Jem

Am sure it will be over 1,000

Not sure on allocation but when I bought mine last week was told by box office they expected to sell out our allocation

[quote user="swindoncanary"]Not for me, have you ever made a mistake at work ?[/quote] spot on. Nobody goes to work to do a bad job. They made a mistake. I didn''t hear all of these complaints against them when they got us from league one to premier league in consecutive seasons.

We may win some games

[quote user="Cantiaci Canary"]Being awarded penalties when fouled in the box and escaping penalties when we haven''t fouled against teams playing with any badge on their chests.[/quote] This

The cost per game of my season tickets is less

[quote user="Eagleeye"]to lose today by 10, 12 or 15 goals SO LONG as it guarantees Hughton goes !!![/quote] How can you call yourself a fan wanting us to lose? Whatever I thought of the manager I could never want us to lose

Doh! Hughton

This is the team that let in 6 against Hull and 4 at the weekend at home yet we make them look world beaters. We have good players who look like rabbits in headlights. Hepughton and his coaching team have to go

[quote user="City 2nd"]Hackedoff wrote the following post at 2013-11-07 7:40 PM: Ricky''s a decnt height. Put him at CB. May as well - he ain''t no striker![/quote] I don''t think with the service he has been given that we are in a position to judge him, Hooper or Elmander as strikers. They all have had no decent service all season, just as Holt didn''t last season.

Louise was a slip caused by damned autocorrect which I hadn''t even noticed until now Sorry Louis

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Jem"]Louise - but you see that the postings are merely serving to prove exactly my point in the first place Nigel - clearly you missed my original point so I will try and repeat it in a different way. I rarely post just because of this sort of banality and the fact that if a posters view does not conform to those of the majority then they are put down[/quote] I still don''t get the point. Is it that you rarely post because of threads like the only one you''re posting on[:^)] [/quote] Very good - Now that did make me laugh. No hidden agendas or meanings in my response Nigel so please don''t look for them. That was funny

Louise - but you see that the postings are merely serving to prove exactly my point in the first place Nigel - clearly you missed my original point so I will try and repeat it in a different way. I rarely post just because of this sort of banality and the fact that if a posters view does not conform to those of the majority then they are put down

Nigel - not one post about you still

Nigel - you really need to get over your paranoia. I was not posting about you. Re your question I refer you to my opening post..................

Nigel - you really need to get over your paranoia. Re your question I refer you to my opening post..................

But Nigel it wasn''t a personal attack against you - it was a general comment with specific reference to two negative comments. If it were a personal attack then there would have been derogatory comments at you - there were not. Your comment was negative and I referred to it. I fail to see how this constitutes a personal attack?

Nigel - this is really quite sad. I have made no personal comments directly against anybody. What I made was a general comment regarding negative comments made towards other posters. I am not buddies with Robert but you seem to keep inferring that we both are and we are part of a conspiracy to undermine you. That is not the case. You are absolutely right the forum is not about you. It is for discussion about something that we all feel passionate about - ie our team. There are those that seem to think it is their forum and the opinions of others do not seem to be welcome.

Nigel, I have plenty to say but sadly you will just go on the defensive and suggest I am picking a fight. I''m really not I''m just expressing an opinion which is surely what a forum is all about isn''t it? Clearly my opinion is different to yours but that is no reason to write reams and reams in a post reply just to try and get the upper hand or have the last word

Thanks for posting that. Great goals

Nigel - am certainly not picking a fight with anybody. Were I to want to do that I would have used far more inflammatory language and maybe even use provocative statements which I don''t think I''ve done. What I have said is that there are a great deal of regular posters on the board who appear to decry the input of anybody other than themselves and their forum pals which tends to prevent others from adding to the board as they will merely be put down as is the case with this post. Also, as an aside, I did not say I rarely come on here, the converse is true, I said I choose to rarely contribute. A subtle but very important difference.

Sorry to be negative but it is because of the responses to this post by Messrs Mullins & Nigel that I choose to rarely contribute myself. It appears that a well structured argument will get put down if it is not the view of one of the many prolific posters on this board. For my part I have not yawned once reading your post and, with the benefit of having attended Carrow Road for over 42 years, have to agree with a lot of your comments

[quote user="splutcho"]I never want Norwich to lose in any circumstance. If you do, you are not a fan, you are a disgrace.[/quote] my thoughts entirely. How could you ever want Norwich to lose and be a fan?

[quote user="stoke canary"]Things will NEVER be that bad !![/quote] This

[quote user="canarydan23"]...by the racism saga. He is still the same god awful ref he was. Never a free kick for their goal, missed handball from Lambert before he stuck it in and then bottled a clear penalty when Snoddy was fouled. Still, a point apiece is probably what was deserved, it doesn''t hide how consistently woeful the referee is.[/quote] My thoughts entirely - bottled big decision. If it was anywhere else on the pitch it''s a free kick. Also first three free kicks they had were dubious in the extreme