LeedsYellow

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="Shack Attack"] I bet Wiz got it pulled [;)] [/quote] Surely he should be consulting his balls rather than getting things pulled !  I need to know if we''re safe this season, and the secret is in Daves'' balls ! [/quote]   If the secrets in Dave''s balls I''m sure it wont be long until he has it plastered all over the Pink Un.

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="LeedsYellow"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="LeedsYellow"] [quote user="blahblahblah"]I think you should start another thread, but argue the opposite point to the one you were arguing in this one. [/quote] I think that''s an excellent idea - then start another new post, admiting you got it wrong and that you''re now back to where you were in the thread before the last one where you changed your mind. [/quote]   I was going to post on this thread, but I''ve changed my mind and decided to wait for the next one. [/quote] I can never decide whether to disagree with his view on any particular topic, or wait until the wind changes direction and agree with him when he completely changes his opinion. [/quote] I find it far easier to be argumentative with him at all times.  That way we both get to sample all aspects of opinion, and decide for ourselves which one we like best. [/quote] Very funny - must admit, even when I agree with him, I find it disagreeable!

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="LeedsYellow"] [quote user="blahblahblah"]I think you should start another thread, but argue the opposite point to the one you were arguing in this one. [/quote] I think that''s an excellent idea - then start another new post, admiting you got it wrong and that you''re now back to where you were in the thread before the last one where you changed your mind. [/quote]   I was going to post on this thread, but I''ve changed my mind and decided to wait for the next one. [/quote] I can never decide whether to disagree with his view on any particular topic, or wait until the wind changes direction and agree with him when he completely changes his opinion.

[quote user="1st Wizard"] [quote user="LeedsYellow"]... but he does now.  Although he''s still vexed that it might or might not be a short-term appointment.[/quote] Prove where I''ve said I don''t support him! [/quote]   I thought you did support him - gosh this is confusing. Start a fresh thread and clear things up would you?

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Jonesy"] [quote user="1st Wizard"]Not what some of you want to hear, but he does.[Y][/quote] So is relegation still a certainty, Wiz? You did say if Gum was appointed we would be for the drop. [/quote] You see? this is why I repeat threads! [/quote] Better start a new thread to clear matters up

[quote user="blahblahblah"]I think you should start another thread, but argue the opposite point to the one you were arguing in this one. [/quote] I think that''s an excellent idea - then start another new post, admiting you got it wrong and that you''re now back to where you were in the thread before the last one where you changed your mind.

[quote user="1st Wizard"] You don''t fly someone half way round the world for just a few months work at City, nor, if Archant are to be believed, nick an old City player from Hartlepool for the managers number 2, and pay compo to boot, if Gunns appointment is just temporary......... do you? No matter what the club tries to claim, Gunn has the job for a long while yet........win  or lose! [/quote]   Put a sock in it Dave - we''ve all got the picture and we know you''re not entirely with the recent appointments... although we also know you''ll be wholly pacified if Gunn signs Hux. Equally, we all know that you''ll adopt an entirely different view if/when Gunn & Co grind out some good results - then switch again if/when we lose a few games. Further, it really isn''t necessary to start anymore new threads on this.  This mindless attention seeking and inconsistency has got to stop - it''s all very predicatable and is not what the club needs right now - it needs some level-headed SUPPORT.

[quote user="TheCanaryFan"]NO. Board cutting corners again. Fans deserve better. All I ask is the club appoint a manager with even moderate success against his name. We all know what happened last time we appointed a Jock with no experience dont we?[/quote]   I see where you''re coming from in terms of this being ''the cheap option'' and I agree to a large extent, but I think this is the board cutting their cloth, rather than cutting corners. The board have made many mistakes IMO but the feel good factor from Saturday was priceless and I think they are taking a calculated gamble.  If it goes drastically wrong, we can take another roll of the dice in 8/10 games time; if we had appointed a new man it went drastically wrong, we''d be stuffed.

Yes! Really hope everyone gets behind him and the team knowing that even if it doesn''t work out, Gunn will show integrity and leave of his own volition.

