Taxing

[quote user="Spud1973"] "Yes Grant I''m sorry to tell you its all been a dream & Bryan Gunn is still the Norwich Manager" [/quote]   ? 

[quote user="First Jedi"]"Is every single remark from Lambert, Smith and McNally going to be pored over as if it came from the Delphic Oracle?" I know - it''s pathetic, sometimes even the most simple and common turn of phrase can signify the downfall of mankind for these people...[/quote]   tch, these people. I don''t know. You too have clearly studied (probably still studying) at the Pontiff Beausant''s School of Pontification majoring in Pomposity.

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Hello Bryan. [/quote]   Blimey, lighten up for crissakes.

"They didn''t come close to leaving" simply means that no one came in for them. Doherty was dropped to avoid him being injured at a time when they hoped he would be bought along with Russell and Hoolahan. In other words, he wasn''t dropped for footballing reasons and IMO the explanation is disingenuous. Don''t get me wrong, I''m happy with Lambert, very happy, but this article smacks of good old doublespeak and revisionism.

Yeovil 0 Norwich 4  might be another good one. Rather better than Yeovil 3 Norwich 3 anyway.

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]It is indeed a picture of Norwich City 1, Colchester United 7...[/quote] To be honest, that''s just pathetic.  

[quote user="Jim Smith"] [quote user="becclesboy"]I reckon a Saints full side will take us to cleaners no matter who we got in the side.[/quote]   They wouldn''t. They didn''t a few weeks ago and we played pretty porrly down there to be honest. We are more than a match for thme at full strength. If Nelson plays thoygh we are f*8ked! [/quote]   Oh, how can you say that Jim ? Sainst won the first half and we won the 2nd half fair and square. good, fast football played by both sides.   IMHO, if we play tonight like we did at Yeovil then we will take a bit of a hammering, I''m afraid.

Easy, a signed photograph of himself.

[quote user="ncfcstar"]Before we slate the Yeovil fan, who is this Norwich joker who wonders how Holt gets a game??  Truely bizarre.[/quote]     It''s obviously a lie. Their best players are clearly the loanees from Tottenham.

[quote user="cityangel"][quote user="ncfcstar"] I''m glad you''ve finally called her bluff Cam, because I am getting fed up of this constant bitching.  I know you do/used to post on tractorboys CA, because unfortunately my best mates are both Ipswich fans. [/quote]   I haven''t posted on tractorboys for over 4 years and only got involved with that to chat to my two best mates who are Ipswich fans, when they left, I left. I do still post regularly on 3 or 4 multi team forums where fans from all teans/leagues are welcomed, but thats slightly different to monopolising a Club site which only represents one team. As for constant bitching, think you''ll find its the first post of Cam''s I''ve replied to in the past few months, I''ve tried hard to avoid his posts but obviously not hard enough [:)] Back to the Adam Drury tackle has anyone got a link as I haven''t seen it yet? [/quote]     Cam ..... Monopolising ? Blimey City Angel, have you recently graduated from Pontiff Beausant''s School of Hyperbole ?

What an excellent piece Josh, thanks for lighting up my afternoon ! You used wit and humour making a point that many including me have tediously tried to make.

[quote user="First Wizard"] Gunn did that, Worthy signed him, its Roeders team this etc. Wake up, only one man and his team has turned City round. PAUL LAMBERT! [/quote] I doubt that any fan would disagree that Lambert has clearly done an excellent job so far and I am confident that he has 100% support from all the fans. However, what has angered many fans is the constant rubbishing of Gunn. Lambert deserves credit for what he has so far achieved. But Gunn deserves credit too for stopping the rot, bringing is some excellent new players, giving academy players such as Smith, Adeyemi etc their chance and so on. What he doesn''t deserve is the constant and gratuitous contempt displayed by so many posters on here. None of us will ever know whether or not Gunn would have been a good manager for us because he wasn''t given the chance to show what he could do with the squad of players that he and Butterworth assembled. Either way it is just pure speculation so therefore pointless. Posters such as Pope Beausant pontificating that "Gunn was a disaster" are just indulging in self-congratulatory hyperbole. It might sound very authoratitive to the Pontiff and his friends on here but it''s just a silly statement to make. However, one thing is indisputable - that Gunn was either brave or stupid to step up to the plate when he did because - fact - he inherited a truly awful squad of players, of which a significant proportion were Roeder''s loanees and the better contracted players wanted to go, a poisonous atmosphere, a rudderless ship of a club suffering from years of mismanagement and misdirection and a thoroughly disgruntled set of fans most of whom were ready to explode with "righteous indignation". Gunn didn''t take the club down, his predecessors, owners and directors had already effectively done that. The trouble is that the one dimensional posters on this MB don''t recognise that fact or are incapabable of understanding it. I fully support Lambert and I have a high regard for him but there is no doubt in my mind that he would not have saved us from relegation had he taken over when Gunn did. I will continue to support Lambert but I will continue defending Gunn as long as silly posters on here continue to feel the need to give ALL the credit to Lambert and at the same time rubbish Gunn.  

