Grumpy Old Blogger

Loan players are the answer for an egotistical manager with an eye on proving that he CAN manage a club for a second year without leading it to disaster. Unfortunately it makes no allowance for what might happen in years 3 and 4 - but maybe he isn''t looking that far forward. Maybe a strong finish at the end of this year will be good enough to set his reputation back on the right tracks and allow a move for Team Glenn to bigger things. I never will be in favour of turning up on a Saturday to watch someone elses players masquerading as my team - they are not my team and never will be. They are here entirely for their own reasons which vary from "getting a game" to enhance their reputation through "getting fit" to recover from injury to "getting a final pay day" before retirement - but they are NOT my team playing for my club. Why not do away with the cost of having a team at all and instal giant screens around the ground and watch live coverage of Manchester United while pretending they are Norwich City. that way we get a winning team, at no cost.

[quote user="The Butler"] If true I would for one not blame them. They have now had some time to see what being a director of a football club is all about. Someone else spends the money you have worked hard for and gives you total abuse in exchange. They obviously do not (unlike some) seek the limelight so why put up with all the agro dished up. [/quote]   What a spot on observation Butler. I, for one, was surprised that they got involved in the first place. Given that they have never been self seeking publicists with book sales and TV programmes to promote they have looked uncomfortable since they day they had to stand in front of the cameras on the pitch when they came on board. The final straw could have copme when they refused to do a Tipsy Rant at half time on Saturday.

Yesterday I went to watch my 12 year old son playing football. His team were a couple short at the start so borrowed two from the opposition. As I watched something occurred to me. I think the biggest point Glenn Roeder misses when he brings in half a team of loanees is that he is asking supporters to turn up to watch a team that, to all intents and purposes, isn''t ours. It a set of borrowed players that other clubs have no immediate use for and fancy getting them off their wage bill for a few months, getting them fit and probably receiving a nice little fee into the bargain. No doubt the arguement will be that he is bringing in a better class of player than we would get in the permanent market - but it doesn''t make me feel any more comfortable on a Saturday afternoon to be cheering someone elses players.

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"] [quote user="CanaryKid2k8"]Isn''t it 15% of the profit west ham make which would be around £675,000. Both great sums of money and a great positive for the club.[/quote]   and you know that £800k of that has ''already been accounted for'' [/quote]   Nice one!

Interesting thought - why do we find it so much easier to sell players than to buy them? Every transfer out of the club seems to go like clockwork. I''ll bet they even have a machine to take credit cards over the phone at Colney. Yet whenever we want to bring someone in it takes forever, even in the increasingly unlikely event that it happens at all. Hoolihan - dragged on weeks. Bell - went on forever even when he had a broken ankle. Taylor - never did happen. OK the two guys from Fulham seemed easier but maybe no one else was in for them. Correct me if I''m wrong but wasn''t Big Bryan supposed to be Transfer Liason Manager or something similar - in place to make things happen. Now we are in the crazy situation where Jason Shackell walks away as soon as the credit card machine verifies the transaction, yet we spend months trying to get a striker who is physically suited to anything above Under-13 football? Maybe we have people in the club responsible for transfers who are making hard work of what other clubs find a relatively straightforward matter.

[quote user="FilletTheFishWife ."] [quote user="Freeza"]For a £1 million I''m pretty happy to see him go. Doesn''t have the bottle in my opinion, which is a shame because he has all the physical attributes. Hopefully we can get Kennedy permanently and add a bit of money towards the centre-forward fund. Seems like a deal that makes sense from both parties'' POV.[/quote]   wolves obviously think he''s worth it and if you take a look at the league table last season and this i think you''ll find they''re a better judge of players. and why do we keep selling players when we time and time again fail to fully reinvest the funds in the playing squad   [/quote] Think you''ll find the answer by referring to another thread "I know where the money has gone". There simply can be no unbalanced expenditure on players. For every pound spent there must be a balancing pound coming in. The debt must be serviced first at all costs. Wages of Hucks and Dion plus the others who were shown the door have been balanced by the incomers. Any money that was spent on transfers will need to be recouped. My guess is that they knew this move for Shacks was on a long time ago. Doesn''t alter the fact that if they did get £1m for him it was good business although I''m sure Mr Doncaster will patiently explain to anyone who will listen why the club will only receive £10.55 when all the costs are taken out!

