Hard one to write, this. Sure, it was yet another frustrating home result and performance, but then, we didn't get beat. The afternoon's proceedings never threatened to turn enjoyable, but we've played worse. And after this, we still have a good chance of making the play-offs - but is that good or bad? It all depends where you start from, I suppose. Back in August, we'd certainly have been happy to take fifth position - I reckoned we wouldn't finish as high as last season - but against that, we were top, for several weeks, and by several points. Having headed the table, isn't it a little disappointing to be hanging on for the play offs with ten games to go? But then, if we do cling on for a top six finish, that'll be the highest Burnley finish in my time supporting them, so shouldn't I be happy with that? Although if we do make the play offs, can you see us beating anyone decent? We've won two League matches in 2002 (both away), and from the six home games since we beat Stockport, we've garnered three points. Is this the sort of run you'd want to take into the play offs?
More questions than answers, as usual. I don't know. I'm genuinely struggling between frustration at our recent collapse in form and acceptance that a small club cannot always beat the odds.
We beat the odds in getting to the game, anyway. The railway system - not sure that's the right word - continues to throw up new and interesting challenges. This time we faced a strike by the workers of the rather inaptly named Arriva, and with Virgin still playing coy with the concept of haste, we had no rail route to Burnley. Still forewarned is forearmed, so bring on the latest innovation borne of desperation: we give you the minibus from Wakefield! The journey through boring Yorkshire towns was slow, but we still fetched up in Burnley with enough time to visit one or five pubs before kick off. Excellent Black Cat in the Ministry, but that new Wetherspoon's is highly dubious.
And so to the match. Stan had brought changes in the wake of the latest defeat. Davis started at the back alongside Arthur, meaning Cox was dropped. Very dropped: he wasn't even a sub. It's been quite a slide from stand in skipper to beyond the bench for a player who did so well last season, but if we're being honest, it's been coming. Branch, a decent player who has fallen apart from being played out of position, was also omitted, again something overdue. Turfy tossers could relax, however, because they still had our top scorer, Gareth Taylor, to criticise. Thankfully, he wasn't being asked to plough his lone furrow once more, because the 4-5-1 had been ditched and Robbie Blake was making his first start up front. The rest were as you'd expect: Briscoe and current best player West as fullbacks, Ball and Weller in midfield, and Little and Moore (Alan) wide. Some bloke called Papadopoulos was on the bench. Who he?
In the Norwich goal we saw the return of the Admirable. In honour of his return I was wearing his old goalkeeping shirt - the famed Shirt of the Admirable - as given to me last summer. Sometimes you have to tempt fate.
Early on Crichton was beaten and we had the lead! True, it was a soft goal, but if you try to score, sometimes they go in. Little's corner was met by Taylor's forehead - naturally enough - and his header somehow crept in, perhaps by way of a deflection. It should have been cleared off the line, but who's complaining?
1-0 up against a side with a dreadful away record. What could possibly go wrong? But before you could say Vennegoor of Hesselink, it was starting to slide away from us. It began when Little challenged for a header, and went down prone. There was clearly something up, as he wasn't moving, and both sides' physios were on the pitch. It looked very bad, and we could only sit, watch and wait. Apparently he was unconscious, and the Norwich physio intervened to get this tongue out of the way. A complicated-looking stretcher was brought on, and Little was carefully strapped into it. A neck injury was obviously feared. The whole thing took an age before our greatest player left the pitch to sustained applause from all four stands. Moore (Ian) - about whom there are all sorts of interesting rumours at the moment - replaced him.
It's often the case that a long stoppage changes the flow of the game, and that's what happened here. The lengthy pause had caused whatever atmosphere the place had to dissipate, while on the pitch the team struggled to pick up the pace again. Little had looked bright at the start, and now we missed his presence. A key question that has been asked time and again - one never really answered - is whether we can perform without Little. My view is that when he's not playing or, as recently, playing badly, the rest of the team needs to be really good to compensate. Without him, we can't get away with too much else; we can't carry too many bad performances - or accommodate naff tactics. Little apart, our players are pretty run of the mill. That's not so surprising. We're a small club with not much money. We don't have the best players. If the players were better, they wouldn't have signed for us. They wouldn't have been let go by other clubs, and they wouldn't have been available on free transfers.
It doesn't get any easier to work out whether to be content or unhappy. It's hard to argue with the point that we are doing well considering our lack of resources. Against that, how much did Ray Ingleby sell his company for? Questions, questions.
Back at the match, and the substitution of dirty, useful Iwan Roberts looked to provide cause for Claret cheer. He's a handful, and did very well against us at their place. Unfortunately his replacement Libbra turned out to be a hard to handle too. The referee did nothing to help the play flow, blowing for the slightest incident. Cunningly, he would often wait a few seconds, see if the fouled side had got an advantage - and then bring play back. If this is a Premier League referee, they're welcome to them. At least we won't be getting them every week.
Burnley continued to have the better of the half, but even though it gives me no pleasure to be right, I did think we were going to regret our failure to score a second goal. As we don't keep clean sheets any more, Norwich were bound to score at some point, and then we might struggle to strike back. Ah well, I'm not that much of a pundit, but that's how it went. We never pressed home our advantage and we never made possession count.
The half finally finished after nine minutes of stoppage time caused by Little's injury. If anything, it could have been longer. It meant that the rest of the afternoon was skewed, with the second half starting late and us still in the ground at five o'clock. Still, at least we didn't have a train to catch.
