Taxing

[quote user="ROBFLECK"]He''s got experience and can be a good asset in league one. I would keep him on board.[/quote] Well, no one''s going to buy him and his wages so Gunn has no choice. If Cureton applies himself and gets fit he will have a significant contribution to make next season. No one doubts his commitment to the club even his mockers on here.  

Bump. This is too funny to let slip away.

I must admit I creased up when I saw Gunn ! I''m still laughing. Excellent.

[quote user="Gunn Be Gone"]What about Cureton i suppose he gets to stay as he is Gunnys buddy , pathetic. [/quote] Good to see that you''re not allowing your anti Gunn obsession to cloud your judgement and prevent you from being constructive !  

[quote user="pagirl"]I am probably different in thinking that we have shareholders who are prepared to add funds so are best left well alone considering they do support the club. But why would they not talk to Cullem or Tweed about joining the board in Doncasters place.[/quote]   Oh, gawd, here we go again : the late Jade Goody''s boyfriend''s uncle, good old  Tweedle ".... but they didn''t want to talk to me" Dum.

[quote user="nolegs"]I think we are probably totally borassic lint.....option 2 [/quote]   Well, well, well, I never knew that before - boracic lint = skint. I looked it up and came across the historical fact that London''s nickname was "Cockney" ! : The interpretation of the word Cockney, is, a young person coaxed or conquered, made wanton; or a nestle cock, delicately bred and brought up, so as, when arrived a man''s estate, to be unable to bear the least hardship. Whatever may be the origin of this appellation, we learn from the following verses, attributed to Hugh Bigot, Earl of Norfolk, that it was in use. in the time of king Henry II. Was I in my castle at Bungay, Fast by the river Waveney, I would not care for the king of Cockney; i.e. the king of London.

This is from today''s Southampton Daily Echo. Not looking at all good. This has being going on for almost two months now and no firm, credible offer has yet been made.   Mystery group waiting in wings for possible Southampton takeover 12:07pm Monday 18th May 2009 Comments (30)   Have your say » A MYSTERY overseas group could be poised to make a dramatic 11th hour bid for control of Saints. The Echo understands that the consortium are waiting in the wings if the Matt Le Tissier-backed Pinnacle bid fails to meet administrator Mark Fry’s deadline extension today. Your Vote Are you worried there''s no deal for Saints yet? Yes No We revealed last Wednesday that an overseas group had made contact with Pinnacle’s Tony Lyeham a few days earlier with a view to possibly combining funds. But it is now believed the group are keen to take control of the financially- stricken club by themselves

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="LQ"]How many more articles do we need focussing on history? We seriously need to move forwards - what''s done is done and no amount of berating can change that. The Chris Lakey piece about the present and the future, however, is great - apart from the omission of the word ''apparently'' in this sentence: "The first came last summer when insurance tycoon Peter Cullum offered the club £20m in return for becoming the majority shareholder." Could you put a link to it in here Pete? [/quote] No need for the word ''apparently'' whatsoever LQ. PC did offer the club £20,000,000 in return for becoming the majority shareholder. Thing is he offered it in return for £20m of NEW shares and not for the purchase of Delias shareholding so that the money could go into the club and not to Delia. (This is loosely known to the club as investment ie. PC was willing to invest £20m in the club). A £20m shareholding would of course have made PC majority shareholder displacing the Stowmarket two. It is apparent that Delia/MWJ either wanted out completely or investment which they could control by retaining their positions. PC''s offer was too big for the latter and being in return for new shares did not allow Delia/MWJ to cut and run. We lost £20m of fresh investment secured against nothing more than shares in the club because it did not suit Delias/MWJ''s agenda. So all those carefully worded statements of ''he didn''t make an offer'' are technically correct but could quite easily and just as accurately be expanded to ''he didn''t make an offer for Delia and Michaels shareholding but he did make an offer of £20m in exchange for new shares which would by the very mathematics of the share issue make him the majority shareholder at the club''. Effectively we turned down an investor because he offered too much. This article from the football economy website does clear up the ''he didn''t make an offer'' issue. Peter Cullum subsequently confirmed that he did not offer to buy the shares of the majority shareholders. He explained the £20m he offered would have been in return for new shares and that money would have been used to buy players, but he had never offered to buy out the majority shareholders. He added, ''From my perspective, discussions have been terminated and I shall watch anxiously, as a lifelong supporter, at the disappointing results on the pitch.'' One view would be that a gift horse has been looked in the mouth, but there is no definitive view on why the negotiations, brokered by club sponsors Aviva, broke down. As things stand, the AGM heard that the club''s ''dire'' situation financially meant that the transfer chest is empty and manager Glenn Roeder will have to rely on selling players and donations from supporters to boost the playing squad in January. [/quote]   Of course, Delia Smith could not accept this putative offer. No company owner is going to accept their shares being significanlty diluted AND loss of control. This is nothing to do with whether or not I support Delia it''s simply commonsense.

