Rumours and speculation

[eatonparkboy]

I think its the Naismith position that he'd be looking at really, not the Tettey / Howson one.

My worry is that with us not being able to dispose of Naismith we are now going to stick with playing him and Pritchard will be pushed out wide. 

That's why I said we already have the Naismith replacement earlier in the thread, we've got 3 second strikers and only 2 actual strikers  :blink:

Why do we have two have two central midfield players sitting so deep? Howson is wasted on the halfway line and we end up with a gap between Wes/Naismith and Tettey/Howson and the opposition are having a field day at Carrow Road by just sitting and waiting and feeling comfortable. We play the same away and we have no-one backing up when Jerome has to wander out to the corner flag to get one of the Tettey/Bennet hoofs.

If Pritchard is the business, lets get him in that middle and pushing defenders into positions they don't feel comfortable in. People backing up and winning the ball in the space vacated by the opposition. Why has Wes been arguably our best player so far this season? Because he isn't predictable. And I;m afraid I believe the rest are. Let'shopethe manager sees sense and puts Pritchard where he can do damage.

 

[eatonparkboy]

Don't feel too sorry for him. He chose to stay here and be played out of position rather than go to the Premier League and be played in his best position.

Of course I would question his ambition. It may not have been football reasons of course. Players do have families and they might like living in Norwich. But that doesn't make a him a scapegoat for recent average/poor displays.

 

[SussexYellow]

staggered that the stumbling block appears to be his wages!

more staggered that he would rather stay in the Championship than go back to the Prem with his old boss.

Mercenary.

Or perhaps Sunderland were trying to bring in a squad player on the cheap, Rumours have it they offered £1m for Ruddy and presumably did not want to got higher. So would fit.

Naismith is of an age where he is going to want to get the most out of any transfer opportunity. You can not blame him for that.

Also I am not convinced he is as bad as comments on these forums would have us believe. The problem is that he is not a good fit with Wes in the team, a bit like Redmond we always looked a bit lightweight when both he and Wes played. If we go back to Lamberts day he had to come up with a system to get the best from a team with Wes in it, a lesson that may be worth revisiting.

But if Naismith does play we should get behind him. Find it hard to understand why he is being so heavily scapegoated when the RvW love in knew no bounds with some still thinking he could cut the mustard as recently as pre season!

 

[Canaryboy]

If Pritchard is the business, lets get him in that middle

So your position is that we shouldn't be annoyed that Naismith didn't join Sunderland.

But we should drop him and have an £8m player sitting on the bench. 

I think you perhaps aren't computing this correctly. If you think that the Howson/Tettey/Naismith trio isn't one which works, then the only way that Pritchard can change that is by taking Naismith out of the equation. 

Pritchard is not a Howson or Tettey replacement, he is a Naismith replacement. Its Naismith who has occupied his place on the pitch so far this season. 

I wanted Naismith to leave yesterday because I think the result of him staying is him getting minutes where Pritchard should be, and Pritchard being played out wide where he isn't effective and at the expense of Cano's or the Murphy's. 

Now I think that Alex Neil is going to be tinkering around giving Naismith minutes just to justify his big wages and to save some face. That's my worry. 

 

[eatonparkboy]

So your position is that we shouldn't be annoyed that Naismith didn't join Sunderland.

But we should drop him and have an £8m player sitting on the bench. 

I think you perhaps aren't computing this correctly. If you think that the Howson/Tettey/Naismith trio isn't one which works, then the only way that Pritchard can change that is by taking Naismith out of the equation. 

Pritchard is not a Howson or Tettey replacement, he is a Naismith replacement. Its Naismith who has occupied his place on the pitch so far this season. 

I wanted Naismith to leave yesterday because I think the result of him staying is him getting minutes where Pritchard should be, and Pritchard being played out wide where he isn't effective and at the expense of Cano's or the Murphy's. 

Now I think that Alex Neil is going to be tinkering around giving Naismith minutes just to justify his big wages and to save some face. That's my worry. 

I believe I have computed it correctly. It isn't about a trio, its about a duo.

I would have been happy for Naismith to have joined Sunderland. I wouldn't have been happy at £4M. But my post wasn't about him playing anyway. If you read it correctly it is about our overrated under criticised manager, who paid £8M plus decent wages no doubt, for Naismith and couldn't find his real position in the team but played him anyway, persisting with the Tettey/Howson combination in midfield when that engine room but also the gearbox clearly needs servicing.