We paid the price for our lack of ambition in the second half, when Norwich were the better side and we went backwards. Inevitably the equaliser came, and it too was a soft goal. Briscoe didn't get tight on his man and allowed him to cross. It was close enough to Marlon for him to claim it, but he didn't, and Libbra was there to make the most of our mess. Bad defending, bad goalkeeping, predictable outcome.
The team couldn't muster a response, and Stan didn't help matters with a bad substitution. Blake went off, and Armstrong came on. Can't complain about Blake going off. He'd done nothing. I'm sure there must be a good player in there somewhere - I just can't see Stan spending a million lightly - but he really needs to show something soon before frustrations grow. So far, he has done nothing. As I seem to be in the mood to ask questions, how wise was his signing anyway? Long term, he may well turn out to be a good player, but in the short term, we're struggling. Given the position we were in, was this the best use of a million pounds, a lay out which we're told has stretched the club's finances? Wouldn't someone who could come in and make an immediate impact have been a better purchase? And, for a club with no brass, you can't overlook the fact that in Blake, Moore and Papadopoulos, we have now spent £2.5 million on 'strikers', none of whom look likely to score enough goals. Would we ever have considered spending that £2.5m on one, better goalscorer?
Plenty of time to speculate as the game drifted by us in the second half. Armstrong's introduction should, theoretically, have strengthened the midfield, but with Ball and Weller playing badly we were overrun. Perhaps Cook would have been a better sub, but these days he's rarely considered. That must have been a hell of a falling out. A quality side would have murdered us, and as it was, we more than once relied on the back two. At least we had Steve Davis back. His reading of the game was good, and he made some crucial interventions. Meanwhile, as the team treaded water Arthur looked our best bet for getting something going again. Late in the game he attempted a couple of surges forward.
Shame the attacking players didn't follow his example. Have we had enough of Alan Moore yet? Remember early in the season when we looked a great signing? But we should know: Burnley players always start well. He clearly has talent, but not the application to make it count. He generally starts brightly and fades, but it seems he cannot impose himself on a game.
Which brings us to Ian Moore. Bluntly - sharpness would be inappropriate - what is the point of Ian Moore? When we bring him on, what do we think he is going to do? Sure, he works hard and runs about a lot, but that should be the minimum expectation of any player. As Liam Robinson proved conclusively, working hard is not enough. Ian Moore has never had a decent scoring record, but as we've declined he's regressed. Never at any stage was it possible to imagine him scoring. His runs find blind alleys, while his dribbles make a gift of the ball. He seems to lack anticipation, and awareness of the game around him. Burnley couldn't penetrate, and Moore was the most impotent. Still, you're not allowed to criticise him, as I found. Stick to bashing Taylor - who had a good, hard-working but isolated game - and you will make friends of fellow Clarets. Dare to suggest that Moore is letting us down, and you will incur the wrath of the baseball capped.
What's frustrating is that we know Crichton, love him, ain't the best, but we never tested him. His kicking is as terrible as ever, and many was the throw in quickly wasted that he gave us, but did he have to do anything serious in the second half? Even worse, previously sides have stopped us at Turf Moor by maintaining a rigorous defence, subduing us and hitting on the break. Norwich didn't really do that. They didn't have to. We were so static that they didn't need to worry about us in the second half. They could just get on with playing their own game.
Stan's final substitution was to replace Alan Moore with the lightweight Brad Maylett, although it had looked like he was about to bring the lightweight Papadopoulos on. Needless to say, this didn't change things, and Maylett's only contribution was to increase my blood pressure by letting a simple ball go out of play.
Norwich could have won it near the end. Briscoe was beaten again, leading to another cross to Libbra. Somehow, his header didn't go in, thanks to the crucial interception of the post. It fell to Arthur, who knew little about it but by instinct managed to get it away. Norwich had been unlucky not to score; if that had been the other way round, we'd be saying we should have won.
And that was that, with the curtain coming down on another less than enjoyable afternoon at Turf Moor. I never thought I'd say this, but thank god I go to away games, where there is at least a chance of seeing a win.
Stan laid into the supporters after the game. It's a while since he's done that. I can forgive it as a reaction to another bad day, but he must know that we didn't play well. He's entitled to criticise supporters for booing, but then supporters are entitled to boo. In a passionate sport, they're both legitimate responses to disappointment. To be honest, on a quiet day (was there a single chant of any kind?) I didn't hear many boos, but why shouldn't people complain? They pay a lot of money and they're watching mostly rubbish.
I get a bit tired of this 'champagne tastes on beer money' stuff too. We know we don't have the riches of other clubs. We know just to be where we are is an achievement, even though it's bound to feel like a bit of a come down when we were top. But even if, rationally, we know we are doing quite well overall, it's hard not to react emotionally when you watch us play badly time after time. There were things missing from this game - teamwork, running, passing, shots - that are more beer than champagne. It isn't luxury that we're asking for - although you could buy a decent non vintage bottle for the price of admission these days - but the basics. These are what are missing at the moment.
It's worrying, and I can't put my finger on why we've fallen apart at home - but then, that's not my job. It's Stan's. He's paid to sort it out. Get on with it. Stan isn't going to get people to stop booing by criticising them. He'll do that by getting us playing again. I wouldn't normally speak harshly, but if he can, so can we.
Ah well, if you want silver linings apparently Little's injury wasn't as bad as it looked and we managed to take in five pubs in Wakefield. Now here's to a few, hopefully celebratory, pints of beer in Walsall and Stockport. As for the champagne, don't put it on ice yet - I don't think we'll be needing any at the end of this season.
Scorers: Taylor (6) / Libbra (54).
Crowd: 14,679.
Referee: Pedantic P Jones of Loughborough and the Premier League.
Firmo's Man of the Match: Steve Davis.
Hard to Explain