[quote user="FilletTheFishWife ."] [quote user="Freeza"]For a £1 million I''m pretty happy to see him go. Doesn''t have the bottle in my opinion, which is a shame because he has all the physical attributes. Hopefully we can get Kennedy permanently and add a bit of money towards the centre-forward fund. Seems like a deal that makes sense from both parties'' POV.[/quote]   wolves obviously think he''s worth it and if you take a look at the league table last season and this i think you''ll find they''re a better judge of players. and why do we keep selling players when we time and time again fail to fully reinvest the funds in the playing squad   [/quote]

His movement and running was exceptionally good but he was definately tiring. He was also winding up the referee as only an Italian could. The ref put up with so much of it and finally had a word with him. Couln''t help thinking at the time that his next offence could be his last. Good move to take him off. unfortunately he was replaced with Barn Door Banjo Boy. I wonder if he realised how much patience and sympathy green hair against Ipswich years ago would one day buy him.

Two other quotes from the full article give us some interesting insights. Clearly the club are hugely dependant on maintaining the 25,000 home attendances and ensuring that season ticket sales remain at current levels. Any drop off will be a disaster in financial terms. It also appears that a relatively small change in income stream that isn’t matched by corresponding overhead savings can quickly tip the arrangement. Quote - “…….. some of the other clubs that had thousands of dedicated supporters who were ready to turn up to matches regardless of how badly their team was performing on the pitch were receiving favourable investor attention as being good potential candidates for securitisations.”   We can also see an explanation for the reluctance to be seen to spend on transfers at the same level as other clubs that, on the face of it, are not as well supported or financed as we appear to be. Quote - “The problems with football securitisations became apparent when Leicester City and Ipswich Town went into administration………The reasons for these difficulties were structural, economic and managerial. Many clubs had spent too much of their money on buying new players and on paying increased wages to the existing players……….. Ipswich Town and Leeds United were prime examples of clubs that had spent too much money on players”.   It has to be remembered that half of the securitisation that NCFC took onboard was for the replacement of the old South Stand which was at the point of being condemned and therefore unusable and this replacement itself increased the capacity of the ground and probably became self funding. Much of the other debt was probably taken on in “Chase years” as a result of the land deals around the ground which have be largely profitable.   Overall, probably the right thing to have done at the time but the nett result is that we have a huge debt to service and nervous investors. This would explain the board’s comments relating to the debt needing to repaid in the event of any change of ownership. I’ll bet they can’t wait to get their money out without forcing administration.   So the message is – keep turning up in huge numbers to support your team, don’t expect any significant investment on the playing side and be grateful you still have team to support whatever league they are playing in. That, I guess, is the depressing reality of football life outside the Premiership and I’ll bet there are a lot of supporters who visit Carrow road and go away envious.

Reading through the list of City Legends who are turning out for the club on September 7th has left me feeling positively inadequate. I know that legend status is thrown around pretty easily these days. When I was young it was confined to people like King Arthur, Nelson and maybe, just maybe, Dennis Law. Today’s legends apparently include – Robert Heffer (and there was me thinking the last legendary heffer we had here was John Hartson), John Greatrex, Fred Sharpe, Brian Whitehouse, Grenville Williams and Bobby Wilson. It’s probably just my memory going and I’m sure they were probably all part of the Milk Cup winning team – it’s just that I don’t remember them being like King Arthur, Nelson, Dennis Law or even Ian Botham. Can someone help this poor old chap out here? No, it’s OK. I’ve got it – they are all strikers Roeder has signed this afternoon who will all play on Saturday….and by September 7th they will be legends.

