Stan likes the odd clich?, so here goes… 'Some habits die hard…
For Norwich City, in recent times, that habit is losing your man in the area and conceding soft goals from set-plays. Managers come and go, as do players, and yet us supporters have seen this happen time and time again. It costs us games, it loses us points, it drives you mad.
In this case, it also allows that idiot Pulis off the hook. Gutting, Stan thinks the term is.
Given our current predicament, however, it is only fair that Stan seeks to temper frustrations by adding context and some large doses of hope to another away day defeat.
Most obviously, this was not a drubbing or a no-show. In the first half, City were excellent, played good football and made Stoke react to us (rather than vice versa).
Come the second-half, and the 'land of the longball giants' returned with a vengeance. A quick equaliser and our plans unravelled. We got rattled, Stoke by-passed the midfield, and City could not quite cope with what was a sustained aerial bombardment.
Nevertheless, we still competed, created the odd opening, but just failed to get a hold back on the game.
Second, our win at Blackpool meant that this was in no way a 'must win at all costs' type game. Three points off two away games is still better than two (or one or none).
Before Blackpool, Stan felt that one point was the minimum requirement for these two games, two a good haul, and any more a bonus. To that extent, job done.
Now we need to ensure that we take at least four points from our next two Carrow Road fixtures.
Third, the slack defending is something Stan believes the current coaching team can and will sort out.
Where Worthy seemed to have stopped bothering about it, and where Grant didn't really understand what defending actually entailed, Roeder appears to be a chap who will act accordingly.
The enforced change to the back four did not help us in terms of continuity, although Doc was probably a more effective man to have around at Stoke given Pulis' awful style of play and Johnny O's – how shall Stan put it – preference for the ball on the ground.
Certainly, Doc was not to blame for the goals, lest the whipping boys be sharpening their talons. In the long term, however, it means buy Taylor, make him skipper, get in another centre-back, and add 'concentration' to the 'things-to-do-list' at Colney.
Finally, our whole approach to playing away has clearly changed under Roeder. At both Blackpool and Stoke, we went to win it.
Both Worthy and Grant opted for safety first on our travels; Roeder seems intent to play away more as you would at home. At Blackpool it worked for us; at Stoke it did not. At the very least, it means excitement and a sense of possibility for us travelling fans.
Of course, we must not forget that we lost again and remain bottom. The Hucks conundrum also remains, and it will be interesting to see how Roeder tries to square the circle – both Tuesday night and on Saturday.
Do we go back to 4-4-2 with Hucks out wide, Pattison in the middle, Jamie up front and either Foz or Rusty on the bench? Does Pattison get a rest? Does Hucks get pushed further up field into the 4-4-2, or does he stick with an attacking 4-5-1?
Stan feels that Croft and Cureton are not quite Roeder's ultimate cup of tea. Our new man demands, quite rightly, 90 minute performances.
At least, however, there appear to be options open to him and he has the pedigree to make any changes appear decisive rather than the mere tinkering of someone who does not know quite what he wants.
Once again, we enter into a decisive week for Norwich City. Let's hope that this time next week, we are off the bottom and looking forward to another away game.
On the ball, City?