Cheerio

[quote user="tHeBrOKeNSeAT"]  Then that''s supposed to be the parents job to make sure they heed those warnings. [/quote]You''ve got no kids obviously. Oh that life were that simple. SHould parents add Pinkun message board to Net NannyGet real. The fact that Archant condone such a link just because - quote from Mod ".....there are many other ways of finding material on the Web" is incredibly naive. Seems they wouldn''t mind links to hard core porn being posted then because its easy to find elsewhere.Utterly ridiculous. When will people find the nuts to make a stand.You know what.... shove your forum. I doubt you''ll miss my positive pro board comments and info. You can all drown in your moaning self pity.Bye

[quote user="Trent Canary"] Why? Clearly has a warning with it.. [/quote]Yeah, kids heed warnings dont they

[quote user="paul moy"]I''ve emailed them twice now and still no reply.  I''ve absolutely no intention of renewing my subscription next season. I advise anybody thinking of a subscription to not bother.  They really are useless !!![/quote]Hack in.... everyone else does. They dont deserve anything else. Really poor setup and I''m surprised the club hasn''t listened to all the complaints. Too easy to just hand it all over I guess

[quote user="Dogger Slipraid"]I remember Eagle as a kid, came from the same small town in suffolk, he was forever practicing and training every spare hour of the day, obviously he has kept that up to get in the team. [/quote]Played very well for the reserves at left back a couple of weeks ago. I''ve only seen him in midfield before.... very impressed

[quote user="Barclay_Boy"] yes his hands were tied by the board, and if he had a decent budget at his disposal in january we would now have taylor, and a decent striker.what is said in public especially at carrow rd is usually putting a brave face on it. Tragically by the time you realise you are wrong GR will probably be off to another club as Martin O''neil was before him. Norwich have a history of not backing the manager, expecting the manager to work miracles on a shoestring, not showing ambition and taking us for mugs and you are quite happy about it obviously.   [/quote]I''m extremely happy about this board yes. I also know roughly what the transfer budget was going into January. What did this board have to do with O''Neil ? The valuation was Roeders - he stated that he had the full backing of the board and was looking to 4 or 5 players. There was plenty of money to sign Taylor, but Roeder stated he would not be held to ransom.Nothing to do with the board whatsoever and I challange you to prove otherwise. Roeder is not the sort of personality to get hoodwinked by a mean board I assure you. He''d have walked in the first month.you know it. Absolutely no doubt about that .......... He''s nobodys yes manWhat makes any of you think that the board set the valuations? Its quite bizzare. I''d love to know. A great number of my friends have been in and around professional football for 40 years..... I can think of one club whose chairman set valuations and that clus is still suffering from the policy.

[quote user="the1englishman"]I will give you all a link to a picture of his leg as it happened, i warn you its bloody horrible, and by the looks of it it could end his career.http://coolsmurf.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/eduardo-da-silva-suffers-career-threatening-injury/As i said, be warned its not nice, you can see the bone split the sock open as it come out.[/quote]Take that off please mods.

As long as Hucks doesn''t keep drifting wide that could be a very good selection from GR

[quote user="ricardo"]We have to realise that this regieme is quite happy to trundle along in a mid table comfort zone. [/quote]What makes you think that? And what exactly is it you propose? Evidently you''re aware of somebody ready to take over..... who might that be? Bush tried to rid Afganistan of the Taliban with no plan for the aftermath. Ditto Iraq. Is this what you propose at Carrow Road? Make the board stand down before there is anyone to take over? And Bye Bye Babes..... shouldn''t your post be addressed to Roeder and the coaching staff / scouts?. They decide targets, not Doncaster. Or maybe you''d like to propose a scheme that would enable the club to function whilst paying that calibre of player £20k + a week. No....why bother. Much easier to sit on here moaning because somebody else isn''t putting their money in.........Never anthing contructive form the moaners - do you all live alone? Bet you''re always moaning about the neighbours..... kids playing outside..... people parking outside your house......Everything always has to be somebodys fault.....somebody elses fault........never yoursZzzzzzzzz

Short memory syndrome.....? we went for Nugent remeber? It was a whole 4 weeks ago so maybe you''ve forgotten.He say no.

Ok I was a little slaughtered last night as was the old trouble and strife but she swears she hear the Galaxy thing at 3a.m. on Radio 5 (whos listens to Radio 5 at 3 a.m.?

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]and lets try not to slag him off to much when he''s blowing out of his backside and bent double after 15 minutes.... [/quote]Undoubtedly your best post ever.He''ll get subbed after 60 mins..... the crystals say so....

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Nice to see that charitable status and taxation are regarded as the finer points ! One can only only imagine what the major issues are with regard to this scheme. [/quote]LOL.... Major issues will be the font on the letter head and who will stump up the £30 for Companies House......

