0Amarillo<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM>  º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>ddMMyyyy0Falseen-US<P><FONT color=#cccc00 size=4><EM>  º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ Amarillo ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°<EM><FONT><P>True

And now... would you really drop our two Scotland internationals?

Look at it this way, that''s pays Svensson''s fee. Did he really cost that little?!! Ama

Nope, I reckon we''ll get about 4 new players to add strength in depth. I think the team that started against Walsall will also start our first game next season. They know each other''s game and until they prove they''re not up to it or get injured they deserve a chance to have a go. Frankly, even though it was only Walsall, I''d fancy the chances of that team against, say, Man City the way they''re playing at the moment, wouldn''t you? History suggests that if you change the team wholesale you lose the team spirit, and that''s fatal. Look at Ipswich in their second season up.... Ama

Oops. ;-)

Erm, are you talking about Norwich? The same side that has won the last two away games and had a vastly improved away record this season. You know, the one sitting 4th in the ''away'' table at present: http://stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/D1/away.html Ama

Although Nigel does seem to have a knack of getting the best out of players when other teams weren''t. I mean, right now I would expect that Edworthy, Svensson - even Hux would surely get into the starting 11 for the Prem teams that they came from, given their respective forms. And don''t forget, he gets an overall player budget to cover fees and wages. So the same £1m will pay for one £500k player on £10k per week, or a £50k player on £18k per week. That''s probably over-simplifying it, but you get the gist. If you want players of the quality that £18k per week buys (Hux) then you have to get them on frees or very cheaply. Who cost more, Rivers (650k) or Svensson (50k)? But who earns more, and who is the better quality player? Its still all about wages.... Ama

Actually, ponder this. Which current England regular has played against our defence this season and failed to score? Rooney. As I recall, Malky and Flem kept him pretty quiet on a day when some would have expected him to run riot against such a weak defence as ours.... Ama

I can see what you mean, but, but, but... 1. We won''t be able to afford more than 4 or 5 new players I think 2. Underestimate ''team strength'' at your peril. Make too many changes and the team becomes less than the sum of its parts all too easily. I hate to say it, but look at Ipswich as an example. The team that went up through the play-offs (i.e. the best in the league, obviouly) finished 5th in the Prem with relatively few additions. They added a bunch of ''better'' players and.... If our back 5 can keep clean sheets against all the other teams in the top 6 of the division, then they have a good chance against the bottom 6 in the Prem. What we need is strength in depth so that when we do get a few injuries we have more quality to call upon rather than inexperienced youngsters.

I totally agree Hayden. At the very least, the players that have taken us up deserve to play in the Prem. Everyone assumes that Malky and Flem aren''t up to it. Now they''re not top Prem players, sure, but I bet they''ll hold their own against average strikers in the Prem. They''ve done okay with the best of the first division haven''t they? Who''s to be scared of in the bottom half of the Prem? They may not be fast but they work very well as a unit. I was watching The Prem on Sat night and they were analysing the positioning errors by defences. Like a good striker, there''s a lot to be said for reading the game well and being in the right place... don''t write all our players off yet. Strengthen yes, disrupt a winning team no. Ama

Not sure when, but I was there in (98,99?) when we played Birmingham at home on a Tuesday night. Just 9,900 turned up, the lowest in a decade I believe. Kenton had a mare at left back and we were 2-0 down by half time. Kenton was subbed for his own sanity and it looked pretty bleak. Then we came out in the second half all guns blazing and two young players with enourmous promise contrived to score 3 goals between them.... it was Bellamy and Llewellyn as I recall. At the end Brum scored an equaliser to make it 3-3 but we went home happy cos we''d shown fight, and seen some exciting quality for the future.... But that crowd figure - imagine Carrow Road only being half full now! Ama

Too true Mr R. We''ve sung ''We''re going to win the league'' a lot recently, but it sounds very much like ''We''re going to Wem-ber-ley'' from where I stand in the Barclay. Which of course is plainly silly, we won''t even be in the play-offs at this rate. Ama

OK, so there is a lot of talk about our prospects for next season. With my statto hat on I took a little look back of the fate of teams winning the first division over the past decade. We still have some way to go to win it, but if we can this makes quite positive reading: Season - Winner - Position in Prem following season 03/04 Norwich? 02/03 Portsmouth - ? Looks like they might survive 01/02 Man City - finished 9th 00/01 Fulham - finished 13th 99/00 Charlton - finished 9th 98/99 Sunderland - finished 7th 97/98 Forest - relegated in 20th 96/97 Bolton - relegated in 18th 95/96 Sunderland - relegated in 18th 94/95 Middlesborough - finished 12th 93/94 Palace - relegated in 19th So the last time a winning team was then relegated (depending on Portsmouth) was Forest in 98/99 season. So no, Micky Adams and co, its not a ''FACT'' that the promoted teams come straight back down. Far from it, the winners actually do quite well, at least in recent times. As for the gap getting larger, the above suggests its getting smaller, with more and more div1 champions staying up at the first go. As for our own prospects, sure we may well get taken apart by Arsenal etc., but I''d fancy our chances against the likes of Spurs and Man City at Carrow Road at the moment! Ama

Maybe there is a lot of truth in what Micky Adams said. But he did conveniently overlook teams like Birmingham and Fulham who did stay up at the first attempt, and even Ipswich were doing fine until they blew all their money and team spirit on fancy foreign players. Why shouldn''t we do a Birmingham? They''ve built their success on hard work, the same ethic Worthy employs. Yes we will need a few new players, but we''ll have a fighting chance.