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"] [quote user="blahblahblah"]Why can''t Holt keep tracking back ?  Surely that is just the way he plays.  If he gets a game off every 10 or 15, as he seems to for 5 yellow cards, barring injuries he should stay fit. That said I am all for having a plan B, and so is Lambert if his signing of McNamee is anything to go by.  Hoolahan should start if he is able to, so I''d stick with the diamond unless we get stuck in games and need a change around 60 minutes.    What worries me is the possible sale of Hoolahan in January.  As you say he is our main creative outlet. Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems - or is it just me that thinks we win a lot of matches in the last half an hour ? [/quote] This would surely imply a good pre-season under Team Gunn. Now come on, we can''t be having that can we........... You mean they brought in Holt, Hughes and Askou; refused too sell Russell, Hoolihan and Doherty AND got the buggers fitter than the rest........... Dear oh dear. Whatever next. OTBC [/quote] So do you think we looked superfit in the early part of the season? As fit as we do now? It''s amazing how much insight you can glean from a news ticker. Although of course, you''ve seen one game on TV. Dear oh dear Incisive debate or nasty minded mischief making? Your slip''s showing again Bly.............................and the world and his wife are watching. [/quote] Okay since you boast of having been the manager of a professional outfit in the past, Ill give you a chance. Blah cubed (not me) said that ''Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems......'' Do you seriously think that City could be fitter than most at this stage without a good pre-season? Or are you on the bandwagon to try to rubbish Bryan Gunn more than is necessary? OTBC OTBC [/quote] Yes, because while pre season is important it''s not impossible to introduce new training and conditioning techniques after the season has started with fairly quick results. We are talking about professionals who train every day, not park players. It''s perfectly feasible to generate both higher stamina levels and improved sprinting ability within a training framework that still alllows plenty of ballwork to sharpen skills. In fact, it''s actually relatively easy to improve stamina WHILE doing ballwork as it''s much easier to encourage players to run hard after a ball than in between cones. One of the reasons often quoted for the success of the great Liverpool sides of the 80s and 90s is that they played football most of the time in training rather than running incessantly. I don''t recall the likes of Peter Beardsley ever blowing out of their arse with 20 minutes left, do you? The other important factor is that if you make training stimulating and interesting you will get much more out of your players. Sorry, but Gunn''s regime was a disaster, whatever you think of the manner of his sacking. If you speak to people with access you will find that the prevailing opinion is that pre season was way too lax. [/quote] And another big puff of the chest and a hurrumph and then the proclamation "Sorry, but Gunn''s regime was a disaster".  So there you go, The Pontiff has pontificated that Gunn''s regime was a disaster so all is well with the world NB Disaster :  "an occurrence which causes great destruction, distress or ruin"  Oh, well, what''s a bit of hyperbole when one is pontificating ? The fact that the ruin and destruction was caused by Roeder, Delia et al over a period of several years is just a minor detail in The Pontiff''s world.  

