Putney Canary

I''m also feeling confident, we are getting linked with a lot of the right sort of players (though some might be too scottish for some people''s tastes) and we do seem to have cash in the war chest. Frankly I would be angry if we had let the Turners onto the board for just 2m, but I think only the most negative people actually think thats the case. I''m not sure we will be up for promotion next Season, I think the club has too much to do in one summer, but if we get 5 new players in who are young, ambitious and talented and we show more guts on the pitch (OK and get 6 points off the binners) I will be happy enough.

I''m not sure about this, I''d always go with the position of a strong manager, as a weak manager and a "director of football" type character isn''t a particularly good situation to be in, it''s also much harder to get rid of a board member than a manager.  My opinion would be that a manager must be chosen and supported correctly, otherwise you may as well have the board member running the team and just coaches.OTBC!Chunky I''m not sure I am suggesting a director of football, but a director who knows the sport inside out. I don''t think anyone on our board really understands the game except as fans, and as a result the words of the manager have been relied on too much. They involved Stringer in chosing PG, why not utilise him day to day? Would Stringer have let the scouting situation slide, as it appears to have done?

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="SPat"]No idea whether it''s true or not Jas, it''s irrelevant. But I do think  a young , city player should be given the time to prove himself before being constantly rubbished by his own  supporters  In the one game I saw him (Blackpool) I thought he played prety well, put in the effort and doesn''t deserve the stick that you and others are dishing out.[/quote] ahhh don''t worry about Spat JAS... it made me chuckle...  I thought that it was the funniest and best post from yourself in many a long month... I like your friends style!!!  [Y] How about singing that little dittie next time Granty had the audacity to bring the fella on... yes??? [/quote]How about supporting him when he is on the pitch? Brown was bought to partner Earnie, and hasn''t had the chance to do that. With support from the stands, maybe he can prove to be a decent buy. Do some people want him to fail? Why on earth would anyone want that?

Mark, My opinion would be that the scouting setup is linked to the manager more than the board, but you''re completely right, investment in a scouting and youth setup is important at this level, because in effect all clubs below the top ten in the country must be able to produce their own talent to reduce their dependance on expensive signings.  However, don''t we already have a good youth setup, and hasn''t Hunter improved our scouting and awareness of young players? If I had more time and the inclination (of which I have neither) I''d investigate how much has been spent on the off-field activites and the team, but my gut feeling is that a substantial chunk of the £35 million thats bandied about on this board has been spent on players wages and the south stand (which doesn''t count as an off-field activity imo), and the actual investment in off-field activities is well below £10 million.  However, I''m willing to be corrected and if anyone has the actual figures I''d be interested to see them! I''m not even sure who our scouts are?  I feel that things have improved with Grant bringing some of his own people in, because in the end, he and his assistant tell the scouts what kind of player they want and decide if a player recommended by a scout is worth the investment. OTBC! Chunky Nobody has actual figures except the board. We are all presuming a lot, and some of us presume positive things about the board and some chose to presume negative things about the board.As for the scouting, it seems the manager has taken this in hand, but I feel it is something the Board should have stepped in about long ago. This is one reason why I think we should open up a new board member with football experience, someone like Stringer. The previous manager was (with hindsight) allowed to build a badly balanced squad, and seemes to have let certain things like Scouting drift. The board shouldn''t have let this happen, but didn''t understand the issues enough to step in.

Well done Nutty. Unfortunately Yankee was right, its gone sailing right over Smudger''s head.Smudger, just drop this ''bah'' / ''apologists'' crap, can''t you? You agreed on another thread to agree to disagree, and now you are starting this drivel again.Wiz, I suggest you just try and be happy, its great news we are bidding for exciting young talent. Yes he could end up elsewhere, but honestly suggesting the board only bid *knowing* they wouldn''t land him is a conspiracy theory too far.

