Jump to content

Jim Smith

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    12,824

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Jim Smith

  1. Jim Smith
    The board absolutely deserve scathing criticism for this season which has been a monumental screw up. Indeed they''ve wasted the opportunity of this season twice. Firstly by keeping Neil on for far too long and then subsequently by effectively writing off the last quarter of the season by not having their ducks in a row to sort out a replacement and telling Irvine to carry on as you were. It may well be that Webber and this new all singing, all dancing structure works well in the future. I hope it does. However it doesn''t alter the fact that their decision making this season has been appalling and that they have wasted one year of our two year parachute payment window of opportunity and still appear to be a bunch of rank amateurs.
  2. Jim Smith
    When you read that interview with him it would certainly seem to be an appointment that makes sense as he has been operating/scouting in the player market (in price bracket terms) that we are going to be operating in from now on (and you could argue should have been operating in for a while if we want to run on a basis that is sustainable even if "yo-yoing). More encouraged by this prospective appointment that many of the other rumours so far.
  3. Jim Smith
    I suppose it all depends on whether the announcement is going to be the actual proposed structure itself or the personnel filling the roles within that structure are also going to be announced at the same time. If the former then I don''t know why there would be any cause for delay. If the latter then presumably they are finalising the details with the individuals involved before announcing anything.
  4. Jim Smith
    [quote user="Len"]If we tear the squad up this summer then we''ll probably not strictly be aiming for promotion. It''ll be more a case of let''s see where the new look team takes us.[/quote] We don''t need to tear up the squad. Half a dozen will leave anyway due to their contracts expiring. the squad will be naturally trimmed and what is left, supplemented by three or four decent signings, should be plenty good enough for a crack at promotion.
  5. Jim Smith
    [quote user="Nuff Said"]To quote the BBC, this will be the fifth consecutive East Midlands derby with a different manager in charge of both clubs. Nuff said. What is unsurprising is that posters on here criticise the club for taking time to make a crucial decision. They would equally probably be complaining if we''d appointed someone quickly.[/quote] Nobody is criticising the club for taking time to make a crucial decision. I think the point being made though is that any self respecting football club who have known for at least 3 months that they may need to sack their manager should have a potential replacement lined up by the time they sack that manager rather than appearing to start the search from scratch a while afterwards, particular where any further delay is caused by this "restructuring" red herring. Derby clearly acted swiftly in sacking McLaren and getting Rowett in because our job became available and they were concerned he would be offered and take it. Their hand was therefore forced to a degree but obviously he was the man they had identified to succeed McClaren. Whether or not you agree Rowett was the right an for us it would be nice to feel that the club had a similarly clear idea of who they want. It doesn''t quite feel like that.
  6. Jim Smith
    [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="FenwayFrank"]There has been nothing to say we will be having a dof other than speculation on here[/quote]No. EDP football writers have been they believe that is what''s planned:City have already teased a major announcement this week over the new structure at Carrow Road, which looks set to share the chief executive responsibilities between other positions while introducing a director of football role.They may be wrong, but it is not just speculation here.[/quote] That''s not splitting the manager''s role Purple its splitting the CEO role.
  7. Jim Smith
    I''ve never denigrated the corporate structure at the club Purple, I had my ups and downs with Ncnally but really all I''ve been critical of is the Balls £90k and expressed concerns about the Tom succession plan. I hope you are right and they have irons in the fire already but I don''t understand what Balls hopes to achieve by giving an interview like that. It may seem that the season is over but we have a window of opportunity now where there are good, out of work candidates available and I hope we do not waste it recruiting someone at director level first. I personally feel all of these organisational matters at clubs are smoke and mirrors and you can waste a lot of time on them. Get the right people in thee club and their job titles are largely irrelevant. if they know what''s happening why do we have to wait for some kind of grand announcement next week? It just gives off pitch matters which should be behind the scenes a level of attention that is unnecessary.
  8. Jim Smith
    Ball even!
  9. Jim Smith
    I agree. I have started watching back the goals we concede in slow motion and the marking is horrendous. Martin is generally just bouncing around marking nobody and pointing at others, his centre back partner is usually the wrong side of the man heading the bell and the full backs have usually been sucked into the middle to mark men they perceive as spare leaving the man at the far post a free run at a header. It all looks a complete mess.
  10. Jim Smith
    I was feeling quite confident about our new managerial appointment this morning in the basis that there seemed to be a lot of links and the suggestion was we will move swiftly, indeed perhaps already had someone lined up. His interview has made me feel less confident. Why can''t that utter cretin and his colleagues on the board understand that we want them to have a hidden plan, we want them to have someone else already lined up when they sack a manager they must/should have been considering sacking for 3 months. I also couldn''t give a t**s about the corporate restructuring of the club and am dismayed that this appears likely to delay the start of the new manager appointment process. Get on with it you utterly useless rabble of a board.