So how long will it be before our manager throws his toys out of the cot and turns on his paymasters? He has handed out a public flogging to the lad who, just a few weeks ago, was the best thing since sliced Huckerby and now he learns that, despite his assurance to a press conference a week ago, the hold up in the transfer of Iverson would be financial even if they did want to sell him (which they apparently don’t).   Presumably finances are organised away from the playing side and an offer was made for the player. The world was informed that the only hold up was that they had not kept their word to the player. Sort that out and it’s plain sailing on the old Newcastle ferry, a drive down the A1, turn left and Robert, as they say, is your mother’s brother. It seems not. So, who got it wrong? Rosenborg? Unlikely, they never accepted the offer in the first place so they say – and why would they lie about that as they have said they won’t sell anyway. Glenn Roeder? His statement was quite unequivocal – it’s not a financial issue.  Maybe it’s our negotiators at board level then. Maybe Rosenborg aren’t the only ones not keeping their word here. They must have known if they had an offer accepted or not. Clearly not. So why was the manager under the impression that he only had to convince them to keep their word?   I don’t suppose Steffen Iverson has any particular affinity to Norwich so can anyone else see this getting resolved this week by one of the many clubs above us in the Championship table meeting Rosenborg’s valuation and the player getting his wish to move to England. If so where would that leave us? More loans? Or will our manager finally have had enough and take the long walk quoting liberally from the Bruce Rioch leaving speech. There are a disturbing number of similarities – both respected managers whose record didn’t quite merit their attitude, both starting to get a side together (weren’t we 6th when Rioch left?). Oh, and wasn’t there a guy called O’Neill who walked for exactly the same reason.   Now for the really worrying bit – if he does walk he has not only assembled a whole new team many of whom came to work with him (or so he thinks) he has also completely changed the backroom team so that it now really is Team Glenn……and if the team leader goes…..

So how long will it be before our manager throws his toys out of the cot and turns on his paymasters? He has handed out a public flogging to the lad who, just a few weeks ago, was the best thing since sliced Huckerby and now he learns that, despite his assurance to a press conference a week ago, the hold up in the transfer of Iverson would be financial even if they did want to sell him (which they apparently don’t).   Presumably finances are organised away from the playing side and an offer was made for the player. The world was informed that the only hold up was that they had not kept their word to the player. Sort that out and it’s plain sailing on the old Newcastle ferry, a drive down the A1, turn left and Robert, as they say, is your mother’s brother. It seems not. So, who got it wrong? Rosenborg? Unlikely, they never accepted the offer in the first place so they say – and why would they lie about that as they have said they won’t sell anyway. Glenn Roeder? His statement was quite unequivocal – it’s not a financial issue.  Maybe it’s our negotiators at board level then. Maybe Rosenborg aren’t the only ones not keeping their word here. They must have known if they had an offer accepted or not. Clearly not. So why was the manager under the impression that he only had to convince them to keep their word?   I don’t suppose Steffen Iverson has any particular affinity to Norwich so can anyone else see this getting resolved this week by one of the many clubs above us in the Championship table meeting Rosenborg’s valuation and the player getting his wish to move to England. If so where would that leave us? More loans? Or will our manager finally have had enough and take the long walk quoting liberally from the Bruce Rioch leaving speech. There are a disturbing number of similarities – both respected managers whose record didn’t quite merit their attitude, both starting to get a side together (weren’t we 6th when Rioch left?). Oh, and wasn’t there a guy called O’Neill who walked for exactly the same reason.   Now for the really worrying bit – if he does walk he has not only assembled a whole new team many of whom came to work with him (or so he thinks) he has also completely changed the backroom team so that it now really is Team Glenn……and if the team leader goes…..

[quote user="jas the barclay king"] Lawro asked the question "why does Michael Owen score so many headers?" Lineker, a striker, an not the tallest one answered for him "Because of his movement in the box and his positioning, You dont have to be 6ft 3 to win it in the air". this got me thinking.. is a target man really what we need? if we had a couple of decent wingers who could put the ball in the right place, with intelligent strikers who know where to run and when we could avoide the need for a target man (and thus rule out hoofball) in the future.  Manchester utd do this with Ronaldo, Rooney and Tevez.. all 3 are not target men.. yet score their fare share of eaders (Ronaldo particularly is good in the air, possesing a good hang time). Newcastle have Owen.. who has scored with his head for both Newcastle and England... Are our strikers smart enough to find the space? Possibly with Lupoli who has trained in Italy.... are English forwards that tactically aware? Owens played in spain, Ronaldo and Tevez are Imports.. Rooney is training with the best in the world... Is it down to coaching? or are our players tactically naive? do the wingers put in decent enough balls? Discuss? jas :) [/quote] Yup would work with loads of money in the thord of the Premiership. other examples?

Rudd an Nistolroy!

