Player Scores v Norwich | Vital Football

Player Scores v Norwich

Calvin Plummer

Calvin Plummer

Vital Football Legend
Waited to post for when I'd calmed down, I haven't.

Pants: 5, on another day this could of been a 9, he made some excellent saves but he's always got a mistake in him.

Darikwa: 6, energy at least I guess.

Fox: 6, looked rusty

Hefele: 6, battled but meh

Robinson: 3, the frustrating thing is he was doing well but yet more stupid indiscipline from him and this time it cost us. Fucking bellend.

Jacob: 5, largely lost the midfield battle and when Norwich piled the pressure on he crumbled.

Colback: 5, as above.

Lolley: 7, looked a threat on the break

Carvalho: 7, fulcrum of our best passing moves, not one for a battle though.

Cash: 8.5, energy allied with end product, more of this please. Fuck knows why AK took you off.

Grabban: 6, not especially at the races.

Subs: 2, as usual did very little to impact the game.

AK: 3, another who dropped from a high score due to some odd substitution choices and he has to take some responsibility for our capitulation. Let down by our left back though.


The truth is Norwich were braver and better than us and a draw was the least they deserved. It's no coincidence that the top two play far more attacking football than us.
 
Largely agree with that CP although I would be inclined to drop Carv down to 6.5 as he did his disappearing trick too often again.

Derek seriously needs a rest too - he looks like he is going backwards. Is he one of the players AK has allegedly fallen out with?

AK is a 5 for me. Substitutions were a bit odd but one at least was enforced and you expect the players you bring on to at least put in some effort. They’d didn’t.
 
The only one I couldnt understand was Cash. He looked like the only player with any drive when drifting in. Lolley was absent for 60 mins as well.

Robbo had to be taken off or we would have been down to 10 men. Brain dead scouser.

Grabban has been off for three or four games now, so sticking Murphy on to hold up the ball was probably the right thing to do. Unfortunately it was the Murphy from this time last year. Nothing stuck and he looked disinterested

Carvalho does one trick too many and although hes a clever player, he often loses possession and his shoulders go down and he wont chase the ball.
 
Harsh on Pantz IMO he made some cracking saves & kept us in the game ok he’s not perfect but I’ve no idea what the players in front of him were doing.

My one criticism is they scored 2 goals in injury time which wasn’t actually for injury’s it was his time wasting, however you can’t really blame him for that as Krankz must be telling him to do it.
 
Can't see how on earth you give 6 to Darikwa, whose needless raising if his foot for a dire attempted again clearance gave them a foothold in the game, get a 3 to Robinson who scored and suffered exactly a tackle that brought Fig a red card 3 weeks ago.

Don't really see what he did wrong.

Oh, and CP- any chance you could forgo the Norwich fans posts today? I'll be tempted to read it and I really can't face it.i'm sure others feel the same
 
I'd have gone with the 9 for Pants not sure where 5 comes from? Numerous point blank saves and kept us in the game, thought it was the best I've seen him play for a while.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Can't see how on earth you give 6 to Darikwa, whose needless raising if his foot for a dire attempted again clearance gave them a foothold in the game, get a 3 to Robinson who scored and suffered exactly a tackle that brought Fig a red card 3 weeks ago.

Don't really see what he did wrong.

Oh, and CP- any chance you could forgo the Norwich fans posts today? I'll be tempted to read it and I really can't face it.i'm sure others feel the same
Click to expand...

I could easily skip it if others would prefer, I've a 4-5 hour journey ahead of me now.

As for Robinson he was begging for a red card, could arguably of had two and none of it was necessary. He'd been playing fairly well but his head went and it forced AK into making a substitution that clearly weakened the team. It's the pattern that troubles me, getting sent off for diving etc when it's just putting the team at risk.
 
Ian2005uk said:
I'd have gone with the 9 for Pants not sure where 5 comes from? Numerous point blank saves and kept us in the game, thought it was the best I've seen him play for a while.
Click to expand...

He did, and maybe I was harsh but I blamed him for at least one of the goals. Not seen replays but live he looked culpable.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
I could easily skip it if others would prefer, I've a 4-5 hour journey ahead of me now.

As for Robinson he was begging for a red card, could arguably of had two and none of it was necessary. He'd been playing fairly well but his head went and it forced AK into making a substitution that clearly weakened the team. It's the pattern that troubles me, getting sent off for diving etc when it's just putting the team at risk.
Click to expand...

Needed the Osborn sub instead of Dias for extra work rate and defensive cover to help Janko. Robinson was lucky to get away with the handball but arguably we should have had a free kick just before it. Terrible referee once again both in our favour and against!
 
Calvin Plummer said:
I could easily skip it if others would prefer, I've a 4-5 hour journey ahead of me now.

As for Robinson he was begging for a red card, could arguably of had two and none of it was necessary. He'd been playing fairly well but his head went and it forced AK into making a substitution that clearly weakened the team. It's the pattern that troubles me, getting sent off for diving etc when it's just putting the team at risk.
Click to expand...
You have given a 3 to Robinson. Yet the number of goals conceded with him on the pitch was zero. He was not sent off. He scored and he was the victim of far worse than he perpetrated.

The number of goals conceded while Pantillimon, Fox, Hefele, Darikwa and Janko were on the pitch, not to mention Yacob and Colback, was 3.

Given you have 7 defensive players there who all were on the pitch while we conceded 3 goals, perhaps others could appreciate my confusion that you attribute the blame and lowest score to the only defensive player to keep a personal clean sheet.

