When City’s season sinks to new-found lows, many seek one man to blame. They rest upon him every insult, every misguided opinion, and immature comment, for it perhaps gives them some sort of respite of a disappointing defeat. It’s the man they love to hate: it’s Mr Steven Whittaker.
But should just one player receives the fallout of what is often a disaster on cataclysmic proportions, something that actually incorporates the whole team?
This scapegoating, it’s a disease – and the epidemic began last year.
He originally arrived on a free transfer from Rangers, who were undergoing the collapse they’re now famous for. At first, he was just a back-up. A spare part. Did nothing to offend, nor warrant offence. He was simply one small cog in the much greater Norwich City machine. Yet as his role increased, and as Whittaker became ever-more influential, regularly being utilised at right-back, his exposure in the firing line followed. The burning question is therefore: is such criticism fair?
It’s been a problem for a while, but one which has reached it’s summit this season. Often, and despite the change of managers, Whittaker has found himself popping up in the right-back position, ahead of the preferred Russell Martin. Not only has he regularly replaced his fellow Scot, but he’s pushed the latter further inside, where ironically, he’s been as much of an atrocity as Whittaker himself.
While I’m no believer that Whittaker actually IS a great footballer, the overwhelming scapegoating of him is embarrassing. Although I’ve tried to avoid it myself, the all-devouring trend even has me shrieking at him when our fortunes turn sour.
Of course he has his limitations. There’s no doubt he’s a weak link. Lacking in pace, mobility, spacial awareness, and having more than an ample serving of clumsiness, he runs around like a time-bomb – at any moment he could spontaneously combust. He’s seemingly managed to clock up mistake, after mistake, and surprise us that the most recent in his little portfolio is even more horrific than the last. But he’s had some brighter days too, this season coming in the shape of an unlikely, yet fabulous volleyed goal which rescued a point away to Derby, which in turn sparked a small period of good form. It was moments like those which he was signed for – moments which perhaps were more frequent at the start of his Norwich City career, and have since faded. He has got two good feet when he uses them appropriately, and can ping a ball over the top too. Take his goal away to Swansea – after an exquisite exchange with fellow Scot Snodgrass, Whittaker raced on to open the scoring, cutting in on his relatively strong weaker foot, firing low past Vorm. We must also remember he pulled off a remarkably flukey cross for van Wolfswinkel’s only Norwich City goal, and so we must also be thankful for that.
Whittaker watches as his volley carves a route through a crowd of Derby players.
Pundits do say some players only play well when they’re given a run in the team – Grant Holt, for example – a player who will struggle to stay fit and struggle to score goals if he’s left on the bench. Whittaker however, has perhaps been played too much this season – 20 of 27 games, accumulating 1745 minutes of footballing game time. That’s more this season than the last two full seasons individually.
He’s been the direct source for three of the goals we’ve conceded this season, and contributed to a wider defensive disaster. But that’s the key. It’s not just him. It’s not just his gangly legs which often appear a little detached from the rest of his body. It’s the whole damn defence. Russell Martin, Carlos Cuellar, Michael Turner, Martin Olsson and Jos Hooiveld – all at some point, or more likely most points, been a problem. Let’s be honest, Hooiveld was a car crash from start to finish, and his recent loan termination is testament to just that. Then again, the last time we cancelled a loan early was a certain Harry Kane…
On average, per game, Whittaker manages just 5 defensive actions (Squawka), which is a stat that is completely useless unless contextualised. Well, Derby’s Ryan Shotton manages 9. Bournemouth’s Simon Francis manages 7. Ipswich Town’s Luke Chambers manages 8. Somewhat better, don’t you agree? Okay, okay, so it’s not overwhelmingly black and white, and a couple more challenges per game may seem insignificant, but I very much feel that there’s huge emphasis in this league on playing as a team, and making sure there’s no passengers. So those extra tackles are the sign of a player who is pulling their weight. Once again Whittaker appears not so.
But this is where things get interesting. What if I told you Martin Olsson has managed just 5 per game too, albeit on the opposite side? The thing is, while Whittaker has been highlighted for his below-average performances on the right, Olsson has avoided the watchful glare of the Carrow Road faithful. And much of the criticism. In my opinion, Olsson has been almost as poor, and like Whittaker, he has been directly at fault for 3 of the 34 conceded this season. That’s not to say either are exempt from criticism of other goals, but those are the goals that their own mistakes have led to.
Anyway, let’s delve a little deeper.
As we saw against Brentford, Whittaker was without doubt, at fault for the first goal; losing the ball on the edge of the visitor’s box, before collapsing realising his actions would be fatal. In terms of the season as a whole, Whittaker has been dispossessed 18 times – Ryan Shotton has been dispossessed twice, albeit in six fewer games. Luke Chambers has been dispossessed just 6 times (26 games), and even Simon Francis who works out as the worst of this bunch has lost the ball 12 times – still less than our Steven.
But with Whittaker, one of the most significant features is his lack of ability to deny a cross coming into the box, be that because of his pace or his eagerness to get forward, which sometimes leaves him out of position. He’s managed a grand total of 9 blocks to crosses this season (Chambers: 13, Francis: 18) and looking back at the Bournemouth away win, I’d say it was this feature that was the infringing article when it came to Ritchie’s opening goal.
So if we are to return to the main question – is the criticism fair?
Well, given the aforementioned evidence, the criticism he has received does not seem misplaced. But, this is where a whole new conundrum is consequently created. Is there a difference between criticism and abuse? I believe the answer is yes.
I’m not keen on Whittaker being in the team, I’d much prefer Russell Martin. But, there’s a line, and Norwich fans must be wary not to cross it. It’s not fair to blame him for lack of cover from Redmond. It’s not fair to blame him for playing poorly in an unfamiliar central midfield position. It’s not fair to boo him when he’s substituted – seriously, how is that helping in any way?!
I’ve touched on this, but the other players in the defence have also had their fair share of incompetence, and should therefore take a proportional slice of the criticism cake. Turner, who I recently described on the podcast to have the ‘turning circle of a large ocean cruiser’ (ironic given his name), has had his moments in the middle, and whoever his partner has been, has also seemed doomed for disaster. Cuellar – just how many penalties has he given away? Martin – doesn’t look comfortable whatsoever, and has in many ways has paralleled Bassong’s lack of leadership seen in his second season. Finally, as I’ve said, Olsson who was impressive last season, has been less than convincing and I wouldn’t mind letting him go as long as we could replace him adequately.
I just think we need to take a step back sometimes. Look at the whole picture. Whittaker forms just part of that, and so can’t account for its entirety, as much as that may seem hard to believe. While like me you may believe he’s not up to scratch, please don’t boo or abuse him. Doing so just contributes to a negative, belligerent, immature atmosphere that seems to be materialising. Don’t let it grow.
