I have doubts about Farke that I hope will be resolved............ .

He arrived at the club discussing a football philosophy before even taking into account the players available. It seemed that he selected players who might fit that philosophy rather than select the best most effective players and develop tactics to suit them to maximise the potential of the team. Farke had Olive, Wes and Tettey as bench warmers and it seemed that Olive and Tettey were close to leaving.

Farke’s football philosophy was failing. Farke was left with no option but to make significant personnel changes following the 4-0 loss to Millwall; as surely his job was becoming under increased pressure. He then selected 2 central midfielders who are more defensive, and dropped Martin, Husband and Franke. Norwich then became a lot harder to beat so easing the pressure on Farke’s job. Much of the media seemed to claim the changes in results were down to coaching during an international break and Klose returning from injury; overlooking that much of the defence and central midfield were different players.

The bad situation seemed to have forced Farke’s hand to make changes that he should have pre-empted from the outset rather than force tactics and selection onto the team that didn’t work. Regardless of how he’s arrived at this point, at least the team is now harder to beat.

The problem now is Farke’s team selection in the final third. With the team now more solid in defence and central midfield, this should provide a foundation to allow greater freedom for the more creative players to be more effective. However, against Bristol City, Farke didn’t start either Wes or Maddision, somewhat surprising as the team is also missing the creativity of Olive, and that CamJam needs good chances creating for him. Therefore, it seems doubtful that Pitch would have started even if he had been fit. Murph was selected as the only unpredictable player in the final third; ensuring it was going to be a tight match. I think the concern was not to lose rather than going for a win.

Post match, Farke said he was happy with his striker options and named Watkins (who hadn’t played as a striker until a few weeks ago). However, he had said much the same about the defence before signing Spiderman and Hanley so I would take what he says with a pinch of salt. He isn’t going to be critical of the person who makes the signings and brought him to the club.

I wonder what circumstances could force Farke to have a rethink about the final third; to get some more creatively in there at least for home matches, and look to boost striker options in the January transfer window.

Posted By: Larry Hagman, Sep 24, 14:44:47