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="chipster"]i hope i am right but the point of the original post is that the championship is underselling itself, at the moment we are relying on left overs from the prem but if we where to have confidence in our product and sell it correctly we could start seeing some of the money the prem is getting, thats my take any way, might be a bit naive but after watching the playoffs they where the best games i have seen for years and the championship is now starting to come on fox over here in oz so if we can get the right deal i think the product is actually better than what we think and might even be better than the prem, it might be a chance to break the strangle hold of the top clubs and open the game we love back up again by taking the big guys on at there own game, as much as i hate all things corperate it seems you have to compete or you die, we have to fight to get our game back, great post bbb[/quote] Yes, Chipster you are dead right about the main point of the original post. Thanks. I agree with you 100%. Would love further details of what you are seeing of the Championhsip in Oz. Anybody else outside the UK getting playoffs or Championship matches live/delayed? I think I heard something about Setanta (an Irish/American satellite outfit) and the imminent end of Sky Sports monopoly coverage outside UK. Anybody else heard of this?? Will have to research it. OTBC Where I am in Oz you get 1 game per week (during the bulk of the season) shown live, and repeated. It tends to be either the Friday night game or a Sunday game. Norwich were on once, we lost to the binners, Biringham (my girl''s team) were on about 6 times. Its to serve the ex-pat community though. I really don''t see a market for much more Championship over here, or anywhere else. Most countries that import the ''EPL'' want to see the big four clubs and aren''t interested in Villa vs Middlesburgh let alone Colchester vs Luton. Setanta and Sky jointly hold the contract for the new TV deal. The EU said Sky couldn''t have a monopoly, so now Setanta are in as well having won the bid. Hence the new huge package for the Premiership thats widening the gulf between them and everyone else.       [/quote]

[quote user="mystic megson"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"] Its the players who are not performing and not being encouraged to perform consistently enough.  [/quote] True Zipper, as far as it goes.  But it''s not the root of the problem imo.  The underlying culture at Norwich City has become far too risk-free, safe and comfortable - "affordable family football" (ND quote unquote), whatever that is.  These qualities are not compatible with ambition and success, because ambition and success involves risk-taking.  The board has NOT been pulling in the same direction as the manager and players for some time now.  Motivating the team is like trying to drive a car with the brakes on.  [/quote] I agree with ZLF that it is at the door of the players the majority of the problem lies, and with the team being way too unbalanced - and that has to lie at the door of the previous manager. I still agree wuth Nutty, that the board needs to find a better balance, but I also think that it seems so far this summer they are. Time will tell on that one. Mystic, at the moment in the Premiership gates over the last few years have been going down, and the average age of those attending has been going up. The traditional fan is being priced out. You won''t see this on TV, Sky will do what they can to mask the truth, but it is happening. The concern is, where is the next generation of fan coming from? Any club that doesn''t provide "affordable family football" is not getting the next generation of fans. The vast majority of people chose allegiance to a club when a young kid. If they can''t get in to see Norwich, they will pick a team off TV and wander around in Chelsea / Man U / Liverpool / Arsenal shirts. Not good for Norwich, is it? Norwich can''t compete with the big 4 clubs at winning fans, without getting them into the ground! It sounds like you are wanting success at the club at any cost, whether it be at risk to the long term viability of the club, at risk to gaining future supporters, at risk of losing the Norfolk club character. Thats just not for me I''m afraid. I love Norwich BECAUSE it represents Norfolk, the county I love.

[quote user="Web Team - Pete"][quote user="cambscanary"] Are the new board memebrs actually giving us a few mill to spend but we''re just keeping it quiet so we don''t get overinflated quotes???? [/quote] That would be my theory... [/quote]My theory too. Our board always plays the financial bit close to their chests, and it makes sense to do so.As Marshall has just handed in a transfer request, and has stated he wants to come to Norwich, I would expect us to try and get him cheap. He would be an excellent buy.

