The 4th Official

[quote user="City1st"]The Stoke pitch had to be increased to meet EUFA standards and was then put back to what is was normally (!) Eufa requires the goalines to be between 70 - 80 yards, whereas the FA allows anything between 50 - 100 yds. So theoretically you could have a goal (8yds) plus penalty box (2 x 18yds) which would, at 44 yds, allow only 3yds either side of the penalty box to the touchline.I suspect that Stoke pushed the lines out to 70yds for their Eorpean game and brought them back in by a yard or so either side for our game. Yep, it could be seen as gamesmanship by Stoke, but technically they could have made the pitch an awful lot narrower than it was.[/quote] A point of information. The FIFA rules on pitch size are as City1st states. The Premier League has tighter rules: length between 100 and 110 metres, width between 64 and 75 metres. EUFA usually requires a pitch exactly 105m x 68m. Details here http://www.premierleague.com/content/dam/premierleague/site-content/News/publications/handbooks/premier-league-handbook-2011-12.pdf section I, para 21.

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]... `08 showed an income of £19m and player wages of £6.8m largely funded by a £3.5m transfer profit. .. [/quote] This figure of £6.8m for player wages has been mentioned several times. I can''t find it in the 2008 Annual Report. Could you tell me where it comes from please? Also, is the figure inclusive of social security costs? Thanks.

[quote user="Duffman"]No idea what the official rules are ... [/quote] http://www.refworld.com/information/5/article/36/0

[quote user="gary "] did a quick look back and summarised NCFC league history as Div 3 - 34 seasons Div 2 - 27 seasons Div 1 - 20 seasons       So are we really only returning to our rightful level seeing as that is where we have spent the majority of our league life   [/quote] http://stats.football365.com/hist/postwar/atavgpos.html In the 56 seasons between the war and 2001/2 Norwich''s average position was 30th - middle of the second tier. Since then we''ve finished 28th, 21st, 19th, 29th, 36th and 37th. So probably slightly lower, but still mid-table in the 2nd division..

[quote user="chicken"] ... I am pretty sure that the statistics are all out there somewher ...  [/quote] Figures from 2006, but still interesting. For those working out where the money has gone, remember that the employer also has to pay an additional 12.8% employers national insurance contribution on nearly all that salary. http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/163676000-the-average-salary-of-a-premiership-footballer-in-2006-473659.html

[quote user="1st Wazzock"] ... Is it true that every referee is assessed at each game? ... [/quote]   Yes. Here''s how it''s done. http://www.refworld.com/information/8/article/39/0 http://www.refworld.com/filebrowser/Files/05GuidelineAssessorsSeason0809.doc   

The EDP states that the club has sold a 75% stake in EventGuard but the official site doesn''t actually say that. It says that Norfolk County Services has acquired a 75% stake, with the club retaining the other 25%. The last Annual Report (May 2008, page 25) showed that the club only owned 75% of EventGuard, so it couldn''t have sold 75% - all of its holding - and still retained 25%.  Unless it bought the remaining 25% of EventGuard shares between last May and now. Anybody know?

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Hi Mick, 2 quick questions if I may - based on this : Points per game per manager from John Bond to now (assuming 3 pts for a win) 1.76 Martin O Neill - 26 games 1.59 Nigel Worthington - 280 games 1.48 Ken Brown - 367 games 1.42 Dave Stringer - 229 games 1.41 Mike Walker - 179 games 1.32 Peter Grant - 47 games 1.30 Bruce Rioch - 93 games 1.26 John Bond - 340 games 1.23 Glenn Roeder - 61 games 1.14 Bryan Hamilton - 35 games 1.05 John Deehan - 58 games ...And our current league status - 26 points from 26 games.  If we continue at the rate of Roeders'' points per game of 1.23, we will amass another 24 points from the remaining 20 league games.  1) Will 50 points be enough to avoid relegation ? 2) How long should we continue to give a manager who has proven to be only marginally more successful than Bryan Hamilton, who was only given 35 games ? I''d argue that if we had to pay compensation to another club for a manager with proven success at championship level, then it would be a price worth paying, as the boss gets to play with 8 million pounds per season.  We should also be approaching people, instead of inviting them for interviews, as the best candidates are very rarely unemployed for long. [/quote] Or, if you happen to be a Roeder supporter, 2) How long should we continue to give a manager who has proven to be only marginally less successful than John Bond, who was given 340 games ?

Munby was talking about Roeder''s record at Newcastle - played 72, won 33, win % = 45.83. You can listen to the press conference here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/norfolk/realmedia/nb/ncfc_roederconf_20071030_au_nb.ram (you will need RealPlayer). Munby''s comments are 8 minutes in.

[quote user="paint_me_yellow"]Don''t trust anyone on this forum who registered in 2003 and yet has only about 10 posts in all that time.[/quote] Why''s that then?