  11. Jim Smith
    No thanks. This is an absolutely crucial season. Can''t afford to gamble on an inexperienced candidate. No guarantees with any candidate but harder to criticise if go for proven experience and it doesn''t work.
  12. Jim Smith
    @Purple - she knew he was called Paul if that makes you feel any better ;-)
  13. Jim Smith
    @Nutty I''m stating it was almost entirely left to McNally because in that instance I happen to know it was Nutty. She said they were "stepping back" and getting less involved in the football decisions than before albeit of course they still had to sanction any decision whether to hire or fire. The implication was that they had been more personally involved with previous managerial decisions (e.g. Worthy) but they had been advised at that particular time to find a real "football" CEO (McNally) and take a step back. I''m not even saying the dithering over Hughton was all down to them although they were clearly involved a bit more again at that time because if I recall correctly they went on the radio to defend his continued employment. To my mind though McNally lost the plot that season and didn''t regain it again until he realised Adams needed to go. In all of these cases in my view the CEO should be making a recommendation to the board and they either accept it or they don''t. The worry at the moment is that we don''t have a CEO and I don''t know whether Stone, as interim CEO, would feel confident enough to try and force the issue if he feels that Delia, Michael and Tom are not keen on acting. If Balls was any use then he would perhaps take the lead and present the case for sacking but he appears to only be interested in self promotion. Perhaps to be fair I should have said the "achilles heel of Norwich City boards during the current owners'' reign."
  14. Jim Smith
    @Purple - they had authorised the appointment Purple, i''m not saying it wasn''t done with their final nod but she had to ask us to remind her of the new manager''s name and said that they had not really had anything to do with it and had left it all up to David. Perhaps she was just giving extra kudos to her new CEO appointment but I took what she said at face value. On that day (and on other occasions I have met them) the two of them were great value and clearly enjoyed being able to have a few drinks with other fans. For that reason I find it a little sad that their Achilles heel of oversentimentality/loyalty to failing managers coupled with the whole Times article and Nephew Tom succession plan risks it all turning rather sour.
  15. Jim Smith
    PS I don''t subscribe to the theory that Delia has ever had bad intentions or is evil in any way. I am grateful for what she has done in the past. I do, however, feel that they may be losing their way of late and letting ideology/stubbornness/sentiment get in the way of progress and what may be best for the club and I do really fear for what Tom may inherit and his ability to deal with his inheritance if we are a championship club.
  16. Jim Smith
    Nutty it also came about from Delia taking a complete step back from running the football club and allowing McNally and Bowkett to do everything and, I would argue, it came about almost entirely due to that appointment of Lambert which worked out better than anyone could have imagined. I spoke to Delia in a pub on the day lambert was appointed and she didn''t even know his name because she said McNally had sorted it all and they were not getting involved on the football side any more. For all the good things McNally and Bowkett did it was primarily the success Lambert brought on the pitch that has enabled the off pitch team to make us debt free and (for now) financially stable. If you take Delia''s 21 years as a whole then the record is pretty average (if you excluded the period she took a back seat it looks even worse but that would be churlish so we won''t) certainly in comparison to Chase who of course was hugely maligned.
  17. Jim Smith
    I can''t be in Norwich this weekend but if I were I would certainly join this. Fans who want him sacked should take part in this. Its the only type of thing that will get their attention.
  18. Jim Smith
    In fairness I would say Oliveira has done well. I also think Pritchard will turn out to be a good signing for us although possibly not under this manager. Ditto Maddison.
  19. Jim Smith
    At the risk of enflaming the situation again can someone just explain what Morty is banned for? Don''t need to know the specific words used o anything but what did he do?
  20. Jim Smith
    He is in fact running the argument Morty has advanced on here many times! ;-)
  21. Jim Smith
    He is saying we are not qualified to comment on what we see on the pitch because we don''t see what goes on behind the scenes day in day out. He knows best. I don''t need to see what goes on at Conley to see the obvious flaws on the pitch and with his tactical abilities.
  22. Jim Smith
    I doubt we will continue to get 26,000 every week if we have a prolonged spell in the championship Purple. It was a bit different last time we went down, all hands to the pump so to speak. Doesn''t feel the same now, a lot of long term fans are highly disillusioned and I can see a lot of people switching to buying tickets on a casual basis if we remain the the champ after next year and there is no hope on the horizon re investment/ownership.
  23. Jim Smith
    [quote user="Nemzadze"]I''m still trying to find out why Alex Neil is the anti Christ ? What has he done to deserve this treatment? Judas fans[/quote] He''s not the anti christ he''s just a very poor football manager.
  24. Jim Smith
    Wow. Breathtaking arrogance.
  25. Jim Smith
    *couldnt understand* sorry.
×
×
  • Create New...