And I stated that if Pritchard is the real deal, and you said he can play central despite him named as a right/left midfield player, then put him in the team as soon as he is fit. I keep hearing we've done well in the window and we have a good squad for the level we are playing at so why not drop Tettey (before he gets suspended) stick Howson in that position ( he is a professional footballer and if he can't tackle or pass, why is he team captain?) and tell Pritchard to show his apparent class, at this level, and drive us forward.

I couldn't care less if Naismith doesn't play for us again. I think he is better than he has shown here. But clearly there is a problem.

Mind you RVW has scored 3 in 4 for Vitesse.

 

[SussexYellow]

So your position is that we shouldn't be annoyed that Naismith didn't join Sunderland.

But we should drop him and have an £8m player sitting on the bench. 

I think you perhaps aren't computing this correctly. If you think that the Howson/Tettey/Naismith trio isn't one which works, then the only way that Pritchard can change that is by taking Naismith out of the equation. 

Pritchard is not a Howson or Tettey replacement, he is a Naismith replacement. Its Naismith who has occupied his place on the pitch so far this season. 

I wanted Naismith to leave yesterday because I think the result of him staying is him getting minutes where Pritchard should be, and Pritchard being played out wide where he isn't effective and at the expense of Cano's or the Murphy's. 

Now I think that Alex Neil is going to be tinkering around giving Naismith minutes just to justify his big wages and to save some face. That's my worry. 

My take on it is that Wes, Pritchard and Naismith all operate best from the same position, i.e. Centrally.

AN's problem seems to be that he knows his best players but not his best team, or his best formation. To get the best from the current personnel possibly we need to line up 4-1-4-1. That would mean a choice from Wes, Naismith, Pritchard and Howson for the central two - that would be great competition for those spots, but would mean accepting that nobody has a right to play, they have to earn it and would mean AN accepting he has to bench some of his top players. With Brady operating on the left and Jacob/Sergi/Josh on the right, that could work. It also shows why Maddison was allowed to go get a bit more experience.

One of Tettey, Mulumbu or Thompson to sit in front of the back 4.

To be at our most effective it requires Ollson and Brady to stay fit. Cover at left back looks a bit thin and I won't even go there on the debate about right back.

OTBC.

 

[Canaryboy]

Mind you RVW has scored 3 in 4 for Vitesse.

Eredivisie is a very poor league. The UEFA coefficients system has the Netherlands as the 15th strongest league system in Europe, below Greece and Croatia. People just remember that famous Ajax team of the early to mid nineties and give that league far too much credit in the 21st century. 

If you put Kyle Lafferty in the Dutch league he'd probably do very well. 

I don't know where you've seen Pritchard muted as a winger, but my understanding has always been that he's a central player who has sometimes been used out wide. I'd be disappointed if we use him as a winger all season. 

 

[eatonparkboy]

Eredivisie is a very poor league. The UEFA coefficients system has the Netherlands as the 15th strongest league system in Europe, below Greece and Croatia. People just remember that famous Ajax team of the early to mid nineties and give that league far too much credit in the 21st century. 

If you put Kyle Lafferty in the Dutch league he'd probably do very well. 

I don't know where you've seen Pritchard muted as a winger, but my understanding has always been that he's a central player who has sometimes been used out wide. I'd be disappointed if we use him as a winger all season. 

It was meant to be TIC about RVW. Where do UEFA place our Championship?

I hope you are correct about Pritchard. We don't need another wide player. I can't remember the site I saw it on, Hopefully, it may well have been mistaken. The Youtube clips of him at Brentford look like he was given license.

 

[Din]

I'm sorry it may be an overreaction but I am genuinely gutted the Naismith to Sunderland deal didn't go through, whether we would've made a £4m loss or not. We've already seen one promising attacking player go out on loan because he and the club feel he's not going to get a chance here (Maddison), how many more are not going to get an opportunity because Naismith is unjustifiably getting game time over them? We currently have 7 attacking midfield options; Hoolahan, Naismith, Pritchard, Brady, Ja Murphy, Jo Murphy and Canos. All of those are competing for 3 starting spots and then maybe 2 places on the bench. If Naismith had left then we would only have to leave one of those 6 remaining players out of our squad, and with the amount of injuries we have at the moment the one player who was left out would likely be in right now anyway. With Naismith however filling one of those spots two of those players will now have to sit out all because Alex Neil feels obliged to play someone who he paid £8m for and is undoubtedly one of our highest earners, on the off chance that he will come good.