[quote user="tHeBrOKeNSeAT"]I''m not sure. Who''s to say the board won''t back Glenn in the Summer? I can''t believe they won''t. So if a ''back Glenn'' march goes ahead and then funds are used then we will get the idea that we created that thus empowering us/the marchers giving them further evidence that protests/marches work which in the future will lead to further marches about other thing (board out, back Glenn in Janruary, Sack Gunn, Demolish the hotel, whatever) which then casts NCFC in a negative light.[/quote]Precisely. They backed him in January so why wouldn''t they in the summer - I fail to understand that logic.Remember it was Roeders decision who to bid for and within his budget how much to bid. His hands were not tied by the board. If you think to the contrary I''d love to see your evidence

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]nah - can''t see it after gibbs and henry displays.  the rot needs to be stopped, and roedy wants another win.[/quote]I dont know Henry but Gibbs is class - seen him twice and he really was incredible. He switched to the right for the Arse and was very effective, cut in a bit too much playing that side though. Not sure what went wrong the other day. Give him another couple of games.....

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]Last time i saw him he was shutting his eyes and hoping when he missed the ball copletely with a header against Bury.. he hasnt featured since has he?  jas :) [/quote]Last time I saw him he was covering more ground than Phil Boyer on speed - Ressies at Luton - he was excellent - a completely different attitude. The whole team were outstanding against a very experienced Luton side.

So when Hucks has a blinder tomorrow will you all be saying ''told you so'' or ''Well done Glen'' for firing him up....I wonder ...........LOL

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]we are thin enough on the ground as it is?  Ok so he might not be doing the business to us but we need bodies in the squad.  Sending him out on loan to Crewe is fair enough but surely if we have 2 strikers (at least) who score regularly. We aren''t in that position so cannot afford to loan Martin out.. all it needs is one high placed kick to Chedwyns Knee and we are Royally screwed.. Dion, Curo and Hucks are all not prolific enough to score the goals and we''d drop back into the relegation battle without someone to score the goals to get us out!  its a dangerous risk and 1 i dont think Roeder should take.... We need to bring a striker in before we let another one out jas :)  [/quote]Believe everything you read?[quote user="UEA Canary"]In my opinion Martin would be currently a worse choice than either Dion, Curo or Hucks[/quote]When was the last time you saw Martin play?

[quote user="1st Wizard"] Grow up, and answer the point I raised............oh sorry, you can''t!. [/quote]You really need a new way of evading critique other than retorts about your fellow board members being somehow immature

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"] Exactly how will you know whether or not you are right? If the magical £5m isn''t spent (again), you''ll assume its because it wasn''t available.... not that the manager deemed it prudent (yes that word again) not to sp*nk the money on also rans........as was the case last month.Your big mouthed challenge is all show and no substance. The club will not make public the funds available for obvious reasons to anyone with an ounce of sense..... as opposed to the Fayid style conspiratorial rubbish spouted on here..... [/quote] ..........now, your silly and juvinile point was?[:|] [/quote]My point is - as you''re too dumb to work it out, is that your criteria is impossible to satisfy, thereby making your challange mute.You have no way of knowing next summer if the assumed failure to sign 9 players at a cost of £5m will be the fault of the board or Roeders refusal to waste money on rubbish. My money would be on Roeder making it quite plain however, that he had been short changed, as he would have done this January. He''s not a man to mince his words.The fans have no god given right to know what funds are available - on the contrary - it makes perfect sense to keep that information OUT of the public domain.Do you undersatnd the silly and juvinille(pot, kettle) ''point'' yet? Or would you like it in more simplistic terms......?

But the fact is we arfe NOT a big club. So whats the problem?

[quote user="Rupethebear"]Sad fact is he hasn''t progressed in 4 years, just like ....... Crow .[/quote]Really? Did you ever watch Crow? I speak as a fan who detests small players but Crow was destined..... not top level but big time Championship.His downfall was attitude, not ability

[quote user="NorwichRUs"]It seems that norwich fans on both sides of the fence cannot claim to being overjoyed with the board''s business dealings in the transfer market. We only have to look at the Taylor sham to see that the priorities aren''t there and with Fozzy''s comments today and previous Hucks rants it''s clear this is an issue in the dressing room as well. [/quote] Whoooooa..... Hang on a minute. Isn''t this the board that publicly stated that they would back the manager? Aren''t you confusing the managers valuation of players and stubborness (which I agree with) against the willingness of the board to do what ever is possible to back Roeder?Show me any evidence that the board cramped Roeders progress in january?The board cannot be faulted since Roeder arrived. They have done everything possible to accomadate his plans.......There is money available which GR has chosen to keep for the summer.

[quote user="Bingo"] ...................they weren''t that fat[/quote]Yeah right..... beer goggles takes off at least 4 stone........ each.Thats disgusting

[quote user="Cannycanary"]  We are working to achieve charitable status so full benefits of the Kitty are available to the club. The Fund will achieve the best financial position. [/quote]I think you''re on really tricky ground there. Also that may (though I doubt) avoid the tax liability of the fund, but what about tax liability of NCFC recieving unearned income?

[quote user="Thecanaryfan"] If there is a kitty waiting to be spent surely the fans deserve to know about it?" [/quote]Why? Would you also like any club we''re negotiating with to know whats in the bank? Though to be honest they will I''m sure have a better idea than most posters on theis forum, they''d do a little research I''m sure.... Still, much easier to just make assumptions eh? Jump on enough bandwagons and ones bound to take you to where you want to go eventually.LOL