Jump to content

Shaun Lawson

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. [quote user="St.John Cooper"]He will never win any grand-slam, he has got no stamina or balls when push comes to shove, its what is needed in a champion. I must say I laughed when he went out today, I will not forget his sledging of the England football team. Ha ha ha Its us who are laughing now Andy OTBC St.John [/quote] I''m no great fan of Murray myself. But the ignorance you''ve just displayed is absolutely breathtaking. He has plenty of time ahead of him yet, but was overhyped before he was quite ready at this event. And unless you''re one of the best four protagonists in your chosen profession on the entire planet, I suggest you be quiet, and stop embarrassing yourself.
  2. L 0-2D 1-1L 0-2(Exit Roeder)D 2-2W 1-0L 0-2Uh oh...
  3. Norwich City''s managers in the modern era (1992 onwards, excluding caretakers - ranked by my personal opinion):1. Mike Walker (I)2. Martin O''Neill3. Nigel Worthington=4. Bruce Rioch=4. Glenn Roeder6. Mike Walker (II)7. John Deehan8. Gary Megson9. Peter Grant10. Bryan HamiltonMost of Grant''s points were gained by a squad still receiving parachute payments, including players like Huckerby, Earnshaw, Etuhu, Safri and Dublin, and which flirted with the drop, but was never in serious danger - after which a number of wins were accrued with us floating along to a mid-table finish. As soon as he had his own preseason and brought in many more of his own players, we were sunk.Roeder inherited a team in our worst position since the 1950s, which was absolutely dead and gone. There was almost no previous precedent for a club in such a dire predicament to survive in this league - the only one I could find, indeed, were Crewe Alexandra''s 1998/9 side. Yet survive we did, after grinding out result after result and extracting the absolute maximum from a desperately poor squad. To even compare the two managers is laughable - and while I''ve always been a sceptic regarding Roeder, and doubt he can lead us to real success, for me, that''d apply to almost any manager in the current regime. At the very least, for the job he did last season, he deserves our backing: if it wasn''t for him, we''d be in League One. No question about it.
  4. Alright then Bly, I''ll engage with you. I suspect you wanted us to give all the credit to Super Robert Chase - but in fairness, I agree in large part with your belated answer above. Norwich finished 3rd in 1992/3 because of the stability and gradual improvement at the club over many decades, overseen by Geoffrey Watling, Sir Arthur South, and latterly, the Fat Controller; and especially, an unusually gifted crop of young players developed by Kit Carson (you want a reason for us doing so well back then? He''s the biggest one). These players could be sold on, with some of the money reinvested if not in the team, then at least in further youth development - but the trouble was, football was changing, and increasingly, a stable board and good management became less important than having money to burn.At the very least, it meant the club''s margin for error was tiny - but failing to properly replace Chris Sutton, Ruel Fox or Mike Walker were bad, bad decisions, leading to relegation at the worst possible time. Because, especially after the Bosman ruling of 1995, it was suddenly all but impossible for provincial clubs to develop talented young sides without quickly losing their best players; and with the gap to the Premier League growing by the year, it became harder and harder to bridge this without a sugardaddy coming on board.Look at our fellow founders of the Premier League. Coventry, Southampton and Wimbledon were all established members of the top flight, just like us - but all eventually went down, and have struggled badly since. The first two have both been incredibly close to administration; and Wimbledon actually disappeared altogether. QPR, Sheffield Wednesday and Nottingham Forest, the latter two bigger clubs than ourselves, all ended up in the third flight, and the only one appearing likely to progress now are the West Londoners: because of the wealth of their new owners. Leeds? Nuff said! Ipswich finished up in administration, and only the money of Marcus Evans has given them a chance to return; Oldham, where Joe Royle had been in charge for almost a decade, disappeared into the third flight; Crystal Palace have found themselves unable at any point to re-establish themselves in the top tier; and Sheffield United have only started to challenge again in recent years, mainly because of the money their owner is able to provide.Please don''t misunderstand me here. It''s very, very obvious to me that we need much more money if we are ever to recover, and I''m on record as saying that I think Delia and Michael have run out of ideas, that their footballing record is nowhere near good enough, and was appalled by their treatment of Cullum. If I''m honest, I think Peter Cullum is our only real hope. But you only have to look at the Premier League now to see how crucial either a massively rich benefactor or consortium is to even genuinely big clubs: it''s the only way Middlesbrough have been able to establish themselves as a mid-table top flight side, the only way Sunderland are presently doing so, the only way Blackburn have managed it (meaning, now the money from Jack Walker''s trustees has apparently run out, big trouble ahead), and the only way Portsmouth have prospered so much too. It''s also the only way Fulham and Wigan, much smaller clubs than ourselves, have kept their heads above water. Meanwhile, although Bolton are widely cited as an example we should follow, they''re actually massively in debt, and will be in deep doo-doo the moment they go down.And with it being a case of "enjoy it while it lasts, boys" in the cases of Stoke and Hull, I''d say the only club we can really take any lessons from here are West Brom. A similar-sized club to ourselves, with no sugardaddy, who earlier in the decade, were locked in a very tight battle with us to scramble into the top flight and stay there. Sadly, thanks to poor decisions by the board and manager, we lost an eminently winnable contest - and after almost an entire decade of hard graft, they seem on the point of finally cracking it. Their margin for error was also very slight: they only just survived at our expense in 2005, and had they failed to go up last season, they''d have been right back at square one with no parachute payments. But assuming they do stay up this season, they''ve shown it can be done: albeit that it''s an incredibly long haul, and there are very fine margins. In general though, the rule is clearly that clubs run a la Norwich in the early 1990s just cannot succeed nowadays - which is precisely why I believe the present board''s time has run out, and new ideas, new hunger and especially a lot of new money are now imperative.