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="LeedsYellow"] http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/norwich/7294086.stm   Let''s hope he puts his money where his mouth is - although, note the complete lack of commitment: "the board will make as much money available as possible." [/quote] Look, cynics, it''s really quite simple. If Donkster says "there''s £10m in the kitty for Glenn to spend," straight away each player we enquire about gets their price inflated.  It would be like playing poker with your cards face-up on the table. [/quote] Dear Mister Chops   Next time you''re stating the obvious, might I suggest you take a slightly less patronising tone?  I really do think that every other Pink Un poster takes what you''ve said for granted - even the school kids.    What I''m thinking (and possibly one or two others are too, looking at the replies) is why can''t Doncaster for once come out with something positive and inequivical?  For example, "Roeder''s worked miracles since he''s come here... ''major surgery'' is required .... whatever happens, we''ll be backing the manager and making funds available."   It doesn''t commit the board to finding £10m/£20m - but it does give a clear signal of intent and gives us, the manager and the players some confidence as we go into the last 10 games, needing to scrap for every point we can get.   As it is, the comments attributed to Doncaster sounds suspicisously like 2008''s answer to "ambition with prudence."      Best regards   Leeds Yellow

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/norwich/7294086.stm   Let''s hope he puts his money where his mouth is - although, note the complete lack of commitment: "the board will make as much money available as possible."

[quote user="jas the barclay king"] is that that we have conceded less goals then stoke? nothing to do with the back 4 then? jas :) [/quote] Close Jas.  Now have a look at the ''F'' column as well as the ''A'' column - this illustrates that Stoke (who are second in the table) have scored more goals than us, but have also conceeded more goals than us.  Can you see where this is going?   

[quote user="I. Shurmer"]Jas, seeing as you clearly only post when circumstances suit your views, here''s a little excerpt of the current league table for you. If you can, please pay attention to the F and A column. Frankly, if this doesn''t stop you blaming Marshall for our woes, I don''t know what will! (I apologise for the formatting in advance - can''t work out pre tags in this editor) Team                                    P          W        D           L        F      A      Pts      GD 2              Stoke City            38        18       12         8          61       49       66        12 17            NORWICH CITY   38        12        10        16        35        46        46        -11 YOU SHOW THEM JAMIE! [/quote] Jas - just thought I''d draw your attention to the above post from which you seemed to have completely glossed-over...  much as you did last week when IShurmer destroyed all of your arguments on the same subject. It doesn''t do much for your credibility.

I do!

1.  Don''t change a winning side. 2.  Don''t change a winning side.   For me this stems back to Roeder changing a team that was high on confidence; confident in their ability to grind out a result, sneak a goal, overturn a deficit.  As soon as he started tinkering with the team, dropping Mo and playing Gibbs, I started to worry, and results started to slide.

A cracking post I.Shurmer.  I can barely wait to read the next instalment.  I was also surprised to hear such strong opinions on last night''s goal keeping performance from someone who wasn''t at the game.

I really admire Wenger and have always had a very big soft spot for Arsenal but I think Wenger''s got it wrong today.  He''s the first to point the finger of guilt, yet when his players are at fault, he does not take any accountability.  I can only assume Wenger''s said what he''s said in the heat and anger of the moment. I haven''t seen the challenge but from everything I''ve heard on radio phone-ins tonight it sounds like a genuine mistake on Taylor''s part - which concurs with everything we know of him. I really hope Wenger comes out and retracts his comments tomorrow - Taylor''s going to feel bad enough abouts Eduardo without Wenger upping the ante with such ridiculous comments.

Sounds like a horror tackle on Eduardo... a leg breaker and a straight red for Taylor. I wish Eduardo well

[quote user="camuldonum"] ...witness a recent event at my quite hapless Colchester. Dropping one Teddy Sheringham to the bench (perhaps even more famous than the famous Hucks in his day?) our Manager politely inquired of this lovely guy: "Would you like a full game in a Reserve match?" "Yes please" said Mr Sheringham. And thus it was at 2 pm on February 5th in the  Pontins Holiday Combination League before all of 56 people one T. Sheringham played the full 90 minutes and laid on both goals for Mr Guy in our 2-2 draw with the mighty Northampton Town Reserves. He was still an unused sub in our reasonably creditable draw away to Hull City on Saturday (which we should have won but heigh ho or hey ho even). There are legends and legends.  I know which one is currently mine (and, yes I respect Mr Huckerby very much indeed). Perhaps Mr  Huckerby could grace the Reserves with his presence.........just to get a game? [/quote] An interesting post and must admit I''m surprised to learn that Sherringham''s learned some humilty in his old age.  However, I think the Sherringham scenario is a little different to ours with Hux.  It may or may not have been appropriate to drop Sheringham.  In our case, we''re suggesting Hux should be playing.  After 2 suspect team selections and performances, I think if we were to find Hux in the reserves, it would add insult to injury.  

[quote user="MK Canary"]I don''t understand what''s so difficult about this. Simple choice - Do you want to play a) Gibbs, b) Henry or c) Huckerby. People who answer a or b need their heads looking at.. [/quote] Fantastic post MKCanary.  The litmus test as fas as I''m concerned on this whole topic. Suspect 95% of fans would vote C after Saturday''s game.  Including (if they''re honest and know anything about football) Rudeoph Hucker, Jas et al.  