[quote user="Indy_Bones"][quote user="CANARYCHARGE"]Gunn was chief scout for Roeder, he had a hand in bringing most of the players he has know to carrow road![/quote]Not saying that this isn''t the case, but where''s the evidence? When Roeder was in charge we got some pretty underwhelming players coming in, when Gunn was put in Caretaker charge he seemed to bring in exactly the type of players we needed in the positions we needed - where possible. Gunn brings in Lee - Roeder got Lupoli Gunn brings in Shackell - Roeder sold Shackell and went for Omozusi Gunn brings in Gow - Roeder didn''t feel Gow was good enough despite performing for Blackpool and then almost signing for Wolves Gunn signs Mcdonald - Roeder wouldn''t even consider looking down there for players Gunn wants to give youth a chance - Roeder didn''t Gunn was looking for experienced or hungry players to try to help keep us up, whereas Roeder generally went for players who didn''t give a damn. I could go on here, but it''s crystal clear that Gunn''s ideas for transfers are way above what Roeder''s were, at least in the position we were in. Just because Gunn was in charge of scouting, didn''t mean that Roeder actually listened to him that much... [/quote]   Good post, thoughtful, constructive and positive. Blimey, and yes I am on the Pink Un MB !

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]Roeder would have kept us up , big mistake sacking him if we were only going to replace him with a clown . [/quote] I don''t even know why I am responding to this silly post but I am so here goes : what an idiotic post ! If you haven''t got anything more sensible to say why do you bother ?

[quote user="First Wizard"]At least the old trout is consistant.[/quote]   Pot, kettle ........ !

[quote user="still holding out for new heroes"][quote user="Yellow Wall"][quote user="still holding out for new heroes"] the loan players are easily quoted as the source of all our ills.. but how many decent shifts did we get out of Russell, Otsemobor, Marshall, Fotheringham, Cureton, Pattison, under Gunn a didn''t see Gunn having a huge impact on our contracted players [/quote] Have you not heard of the phrase "You can''t make a silk purse out of a pig''s ear"? I do not believe Jose Mourenio would get those players playing to a standard that was acceptable. The blame for their performances should not be Gunny''s but the people who brought them to our club. [/quote] such as the head of player recruitment you mean? [/quote] Oh come on, you know damned well that Roeder made the decisions as to who he wanted at the club. "My mate Wenger, my old players at Newcastle etc etc" He was the one who ripped out the heart of our club.

[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="TIL 1010"] [quote user="First Wizard"]You just know its going to happen don''t you?[/quote] How do you come to that conclusion as he has just quit as a board member? [/quote] What like Munby''s quit you mean? wake up and smell the bloody coffee for Gawds sake! [/quote]   Blimey Wiz, you''re not drinking coffee today are you ? What''s happened, fresh out of toxic bile ?