  5. [quote user="Badger"][quote user="alex_ncfc"]Fantastic post and thanks for sharing - but sadly nothing there that will make the apologists wake up and open their eyes, as much as it should, because it''s all there, in black and white, and it is actually beyond me how anyone can disagree with a single bit of it.[/quote] Not going to go through the whole thing - (and in any case I agree with quite a lot of it) but "the Jarrold Stand securitised against season ticket sales" - how do you think we should have paid for it? [/quote]I don''t know. I do know, though, that securitisations are generally disastrous in football: Newcastle ended up £100m in debt and close to administration partly because of one; and Manchester City went crawling on their hands and knees to Uncle Thaksin because they built Eastlands in conjunction with the local council by securitising it against 50 years of future season ticket sales, only to find that gates started falling, and they had no money with which to build a better team.Meanwhile, in our case, we ended up borrowing over £10m after Doncaster completely overestimated the ability of revenues generated by other property speculation on land in and around the stadium to finance the new stand and infill. It''s a moot point as to whether we''re better off with our bigger gates now, but with so much going on repaying the loans - but the fact remains that we have so little money to spend on the team because the board put a long-term financial millstone round our necks. And, given they still clearly have a very high (too high?) evaluation of the land, it''s also resulted in it being close to impossible for a sugardaddy to take over or by into the club: because the price demanded is just too great.
  6. [quote user="Tim Allman"]For those with long memories, I’m sure I recall that Shaun Lawson also described this forum as a “car crash of a message board”. The sort of thing that you should drive past and ignore, but end up looking at it, because it is so gruesome. It may have posted it here, but I’m not certain Of course, apologies to Shaun if I am incorrect.   [/quote]I can''t remember using those exact words, Tim - but happily acknowledge that this forum has done my head in in the past, yes. Back in the moderated days, when it was just Cluck or Smudger trolling, or 1st Wizard performing his 357th sensational about turn that week, I found it incredibly frustrating - because the issues were invariably just drowned out by a great deal of shouting, and not a lot else. I do think it''s improving though, and things are being debated more calmly now - and in fairness to Cluck, for example, I think (s)he exaggerates their point in order to get a reaction, but at least provokes debate and opens people''s eyes. Plus, although I abhor anything personal aimed at any of the board, I''m afraid events seem to be slowly vindicating the three posters I''ve mentioned, and others too.Now, if I''m honest, it''s WotB that''s starting to annoy me! All I''ve ever wanted is a decent messageboard on which all the issues surrounding the club can be debated. Celebrity posters are OK as long as they at least entertain - but there''s only so much "what did you have for lunch today?" or "sorry, couldn''t be arsed to read more than a paragraph" I can take at times. Conclusion? I''m a grumpy old so-and-so, who would lap up any forum providing real, sensible analysis of Norwich City Football Club. If the PinkUn is starting to become such a forum, then hallelujah.
  7. [quote user="1st Wizard"]I said before the season started that we would be relegated with our crap, weak and cheap, make and mend squad............I still stand by that.[/quote]Until such point, probably in only a couple of weeks, when you don''t. Then it''ll be "Glen''s taking up: City for the play-offs!" Cue much respect for you having the courage to change your tune. Until another couple of weeks later, when you''ll start a thread, insert crying smiley, and assert that it''s all doom and gloom again.It''ll continue like this for the rest of the season. Then, when we finish 14th, it''ll be "but we were only 12 points above relegation - wasn''t far wrong, was I?" And to those who point out what nonsense this would be, you''d respond with "oh - happy about the way Delia''s running things, are you?"There are three certainties where you are concerned, Wizard:1. Your point of view will be based on whichever way the wind happens to be blowing that day.2. At no point will you learn to spell our manager''s Christian name correctly.3. At no point will you grasp that in the English language, an exclamation mark ends a sentence, and is not to be followed by a full stop.So posts such as "Delia''s running this club into the ground!.[:@]", or "Glen might be doing a good job - but I still don''t like him!.[:|]" will not only be all wind and piss as usual, but will make no grammatical sense either.