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"] [quote user="blahblahblah"]Why can''t Holt keep tracking back ?  Surely that is just the way he plays.  If he gets a game off every 10 or 15, as he seems to for 5 yellow cards, barring injuries he should stay fit. That said I am all for having a plan B, and so is Lambert if his signing of McNamee is anything to go by.  Hoolahan should start if he is able to, so I''d stick with the diamond unless we get stuck in games and need a change around 60 minutes.    What worries me is the possible sale of Hoolahan in January.  As you say he is our main creative outlet. Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems - or is it just me that thinks we win a lot of matches in the last half an hour ? [/quote] This would surely imply a good pre-season under Team Gunn. Now come on, we can''t be having that can we........... You mean they brought in Holt, Hughes and Askou; refused too sell Russell, Hoolihan and Doherty AND got the buggers fitter than the rest........... Dear oh dear. Whatever next. OTBC [/quote] So do you think we looked superfit in the early part of the season? As fit as we do now? It''s amazing how much insight you can glean from a news ticker. Although of course, you''ve seen one game on TV. Dear oh dear Incisive debate or nasty minded mischief making? Your slip''s showing again Bly.............................and the world and his wife are watching. [/quote] Okay since you boast of having been the manager of a professional outfit in the past, Ill give you a chance. Blah cubed (not me) said that ''Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems......'' Do you seriously think that City could be fitter than most at this stage without a good pre-season? Or are you on the bandwagon to try to rubbish Bryan Gunn more than is necessary? OTBC OTBC [/quote] Yes, because while pre season is important it''s not impossible to introduce new training and conditioning techniques after the season has started with fairly quick results. We are talking about professionals who train every day, not park players. It''s perfectly feasible to generate both higher stamina levels and improved sprinting ability within a training framework that still alllows plenty of ballwork to sharpen skills. In fact, it''s actually relatively easy to improve stamina WHILE doing ballwork as it''s much easier to encourage players to run hard after a ball than in between cones. One of the reasons often quoted for the success of the great Liverpool sides of the 80s and 90s is that they played football most of the time in training rather than running incessantly. I don''t recall the likes of Peter Beardsley ever blowing out of their arse with 20 minutes left, do you? The other important factor is that if you make training stimulating and interesting you will get much more out of your players. Sorry, but Gunn''s regime was a disaster, whatever you think of the manner of his sacking. If you speak to people with access you will find that the prevailing opinion is that pre season was way too lax. [/quote]   Ha ha, I see The Pontiff is in good form today, otherwise know as "he who knows everything" ! Don''t challenge The Pontiff for he has access to people with access. With a puff of the chest : "the prevailing opinion is that pre season was way too lax" doncha know.

quote user="Cullum ''Ave A Go If You Think You''re ''Ard Enough"]Been said before but Gunn should have stuck to putting out the napkins in the Gunn Club. Where is he now? Working at Carphone Warehouse FFS...quote   What a nasty, uncalled for little post. I expect you are probably a nasty, unplanned little so and so.

[quote user="ron obvious"] To me, the difference is that I can''t imagine any team that Lambert put out would roll over & die the way that Gunn''s teams did all too often. [/quote] Interesting thread with inaccuracies on both sides of the argument as usual. This post is a good example. The only team that could be called Gunn''s team was the team that got hammered by Colchester. The team/squad that he inherited from Roeder was self-evidently not Gunn''s team. Therefore, "Gunn''s teams did not roll over and die too often". I strongly doubt that any manager could have mobilised that rag bag assembly of loanees and want aways into a winning streak, not even our latest Messiah Lambert.

[quote user="a1canary"]If we had the management we have in place now at the start of the season, who''s to say we wouldn''t be right up with Leeds?[/quote] Agreed, Gunn put together a great squad of players and if Gunn could have been persuaded to leave before the Colchester game we may have picked up more points under Lambert. Equally, if only Lambert hadn''t stubbornly cold shouldered Hoolahan in particular, Russell and Doherty we would have picked up points in vital games like the away match at MK Dons when these players weren''t even in the squad ! Ah, if only........ 

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="The Butler"] I really can''t be bothered Nutty. As you are only too aware of the true nature of the takeover stop bulls**** DS became a director in 96 with .5m investment without any intention of buying Chases shares! Cuckoo land again! The points totals are facts not fictions. I don''t deal with spin you do. Following the club via Google is not my way but yours. Or is your NCFC Library of Nutty facts that big? At this point I am now stopping posting on this. I have far more important things in my life than trying to convince someone who you know will NEVER believe what you tell them anyway. Just so you have something to do this afternoon I would recommend Googling Nigel Worthington. Absolute pages of articles, videos, pictures. you could have an afternoon to remember. Oh don''t believe it all though! [/quote] Thanks for that. Is your cupboard under the stairs full of balls you took home[:|] And I will guarantee I have more to do this afternoon than you. I fill my entire life with things I have to do. Again you get personal because you have no answer to the point I make. When is a majority shareholder not a majority shareholder? When The Butler says so.     [/quote] Personal ? Classic you call me a liar and then say I''m getting personal!! When is a fact a fact when Nutty says so? The cupboard under my stairs has footballs signed by the ''59 team, the championship winning team, whisky decanters and whisky (NCFC) Special crystal NCFC bowls, photographs, programs from Munchen and Milan and  Arnhem. Lots and lots of NCFC stuff all got from Google of course.[;)] Have a good afternoon [/quote] In your earlier post you sated, unequivocally it seemed, that .............."At this point I am now stopping posting on this." - so why don''t you ?  

IMO Chris Martin has a good first touch, great feet, pace, powerful shot and and eye for goal, prepared to shoot on sight and from distance. He comes across as arrogant but that goes with the territory as they say. In short, I think he has genuine quality and definitely has potential to play and be successful at least at Championship level, possibly higher. He burst onto the scene at Carrow Road, then had problems and a season at Luton and it''s great to see him back at Norwich, playing so well and scoring goals .....and he is a local lad to boot. For crissakes, don''t knock him.