[quote user="visitingblueboy"]OK, I''ll hold my hands up. I''m an Ipswich fan. And I''m not one of those who doesn''t want Norwich to do badly. Some Ipswich fans wanted you to stay up so we''d still have the derby games to look forward to. Not me. Its nothing really personal - and I''m sure the feelings would be (mostly) recipricated should the situation be reversed. So to continue to extract maximum enjoyment from your current situtation I registered here, not to gloat and post nonsense - its not my style - but to allow me to post where I felt able to contribute with a semi-serious voice. Today though, I''m beginning to feel slightly unnerved. We''ve always been two clubs similar in many ways. Similarly isolated geographically. Similar recent history, alternating between the top two divisions with brief excursions into Europe the glorious highlights. Similar falls, although different failings. Whatever happened though there was always the certainty that there wasn''t much to choose between us really, and whoever happened to be a division higher at the moment didn''t matter in the grand scheme of things. We''d meet again someday, and then the clubs would remain about the same. Rangers and Celtic. Arsenal and Spurs. Ipswich and Norwich. Today though I watched your press conference to announce your new manager. Obviously I was initially pleased to see Bryan Gunn appointed for next season, a man who may prove to be a good manager for you in the medium term, but equally it seems entirely possible he will be out of his depth. I was of course struck by the difference with our recent change of leadership. On a Monday we appointed a Chief Exec who used to run the British Olympic Team and a man who seemingly impressed everyone who met him. On Wednesday we sacked Magilton and on Thursday we appointed Roy Keane - a man no sane Ipswich fan had mentioned as a possible replacement for Magilton because nobody thought we''d have any chance of him joining us. Yesterday you lost your CEO and your Chairman, both apparently having stepped down. Them leaving seems to be the right move. Nothing has gone right for you recently with a string of managerial appointments turning sour, so something must be going wrong. To have any chance of uniting the fans, and to breath fresh life into the club it seemed sensible for there to be change at the top. So I settled back and waited for local businessmen, or possibly a football administrator to be brought into the club. The suggestion that our former CEO Derek Bowden might join you seemed sensible. The next step for the club would be to recruit a leadership team, THEN think about the manager. The CEO and the manager need to get on. They need to respect each other and one of the CEO''s main jobs is in the hiring of the manager. Today though was the weird press conference. Delia sitting silently. Looking stressed, shattered and furious. Gunn looking petrified, and Jones looking like a small time businessman addressing a room with a handful of local hacks in. Why appoint Gunn now? And why have Smith and Jones having apparently been in charge of a series of bad appointments decided to refresh the board, but not decided to listen to whatever advice the new appointees will bring? They have fewer voices to listen to, fewer wise words to hear, but they seem in a huge hurry to make the most important decision. They hadn''t even agreed a contract with Gunn. Its clearly not agreed how long his contract will be for, let alone the basic salary. With all this in mind why the hurry? I don''t understand it. Smith and Jones own the club, but they aren''t expert football administrators. Clearly. The strategy for them should NOT be to remove the people that ran the club previously and try to do the job themselves. It may look easy, but it isn''t. The strategy should be to appoint a management team and let THEM run the club. The board set the targets and the financial parameters. The executive team are in charge of meeting them. For the first time I''m looking at Ipswich and Norwich and not looking at two medium sized clubs, one of whom happens to be doing well, and one of whom happens to be doing badly. I now see one club who has had the great good fortune to be bankrolled by a very rich man who have clearly got excellent people at the top, and one who appear to be being run by well-meaning amateurs. And to my surprise it doesn''t give me great pleasure to say this. You have some things in your favour. The extraordinary reliance on loan players has given the manager a clean sheet to work from, and your home support is holding up astonishingly. The thought lingers that next season will be crucial for you. If you start badly then things could get very bad from a financial point of view as your fans drift away. A season of relegation struggle gives the club a goal and a purpose. A season of mid-table mediocity is something else and is astonishingly boring (I should know) - and a season of mid-table mediocrity in the third tier is almost unimaginable. With what I consider such a huge season ahead of you, I''m astonished at the decisions the board are making, and I wonder how long the effect of the apparent current mismanagement will last. A long post. Sorry. I''m not trying to gloat. I think I can sum it up though by the thought that Ipswich appear to be a club thinking big, and Norwich appear to be a club thinking small. What is really scary is I can see a possible future for you even worse than I would like to see - and that is bad. Maybe Delia et al will appoint a bunch of clever people. Maybe Gunn will prove an inspired choice. I''m not sure though.[/quote]   Well, I''m a Norwich fan who has never wanted Ipswich to do badly. I want to see all East Anglian clubs do well. Boring, I know, but that''s good for our much derided region. Coming to the title of your thread, the difference between our two clubs is that, for the timebeing, you have an owner who is extremely rich and we have an owner who is moderately wealthy and who has already lost millions propping up Norwich City. Our owner has been in charge for long enough for us to conclude that, however well intended, she has in recent years made bad decisions in her choices of Directors and Managers. It is too early to tell whether or not your owner has made bad choices in recent weeks but I suspect that not only has he made bad decisions but Roy Keane in particular will turn out to be disastrous and how long your benefactor will keep pumping money into your club remains to be seen but he doesn''t have access to unlimited funds like an Abramovitch. I remember the appointment by Soutampton FC of Sir Clive Woodward at £120,000. What a wise and clever appointment that was mumbled "notable and worthy observers" at the time ! So, good for you and all your money but remember this : those who laugh longest are those who laugh last.