  8. 1. England 4-1 Holland, Euro 962. Argentina 0-1 England, World Cup 023. Germany 1-5 England, World Cup 02 qualifying4. Italy 0-0 England, World Cup 98 qualifying5. West Germany 1-1 England, World Cup 906. Argentina 2-2 England, World Cup 987. England 1-1 Germany, Euro 968. Italy 0-2 England, Le Tournoi, 19979. Argentina 2-3 England, friendly, 200510. England 4-2 Croatia, Euro 2004
  9. At this utterly premature time, and bearing in mind the incomings and outgoings, boardroom and possibly managerial changes still to happen at various clubs between now and early August, this is my current forecast for next season''s Championship: 1. Birmingham City 2. Sheffield United 3. Crystal Palace 4. Queens Park Rangers 5. Ipswich Town 6. Wolverhampton Wanderers 7. Cardiff City 8. Reading 9. Sheffield Wednesday 10. Coventry City 11. Burnley 12. Plymouth Argyle 13. Preston North End 14. Nottingham Forest 15. Bristol City 16. Charlton Athletic 17. Swansea City 18. Norwich City 19. Derby County 20. Watford 21. Blackpool 22. Southampton 23. Barnsley 24. Doncaster Rovers So I wouldn''t say the bookies are wrong, no. Of course, this league is essentially impossible to predict anyway - but bearing in mind very few others will have Derby, Watford or Charlton down to do so badly, and that among most other clubs'' fans, I seriously doubt any will expect us to be higher than around 14th, the chances are we''ll start next season as one of the five or six favourites for relegation. Which is depressing - but on the bright side, the last time I was this pessmistic before a new season was, um, 2001/2: and we all know what happened then...
  10. Purely in my (inevitably subjective) opinion, taking into account fanbase, potential, money, history, trophies won etc, here''s a top 30 in terms of club size. People are, of course, entirely free to disagree! 1. Manchester United 2. Liverpool 3. Arsenal 4. Chelsea 5. Newcastle United 6. Tottenham Hotspur 7. Manchester City 8. Aston Villa 9. Everton 10. Leeds United 11. Wolverhampton Wanderers 12. Sunderland 13. Birmingham City 14. Sheffield Wednesday 15. West Ham United 16. Derby County 17. Middlesbrough 18. West Bromwich Albion 19. Nottingham Forest 20. Sheffield United 21. Portsmouth 22. Bolton Wanderers 23. Blackburn Rovers 24. Leicester City 25. Norwich City 26. Southampton 27. Ipswich Town 28. Burnley 29. Stoke City 30. Coventry City
  11. Right, to expand on what I''ve mentioned above about Allen. A few of you may have noticed a rumour that spread on Saturday: supposedly, Matt McCann, Wigan''s Director of Communications, told the local radio station that he was almost certain Jewell was about to take the Norwich job. Given different people posted this at the same time, I figured it could well be credible, so emailed Mr McCann. He got back to me earlier today: and actually, what he told the station was he''d be very, very surprised if Jewell came here. Quite how this mutated into such nonsense, I have absolutely no idea. McCann is regularly in touch with Jewell - and spoke to him as recently as Saturday morning, while PJ was still in Dubai. Jewell mentioned nothing about any possible job. To my mind, this suggests very strongly that he isn''t looking to come back into football right now, has politely rebuffed our approaches, and is waiting for the right Premier League job to become vacant. Sorry guys: I''m sure the board have done their level best, but it ain''t going to be him. And given I''d concluded this morning that only him, Allen and Roeder were still in the running, my money is very, very strongly on Mad Dog being unveiled tomorrow: that''s what I''m hearing at the moment too. It''s possible Roeder might be a DoF above him - and as long as they want to work with each other, and embrace their different roles, I''d have no problem with such a setup. I also have no problem with Allen being appointed: his record is good, so good that a Championship club with an ambitious Chairman and lots of money to spend appointed him, before sacking him scandalously prematurely. Of course it''s a gamble - but he''s the best realistic candidate we''ve been able to secure, has passion and fight, and exactly the right kind of mindset to drag us kicking and screaming away from trouble. If it''s him, as I strongly believe it is, I''ll be giving him my full support: starting on Sunday against Ipswich, a game which - almost in spite of myself - I''m confident we''ll win.
