NMTD

I have read with interest all the things about the "Huckerby Fund" If, and its a big if, a considerable amount of money could be raised, wouldn''t the right way to go ahead be to for the NCST to act as the conduit. NCST buys shares in the club - the club have the money, the NCST would become a massive shareholder (if anywhere near 10,000 chipped in £100) and the NCST represents the fans views. Now I have nothing to do with the NCST, so please don''t think I''m just trying to ''feather its nest'' - it just seems to me that it would be the right way forward if this really is to happen. Now, the NCST could not guarantee that the money paid for shares would be used for Huckerby, thats the clubs job - and as other people on this board have said - it maybe better spent elsewhere. However, we would be helping the club we love - and we''d be getting a shareholding that would give us a major voice - and vote - on important issues facing the club. It could be that the NCST is actually afraid to play such a major role, and it could be that the club doesn''t want such a powerful supporters group - because with a large enough shareholding - thats what it would be. I note that the NCST has not said anything about this idea - I wonder why? Maybe Simon Thomas (who is the ''figurehead'' for the NCST) could make it the next Blue Peter Appeal!

Finances are now - and always will be - the controlling factor at our club unless something extraordinary happens. Untill one of us comes up with 6 balls on the lottery and then places the whole lot on a 100-1 outsider in the Grand National, and wins, we''ll never compete against the new order thats appearing in football. First and foremost we all want a club to exist so that has to be priority number 1. Period. The way that the club is being financially managed seems ok to me - budgets are set, and then spent by their respective ''holders'' - if new money comes along from whatever sources i''m sure these budgets would be adjusted/juggled accordingly. Its business. As to what happens at the end of the current 3 month loan spell - we will have to wait and see, but I assume that there is still something left in the pot. I think its highly unlikely that Huckerby will be retained, because of the loan rules over players of his age, and the fact that there is no way that we could afford to both buy and pay him. Crouch has indicated that he might like to stay beyond the 3 months, and with him its only a matter of wages effectively ''saving'' the club a capital expense making him much cheaper to retain than Huckerby. Harper turned down a 400k move to Watford - this sum could be within our reach so if he does the business for us he could well be on his way permanently. If we sell come January to raise some serious cash - the only two possibles to achieve this being McVeigh and Drury - it could put a different swing on things. Its all about being realistic - of course we all want promotion - but there is only so far the club can go to achieve it within its financial boundaries. I think the best outcome we can hope for is that Crouch will be retained on loan for the season, and we buy Harper. This assumes that they will continue to deliver the goods - if things dry up or Villa want Crouch back - and lets face it, it could happen - we may not want/be able to retain them. Even if we achieve promotion, we have to be prepared to face the likelyhood that we''d come straight back down. (i''m not saying that it would happen - but it would be likely). What a club like Norwich needs to prepare for is to bounce straight back. By not going crazy and bringing alot of the revenue back down into the 1st division would allow us to buy the best at the level and hopefully go back up stronger than first time. We now find ourselves looking up at clubs like Charlton and Southampton, who 10 years ago were definately no bigger, if not smaller clubs than us. Div 1 is a hard league to get out of - and achieving that is only stage one of getting back to the stage where we can say that we are again on a par with them.

Umm - i''ve heard that Reading are lining up Cotterill (who was booted out from Sunderland)

Oh well - sorry you feel like that about the idea - its not a derogatory song - and certainly not meant that way - maybe its because i''m a child of the 70''s. I thought it was quite catchy.

OK OK - I c***ed up!! Must have had too many beers in celebration when I wrote that. But in his latest swoop I heard NW was after Harry Potter - he''d be able to lend someone his invisibility cloak! That would sort it out

Tumbleweed is spot on - the reason for lack of improvement between the dates is the need for NW to undo the work of ex-binman (and lets not forget it) Hamilton. Imagine if Chase / Hamilton had occurred at the same time - a nightmare of the biggest proportions.

County Hall (end of Martineau Lane) is the biggest and easist place to park but a right pain to get out of after the match. If you get to Norwich by 1pm you can usually get into the multi-story at the railway station. Other options are on a meter on Rouen Road (4 hour max stay - £2.40) or Rouen Road car park but must get there by 12 - 12.30 to stand a chance.

After the excellent work of the last week - come on NCFC - we all want him - go get Bromby!

Yep - things have certainly taken a turn for the better and its all down to Nigel and the Board so lets have some more praise after all the doubters comments on this forum. However, whats going to happen after Christmas - is Santa going to take all his presents back to the toy shop? I''d like to see this formation Front line - McVeigh, Crouch, Huckerby, Rivers Middle - Holt, Mulryne, Francis Back - Edworthy, Flem, Malkie, Drury Gk - Greeno I agree in that we need another centre back - but I don''t agree that Malkie is passed it - he''s a good ol'' boy and needs our support to get back to the form of the latter half of 2001 - 2002. Bromby would definately fill the spot - come on Nigel - one more bit of dealing and we''re looking good.

