he had a tactical nous for playing the ball at the right time. A good midfield player not only needs to be able to pas but know when to pass. I remember Booby Brennan, another wise old City player, telling me that Tommy was the players player. The one they looked to and the one with the respect.

And he had attitude. Norwich got a corner in the last minute at Portman Road. Tommy went to take it but instead just turned and kicked it into touch. No ball boys in those days to throw another one back on the pitch. He reasoned that if he crossed it we could score but we might well allow them to charge up the field and score themselves. And with only two points for a win, an away draw was a great result.

Some were outraged but to me it showed that this guy thought about the game, and the consequences of a local derby, which mattered more in those days because many of the players on the pitch were local, as well as the fans.

In other words, he had flair. He could boss the game. He had influence on the outcome of the game. Someone we haven't had since Crook. I'm not saying he would be as effective today as each player has ore of a specific role nowadays and that may well have nullified his greatest assets.

 

[The Great Mass Debater]

That is an unanswerable question but a great topic over a pint or two. And of course the memory is very selective when remembering the past and trying to make a point in any discussion.

I think there is no doubt that football is played at a faster tempo meaning the players are fitter and technically better on the ball. And tactics play a much bigger part in a players instructions and movement.

The training and conditioning they undergo is far more scientific. They don't go straight to the bookies after training and then to the pub for a few bevvies. And their BMI is monitored to make sure they follow the nutritional advice they are given.

The equipment they are provided with is far superior and they are pampered with freebies and promotions to enhance their lifestyle.

But having said all that, I have no doubt that many players from any era would have been better had they had the same privileges. I don't say all because it just wouldn't be true. But the good ones would, I believe be just as good now.

The game was different. Stanley Matthews was very good but it has to be tempered with the realisation that once he put a bloke on his backside, the bloke just sat there. Today, they get up and chase back. However, I do believe we got better value for money and the entertainment was better.

In the case of Tommy Bryceland, my choice, he was a cultured passer of the ball. He was putting balls inside of full backs for others to run onto in a time when the ball was played to feet when passing. He was happy to mix it even though he was little bigger than Wes and he had a tactical nous for playing the ball at the right time. A good midfield player not only needs to be able to pas but know when to pass. I remember Booby Brennan, another wise old City player, telling me that Tommy was the players player. The one they looked to and the one with the respect.

And he had attitude. Norwich got a corner in the last minute at Portman Road. Tommy went to take it but instead just turned and kicked it into touch. No ball boys in those days to throw another one back on the pitch. He reasoned that if he crossed it we could score but we might well allow them to charge up the field and score themselves. And with only two points for a win, an away draw was a great result.

Some were outraged but to me it showed that this guy thought about the game, and the consequences of a local derby, which mattered more in those days because many of the players on the pitch were local, as well as the fans.

In other words, he had flair. He could boss the game. He had influence on the outcome of the game. Someone we haven't had since Crook. I'm not saying he would be as effective today as each player has ore of a specific role nowadays and that may well have nullified his greatest assets.

I think you perhaps have to divide the premise into two different versions. A version where the original player is picked up, thrown through a time portal and dumped in our first X1 (once he's finished with all the interviews) to play as he was then, and a second version, where the player is taken at a younger stage and allowed to train and develop through modern coaching/facilities (ie transporting his potential rather than his ability limited by previous eras)