[quote user="CT "] we then decided to give Roeder a chance because ''he hadnt had time to build his own squad'' and it would appear the same has happened again with Gunn. When will people wake up and realise that the board have not got a clue? Gunn was responsible for 19 games (incidently we were out of the bottom 3 when he took over) and we went down. Pray tell me Gunny supporters what does he have to do for you to be convinced he isnt the right man for the job? *the above doesnt take away from the fact that I would LOVE for him to succeed* [/quote]   ............ and was in freefall. Look at the 10 league results leading upto Roeder''s dismissal. Yes, we were just above the bottom three at the time Gunn took over but sliding, out of control, at an alarming rate.

[quote user="xcityman"]Glenn Roeder ripped the heart out of this club, his arrogance and clear contempt for the fans, staff and directors showed just how poor a manager he was. Players didn''t want to play for him, directors had little time for him and fans really did not like him and his attitude was all because (IMO) he felt he was too good to be at the club. He could not handle ‘big’ players hence huckerbys departure and him not getting ‘decent’ and experienced ones in. For one he could not handle them when they were here so never really tried to get them and secondly his reputation in football is very well known and many players did not want to come here. That is why we ended up with young loan players and too many of them and that is where my point about Gunn stems from. Gunny had far too many loan players to deal with, at the end of the season they would return to their own clubs next season after a nice break in Vegas thanks of NCFC. The performances are proof of this, I saw two games at the end of the season and one poss two of the payers on the pitch really looked like they cared about the future of the club. Gunn now has a fresh start and should be given the opportunity to proof he can do the job with a clean slate. It is only fair. Now i have been on hear a few times to have a go at the board about previous managerial appointments and if we were in the championship i would seriously question this appointment but we are not and for that reason i think this is a good appointment. This league is not as good, needs less tactical understanding and more about player management and that is where gunn will excel. Butterworth has good history as a coach, Deehan is vastly experienced and Crooks experience and a player will be huge. COME ON GUNNY[/quote]   Yep, agree with all of that. Gunn  stepped upto the plate when most in his position would have kept a low profile. No one will ever know whether experienced managers such as a Boothroyd or an Ince would have done better or worse than Gunn. The fact is that Gunn inherited a complete and utter shambles. The reality is we are now in League One, have no money and, like it or not, we are in a re-build situation. No quick fixes a la Roeder and his legion of Premiership post-pubescent reserves. We have a manager who is a thoroughly decent guy, honest, honourable, determined and really wanting to do the right thing by the club and the fans. Let''s not undervalue his experience in football either. He''s been round the block a few times and has experienced and worked with God knows how many managers at Norwich over the years, plus he is well-supported. IMO, the time has arrived to stop the toxic nonsense being vomited at Gunn and Delia Smith and get behind the Club. Gunn and his team should now be judged over two seasons. Personally, I am confident that the combination of experience, contacts, ability and honest commitment offered by Gunn, Crook, Butterworth and Deehan will result in promotion back to the Championship within the next two seasons. Of course, I would love it if we could bounce straight back but realistically I can''t see much as I want to.

[quote user="Lord Snooty"] [quote user="Salahuddin"]I will support Gunny, if only because of who he is, the real target should be Delia who is slowly but surely destroying this club. Sure a Roy Keane figure would have been nice but without a "Peter Cullum " type investor we do not have the pot of gold needed to lure ambitious managers here, in fact I doubt we could afford anyone right now.[/quote]   Thank God for commonsense. There in  three lines is a succint and salient summary of the position that our beloved club is in. [/quote]   alright then, 3.25 lines.

[quote user="Salahuddin"]I will support Gunny, if only because of who he is, the real target should be Delia who is slowly but surely destroying this club. Sure a Roy Keane figure would have been nice but without a "Peter Cullum " type investor we do not have the pot of gold needed to lure ambitious managers here, in fact I doubt we could afford anyone right now.[/quote]   Thank God for commonsense. There in  three lines is a succint and salient summary of the position that our beloved club is in.

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]Oh AJ, say it isn''t so... I think this thread has made my day.... [:D] [/quote]   No, I think AJ was trying to stop the CanaryCharge bashing. For God''s sake CC made a simple mistake. I admit that when i first looked at the headline early this morning my first reaction was that Cullum had emerged from the woodwork again and then looked again and saw it was actually Andrew Cullen who use to work for the Club and I thought to myself it will be the usual "they were really good guys, always made themeselves available to then fans blahdeblah deblah" gush that is already getting tiresome even though it''s less than 24 hours since the news broke of ND''s and Mumbles'' departure.