I heard that this was during Ken Browns time at the club. I also heard (don''t know if its true or not) that Ken Brown met Beckham during the Japan World Cup and told him that "you should have stuck with me son - i''d really have made something of you!"

Not a bad suggestion - I thought you were going to name Ted McDougall or David Cross! Would he come for a reasonable pay packet? Would his wages upset other players? The striker issue is a hard one to resolve for sure. I''d do it for £50 a match plus a goal bonus - maybe I should write in to Worthy! I once scored a cracker from the half way line for Sutton VC Primary against Hickling (under 11''s) - we won 14-0. What more credentials do you need than that!

Yellas, I have every sympathy for you - i''m just trying to highlight a ''tactic'' you could take. Its totally inappropriate for stewards or police to ask people standing right at the back to sit down if people in front are still standing. Back in the mid/late 80''s, before the new Barclay, I supported from the centre pen of the Barclay. During this time, up until about 2 mins before kickoff a small area used to be taped off - as this was the area that the most vociferous fans, myself included, always wanted to go - it was our patch so to speak. Now the tactics of taping this area off was very dangerous - when the tape was removed there was always a stampeded into the area. Game after game I used to complain about this and once I got slammed against the back of the Barclay by a copper just for saying how stupid it was. At the time, this didn''t impress me much I can tell you, and I wrote about it my fanzine and sent a copy to both the club and the chief of Norfolk police stating the number of the copper that treated me this way. Never again was the area taped off - so it obviously did some good. So - that''s my message to you - complain - its your right to be treated fairly and with respect, but you have to get your message across whilst coming at it from their point of view. Now I wish it was still possible for people to stand on safe terracing - but unfortunately it not the case. Bearing in mind the current regulations you need to come at it from the angle that you are more than happy to comply (even if you''re not really) if people in front of you sit down. Regarding atmosphere - I agree with you - but I cannot see what can be done whilst we have to sit down. It''s an old argument that has existed since the Taylor Report. Now I have a young lad who comes with me, I support from the Snakepit (no family enclosure for me - that really is dead!). I hope you can get a satisfactory response to your problem. OTBC

What''s interesting here is if you look at the true cause of the problem. Regulations dictate that grounds in our league are all-seater. No special dispensations are granted for standing areas. Ground regulations at Carrow Road, as at many stadia, state that persistent standing will result in eviction from the ground. I believe this is closely related to the safety certificate granted to stadia by the authorities. If clubs, hence stewards, hence police do nothing about it, the ground theoretically can have its safety certificate revoked and ultimately ''closed''. Whether you agree or not with the regulations - those are the facts. I for one, do not agree with the regulations, as I feel that there is more than a case for re-introducing safe terracing at grounds. I spent all of my early years standing in South, River and Barclay and was appalled by the early introduction of seating into the new Barclay during Chase''s politically motivated reign. At the time of the Taylor Report, no one was listening to the fans saying that terracing was not inherently unsafe. Terraces on their own didn''t cause all those deaths of Liverpool fans. Well designed and managed terraces are perfectly safe and their re-introduction would solve the basic problem we are seeing in this discussion - that of personal choice. Fact - some people like to stand, some like to sit. It would be interesting to see if people were prepared to pay the same to stand as to sit - we are all now aclimatised to the prices we now pay. The atmosphere has changed since all-seater, some would say for the better, some for the worse. I don''t think that anyone can say the atmosphere in the Lower Barclay and Snakepit in non-existent, and no-one stops you getting to your feet during an attack, goal celebration, controversial incident etc. However, with current rules and regulations, I cannot support persistent standing even when the perpetrator is the ''victim'' of having people standing in front of them. The case is that the club should be more vociferous in stating the rules and the impact for the club, and stewarding / police tactics should tackle the problem from the front - its simple logic that if people at the front sit down, people behind will follow. In the case of overheated stewardship or policing of the regulations - write to the club and/or police asking for a response. They are responsible for their actions just as much as the supporters. A calm and considered approach to the issue is required from all sides before things have the potential to get out of hand.

Whilst I feel very sorry for Zema that he is now out for the whole season, is his career now effectively over? Getting back from one knee injury is bad enough - but twice - and both knees - and out of contract next summer - I don''t think we''ll be seeing much more of him. Do the club carry insurance policies for this type of thing to cover wages, medical expenses etc whilst a player is out for so long - or does it just come out of the ''player budget''? Its very hard on players in this situation, and the club are right to support him through this, but the time will come when a decision has to be made, and sentimentality can''t come into it. I''m sure Zema won''t be the last player to suffer this, so good luck to him - he''s going to need it.

Below is a comment from a good friend who is a Burnley fan. "Taylor is interesting. Great header, very rarely scores with feet. No pace & variable first touch. we play better football without him, but he does get a few goals. Out til mid-sept apparently." Does that make him the answer - I''m not sure for one. Shame to see Nielsen go - we couldn''t have been paying him much if his missus is out-earning him in IT. Can''t worry about it now though - bring on the new - whoever it ends up being.