Thing is Arthur it is very hard to compare effectively pre-Premiership Chase with post-Premiership Delia. The game has changed beyond all recognition. Chase got us relegated at precisely the wrong time, just as the Premiership millions were coming in and the League were missing out, and he did this by selling key players to cover the debt he was building up. He gambled and failed us. When the current board took over, invited by Watling, we were about to go under. Now the finances are in order, but they aren''t very good times on the pitch. And they have done this whilst holding on to our major assets, the ground and the training facilities. Our board did all they could to hang on to Ashton, probably too hard as the last pay rise didn''t stop him going. I''m not sure the same could be said of Chase/Fleck. They are prudent, I think this is a good thing, but I don''t think they have had the right balance between prudence and ambition. However, the downsides of too much ambition (perhaps I should say the downsides of gambling too much to fulfill ambition) are way worse than the downsides of too much prudence.There are huge dangers involved with any sort of investment into a club, whether it comes from abroad, other parts of the UK or even local fans. So many clubs have been in huge trouble through unscrupulous behaviour or just plain mis-management. The list of struggling clubs is HUGE, something life 50% of league clubs have been into administration. Look at what has happened at Cambridge, York, Barnet, Wimbledon, Leeds. How many clubs don''t even own their own ground? How many clubs can''t stay alive without asking for donations from the fans every game?We now have new investment from the Turners, who seem to have the long term future of our club as a priority, we just don''t know how much they are going to invest now. We will find out this summer, but surely you would agree it looks more positive now than a month ago? Its our board who have done this.Football is in a boom generally, hence the bigger gates at Carrow Road. Our board have also tried to make it attractive to come, ticket prices are still comparatively good value, the facilities are good, they should take credit for this. However, the whole game itself is I believe in trouble. Throughout the Premiership gates are down, and the average age of fans is getting older. A much larger proportion of tickets goes to corporates. This, tied with all seater stadiums, is why the passion is going out of the game. Its still hard to spot women in short skirts and face paint at England games today, there aren''t as many a Sky would have us believe. Whilst the FA allow the richest clubs to get richer at the expense of the poorer clubs, money will always be the number one issue in football. I think its disgraceful that you need a billionnaire backer to enable you to compete at the top of the Premiership. Whoever is in charge at Norwich, Chase, Delia or anyone, I don''t believe we will ever be in the top 4 of the Premiership again. This is the real disgrace, and it lies at the door of the FA.Having said all this we need to see improvement on the pitch next season. We need 5 new players minimum this summer. We need to see the board better balance prudence with ambition. They have done it before, now they need to do it again.

Our club had no control over keeping this quiet. It would have been bad business for Scunthorpe and his agent to keep it quiet, their job is to get as much as possible. This means going public. There were always going to be offers to Sharp, well done to us for getting in early. We get to talk to the player first, now we have a bid accepted by the club its down to the player and his agent. If Sharp wants as much cash as possible, I expect he will go to Wolves. I would also expect that Wolves offer the best hope of promotion next season. They have to be favourites, but you never know...

[quote user="Smudger"]Wow the Turners own a few call centres worth £275 million... It is how much spare cash they have floating about that they can invest in NCFC that is the important factor... So far we have little over £2million and approximately a 1% stake holding that makes Smith & Jones look wealthier than Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich put together!!! Please must we really clutch at straws PUTNEY??? As MYSTIC rightly points out... Barry Skipper was obviously feeling the heat and looking for a way out... end of story!!! What exactly could Delia and the rest of our useless board of directors of done about it? Delia may of been lying she may not... What really matters to me however is that this deal with the Turners will effectively change nothing... Delia and the rest of the board need to take a long hard look at themselves and realise that until they look outside of East Anglia (let alone outside of the UK) for fresh investment the club is going absolutely nowhere and it is them and those who remain in support of them that are ultimately to blame!!! [/quote]Shall we go through this line by line?Wow the Turners own a few call centres worth £275 million... It is how much spare cash they have floating about that they can invest in NCFC that is the important factor... So far we have little over £2million and approximately a 1% stake holding that makes Smith & Jones look wealthier than Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich put together!!! We don''t know how much the Turners have as spare cash, its very likely to be more than 2m but is obviously going to be no where near 275m. This isn''t funds to compete with Abramovich, I doubt if its enough to compete with Wolves, but if it isn''t going to be enough to give Grant a decent war chest this summer then I would 1. be very surprised and 2. be angry. We both know how close our board keeps the financial position close to their chests, they aren''t going to come out and say "We have 5m to spend this summer" as that would put up our targets prices. If you don''t understand this, I would think twice about starting your own business if I were you. As MYSTIC rightly points out... Barry Skipper was obviously feeling the heat and looking for a way out... end of story!!!Where does Mystic say that? I think you have said that not Mystic. Mystic can get his points across without resorting to personal insults, something you can occaisionally do but frankly not often enough.What exactly could Delia and the rest of our useless board of directors of done about it?I think we have discovered we don''t actually know... but I would imagine that if the split had been unfriendly, Skipper would at least have tried to get market value for his shares rather than selling them on for what he paid for them.Delia may of been lying she may not... What really matters to me however is that this deal with the Turners will effectively change nothing...Delia wasn''t lying, the extra investors are onboard. You just don''t seem able to admit you were wrong. It really matters to ALL of us if getting the Turners on board will be effective or not, and we will find out this summer. If we fail to get in 5 new players for key positions, it will show that they AREN''T effective. This is a make or break transfer window. At the moment we are being linked with young, exciting players and it seems that we do have money to spend. We will find out for sure over the next two months.Delia and the rest of the board need to take a long hard look at themselves and realise that until they look outside of East Anglia (let alone outside of the UK) for fresh investment the club is going absolutely nowhere and it is them and those who remain in support of them that are ultimately to blame!!!I really think you should educate yourself to the inherent dangers involved in this strategy. Look at what has happened at clubs like Cambridge, Wimbledon, Leeds, Oxford, Sheffield Wednesday, Notts County, York, Bury ... its a long list and goes a lot further than that. Its not just a danger in foreign investment, its a danger in ANY investment where the investor does not have the long term future of the club at the top of its priority list. Right now, we have extra investment from lifelong fans. Surely we all have to agree this is a positive step. Whether it is positive enough, we will find out. My measure will be 5 new players minimum this summer.