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="Shifty Sid"] Huckerby is soon to be the past.  Roeder is our future, so I know which side of the fence I am on.[/quote]   Its not about taking sides, its about giving a loyal decent player who bleeds green and yellow some respect and letting him walk away with his head held high. Plus its about having the best 16 players named in the squad on match days. [/quote] Absolutely spot on CA. This general topic is something I know we both agree on, but I always struggle to articulate it so succinctly!

[quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"] Learn something from this. This ain’t no sugar rush quick fix season. Roeder has taken certain players with certain caveats. He needs to play them for many reasons. Not least of which is to learn. A football team is a constantly changing, living thing. Sometimes you think you know what you need to make the organism faster, stronger, healthier, but sometimes these things have a negative effect. Alternatively it makes sense therefore to now and then throw the dice. This is the same in any business. I’ll repeat that word.... business. I sympathise, really.  I’d have been gutted if I’d gone Saturday.... I was at Palace that day with most of you. But GR has a way of doing things. Some of you might not like it. Some of the players certainly don’t. But its kind of old school and its the way I would do things also. Its a system that weeds out not just the leeches, but also those that think they are above having to dig deep in the freezing rain at some dump like Selhurst Park. This season is a big learning curve for GR, his coaching staff, the board, the players and the fans. I suggest you hold on tight... there’s some interesting stuff ahead Forget the best line up this season. Enjoy the bigger picture for a few months.... maybe 18 of them to savour. [/quote] What a load of bo11ocks.  Don''t play your best line up?  I had to read it twice to make sure I hadn''t misread.  Glenn - please disregard the above post from Attack Barclay and revert to Scott''s message at the top.  Please play your best team and we need you to get over this problem you seem to have with big-name players coz the image is following you around like a bad smell. You''re doing a cracking job but not playing Hux, Mo, Semmy and Pattison over recent games and playing too many inexperienced kids has cost us 5 points and if you continue, will quickly undo all the good work and dent your credibility.  ''Bigging up'' these young loanees whilst dropping more effective players who we own is bad management, bad for morale and bad business (for Attack Barclay''s benefit, I''ll repeat that word.... business... it devalues our assets). I was one of the few who supported your appointment and thought you were very badly treated at West Ham and Newcastle - however, I do worry about this apparent stubborn streak and how it bodes for the future.            

What really p***es me off about this message board is the fickle attitude of a great many of the ''senior'' posters.  The facts are that we don''t really know what kind of form Hux is capable of producing because a) he''s not been fit; and b) he''s not getting picked. It goes without saying, you pick your best team and there''s no room for sentiment - it also goes without saying that Roeder''s got most decisions right.  So please note, I''m not saying whether he should be picking Hux or not.  I''m simply registering my amazement and disappointment at the cavalier and high handed attitidue of so many posters who deem that Hux is past it & therefore want the guy out the door; the one player who''s given us absolute loyalty and commitment, not to mention, something to shout about. No doubt, I''ll be shouted down for ''living in past'' and to ''get over it'' and ''move on'' - but my point is not about whether we should be picking Hux or not.  My point is that we''ve benefited from Hux loyality and commitment over the years, yet now the boot''s on the other foot, the majority seem to want  Hux gone - yet I''ll bet that these opionionated posters are the very people who denounced Earnie and Ashton for moving on to further their careers.  Well it''s hardly surprising is it?  Coz loyality clearly doesn''t count for much for many City fans.  Typical british mentality.  Build someone up, then knock ''em down.  To my mind, the guys earned our support even in the twilight of his career.  And I''ll bet that Hux would sign a new contract for much reduced cash IF he feels he can contribute something to the club.  But know one thing, Hux wont need telling when he''s past it.  He''ll bow out gracefully and with integrity - something I don''t see much of on here.

I agree there''s no point getting loan players in then not playing them, but then changing a winning team to accommodate them seems equally silly.  Definitely not suggesting we shouldn''t have given Gibbs a run-out last night, or that we dissmiss him on the basis of last night''s performance but can''t help thinking that we changed our approach in order to keep the donor clubs happy - will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"] needs to be used as a sub to get to the pace of the game.  [/quote] Totally agree with this measured approach - sending him back is a bit strong.  Gibbs comes highly recommended and would be keen to see how he gets on with a couple of 20 minute run-outs to give him some confidence.  Mainly though, I''m disappointed we''ve changed a winning team.  It rarely pays off and can''t be good for the players who make way, especially when they''re dropped for a loanee.