[quote user="wycombe canary"] Try to forget your personal feelings towards her, be honest, do you think that Delia is the right helmsman (woman) at the club? This isnt about the manager or players, who will sign or who wont etc, that is day-to-day business. This is about the custodian of our great club. In the early days I had a lot of time for Delia and was grateful for what she did for us. I forgave her the "Let''s be ''avin ya" rant (mildly amusing, but extremely embarassing) and the alcahol fuelled comments at the Norfolk Show. However, on reflection and culminating in the Cullum debacle (I firmly believe that we may have let a great opportunity slip away here), I actually believe that she has regressed into a self-centred human being who has set herself onto an ivory tower and wo-betide anyone who seeks to knock her down. There is a lot of animosity aimed towards Neil Doncaster, but if you analyse his position of employment (which is a great job and many would give their right arm for), he can only deliver what he is allowed to deliver, and he almost certainly would have to pay lip-service to his employers.....and absorbing the flak as a bonus. Personally, I dont think Delia is the right person any more, and what now sticks in my throat is that I am sure she also realises she is not the right person any more. But, I feel the pride in the woman will not allow her to hold up her hands and say "I''ve done a decent job here, I''ve had some fun, but now it''s time to let someone else with fresh enthusiasm and resource to take over..." This is a great club, it will still be a great club even if Delia holds out for another 5 years, because it''s the supporters that make a club great. But right now I think those same supporters are being cheated out of NCFC realising it''s potential - forget the results for the moment, I cannot remember ever feeling this concerned about the future for our club.   [/quote] Do you know as a supporter for just short of fifty years - I agree totally with what you say. Delia is brilliant PR (when she has her sensible head on). She milks the club for all it''s worth when it suits her. But sadly she doesn''t have the money to to throw away to get the club to where she has set  the public''s expectations.

I predict three points against Birmingham, no big striker for a whole host of reasons.

[quote user="Disco Dale"]All this talk about needing a"big target man" is like being stuck in a football time warp 20 years ago.First of all it suggests a long ball game, nothing wrong with that but its easier to create chances if you can pass well.I prefere a second striker who plays between the lines.He does not have to be big , but  have a high level of awareness and creativity.A role I think is ideally suited to Hoolahan.Plus you want players like him  close to the oppenents goal.A big striker is handy if we are chasing a game but in the team full time it will encourage our full backs to lump it forward even more often.   [/quote]   Someone - one day - maybe - will get out of this league by playing football with two small strikers. But it isn''t going to be this year and it isn''t going to be us and that''s all that interests me.

[quote user="Iwan is God"] I heard the following last night & have been deciding whether to post it or not all day. I decided what the hell, everyone should know!! Carl Moore who funded half of Huckerby''s wages while he was here was at Carrow Road Wednesday trying to sort a deal out to get Iversen here. He offered to pay £6k a week to cover half of Iversen''s wages but the club could only stretch to £3k a week as they are already up to their wages budget! The club will announce a deal couldn''t be struck between us & Rosenberg but it isn''t strictly true! Also Foulger paid all costs to get Clingan & Hoolahan here & the Turners paid for Bell. Delia can no longer afford to put any more of her own money into the club!!! The feeling is Roeder has had a gut full & may be gone by January!   [/quote] Simply put - Carl Moore''s involvement is VERY unlikely.

[quote user="Disco Dale"]I know he has been a bit frustrating but its not going to do anyone any good to start getting on his back.No one really has yet.But I think its coming.We have to remember he doesnt miss on purpose. [/quote]   Put me out there on Saturday on several thousand pounds a week and i wouldn''t miss just to p**s of the supporters but it wouldn''t make me a good footballer who wasn''t caught off side far too many times and who needed ten chances to be created to score one goal. Mind you......wasn''t that Keegan''s parting shot at Huckerby when he set out for Norfolk. Mind you again - Jamie or Huckerby in your side?

"Go on son, I''ve got him - you can go on and score now. And don''t forget your Mum and I want you home early this evening"

[quote user="Branston Pickle"].....it is some years since I studied law (and only then from the Accounting side of things) but was under the impression that things don''t necessarily have to be in writing in order for them to be legally binding.  Given that all parties appear to admit to what was said/agreed, surely that is enough for the weight of proof that might be required?  [Of course, Norwegian law may be different!].[/quote] For a contract of any sort to be valid there needs to be "consideration" - both sides need to get something. It is debatable whether that would be the case in this situation.