I''d be surprised if this deal was discussed before the Reading defeat. I can believe that an approach might have been made by Cardiff after Reading. However, I don''t understand why Norwich would have completed it so quickly and secretly. If a club such as Cardiff which has just missed out on promotion and is gearing up for a promotion campaign next season wants to buy Marshall then surely Norwich could have "leaked" this and got other clubs interested and pushed up the price ? Seems pretty basic to me although I''m sure I must have missed the obvious.

[quote user="PhatCanary"][quote user="Lord Snooty"][quote user="PhatCanary"] [quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Well i''m holding out fading hope that Clingan sticks around, we need him loads next season. I remember holding naive hopes as a youngster that we''d hold most of our squad together after premiership relegation, and that went tits up, so i''m doubtful any of our talented players will last the summer. Hoolahans another who we never saw the best out of, and i think he''d tear this league apart! [/quote] Well if rumours are to believed Clingan,Russel,Hoolahan and Drury are off along with Croft and Marshall,we will get next to nothing for them because we can''t negotiate it seems,what a f''ing mess this board have got us into,and some still support them, bloody idiots!!!! [/quote]   Drury ? Where''s he off to then ? [/quote] I have no idea, i was just told that he was asked to look for a new club because of all his injury problems,also the club would allow him to leave on a free!! [/quote]   Ah, I thought you meant that Drury was taking the initiative, that''s what surprised me. My guess is that Drury will cling to the club like a drowning man to a lump of driftwood. Much as he has been "a good servant" and all that, sadly Drury really has gone past his use by date. I don''t know how long his contract is and what remains but, to be honest, I couldn''t see him surviving the rough and tumble of the third div. Trouble is, who''s going to come in for him anyway ?

[quote user="Bomber"]The only reason they got to go straight back up was because they kept a majority of their players - which begs the question how come their players wanted to play for them in League 1 yet ours dont.[/quote]   Thanks for the concern Bomber but I can assure you that the last thing I am expecting now or for the foreseeable future is a Norwich bounce-back to the Championship !

[quote user="PhatCanary"] [quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Well i''m holding out fading hope that Clingan sticks around, we need him loads next season. I remember holding naive hopes as a youngster that we''d hold most of our squad together after premiership relegation, and that went tits up, so i''m doubtful any of our talented players will last the summer. Hoolahans another who we never saw the best out of, and i think he''d tear this league apart! [/quote] Well if rumours are to believed Clingan,Russel,Hoolahan and Drury are off along with Croft and Marshall,we will get next to nothing for them because we can''t negotiate it seems,what a f''ing mess this board have got us into,and some still support them, bloody idiots!!!! [/quote]   Drury ? Where''s he off to then ?

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Is the difference between our position and theirs is that the banks know they can''t get their money back from Southampton ?  I''d imagine a buyer could be found quite quickly for Norwich if the 20 million debt was re-negotiated at 10 p in the pound - but of course that would mean going into administration, which we are told we are nowhere near. [/quote]   Hear and agree with what you say but on the basis that there is more than one bidder for Soton it will be interesting to see what price the club does get sold for. As for the earlier post, I must admit that I really hadn''t realised that Harris had only been tasked to find investors - no wonder no one has been found. Surely, Delia must look to sell now, cut her losses and be rid of all the bile and poison vomited in her direction ? Does she stick or twist i.e. hope that the club can "bounce back" and then sell the club as the value will be higher but, at the same time, run the risk of the club failing in League One and possibly even being relegated to the 4th ? Love her or hate her who would want to be in her position ?

I know I''m doing a Cam but thought this article worth posting on here. According to the Southampton Echo there have been several serious bidders for Saints and it''s looking likely that a deal with the Pinnacle Group fronted by Matt le Tissier is imminent. Makes me wonder why Keith Harris has singularly failed to locate a single buyer for Norwich in months.  What has Southampton FC got to offer that Norwich FC hasn''t, I wonder !   A DEAL to save Saints could be completed within the next 24 hours, the Daily Echo can reveal. Administrator Mark Fry is today due to hold talks with one of the frontrunners – believed to be the Matt Le Tissier-backed Pinnacle group – in what could be a decisive meeting. Fry last night told the Echo that he hopes to align himself with a potential purchaser by the end of Wednesday. That is, however, dependent on any late hitches to a prospective deal, with talks reaching a very sensitive stage. Fry, left, revealed at the end of last week that he was in contact with two serious groups and added yesterday that he had received some late interest in the club. He said: “We are talking to a couple of seriously interested parties and there are some late expressions of interest, but we are hoping to align ourselves with a potential bidder within the next 48 hours.” Talks are described as being at a “seriously late stage” and it is thought an announcement on a preferred bidder could be imminent.