Apparently the reserves played them yesterday. Quality journalism that.... Ama

Hmm, I know where you''re coming from saying ''Bradford at home is a must win game'' but that''s theory, not practice. It never works out quite like that. We beat Sunderland at home, but was that a must-win game? In fact, to beat Sunderland and lose to Bradford is better than the other way around, i.e. taking points off one is more important than the other. So how''s this for a glass-half-full theory: if we''re going to lose a handful of games all season, better that we lose them against bottom half sides than top half sides, eh? It also points out that the gap between the quality at the top and bottom isn''t that great. The margins are small - we''ve won lots of games by the odd late goal, they''ve probably lost lots the same way. Its wrong to think that because of the gap in places there''s a big gap in ability. On the day, it just doesn''t work that way. We''ll probably beat Sheff Utd now, and a win in that game could be more like the proverbial 6 points at the top of the table.... Ama

At the Everton game I was really impressed with Henderson. He had two shots that were well saved and he ran at their defence and put them under pressure. He (and for that matter Jarvis) didn''t look at all out of place. As to whether they could perform regularly - we''ve no way of knowing that until we get to it, and they''re a bit more experienced I guess. Don''t forget McKenzie either. If he gets another 10 goals this season and looks the part, we may well put him in that category as well. What about Brennan? Svensson? I felt also that Fleming looked solid against Everton. Sure he might not keep up with van Nistelrooy or Henry, but then who can? He coped well with Ferguson and Rooney. So as others have said, with perhaps 3 new players (RW, RB, CB?) we''d have a crack at it wouldn''t we? Ama

I guess, if you''re building it at the same time as the main stand it will cost a lot less than coming back and doing it later. So it makes sense that the later cost is more than the saving. Which makes it even more of a shame they couldn''t do it now. But then, when the decision was made the prospect of being where we are now wasn''t really there was it? Who''d want to be in the decision makers'' shoes? Sod''s law says whatever you decide, events will conspire against you. ;-) Ama

I know journos often take quotes out of context, but you have to laugh at Neil Warnock''s latest ones on the BBC site: On Paul Shaw''s transfer: "I''m looking for players that I like first, and being out of contract makes them a lot more viable to a club like ours who haven''t got a lot of money," Warnock said. "That''s why, when I was told by his agent that Shaw was out of contract, I became interested in him" Erm, is it just me that thinks these two statements are contradictory? On the Paul Shaw moving to the opposition effect: "I don''t really think there''s an advantage or disadvantage to it." That''s unequivocal then. Ama

Where in his statement does it say reneged? As I read it, there is no suggestion of a change in position, just that ''it became clear that there wouldn''t be a deal''. To me that sounds like some (pretty big) loose ends didn''t get tied up when things had been going well up until that point....

No, you''re right. But DH hasn''t put in a transfer request. Although he may be happy, it is Man City who are selling him, so they would be obliged to pay up his contract. If he was that keen to move, he''d ask for a transfer, forego his existing contract and walk away from the £1.5m. Tough call. Ama

My guess is that it all comes down to the existing contract. Yes we agreed a fee with Man City. Yes we agreed a wage with DH. But, if you think back, there were statements from both sides: KK: "The existing contract is a matter for the new club to sort out with the player" NW: "The existing contract is between DH and Man City". I got the impression that it had never been resolved. I can imagine that with the fee and wages agreed, they turned their attention to this and couldn''t resolve it. DH won''t walk away from £1.5m, KK won''t pay his contract up, Norwich can''t/won''t pay it up. A) why should they and B) how can they find that sort of money, taking the total transfer to well over £2m, even with the share issue. All of the statements made so far fit with this, and it seems a reasonable if not likely scenario to me. So, we need to find a player who is good, but not on the inflated wages that were agreed at the height of the wage boom for a player who is good, but not *that* good. Ama

Aw, shucks. My brain isn''t working today...! Ama

Hmm, but surely since we drew at their place, we''d be top. Not that it matters... ;-) Ama

Not that I care much about Man City or Leeds you understand, but the lack of scoring by Man City hastens Keegan''s departure. And a new manager might want Huckerby in his team. Or, Keegan might decide to give Huckerby a go in the team, you never know. So the fact that they didn''t score doesn''t help our cause any. The delay now is worrying. The last obstacle (WBA talks) has now gone away and we''re waiting for what exactly...? Not that I believe much of what Phil Smith says. He''s put out all sorts of misinformation over the last weeks and months, so his suggestion that Hux may wait a couple of weeks to see what happens could just as well mean he''s going to sign today. Or not. So, what next? Ama

Agreed, its down to Hucks now. Can I find one shread of silver lining from this...? Well, at least he would be going to a team that we don''t see as a threat to our promotion hopes - i.e. they''ll be in the top two anyway, whether they have Hucks or not. Whereas Wigan will not unless they were to get him. Make any sense? I know, its clutching at straws!