Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Jim Smith

Members
  • Content Count

    7,560
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Jim Smith

  1. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    Although would you admit Nutty, that if we become the club that has been relegated from the premier league the most times of any club (which would be the case if we go down this season) then we will have failed to grasp the opportunity provided by premier league football more times than any others?
  2. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    No it’s not just bank balance. It’s about running the club well but it’s about the fact that bigger bank balance coupled with running the club well beats just running the club well 9 times out of 10.
  3. Jim Smith

    Brighton Tickets

    The system is still wrong/crap. No surprise that one of the less glamorous away games where we get a bigger allocation and which follows a run of defeats sees a lower demand is it? Doesn’t really prove much except maybe that the system only works for lower demand fixtures when it’s not really needed anyway.
  4. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    Quite simply Nutty I believe that the financial clout of the owners of the other clubs increased their chances of staying up whilst the financial clout of ours counts against us. As I say, we are what we are and they aren’t going to sell up so this is all hypothetical. Also that’s not to say that the disadvantages we have are insurmountable for us and I hope we are able to defy the odds.
  5. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    I don’t believe those who disagree are brainwashed Nutty just those who take the view that spending more money will inevitably result in “doing a Fulham.” I also accept that a wealthy owner making bad decisions can be just as bad or indeed maybe worse than a poor owner making bad decisions. In terms of current owners obviously the list someone has posted shows such stints have not been the norm for those outside the “big 6” but I would argue that aside perhaps from Man U and Mike Ashley (and even there there is an argument to say he’s not been that bad) all of the owners of the premier league clubs at present are growing and supporting those clubs and are not “evil” foreign owners out to rip the club off or acting contrary to the interests of the clubs. They all seem to me to be pretty “good” owners the likes of which we are often told “simply aren’t out there” and they all seem to have put in significant sums of money.
  6. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    and if we go down we will be told that we need to sell and need to reduce the wage bill again and the whole cycle begins again.
  7. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    I actually like our owners Nutty. I just come at it from a perspective that I am not that bothered whether I like the owners, I just want us to compete at the top level and take opportunities when they come along. If a new owner kept us in the premier league for 10 years I couldn't care less if they are a bit of an a**ehole although obviously I'd prefer it if they weren't and it would be a shame if they burnt bridges with the local community. If you look at the owners of most of the top flight clubs though they have not done that.
  8. Jim Smith