The problem at the world cup was trying to shoe-horn the best players into the team, rather than picking the best team. We were crying out for width and pace, and the tactic seemed to be to let Beckham hoof a long ball forward towards Rooney. When Lennon finally got on the pitch the team looked more balanced, we had someone attacking with pace and taking men on, but that only lasted for 10 minutes until Rooney imploded.It was never Beckham''s fault, he just has never been that sort of player. I blame it on the then managers insistance on playing Lampard AND Gerrard in the same team. If we have to play 5 in midfield, move Beckham in and have pace on the wings. Otherwise, play 4-4-2 and have him on the bench.

[quote user="blahblahblah"]If I try to log on using IE 7, at home or work - I get this - hope it helps : Server Error in ''/cs'' Application. Invalid postback or callback argument.  Event validation is enabled using <pages enableEventValidation="true"/> in configuration or <%@ Page EnableEventValidation="true" %> in a page.  For security purposes, this feature verifies that arguments to postback or callback events originate from the server control that originally rendered them.  If the data is valid and expected, use the ClientScriptManager.RegisterForEventValidation method in order to register the postback or callback data for validation. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.ArgumentException: Invalid postback or callback argument.  Event validation is enabled using <pages enableEventValidation="true"/> in configuration or <%@ Page EnableEventValidation="true" %> in a page.  For security purposes, this feature verifies that arguments to postback or callback events originate from the server control that originally rendered them.  If the data is valid and expected, use the ClientScriptManager.RegisterForEventValidation method in order to register the postback or callback data for validation.Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: ArgumentException: Invalid postback or callback argument. Event validation is enabled using <pages enableEventValidation="true"/> in configuration or <%@ Page EnableEventValidation="true" %> in a page. For security purposes, this feature verifies that arguments to postback or callback events originate from the server control that originally rendered them. If the data is valid and expected, use the ClientScriptManager.RegisterForEventValidation method in order to register the postback or callback data for validation.] System.Web.UI.ClientScriptManager.ValidateEvent(String uniqueId, String argument) +2082620 System.Web.UI.Control.ValidateEvent(String uniqueID, String eventArgument) +106 System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) +32 System.Web.UI.WebControls.LinkButton.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) +7 System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) +11 System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCollection postData) +174 System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) +5102 Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:2.0.50727.42; ASP.NET Version:2.0.50727.210 [/quote]I frequently but intermittently get this error too. Sometimes it just takes a few tries to get through it, sometimes I have to give up and come back later. And yes the whole board has been slower recently.

[quote user="mystic megson"]Judging by some of the responses to this thread, the board now have what they want - a "fan" base that is more interested in facilities than football.  What''s the point of another new stand if we''re scraping around at the bottom of the Championship or even languishing in League 1 or 2?  Or don''t you care? I''ve felt for a while that me and my passion for football are not welcome at Carrow Road any more.  Football is slowly but surely slipping off the agenda altogether.  If this happens next season I''m off for good.  And won''t you pathetic little Delia Drones be glad . . . [/quote] Mystic, I don''t believe for one minute that the board are seriously thinking about putting that extra tier on the city stand right now. If they are, I agree with with you it is the WRONG time for this. I would far rather not even have to think about off field activities, but that is the nature of the modern game. ALL clubs of our size or bigger focus on off the field activities, they all have hotels, restaurants, conference facilities, because all clubs need to get in revenue from everywhere possible. To enable them to compete on the field. I too think the hotel is an eye-sore, and I too would rather have an infill with seating, but I understand why this isn''t financially viable. Personally I blame the FA for letting our game get to the stage where it is dominated by finance.

