Anderz

Years ago and I would have agreed, but now Norwich has an airport that reaches across the UK and beyond, and in my opinion balances up the whole argument of Norwich being a hidden cul-de-sac that is difficult to reach on a good day... I live in Manchester, and have often looked at getting a aeroplane back for a game, and despite the low ticket prices, have baulked at the air-fare tariffs that take the price back up to an unaffordable amount. However, for a footballer on anything upwards of £5k a week, this is not likely to be an issue, and subsequently, the ''problem'' of transport to and from Norwich is solved. Just a thought, and a theory that no-one else had pondered. 

Gow, followed by Rigters, and then Albrechtson. Not sure we''ll end up with Gorkks but would welcome him in just the same.

There''s also no cast-iron guarantee that Hoolahan and Clingan are even in Norwich at the moment to be presented to the media. Clingan''s interview on the Official Site was via telephone and the quotes from Hoolahan don''t specify whether he was physically with the reporter when the quotes were taken. I figure both players were interviewed over the phone, and that they''re both away on their pre-season holidays. Therefore, like someone else said before, I can''t see new players being presented to the media until early next month.

No-one seems to have considered also that to keep the big-money signings down, we are getting in all the cheaper ''squad players'' in now before we announce the more expensive ones later (who knows, they might already be signed, sealed and awaiting delivery..?) If we signed, say Ameobi now, wouldn''t that alert Chairmen, and opposition Clubs to the fact that we have a sizeable war-chest..? Get the freebies and the cheaper players in at a basement level fee - as though we''re financially stricken and then splash the cash further down the line when the basis of the squad has been finalised. This would not lead to Chairmen at other Clubs hiking up prices on players based on the notion that we have a great deal available to spend. Bluffing in football could work to our advantage. I know that that would be how I''d spend the cash if I were in Roeder''s situation. As for this increasingly annoying notion of bashing players before they play - that''s ludicrous and smacks of a desire to post for the sake of posting. If someone wants to and is given the opportunity to play for my Club, then all credit to them, "welcome in, now show us what you can do". All this nonsense about players being crap because they''ve not played in trophy winning teams and whatnot - spout it if you want, but in my opinion it makes the poster look foolish regardless of whether your ''predictions'' bare fruit - hell, bash every player who comes here and sooner or later you''re going to be proved right, but where''s the satisfaction in being right about that..? Each transfer window, people on here tie themselves in knots about which/when and why players are going to sign for us. It almost seems like a competition who can be the most obnoxious at some points. I for one don''t particularly midn reading some of the more far-fetched notions of possible transfers, but some of the vitriol slung back and forth is nauseating and downright bitter. Each and every rumour and gossip posting I''ve read I''ve read with an open mind, and weighed the pro''s and con''s up on what''s been said and categorised them in yes, no and very unlikely - at no point have I jumped on the bandwagon of any particular rumour and bashed a poster for posting - I don''t see the point or succumb to the need to post a derogatory comment on the validity of a posters posting. Each of us needs to assess how great the need to respond is, as well as decide the best form of reply which is courteous but which explains sufficiently why you agree/disagree or other. Some of the views on here will differ from my own, but that''s not a cue to bash posters.   Rant over, and I bid you all goodnight. 

I suspect that any transfer would largely depend upon the fee we can pay and the fee that Chelsea are willing to accept. However, I do have a feeling we''ll end up buying him though.

[quote user="we8wba"] my one mate failed 16times yes 16times [/quote] We8wba, you do realise that your post implies that you only have one friend, don''t you..?

It does read as though someone is giving someone lip service... How much of that is conjecture, and actual interview is dubious - it actually reads like the journalist has been handed a press release and told to fashion a story from it rather than a face-to-face interview, or even via phone. If I''d handed that in at Uni when I was studying Journalism, I doubt I''d have got much more than 50-55% and a "nice, but you haven''t really done much with the subject matter."

It does raise the question of whether a known purveyor of violence who has been found to administer bodily harm should be allowed to compete in an environment where people have to put themselves in a position of potentially harming others. A sex offender wouldn''t be allowed to work in an environment where aspects of his/her crime could be repeated, so should it be the same for a known aggressor..? For me, I am not greatly interested in Joey Barton as an individual or anything he does, just wondered what you peeps think of the overall situation. 