    Must go

    In my view Tom will not get anything like the easy ride that Delia (and MWJ) has had at times from our fans. I think they get extra leeway because of who Delia is, the fact she (to her credit) does mix with the fans and the fact she's female to be honest. If she was a fat bloke like Chase she would have got all manner of grief during some spells of her reign given that the reality is we performed way better during the majority of the Chase reign.
  9. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    The risk is hugely overstated though. I know people will cite Bolton and Pompey but the fact is that clubs the size of ours just do not go out of business and that's assuming that whoever comes in spends recklessly and makes a complete mess of everything anyway. My answer to the question as to what would wealthier owners bring is that in all probability it gives you a better chance to compete and retain your place at the top table because they do enable you to maybe take a bit more of a risk and bring in that extra player because the owners are able to underwrite any debt or manage any cash flow shortage. Or as others have said they pay for the facilities so the club don't have to (either Colney or more pertinently a new stand perhaps). That's the edge that clubs like Bournemouth, Watford (yes I know I know), Wolves, Palace, Leicester, West Ham and Villa have. And if we had that, at a time when we have a fantastic coach and a good sporting director then perhaps we could really flourish during this spell, actually achieve something at the top level (dare I say it even a cup final or something) and not waste yet another opportunity by becoming the most relegated club from the premier league ever. It also comes at a time when the sc*m are at a low ebb and we have a real chance to leave them behind (both on and off the pitch) but if we are not careful we will find ourselves both back in the champ next season and again with not a great deal to show for promotion. In a way I accept this discussion is pointless because they are going nowhere and so we are just talking hypotheticals. We have to accept that our owners have chosen a path and hope that we continue to do it as well as we have for the last 18 months but it doesn't mean some of us don't think there are other paths and I do find the way so many fans have been brain washed into thinking that more wealthy owners (or backers) wouldn't want the club to do as well as it can or wouldn't care or would necessarily mean "doing a Fulham" quite bizarre. The owners have chosen this model out of necessity because they want to hold onto the club and can't afford to do anything else not because they think it provides the best chance of success for the club.
  10. Its a bit misleading though to say that the "expensive deadwood" was all due to us being in the premier league. The fact is we made two poor signings last time we were up in Jarvis and Naismith. Signing up Jarvis on a permanent , long term deal whilst injured was just idiotic in anyone's book. As was agreeing to the contract we did for Naismith which actually played in a position where we had Wes and wasn't really a priority. I think Naismith and Jarvis were more signs of McNally losing the plot at the time than precedents for never spending decent money on premier league signings ever again which seems to have become the mantra for many who advocate not attempting to stay in the premier league. Other than that Klose has overall proven been a good signing for us. Maddison certainly was. We actually caused as much damage by bizarrely giving Russell Martin, Alex Neil, Jerome and various others new contracts after we got relegated and allowing Neil to sign players such as Wildshutt. Not to mention the farce that was Jez Moxey. The amount of money we p**sed up the wall paying people off for decisions made after that relegation must be staggering. If you sign the right players in the right age brackets then in most cases they will retain their value or at least the bulk of their value even if you get relegated. Look at the type of players Bournemouth and Palace go out and sign.
  11. Jim Smith

    3 positives & 3 negatives

    Well any plan that incorporates getting relegated and assumes we will get promoted again is frankly nonsense. All our talented youngsters will be off and there is no guarantee that we will be able to replace them with players who are as good or of the same potential or that the same chemistry will exists or pay off as spectacularly as it did last season when things clicked for us. This "top 25" target that Webber has conveniently set for himself is equally a nonsense which conveniently allows for relegation to still be claimed as "part of the plan." The aim this season must be to stay up. If we do not do that then it will have been a failure to achieve that aim. If we continue shipping goals at the rate we have done so far this season then the enjoyment will soon wear off for everyone. I hope that's not the case and we can turn it around and achieve our objective.
  12. Leicester owned by a billionaire did indeed win the premier league, helped in no small part by all the top sides having their worst seasons in living memory. I just think people we getting well ahead of themselves talking about top ten finishes when week in week out I am told "palace are a good side we shouldn't expect to beat them" or ditto with Burnley or no doubt next week Bournemouth. It was pretty obvious when you looked at the league this year that it was a struggle to pick out the 3 sides we would definitely finish above. Its a strong league this year in terms of the strength of the teams outside the "big 6". There is no one obvious relegation fodder team. Which is not to say that I don't accept that we still cannot finish above a few and survive if the injuries clear up a bit. We are far from out of it yet but we are going to have to pull out some more unexpected results.
  13. Jim Smith

    Must go

    1. We have never "almost lost the club" due to huge debts and to the extent we may have had difficulties then it was on the watch of these same owners. 2. Where has anyone called for spending that would make us financially unstable? Spending £10m on another CB or a winger would not have made us financially unstable. We have players worth millions and millions in our squad who can be sold on relegation if the worst happens. 3. "only in my third season" perhaps explains a lot. We are of course all conditioned by our own experiences as fans. Many more recent fans are obviously happy with their lot because this is all they have ever known or indeed this is better. Many of the really older generation remember us and in a way still think of us as traditionally a lower league club, have seen ups and downs and are just happy to see the club yo yo between divisions. Others of us who grew up watching Norwich genuinely compete in the top division at times are probably the more demanding group amongst our fanbase and don't regard being a yo yo club as success and are probably less happy at seeing our owners limit the clubs potential (to less for example than Bournemouth, Watford, Wolves, Leicester, Burnley or Palace) essentially just so they can maintain control of it and hand it to their nephew. Nobody is claiming spending money guarantess success and as far as I can see nobody is saying we should spend vastly beyond our means. The debate is whether we should have looked (or should be looking) to increase those means by finding owners/investors with bigger resources or whether we should just settle for and accept that we will never be an established top division club again.
  14. Last season he did nothing in quite a few games as well but he did keep chipping in with important goals and was part of a winning team so kept his place. My view of Mclean is that he tends to either be excellent or rubbish with not many performances in between.
  15. Jim Smith