Perhaps his aspiration should be to play like Ruel Fox or evan Louis Donewa ! If he can do that then I will be delighted ...........  !

[quote user="I am a Banana"] [quote user="The Chirp"]Sorry but Green is way above average. Doesn''t get the credit he deserves. Speaking as a keeper, ability wise he is easily in the top 5 keepers in the prem and I would say should be Englands No1. All our Eng keepers make a mistake, but he''s the only England keeper I don''t feel nervous watching... If Gordon was 9M then Green must be 5million... Of that Norwich would get a cut. [/quote] green is better than gordon! arsenal have '' we need a new keeper '' sign all over them! [/quote]   Yep, and if his name was Robert Vert no doubt Wenger would sign him.

[quote user="......and Smith must score."] [quote user="smooth"]Getting back to the point mello the fa cup screwed us in the prem season losing to a west ham team that had better personnel and a point to porve against a prem team that was struggling... we played bentley and helveg both got injured... and guess what when they were back in the team we went on a run that put us in a position on the final day that season the cup competition cost us... yes I agree with an early post the aim this season is not to be in the first round next year, so obviously promotion... but this year we got what we have deserved for two or three years third tier football and that means first round fa cup and jpt yes its not a cup with loads of glory, but hell we aren''t ever going to play at wembley when the result is not about the pressure of possible promotion... we all remember the cardiff game the fa cup might give us a plum tie, but it might also give us doncaster or blackpool who could easily beat us and give us injuries now we can concetrate on the league and one game against soton which puts us one tie away from a trip to wembley I for one would love to see us play at the new wembley in a cup final whatever cup it is... we aren''t going to be there in the carling cup and fa cup so this is it... it is a game with no pressure the game in march if we get there will have pressure, much rather our players have been to wembley and experienced the day because we have all seen norwich teams that freeze I am not even sure if we made the playoffs we could win, so this cup competition sjhould be an easy passage to a game at wembley... where for once we are one of the favourites to get there and now we have a few games to get there[/quote] Yes, but at least if we played a Championship club in the FA Cup we''re less likely to get injuries than against Third and Fourth Division sides in the JPT. Can''t agree that the JPT should be an easy passage to Wembley. It probably will be for Leeds in the much easier Northern section and it''ll be a major shock if they don''t reach Wembley. But I''m not at all certain that we can win at St Mary''s then get a two-legged result against MK Dons should they beat Hereford. Don''t start blowing up your inflatables just yet..... [/quote]   Couldn''t agree more with this post. Away at Southampton, then two matches against MK Dons and then a final with Leeds all for the sake of the tin pot trophy. Potentially, four very tough matches and, if we win them all, we win a trophy only competed for by teams in the old third and fourth divisions. I care about the FA Cup but definitely not the Johnstones Paint Trophy, the JPT is a mickey mouse competition which even if you do win it you have the piss taken for !

[quote user="CambridgeCanary"]Lambert has done well with what he was given and will do better with what he chooses and obtains for himself[/quote]   You make it sound as though Lambert was given the thin end of the wedge when he took over from Gunn. Surely, the truth is that Gunn spent his limited budget on players pretty well, the main exception being Whaley but no manager gets it right all of the time. Lambert has acknowledged that he has a squad of very good players but of course there is always room for improvement and the need for managers to be judged upon the squad they put together not the one they inherit. Gunn was sacked after only one game with his own players but Lambert has shown both what a good manager he is and what a good squad Gunn did actually manage to assemble.

[quote user="Methane"]Your jar is half empty branston. We''d have travelled in hope, won 1-0 and made a mint. Mind you the ratburgers at half-time and replacement hub caps would have put a dampener on it.[/quote]   Hope ? What''s that ? I agree with Branston, we would have got a drubbing and probably picked up some injuries as well. That having been said, I''m still dismayed at the gutless, aimless performance of our team on Saturday evening. At the time, there was everything to play for - the possibility of Manure at home or away or someone like Forest Green - but we just didn''t turn up and it seemed to me.................. dare I say it ........ that our manager just didn''t know how to react to the conditions. It was always going to be a muddy, that much was certain days before, but we still insisted upon playing a short, passing game and time and time again messed around with the ball in midfield, failed to get the ball up front to the forwards and lost possession.

Clearly it must unfortunately be sudden and serious otherwise he would have played on Saturday evening. If it was something like the flu then the club would obviously have arranged cover or one of the players'' wives would have helped out. They must have friends after all. So, let''s hope for some good news soon.