£700k for a defender with height and defensive nous seems a decent deal - but one does have to wonder which Taylor we would end up getting... Would it be the one that we all know and love..? Or would it be the one deeply affected by the Eduardo incident and therefore a shadow of what he has been..? Or somewhere in between..?

Any chance of us signing Greg Halford..? Kind of get the impression that Keane doesn''t rate him as much now as when he signed him.

In football, as a supporter you have to take the rough with the smooth, be that: results, players brought in, players sold, managers brought in and eventually managers sacked. Over the course of your support there will be decisions that you agree with, there will be ones that you disagree with. The same Glenn Roeder that allowed Huckerby to leave is the same manager that pulled City back from the brink and kept us in the Championship. If you welcome the fact that he kept us up, which I assume all Norwich City supporters do, then to abuse and demonise him for allowing an aging player to leave seems a little odd/disrespectful. This pre-season is the first of Roeder''s Norwich career, so we are all not quite sure what to expect, but he does appear to be aware of the size of the job ahead of him. Only time will accurately dictate what state the playing side of Norwich is in come August. Of what we know at present: Roeder will be here, Huckerby won''t be.  If Huckerby can leave with the dignity he is showing, then I reckon the detractors should try and follow suit. Huckerby was a legend, but legends come and go whilst the Club moves onwards, irrespective of whether people like that or not...  

If Huckerby leaving means that other players can be brought into the Club to take us onwards and upwards, then that for me is acceptable. If Hucks leaving opens the door to City being able to afford a Ched Evans, or a Ryan Bertrand (even on another season loan with an option to sign them...) then that for me will be progress. The timing of the announcement, in my opinion, was more to do with the precarious position we were in the League. Midtable and in no danger of relegation and I believe Roeder would have afforded Huckerby the same send-off as Dublin. Incidentally, the Dublin and Huckerby situations differ somewhat, in that in both cases Roeder didn''t make any announcement. The reason that Dublin was given the send-off that he deserved was because he himself had told the media he was retiring and leaving City. Huckerby''s situation was dealt with by Roeder in the same way as Dublin''s, it''s just the world and his dog knew what was happening with Dublin, and not so with Huckerby. Just my opinion, but it''s definitely not the end of the world for me... Both Huckerby and Dublin are City legends, and should be regarded as such but to use them as a stick with which to beat the board seems a bit short-sighted and disrespectful...

Journeying down from Manchester to send off Dion in style... Should be a really good atmosphere with it being a sell-out... Hope we finish the season with a win, but also hope that we don''t end up sending Wednesday down, as I''d much prefer Southampton to be relegated... Any chants for Dublin on Sunday planned..?

Yes.

Southampton would be my choice... and I hope it transpires that they do get relegated... 

The amount someone is worth, and the amount that someone has available to invest are two separate entities, aren''t they?

As a sidenote: Anyone else think the same level of vitriol would have been spewed if the incident had been the other way round, i.e. with Eduardo going in on Taylor and injuring Taylor in a similar fashion? I don''t. I wouldn''t imagine Blatter and his drones would have been quite so quick or forthright to condemn Eduardo as they have been to condemn Taylor. It''s a hypothetical question I realise, but just wondered if anyone had considered this point...

[quote user="we8wba"] so possibly 2pts behind, if this was norwich you have erection by now mate [/quote] Now don''t go judging others by your own standards...

Does this mean then that Gibbs starts in central midfield with Pattison?

