NewNestCarrow

Point 1. Did Mervyn write to the EDP and congratulate the club in 2021, 2019, 2015 2011 & 2010 for fully delivering (maybe even over-delivering?) on ST value? I'll bet he didn't Point 2a. Has Mervyn ever written to the EDP & highlighted the club's achievement in over-delivering in terms of wage-bill (2019, 2011 & 2010 spring immediately to mind) I'll bet he hasn't Point 2b. The pricing table to which he refers is a simplistic overview, and certainly not a forensic or objective view of ticket-pricing (as has likely been discussed previously) Point 3. He went to Portaloo Road to watch a match last season? No more comment necessary. Point 4. He can't be bothered to accurately type the first line of the club anthem ("On The Ball, City")

Don't think so, as McIntosh & Wilson both started (CBs) Renecke, another CB, also came on after an hour.

McCallum played for the U21s yesterday. He clearly has not developed as the recruiters thought he would.

Signing a local lad for a cheap-ish fee , who is in the first team at 20 yrs old, with room for development; on low wages who is happy to commit for the long-term. What's not to like? No team at our level is made up exclusively of Pukkis or Buendias

The U16s also won their 'derby' match, away from home, 2-1

I'm going to ask a question, and apols if a) it has already been asked & answered and b) it is stupid: Do the Takeover Rules say anything about a 'minority' shareholder refusing to sell shares at the "previously-purchased price" but then, later on, selling to the same person (let's call him 'Mark') at a lower price? Might this be a previously-unforseen hurdle?

Isn't everyone forgetting that Jones probably paid only £1 each for the bulk of his share-holding? [In June 1983 NCFC stated that the number of called-up shares had increased by 83,964 and the "Proceeds of share issue" was . £108,049. Chase bought 27,500 shares, Jones purchased 25,000 and other share-holders were given a 4-for-1 purchase option. Clearly no-one was paying £30 per share in those days]

"I'm really very objective" says the poster who is 20-odd posts into telling everyone how wrong they are!.

Roll Up, Roll Up; offer your opinons and then enjoy being told how wrong you are!

To be fair, I think your real interest is in being argumentative. - claps hands emoji -

Just because 'you' are not bothered doesn't make it OK. Being accurate - and respecting history - is really nothing to be ashamed of.

I didn't mention the club, but I'm guessing detail isn't your forte. If the banner at the River End said "6 foot 4, eyes of blue, Duncan Forbes is after you" would you criticise anyone that pointed it out? If the Friendship Trophy was engraved "Presented by Robert Chase...." would you shrug your shoulders and say "No-one is perfect"? If the Milk Cup was engraved "1985 Norwich United" would that be OK with you?

The next time I'm creating something that will be seen by thousands of people, that is meant to highlight my love of an organisation and is seen to be showing that organisation in its best light, please do so.

February 9 1980 is the date of Fashanu's goal. Accuracy is a good thing, not an optional extra.

Drums, flags, ultras, atmosphere, energy... But knowing your history? Words fail me.

"We paid ...." cut n paste SNAFU

Transfermarkt gets much of its data from boys-in-bedrooms. An example of how wildly wrong much of it is: Declan Rice: Transfermarkt value of £70m, Arsenal paid £105m + add-ons Viktor Gyökeres: Transfermarkt value of £11.2m, Coventry sold him for £17.2m Ben Godfrey: Transfermarkt value of £13.75m, Everton paid £23.6m Buendia: Transfermarkt value of £2.15m, Everton paid £1.3m + add-ons

A local club of similar size to ours has just launched a revamped Membership Scheme. £40 per adult, lots of previously-acquired loyalty points being lost and lots of other problems being highlighted by fans. Lots of moans. And apparently all our decent staff went to work there because our club is such a basket-case

Here are some rough figures (based around LFC) £80,000,000 - Cost to add 8,000 new seats, using Up-and-Over building technique £ 10,182,000 - Needed per year to repay cost of stand (based on 5% interest over 10 years) £ 950 per year - Income each new seat needs to generate to cover the repayment costs £ 630 per year - Income each current Carrow Road seat generates £ 350 per year (est) - Income each current U21 ST-holder generates LFC are paying for the expansion by flogging an additional 3,500 hospitality seats per match, ranging from £250-£460 The most expensive hospitality seat for a match at CR last season was just £200. Filling a new stand at CR with youngsters & families (the fans that are allegedly being shut-out of supporting the club) will not generate enough income to pay for it. EDIT - The majority of the new seats in the Anfield Road stand at Liverpool are priced at £45 / £54 per match (£24-£27 for Young Adults)

This is a systems gremlin, where your 'Group' allocation for the following season is listed as 'Purchased' (Price £0.00)', even if you haven't actually done so.

The scheme that was launched in June 2019 was done without any kind of meaningful fans' consultation. That is beyond debate. Three months later you were involved in public consultations that led to an amended scheme, details of which were announced in January 2020.

It isn't my statement. The quote comes directly from a collection of NCFC fans'groups, which is why the text is all contained within quotation marks. I've no idea why you think that workshops in September & October 2019 were proper consultation for a scheme that was launched on June 12 2019.

The only public consultations came in September & October 2019. so the fans'-groups statement of June 28 2019 was absolutely correct.

Nowhere have I mentioned this season. All my comments have been in relation to the changes imposed by Kensall in 2019.

Nope. The scheme was announced on June 12 2019 On June 19 fans' groups Along Come Norwich, Barclay End Norwich, Canaries Trust, Forces2Canaries and Proud Canaries put out a statement asking the club to rethink the scheme, and noting that "The consultation undertaken for the new scheme should never have been allowed to be the final phase of the implementation, whereby a meeting was organised with around 24 hours' notice and appears to have been an exercise in gauging last-minute opinion rather than inviting assistance in shaping a new scheme that would work for, and be fair to, everybody." On June 28 Kensall publicly apologised, saying "I apologise for the lack of communication and fan consultations." Only after this was there meaningful consultation [Kensall visited London on September 12 2019], and reversion to the old scheme was never offered as an option.