Who killed the Croutons

RH, we did build 8000 seat Jarrold Stand! It was the 12000 option that was rejected (at the time). 6000 was the other option (roughly the same capacity as SS before). I think the club pitched it right with the Jarrold particlarly that it evened up three stands leaving just my old bug bear ''conference'' stand to be sorted next. Your general point though is interesting I guess as ever its all about supply and demand and indeed the ''fear factor'' of being left out in the cold re. season tickets has a bearing. I really dont think a two thousand capacity difference at the top end would have much downward impact as many factors would determine future attendance performance, pricing, league status (see performance), potential, entertainment, even pies and corporate goddamit! To summarise I dont think the trick was missed I think the right option was choosen at the time i.e. the middle ground with reduced risk but still an increase nonetheless. We are approaching the need for a further stage of expansion to meet demand & sort that thing of a stand opposite the Jarrold and get the snakepit increased from adder to boa-constrictor! As Ive advocated in a previous recent thread my view is to treat ground expansion as separate investment stream from say player budget and cleverly fund expansion via property/investment/sponsorship deals etc...   Agree with the concessions point but I doubt the govt would [sorry] play ball and if so unlikely that footy clubs would act beyond existing concessions unilateraly    

Good debate and valid points but in I disagree. Define established in the prem beyond two years and even then things can conspire to get any club relegated you dont downsize in football! However the point raised earlier re. matching league position/performance levels to ground size is perhaps the pertinent one.. My argument was based around the fan base increasing and the inevitablility of this expansion in relation to the clubs ambition and not forgetting the present size of the existing stand i.e. piddly and out of place. If it costs 9m now rather than say 15m in 5 years time why not commit now whilst we have income stream from land sales etc.  We need to compete and other clubs are cleverly financing expansion plans and these clubs I would consider our ''peers''.  Of course the balance needs to be struck and investment must be made into the playing squad I''m just advocating a bit of a separatist approach to each area.

Has the hotel made any difference to noise levels within CR? One of the positives may be containment of the sound... Re other building I think yes we need 2/3 more players, Jan should see this happen but whilst we have land deal money coming in and planning permission lets get on with second tier on City Stand, get the ground levelled up and override the embarassment of a League 2 facility. Lets face it we know it needs to be done so why not sooner rather than later, with escalating building costs, finite resources (land/money),  increasing demand and fan base (yes even within the Championship)...capitalise now, make the investment for the future...do a deal with Carters call it the Flybe Stand whatever!      

Some excellent replies thanks and make no mistake I’m proud to be Norfolk and of my City/County/Culture/Heritage/Yes Accent/Yes Footy Team/Countryside but not at the expense of being patronised by ignorant bigots. I guess I should be used to it by now… Norfolk n’Proud

I know a little bit ''off piste'' but doesnt it jack you off when Norfolk (place and people) are stereotyped by supposed big city types i.e. ''journos''. Example I support my local football but also love local music. Went to the Waterfront Monday night and saw some excellent local talent at Oxjam...bought Cord album (excellent by the way despite NME slating and I recommend!!). But people complaining to NME just get put down with anti Norwich/Country rhetorical stereotype, one wonders therefore how anything from this county/city can achieve recognition and that includes our beloved NCFC... Norwich is a wonderful diverse modern city with loads to offer but FFS doesnt it jar me when we are so marginalised in cultural, football and on social criteria in extremes it borders on racism. Or as an alterntive view does this make us more determined and together as a whole the ''no one like us'' Millwall culture of the 80s. Do our friends outside of Norfolk i.e. the various Uni posters encounter this I''d be interested in views/perceptions..    

I would fund building the extra tier on the Geoffrey Watling stand say at 10m. And it would be named in deserved memory of my good self  ''The Crouton Stand'' so the whole structure would become the Geoffrey Watling Crouton Stand (or GWC for short) 

Bit left of centre here but if any of us were lucky enough to win a serious amount of money on the lottery would anyone ever give up a proportion to help Norwich if you could make a difference? And would you stipulate what the money should be spent on??   

Binners and Worthy''s family he comes from Ireland there could be lots! 

IFT/EM I dont think this is the place debating NU internal policy this is a NORWICH CITY MB not NUs Intranet!! Come on guys back to football.... 

Whats the alternative on the left Henderson or McVeigh? The cracks (excuse the term!) seem to be emerging sooner than we needed...

And I''m not a Crouton...I''m a person

Sibierski yes please!

I think we should consider putting a second tier on the city stand now. This is not an endorsement of ground before players but an opinion based on some sense. Pros 1. Will it be cost effective - Yes delaying a decision could add millions to the build e.g.s Wembley (comprared to Millenium!), Jarrold Stand i.e. delaying corner infill ultimately cost more 2. Look and feel - It will balance the stadium - city stand looks out of place and of lower division capacity 3. Atmoshpere improved 4. Ticket demand met 5. We still have some prem money  6. We are 15th best supported club in UK - yes yes I know only stats but even with increase less than 10%  of alleged fanbase Cons 1. Increase debt - but possibly within managable levels 2. Risk of not filling - low to medium and depends on performance but see points 3 and 6 above to mitgate 3. Impact to buying players - the two should and can be separate - solution sell-off remaining land If it is inevitable that we do it why delay lets get it done...and it should add an extra 5 thousand seats which I think would be at the stadium level this club should be at. Be interested to canvass opinion..        

Maybe the players will play better in a non-hideous abhorration of the 2005/6 kit, second worst only to bird***t flecked effort of the early 90s!. Ive just voted for the kit design on the poll. Just one suggestion I would have added as I like it the ''tasteful'' and more subtle flash a la Chelsea, Liverpool or even England come to that... 

If so do we see these guys in the squad, on the bench or starting - if eligible.