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="The 4th Official"][quote user="jas the barclay king"] Ok.. we arent down.. and we might not go down.. lets hope we dont.. but we have to take into account that its likely.. and if we do we have to face facts... 1. Glenn Roeder - Relegation would kill his career... he has been relegated with 3 teams in the past... people wont look at the how''s and whys they will just see the relegations.. if we go down we will be his 4th relegation... it will be very difficult to convince people away from the football club that we have a good manager.. They will see a man who has failed 4 times.. and 2 of those at Bigger football clubs than Norwich City.... Unfortunately this will have a knock on affect.. no one will take Glen or the Club seriously... affecting our media status, transfers etc... <snipped> [/quote] I have no desire to be seen as an apologist for Glenn Roeder, but there seems to be widespread misinformation about his career. The above statement is simply not true. Glenn Roeder has never been in charge of a relegated team. The closest would be West Ham where he was taken ill near the end of the season and relieved of duties. West Ham were relegated with Trevor Brooking in charge. Even if you count that on the grounds that West Ham were "as good as" down, it''s still only one relegation. [/quote] he was still "in charge" of west hame when they went down./.. he has also been relegated with Watford and Gillingham. jas :) [/quote] He was not relegated with either Watford or Gillingham. He was (at the time) widely credited with having saved Gillingham from relegation to the Conference. He was sacked from Watford in February 1996, and Watford were subsequently relegated with Graham Taylor in charge. These are matters of fact, which are easily checkable with Google. A summary of Glenn Roeder''s career is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Roeder

[quote user="jas the barclay king"] Ok.. we arent down.. and we might not go down.. lets hope we dont.. but we have to take into account that its likely.. and if we do we have to face facts... 1. Glenn Roeder - Relegation would kill his career... he has been relegated with 3 teams in the past... people wont look at the how''s and whys they will just see the relegations.. if we go down we will be his 4th relegation... it will be very difficult to convince people away from the football club that we have a good manager.. They will see a man who has failed 4 times.. and 2 of those at Bigger football clubs than Norwich City.... Unfortunately this will have a knock on affect.. no one will take Glen or the Club seriously... affecting our media status, transfers etc... <snipped> [/quote] I have no desire to be seen as an apologist for Glenn Roeder, but there seems to be widespread misinformation about his career. The above statement is simply not true. Glenn Roeder has never been in charge of a relegated team. The closest would be West Ham where he was taken ill near the end of the season and relieved of duties. West Ham were relegated with Trevor Brooking in charge. Even if you count that on the grounds that West Ham were "as good as" down, it''s still only one relegation.

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"] Agree to some extent, but think next season will be the time to judge Glenn. His track record has a history of poor 2nd seasons so i just hope he does not bring that here. Gillingham 1st season-Saved from relegation. 2nd Season relegated Watford 1st season-saved from relegation. 2nd season relegated West ham 1st season-europe. 2nd season relegated Newcastle 1st season-europe. 2nd season sacked hovering above relegation. Ive been told these facts are correct but dont read this the wrong way. I think somehow Glenn has got some brilliant results out of a crap team and will always back the club 100%, i hope his 2nd season houdo does not continue. Glenn has without doubt saved this club from relegation, i just hope the board back him so he can take us that step further. We need permanant squad members, not 8 loan players who couldnt give a stuff. [/quote] They''re not. Glenn Roeder''s management career: Gillingham 92/93- saved from relegation to the Conference. He only managed Gillingham for one season. Watford 93/94 - 19th in the old League Division 1,  94/95 - 7th,  95/96 - sacked in February 96, Watford relegated with Graham Taylor in charge. West Ham 01/02 - 7th in the Premier, 02/03 - collapsed with brain tumour April 03, West Ham relegated with Trevor Brooking in charge. 03/04 - sacked after 4 games (won 2, drawn 1, lost 1). Newcastle 05/06 - appointed caretaker manager February 06, 7th in Premier, 06/07 resigned (as reported at the time) with one game to go - 13th Norwich 07/08 - appointed manager October 2007, Norwich saved from relegation??  

[quote user="jas the barclay king"] "ungentlemanly conduct" has always been a red card.. jas :) [/quote] "Ungentlemanly conduct" or "unsporting behaviour" as it is now called has always been a yellow card. But swearing has always been a red card; it''s just that most referees don''t enforce it. From Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct: Sending-Off Offences A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red card if he commits any of the following seven offences: 1. is guilty of serious foul play 2. is guilty of violent conduct 3. spits at an opponent or any other person 4. denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area) 5. denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick 6. uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures 7. receives a second caution in the same match

[quote user="Duffman"]I would guess the promotion season but I cant be sure.  I know we definately went unbeaten for at least 10 games under Martin O''neill [/quote] The best we did under Martin O''Neill (first half of 95/96 season) was 2 runs of 6 games unbeaten in all competitions (league and league cup). In the league only we had 2 runs of 4 games unbeaten (1 win 3 draws and 4 wins). We had a 10 game unbeaten league run at the beginning of the 96/97 season (7 wins 3 draws) under Mike Walker.

[quote user="UEA Canary"][quote user="The 4th Official"] [quote user="UEA Canary"] I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws. [/quote] The word "obstruction" doesn''t appear, but "impeding the progress of an opponent" does: "Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player. All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent. Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent." http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf  [/quote] Could you reference the page of where you are quoting that from as I could not find it. Obstruction is not used in refereeing terms because it is considered as a tackle to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the player before touching the player [/quote] Page 115.

[quote user="UEA Canary"] I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws. [/quote] The word "obstruction" doesn''t appear, but "impeding the progress of an opponent" does: "Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player. All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent. Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent." http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf   

A point on the Laws. A shoulder charge is defined as a challenge for space, not a challenge for the ball. It''s perfectly legal to charge someone and make no attempt to play the ball.

In 98/99 (5 years ago) Bradford were promoted in 2nd place with 87 points (Sunderland champions with 105). In 96/97 (7 years ago) Barnsley were promoted in 2nd place with 80 points (Bolton champions with 98). Each season for the past several years there have been a few teams who were clearly better than the rest of the league, and this has been apparent at the halfway stage - roughly where we are now. These few teams get a lot of points, and then there is a big gap to the chasing pack. This season, there are no teams which are clearly a class above the rest. The last time we had a league as tight as this at the half-way stage was in 95/96. That season, Sunderland were champions with 83 points, and Derby were promoted with 79. I think this season will be similar (but that doesn''t mean we shouldn''t reinforce the squad).