Delia did also say that anyone investing in our club had to have "passion and ambition" for Norwich City. It wasn''t just foreign investment she was speaking out against, although that made the headlines.The whole situation at Leeds is a disgrace. If the FA are too spineless to step in and stop this sort of thing, the government should. But they are just as spineless.David Conn also wrote a very interesting but ultimately very sad book called "The Beautiful Game?", its well worth a read for anyone who loves football but has concerns about where it is going. There are so many examples of mis-management and fraudulent chairmen, it makes you want to weep. I do think if people understood more about what has happened and what is happening at other clubs, and the effect it can have on the whole local community especially local busineses, they would understand and appreciate our board and Delia a bit more.

[quote user="Cluck "]Just stopped by for a read and I see the Board''s apologists are busting their panties to get themselves heard as usual. Typical clap trap from Putney...yet another pompous Londoner who thinks he knows what''s best for us country yokels no doubt. Probably anti-hunt/fishing/shooting too without a clue about real life outside the smog choked dump he lives in.  Strange how those who don''t live in Norfolk and hardly (if ever) get to see games seem to know what the rest of us are missing.  Switching on the internet for a "listen" is far less taxing than driving for hours to watch a load of crap isn''t it?  I believe it''s called the "talking the talk" syndrome. Baaaaaaaah. [/quote]Yeah, I''m sure there are thousands of pompous londoners supporting Norwich! How many pompous Devonshire canaries are there, Cluck? I don''t live in Putney, want to make some more wildly inacurate comments about me?You obviously have strong feelings about the club, well done, so do we all. Why don''t you come down off your high horse and debate the issues, rather than stick to the personal insults and running a mile when the debate actually becomes factual?Mello - thats the sort of pathetic drivel I enjoy. Can we shake hands and make up?

Agree the squad last season was way too small. I stand by the fact that the 9m player wage bill was large, and counters the argument that our board gave Worthy no money to spend, that figure is (or was) double the average for this division. Worthy had far more money to spend than any other manager in our history. I know nothing about the 6.5m non player wage bill, who is included in that and how it compares with other clubs of our size. I think Worthy was reasonably happy to play the likes of Hendo and WLY on the right. I don''t think he did buy well towards the end, the Cotterill affair shows we *could* have spent more last summer but those funds just never got spent. I do believe that Worthy decided to gamble on a smaller squad size so he could use a larger allocation for wages, I think he believed that the experience of the likes of Thorne, Hughes and Robinson would see us back up.I think we could go around on this forever though!Looking forward to this summer, it looks like Grant has a decent war chest and is looking in the right areas. We MUST sign at minimum another centre back, goalkeeper, centre mid and a left sided player (I prefer Hucks up front). We could also use another right back. There should be money left over from the Ashton and Green sales (I believe it wasn''t full payment at the time) and money from the Turners (or else what was the point getting them in). If we don''t get this, it will be another bad season and then even I will start losing patience...

The deal with Ashton wasn''t cash on delivery, it was payments made over time. I don''t know the details but wasn''t there an article around Christmas when we were told that West Ham still owed us money on Ashton and Green? Maybe we have more of that money to spend, with all the players we are being linked with it seems that Grant does have a healthy amount to spend this summer...

Derby''s new board invested 25m, but some of this has gone to restructuring the previously huge loan (52m). I think we all know they did spend big on players though. Its quite quick to google it! http://www.bbc.co.uk/derby/content/articles/2006/04/28/derby_county_takeover_2006_feature.shtmlBB - so what do you view our board''s ambitions as being then?

Mello - I never came close to suggesting you are a binner. That would be an obviously stupid thing for me to say. What you did was try and take credibility from my opinions, without actually putting up any of your own, and that is pathetic. Why you chose to respond with even more drivel beats me. I agree with you when you say if we all agreed everything was lovely what a dull forum it would be, however can you actually point out one single poster who DOES think that? If there was one, I might share your concerns, but there is no reason for you to think anyone from the club posts on here, even if it did happen once in the ''suvvern league''. Now can we get on with something more interesting please?Shortfatb - no you are being bright, there is no strategy from an awful lot of them. They also seemed to have missed out on the news that they have found someone rich and local to invest in the club. You can get a decent debate going on here, there are people who can engage brain on both sides of the discussion.