......Yes it got me excited too! Someone at the official website thinks it''s funny to headline an article like that when it goes on to explain that John Kennedy and "Barn door with a Banjo" Lupoli are going to be signing autographs in the Castle Mall. They even go on to say the players may change (what, into decent Championship goalscorers?). At a time when we are all desperately hoping we will sign a decent striker this sort of headline is taking the **** isn''t it? Or is it just me having a grumpy afternoon? By the way if anyone is going along to the signing take a really BIG piece of paper for Arturo - or he might miss it!

Empty Mirror wrote the following post at 19/08/2008 2:34 PM: I agree with all three points. Howlers, all of them.  And, interestingly for those who blame the Board for everything, Mr Roeder is clearly responsible for one (Huckerby) and implicated in the other two.   Plus here is another major error, this one down to the Board alone: 4. The (apparent) failure to involve Mr Cullum. I''m not saying the Board should have sold out to him: it''s well documented that he hasn''t made a formal offer, so there was nothing to accept. But upon hearing that the fortieth (or whatever) richest man in the country is a Canary fan and wants to invest money surely the Board owed a duty to the fans and the other shareholders to at least try to involve him somehow. Surely the appropriate response to him would have been along the lines of "Peter, it''s brilliant that you want to get involved, we must meet for dinner, do come to some matches in the directors'' box, and let''s see what we can work out, we may disagree about valuation but there''s plenty of ways of getting involved, how about you fund this transfer and we''ll give you a seat on the Board and the City stand can be the Peter Cullum stand" (or whatever - it really doesn''t matter, the point was to seize the opportunity and try to involve him, not react like it was a hostile take over bid - which it has now, or (if results continue to go badly) will shortly, become). Point 4 is absolutely spot on. I would go even further and say that, knowing that one of the richest men in the UK was sitting in a box at Carrow Road, wouldn''t you think that our board could have been just a tiny bit more proactive? Maybe even pop over there on a match day, invite him for lunch, try to get him involved at any level or just invite him onto the board for no good reason other than he must have a fantastic contact book...and before any pedantics pick me up and say "how do you know they didn''t do that"? The answer is pretty clear in all the arms length dealings after the non-offer became public - there simply wasn''t any common ground before or after.

"Seriously, although some of those post-match comments were a bit daft, let''s not forget what a mess we were in when he took over." I''m beginning to wonder if GR isn''t slotting into the same catagory as Delia. Living off the fact that things were a lot worse before they arrived to rescue us. OK, we can go along with that to some extent but there seems to be some disturbing similarities emerging not least the fact that every time either of them open their mouths in public something daft pops out! Now, with Peter Grant that could also have been the case - but no one could understand a word he was saying, so it didn''t really matter. Nigel, on the other hand had a disturbing habit of asking at the end of every sentance if we knew what he meant - "now what I mean"? I have always held the view that GR''s arrogance and attitude outweighs his track record and I have seen nothing to change that view so far. If you''re going to have an attitude Glenn you will only be forgiven if you have a talent to back it up.

I hadn’t seen any of the pre-season games as I’m not a big fan of them, so yesterday was my first view of the “new Team Glenn”. I should also declare that I’m not a huge admirer of Glenn himself as I believe his arrogance and attitude far outweigh his achievements as a manager. That all said I found myself more than a little impressed with what he had been able to assemble on the modest budget he has been given. He freely acknowledges that a big proven striker is his target, but I wonder if we wouldn’t be facing a very similar dilemma even if someone like Iverson had been the first to arrive in the summer instead of the last. A target man isn’t necessarily going to score a hatful of goals, rather he will hold the ball up and make chances around the edge of the box for the likes of Cureton and little Italian chap. Therein may lay the problem. They both seem to need far too high a chances to goals ratio. They had plenty of chances carved out for them yesterday (and presumably in the other two games) – they simply are not in the same league as someone like a Rob Earnshaw at this level. Not their fault – they just aren’t. 1-1 against a workmanlike team with so many new players bedding in, a central defensive pair that at last seem to give confidence to the rest of the team in a way we have not seen since Fleming and Malky, two outstanding young full backs, a midfielder who can sit in front of the defence and still pick out a safe pass, and Wes Hoolihan who, provided we can hold on to him past January, looks like Player of the Season material already – we are nearly flying. I’m just not convinced, based simply on that one performance, that the big target man is only answer to the lack of goals.