It doesn't matter why he was taken off- the reality is he didn't cost us and other players, who should have been able to perform did not
 
Pants - 6
Derek - 4
Fox - 5
Hef - 6
Robinson - 5
Yacob - 5
Colback - 6
Lolley - 6
Cash - 8
Carvalho - 6
Grabz - 5
Murphz - 4
Janko - 4
Dias - 0
 
Last edited:
Pope John XXIII said:
You have given a 3 to Robinson. Yet the number of goals conceded with him on the pitch was zero. He was not sent off. He scored and he was the victim of far worse than he perpetrated.

The number of goals conceded while Pantillimon, Fox, Hefele, Darikwa and Janko were on the pitch, not to mention Yacob and Colback, was 3.

Given you have 7 defensive players there who all were on the pitch while we conceded 3 goals, perhaps others could appreciate my confusion that you attribute the blame and lowest score to the only defensive player to keep a personal clean sheet.

It doesn't matter why he was taken off- the reality is he didn't cost us and other players, who should have been able to perform did not
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter why he was taken off or the effect it had on the team...

Lol ok Popey
 
Calvin Plummer said:
It doesn't matter why he was taken off or the effect it had on the team...

Lol ok Popey
Click to expand...

What effect?

He is a professional player who was replaced by another professional player. It wasn't his direct replacement that caused us problems.

You slate Robinson every chance you get, yet now you are trying to claim his substition seriously hampered the game?

Make up your mind. If he was that shit then sirely we would be better off if he was subbed.

But we weren't were we?

So come on, what effect did his substitution have on the team and how was he responsible for us conceding three goals while he sat on the bench?
 
Pope, firstly Robinson's ill-discipline and irresponsibility caused AK to think he was a 'sending off waiting to happen', as others have said. He, rightly, substituted him. However, this had a disruptive effect on the team because Janko wasn't as effective positionally, in heading or tackling (notwithstanding that the discipline issue had been resolved). Plus, if Robinson hadn't lost his head he would have stayed on and Cash could potentially have been replaced by Janko on the left of midfield (not Dias). That would have made us a lot more solid in the final minutes than having Janko /Dias on that side (which ultimately proved disastrous).

So Robinson's ill-disciplne did have a detrimental effect on the team.
 
forestonourwayback said:
Pope, firstly Robinson's ill-discipline and irresponsibility caused AK to think he was a 'sending off waiting to happen', as others have said. He, rightly, substituted him. However, this had a disruptive effect on the team because Janko wasn't as effective positionally, in heading or tackling (notwithstanding that the discipline issue had been resolved). Plus, if Robinson hadn't lost his head he would have stayed on and Cash could potentially have been replaced by Janko on the left of midfield (not Dias). That would have made us a lot more solid in the final minutes than having Janko /Dias on that side (which ultimately proved disastrous).

So Robinson's ill-disciplne did have a detrimental effect on the team.
Click to expand...
Thank you for a reasoned explanation. I don't agree with it, but at least I can appreciate the viewpoint.

Firstly, the whole idea is predicated on the idea that Robinson was actuator doing very well before he went off. Janko didn't do that badly, but you are saying that he was much less effective than Robinson and that we effectively missed Robbo when he went off. That alone for me precludes a rating of 3.

Secondly, we say he 'lost his head'. Maybe, but did you see that tackle done on him? Did he lose his head more than Fox, who squared up to Pukki? Or Darikwa, who kept gifting them free kicks? Who is to say that Robinson would not have pulled himself together given the chance? The manager made a decision based on probability of risk, not certainly.

Thirdly, we were 3-0 up. Even with 10 men we should have been able to shut up shop and win. At 3-2 with 2 minutes left (Including their Fergie time) we should have been able to hold on to the ball. A seven year old could have made the clearance Dias missed.

Robinson was sitting on the be changed while 7 defensive players failed to do their jobs three times. He even helped the attack out with a goal- I believe the first fullback to score all season (appalling really).

And yet he is given a 3?

Useful deflection by the OP from the poor performance of one of the players he has picked to champion I suppose.
 
Think Karanka thought game was won at 3-1 which was why he put Dias on and he thought Dias hasn’t had much game time. In a game like yesterday obviously required a Ben o or gueddy on the pitch instead. Poor management and thinking but quite frankly Dias was appalling
 
toms said:
Think Karanka thought game was won at 3-1 which was why he put Dias on and he thought Dias hasn’t had much game time. In a game like yesterday obviously required a Ben o or gueddy on the pitch instead. Poor management and thinking but quite frankly Dias was appalling
Click to expand...
I can understand that but don’t think you can legislate for a player gifting the opposition two goals.
 
Basha73 said:
I can understand that but don’t think you can legislate for a player gifting the opposition two goals.
Click to expand...

I agree but you are playing top 2 , a team protecting a record with their lives. It was obvious they would come at us. We didn’t need a counter attacking fourth
 
toms said:
Think Karanka thought game was won at 3-1 which was why he put Dias on and he thought Dias hasn’t had much game time. In a game like yesterday obviously required a Ben o or gueddy on the pitch instead. Poor management and thinking but quite frankly Dias was appalling
Click to expand...
Karanka has exaplained his thinking.

He felt they were most dangerous to us in set pieces. He basically said that Osborn was useless at defending sing set pieces so he brought in Dias who was better.

That's not saying anything very complimentary about Osborn defensively.

Someone needs to tell Karanka that Osborn is a brilliant modern attacking left back before he gets himself the sack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.