Mystic - I don''t know if there are restrictions on our board members. At companies I have belonged to before, there were restrcitions on *when* execs and board members could sell, and the info was always made public, but when they sold they could always sell to who they wanted and at market price without restriction. These were US publicly traded companies and so different laws would apply. I would be surprised if Skipper couldn''t have sold for a profit, but I believe he didn''t for the good of the club. i.e. help the new people come in and invest as much as possible in the club. I would expect that for the Turner''s it would have been a drop in the ocean though, so it is probably a good will gesture. I also expect that the whole thing was transparent to the board, and done with their blessing. I don''t know this though. It does seem that the board are united and pull together, whether you agree in their direction or not.Mello, if you actually read people''s posts you will find that those defending Delia and the board do not whole heartedly agree with everything being said and done by them, but just want to counter some of the crap being written on here by people who think its OK to fling wild accusations about, call people liars, tricksters etc bordering on the libelous. Its OK to disagree, its OK to have a different point of view or perspective, its not OK to make these wild accusations without a scrap of evidence or a real world argument. The only reason you made that comment about NCFC employees is because you disagree with their perspective, and that is pathetic.

Shows the state of the England squad when best/our only attacking option is from a dead ball specialist. For this reason we need him in the squad, but it shows McLaren''s failure as a manager I''m afraid. I doubt we will qualify anyway. Frankly his 40 yard ''killer'' passes are now looking more and more like hoofball recently with England.

There are some really interesting points being made on this thread.Stevie Wonder re Insurance - you are right of course. However, I would question that if you were relying on selling a player for #10m at a certain point of time, and he breaks a leg, you then you are paying his wages still AND you don''t have the 10m from the transfer. How much would you get on the insurance, enough to cover all of that, or just a proportion of his fee? I can foresee a cash flow problem potentially... and cash flow is what buggers up many, many businesses. Mr Carrow - You say that our investment in the squad was at some point the smallest in the division, but if you include the 9m we were paying in player''s wages then that is just not true. I fully agree that the squad is 1. too small and 2. very badly balanced, and whilst you blame the board for that I would lay more blame with Worthy. I don''t believe our board interfere that much with the playing side and the manager''s plans, as they know they don''t have the footballing knowledge. This in itself IS a weakness - I would advocate us strengthening our board with a person with indepth football knowledge, so they can question some of the decisions being made on the footballing side. Someone like Stringer. I advocate strengthening our board, not wholesale change.I''m not trying to say that money spent on the pitch is money lost, I agree we made good money on Ashton etc. Like you I would LOVE to see us invest in younger players, who have hunger, ambition AND skill. We wasted money on the likes of Peter Thorne and his magic wage bill, for the money we spent on him we could have probably signed 3 or 4 decent prospects. I agree there is a balance, that looking at it Southampton went too far and we probably haven''t gone far enough. We do however need to invest in the club''s infrastructure too, which further complicates the balancing game the board have to play.

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]You really are taking the biscuit if you honestly think people are wasting there time to make petty arguement. It seems to me that anybody who,god forbids,doesnt agree with your points and views then that makes them a binner/stupid! Why on this website are there a minority of people who will not except this is a forum for discussion of views and different opinions. Didnt we once have a war to banish this small minded outlook? [/quote]Rubbish. I disagree with 1st Wizard on nearly everything he says, but we have still debated it on this board without any stupid name calling from either of us. I have never called anyone stupid for holding an opposing view to mine, I talk to them about it. This is so I can review my own thoughts on the matter, and hope they do the same. That is the whole point of debate, is it not? You on the other hand paint a binner scarf on our majority share holder''s picture, lable her a binner, complain like mad when people don''t agree with your outlandish claims whilst offering no argument to support them, and expect your views to be taken seriously. You need to earn respect, not demand it.Mystic - true, and I wasn''t trying to say that Delia single handedly engineered the whole deal. But previously, when Delia said the board would entertain new investment from someone who was a fan, Smudger said she was lying. She obviously wasn''t, which is the point I was trying to make. Everything good that happens isn''t solely down to Delia, just as everything bad that happens isn''t solely down to Delia. Mello - Oh good grief. So are you trying to say that anyone who disagrees with you must be in the employ of the club? Pathetic.

Mr Whittle - you are calling our majority shareholder a binner. That is dumb and rude and patently untrue. Your point about progress since Chase is fair enough. I suggest you stick to intelligent conversation and drop the childish name calling. All it does is make preople presume you are an idiot. This point is being debated at length on other threads and I won''t go into it here.