I may be wrong, but Naismith to me seems like he only turns it on when he wants. Blackburn away he was immense, since then though when we've played more difficult opposition he hasn't been prepared to put in the effort to try and make a difference. Whereas young players like Canos, the Murphys and Maddison may not be the finished article yet but you could bet anything they'd give their absolute all. I'm not trying to scapegoat Naismith at all, but no matter what amount of money he's on I don't feel he should be near the team, because in the 9 months he's been with us he has been appalling. If practically any other player had performed as poorly as he had over the last 20 odd games they wouldn't even be making the subs bench, and the rules shouldn't be any different for him. If he wants to have a place in the side he should be forced to work hard and earn it, if he doesn't do that then he shouldn't be playing and we have plenty of others who can play ahead of him.

 

[SussexYellow]

The point I was making Din is that we have 4 quality central attacking midfielders. At most only 2 should play if the team is to be balanced. They have to earn the right to play, and AN needs to be ruthless in picking the player in form.

That's assuming we play 4-1-4-1. If we play 4-2-3-1, then Howson can drop back into the 2 and its 1 of Wes, Pritchard and Naismith. Playing one of the other two out of position is in my view a detrimental step, both for the team and the players who could occupy the position naturally. As I said I think we can get our strongest team out of a 4-1-4-1 line up.

I understand your viewpoint re Naismith and I think had he gone then Maddison would not have gone out on loan. But he stayed, we are where we are and now having overcome my initial disappointment I can understand the Maddison loan. However I am still hoping that Naismith can play a big part for us, but that will depend on the manager deploying his personnel to best effect. 

 

[Canaryboy]

It was meant to be TIC about RVW. Where do UEFA place our Championship?

I hope you are correct about Pritchard. We don't need another wide player. I can't remember the site I saw it on, Hopefully, it may well have been mistaken. The Youtube clips of him at Brentford look like he was given license.

You say it was TIC, but actually if choosing between keeping RVW for a year or Lafferty for a year it would all haven give us all something to think about. At least with RVW he hasn't failed in this particular league before, although perhaps if we saw had access to their respective wage slips.... 

The coefficients apply to entire countries so no ability to compare between Eredivisie and the Championship. Netherlands is 15th, Scotland is 21st. 

 

[Canaryboy]

I wonder whether Alex Neil likes sending young players to Scotland to toughen them up a bit (probably an outdated stereotypical view of Scottish football, but for some reason I've always seen the SPL as an aggressive league). 

 

[SussexYellow]

I wonder whether Alex Neil likes sending young players to Scotland to toughen them up a bit (probably an outdated stereotypical view of Scottish football, but for some reason I've always seen the SPL as an aggressive league). 

I think sending young players out on loan is part of the toughening up process. Whether Scotland provides a better service in this respect is a matter of conjecture. 

 

[Canaryboy]

Remember that time we sold Gary Hooper for £3m about 5 months before getting relegated back to a division where the going rate for a good Championship striker is £10m and the price to loan Chris Martin for one season is £3m? 

Yeah me too, and I'd quite like to erase that memory. 

 

[dj161]

Marouane Chamakh?

I remember when he joined Arsenal he looked quite good, and played reguarly while Van Persie was injured, once RVP returned though he never got a look in, and has done practically nothing since

 

[eatonparkboy]

No talking about ageing strikers please. We have moved on from that.

 

[KeiranShikari]

He's decent if fit. Much better than Lafferty.

here we goooooooooooooooooooo

 

[Dubai Mark]

Squad is good enough regardless of the latest disappointing window..............it's the Manager who is failing, simple as sorry to say :-(

 

[Canaryboy]

He's decent if fit. Much better than Lafferty.

here we goooooooooooooooooooo

Yeah he's clearly a much better player and professional than Lafferty, and should still be a good player at his level on paper, just a shame that we couldn't have finished business before the deadline and got Lafferty out. 

I wonder whether we actually needed Naismith to join Sunderland in order to free up wages and cash for another target, e.g. Rhodes? Isn't out of the question that we are just a bit skint and plenty of people seem to think that Naismith is on big money, wouldn't surprise me at all if that was the link in the chain which broke. Needed Naismith gone to sign a striker, and when that striker signed we'd have allowed Lafferty to leave? 

 

[eatonparkboy]

Lafferty doesn't want to leave though does he. He hardly played last season yet still managed to be one of the heroes of his national team. It is reputed he is on £15K a week and isn't going to get that anywhere else. How many players now, because the gap in wages division on division is so great, are prepared to sit tight. It just reflects life when, off topic, people are prepared not to work or work harder or longer because it affects their benefits.

Surely AN doesn't want to lose Naismith. He bought him and still plays him (arguably out of position) and is prepared to let others go out on loan so Naismith will be vital should injuries or suspensions hit hard.

Scottish Mafia?