  12. [quote user="Yellow Rider"]Yes - a very good post although I don''t agree with all the observations such as........''blindingly obvious that the board will be handing over to the Turners in the summer'' (or words to that effact). I think they were taken on due to the urgent need for some short term cash and (maybe) to also add some business acumen to the tired, stale buch of existing directors. However, I can''t see Smith just quietly ''handing over'' to anyone, Turners or not. The Smiths are still top dogs and she ain''t going to give that prestige and power up without a struggle. Roeder - very good first season at West Ham (from memory I think they finished 7th) so his records hasn''t been totally ''miserable''. However, the fundamental points Shaun makes about the various managers who may or may not be on the list are absolutely right. Like him, I am no fan of the board at all but I do think this time they have genuinley aimed high at the likes of Coleman, Bruce and Jewell. Unless they pull a rabbit out of the hat in the form of Jewell, the bloke they do eventually appoint will probably be 4th or 5th choice (or worse). Magilton was nowhere near first choice for Ipswich last summer but now seems to be doing a damn good job (and he had no management experience from memory!). Whoever it is we MUST support them - unless of course The Mitchell Bros. get the nod! The board though are still in drastic need of overhaul and they must be open to those with new ideas and a fresh thought process. That does NOT necessarily mean Smith MUST sell her shares. IMO she and Mr Smith should step down immediately - what they then do with their shares is up to them. Jimmy Jones left the board yet retained his 19% shareholding for sometime.    [/quote] Thing is though YR, there''s more than a whiff of due diligence about what the Turners are up to. I agree they were brought in to provide much more business acumen, and suspect they''ve been assessing Doncaster''s performance more than anything else. Equally though, they fit Delia''s oft-stated desire for new owners who are local and have the club at heart - and haven''t you noticed how invariably either Doncaster or one of the Turners are wheeled out for press conferences, announcements, etc? MWJ and Delia - who''s certainly no shrinking violet - have faded into the background. If you then consider both Smith and Jones'' age, as well as the fact that, with our parachute payments gone, we had to start again from scratch even before results became so horrendous, I think it''s clear a transition is being planned. I also have to disagree on Roeder. Yes, he came 7th with West Ham in his first season; then they went down. This is exactly what happened at Watford too: 7th initially, then relegated. He also led Newcastle to their worst ever Premiership campaign; and Gillingham to 2nd bottom in the entire Football League. He''s a nice, decent man - but his record is simply appalling, and no way in the world is he the man to turn a club in so much trouble around. I wouldn''t be surprised if he''s appointed DoF above a young, hungry manager mind you: and I''m very confident given all I''ve heard tonight that that man will be Martin Allen.
  13. [quote user="Salahuddin"]The problem is that most people credit Parkinson''s success at Colchester to Geraint Williams, the man now in charge, and if that is true it would be a disaster getting him in.[/quote] Yes - and I find this bizarre, to be honest. If you ask me, the biggest reason for Colchester''s success is their board: the transition from Parkinson to Williams was remarkably seemless, and given they''ve blocked approaches for Adams (cheers to the poster who pointed this out), that suggests they already have a plan for when Williams ultimately leaves: they''ll simply promote Adams, a very capable manager. But were Colchester fans putting their success in 05/6 down to Williams? No they weren''t: it''s Parkinson who''d acquired such an excellent reputation across the game, hence his move to Hull. Doesn''t matter though: Parkinson was ruled out over the weekend in any case.
  14. Give me strength! Wizard, the board have been looking at plenty of candidates over the past three weeks: some in a job, and some not. And given MWJ couldn''t possibly know who the choice would ultimately be at the time of the meeting, he was dead right to mention ''other clubs'' - because that applied to some of the candidates. Moreover, as I''ve already said, the board will have spoken to Leicester, MK Dons, Brentford and Barnet in order to find out more about Allen... and hasn''t it even occurred to you that the delay could be down to him finalising his severance package with Mandaric. In any case, it''s him - as you''ll see when it''s announced tomorrow. Meanwhile, I can only ask this: were you born stupid, or was stupidity thrust upon you? [quote user="1st Wizard"]And I bet all the clouds are made of fluffy, white cotton wool, in the fairytale world that you live in Shaun!. Read Wynn Jones words again, they are not my words, their his. The guy City want is already employed, and hopefully its not a low mark bully like Allen!.[:@] [/quote]
  15. [quote user="1st Wizard"]And add to that: Sack Allen!. Sack Parkinson! Sack Dowie......................just in case! And sack any other second rate manager as well!.[;)] [/quote] What an absolutely pathetic post. The first name above will be the new manager - and he ain''t going to be sacked any time soon. Now go away and play with the fairies...
  • Create New...