    3 positives & 3 negatives

    Admittedly a failure for which the injuries provide a degree of mitigation but a failure none the less.
  16. Jim Smith

    3 positives & 3 negatives

    I find it staggering that some fans are basically saying they will enjoy seeing us relegated. “Big scalps” are all well and good but we are not some c**p lower league team on a cup run. If we finish bottom three it won’t have been an enjoyable season and it will have been a failure.
  17. We were never going to finish in the top ten. Those who thought we would were in cloud cuckoo land. Just look at the teams we are up against as “rivals” and that should be evident.
  18. If Lewis, Max and Todd are playing with injuries then we must put our foot down and pull them out.
  19. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    Presumably Purple the decrease in their % is due to the additional shares that were issued a year or so ago which have not yet been purchased by anyone?
  20. Jim Smith

    Ownership questions

    My recollection is that Delia and MWJ themselves said once at the AGM that they didn't believe any one person should hold over 50% of the shares so as to avoid a repeat of the Chase situation. This was before conversion of loans into further shares took their shareholding over the 50% mark. However, Purple is generally the man for these types of queries so I am sure he can confirm if this is the case or correct me if not and I apologise if its incorrect.
  21. Jim Smith

    MOTD

    Don't disagree. The good thing is the league is tight and we are not being cut adrift. We just have to stay in touch until Christmas and then hope that we can get Zimbo back earlier than expected. There was some suggestion somewhere recently that Zimmerman had told people he was recovering well and could possibly be back in training in November. We just have to pray that is the case.
  22. I agree. Had we picked this then there were presumably quite a few pockets of space further up the pitch we could have exploited as they were committing a man to mark Leitner at all times. In such circumstances he's clearly going to be under the cosh but it should have opened up opportunities elsewhere. instead we kept passing it to him time and time again in the area where he was being dispossessed and then we did it with Emi as well. I know that to a degree playing out from the back means this will happen from time to time but there has to be a balance.
  23. This. Never get the Tettey hate. He came in for the Man City game and made a huge difference. he never really lets us down. Ok at full strength perhaps Amadou takes his place in the starting line up but right now if there is one player I'd want back for Bournemouth (other than a CB but that's not going to happen by the looks of it) then its Tettey.
  24. This was not meant as a specific criticism of Leitner (although he did not have a good game on Saturday in some other games he has played very well) more to point out that their chances were coming from a very specific source as a result of them sticking a man directly on him and harrying him all game long and getting probably unexpected levels of success from it. I honestly think it led to at least 10 decent chances at goal for them, if not more. I suppose it goes back to the "should we change how we play" debate because to my mind once it happened 3 or 4 times (which it had before they scored their second goal if not more time than that) the team should be adapting and realising that this was happening. I'm not talking about lumping it long but surely someone needs to have the leadership qualities to realise that playing it short to him 30 yards from our own goal was causing us problems.
  25. Jim Smith

    VAR Red Card Check?!!?

    Absolutely Nutty I think i'm correct in saying that had we been given a penalty and scored it then it would have been 1-1. Completely different game. Same at Palace last week when we should have had a penalty to make it 1-1 in my view. Yet the replays of these contentious decisions seem to mysteriously disappear after the games.
×