Just back from the game (I live in South Manchester) and have to say that the game seemed very subdued, almost as though we thought we''d walk it, and that Bury decided to play on the counter attack. It''s been a very long time since I''ve seen any team, especially my own playing football is such a crab-like fashion. Passes across the pitch were played to players already marked or went straight out into touch, or were easily intercepted. Far too many occasions the ball was pinged back to Doc and/or Shackell and then the process started again, before being played backwards again. We looked devoid of ideas going forward and far too happy to keep possesion on the half way line. Against a team playing just one striker, it''s always going to be tricky to play through them, but we seemed almost allergic to playing the ball out to the widemen and whipping crosses into the box. Defensively, we made Bury look good and never really worked their midfield. their striker, Bishop, looked handy at holding the play up and bring other Bury players in, but that seemed to stem more from our players not picking him up than anything else. Attacking wise, Bury offered little but were clinical in scoring, and for that they proved to be better than us. We appear to have the thought-process of "pass, pass, pass" but without penetrating the defences or working the oppositions players out of their positions. Player wise: Jarvis looked awfully out of his depth, Cureton low on confidence, Russell, Fozzy and Pattison showed glimpses, but allowed the game to pass them by on far too many occasions. Huckerby looked disinterested and largely anonymous. Bertrand had a decent game without really doing much defensively or attacking-wise, whilst Spillane looked woeful and hesitant whilst the Doc far outshone the pale-imitation of yesteryear that is Shackell - where is his head at, as it doesn''t appear to be about when he''s playing. Doherty was probably my MOM, simply because he didn''t make as many mistakes as the others, and looked like he wanted to win. With Dublin coming on, it was clear the route that the game was going to take and except for a few attacks, the majority of balls were lumped forward to him, and he attacked them as you''d expect with Dublin. Croft looked lively in his cameo down the left, and did put in a few half-decent crosses, but by now you could see that the dye was cast. Camara on for Huckerby wasn''t a great surprise, allowing Bertrand to move further forward, but again he offered little extra prowess going forward. Dublin''s goal was a strange situation. We saw the keeper save the initial shot and Dublin go in for the rebound, and then everyone stopped. Bury players, City players and the crowd too. I assumed an offside decision and saw Dublin running back out of the goal with the ball and assumed that he was putting the ball down for the time-wasting Bury keeper to kick the resulting freekick, but he kept running with the ball in his hand and reached the halfway line before anyone really twigged. Odd situation, but at least it offered a speck of a chance to maybe go onto equalise. Game wise: we didn''t deserve to win it, plain and simple. We looked and were very poor, which is dissapointing when you consider the journey distance for the majority of fans, and the fact that we were poor in the first game. Some of the choices of players suggested Roeder is looking primarily at the League, with Jarvis and Spillane given game time, but surely Jarvis has now written his own P45 (or footballing equivalent) and will soon be on his way..? Spillane, given MOM on the game report was far from decent, with much wayward passing and weak crossing on show, but looked  adequate at defending on occasions. In short, poor game, but if the lack of distraction in the FA Cup means we stay up this season, I''ll take the gloating that is coming my way tomorrow from one of my supervisors at work in exchange for a Championship place come August 2008.     

Apparently Colin Woodthorpe and Dave Challinor will be the caretaker team to take over Bury for tomorrow night...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/d/derby_county/7166848.stm [img]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44329000/jpg/_44329196_emanuel_villa_203_getty.jpg[/img] - looks like John''s double chin to me anyway... Happy New Year one and all...   A.

Depending upon injuries accrued during the match, bring Evans and Huckerby off the bench after 65-70 mins and let them have a 20-25 minute bash at Blackpool after the graft of Dublin and Cureton for the preceeding 65-70 minutes. I reckon that Huckerby and Evans could form quite a formidable closing-of-the-game partnership. Let''s face it, Huckerby, whist he still offers us a lot, is not the same player that we bought, and therefore we need to re-tailor his game to suit our needs and also to what he can still offer us. I suspect he''s not above accepting this and is more than willing to commit to playing more of an impact role, like people have suggested, from the substitute''s bench. He''s a winner, and a tough competitor and, in my humble opinion, want''s to see us winning as a team, not as Huckerby City FC.

In my humble opinion, it takes a special kind of fan to be able to gloat over supporters of his/her own team when things are going badly. It''s one thing to disagree with people''s enthusiasm and other a differing opinion, but to ridicule fellow supporters for daring to support their team is at best: daft, at worst: idiotic and damaging. I think your post says a huge amount more about you as a person than it does to make people feel ashamed or embarrassed to have been optimistic at Roeder''s appointment and consequential squad decisions.   

The flip side of this being that we now have a few days to prepare for Saturday''s game with Plymouth. If we''d played Watford on Wednesday night, would we not then be giving Plymouth - who are much more a rival team for us than the upper-echelons-based Watford - an extra day''s rest and recupperation over us..? It''s all swings and roundabouts really, no team gets a huge advantage over anyone else, unless of course they know how to add days between days..? [the new day between Tuesday and Wednesday shall be Twensday, a day added for football teams not beginning with the letter ''N'']