Caramac

? You''re a bit pompous aren''t you? I was side on yesterday to the sending off - the Saints player was a good two-three yards behind and blindside of Russell when he went to play the ball. Because the ball was bouncing high Russell''s foot was raised to get the ball. There''s no way that it''s a card of either colour. As to the penalty shout, it would have been given as a foul outside of the box so should have been a penalty. That said we were absolutely played off the park, but sending off was disappointing as we were just beginning to get a toe hold.

[quote user="No Quarter"]I have not read one reasonable post about why he should not get the job. Keep em coming, I need a laugh!! [/quote] How about a couple of reasonable points: lost last three games of the season, while Barnsley were undefeated; his team selection against Charlton? I mean moving Shackell from a position where he was our best player over the last 10 games to left back? The actions of a man who didn''t want the job. I actually thought the one positive to come from Sunday''s debacle was that not even our lousy board would carry on with Gunn as manager - the board is even lousier than I thought.

OK, I''m in favour of both going. However, you have to be suspicious as to who is behind this. All a bit too convenient for our owners if you ask me. Make Mumby and Doncaster the sacrificial lambs and everything wil be nice a cosy for the two of them again.

I''m convinced the Turner issue is to do with the "root and branch" review of the club that they promised when appointed to the board. Closest I''ve ever come to anything substantial on the Turners is the rumour of a 15-point plan that the Turners submitted which then sat in ND''s in-tray unacted upon for 3 months. The other thing I heard is that Cullum was at the game against Reading as a guest of Delia. Don''t know if that is correct or not - not, probably, given the EDP a couple of days later. That said, I think the Cullum issue has completely deflected debate away from what happened to investment that the club had managed to attract? Are the owners and the executive really that difficult to get along with? It''s about time that the local media did a bit more digging around the Turners.

Also what are the chances of finding out about miniscule release fee clauses in the case of Clingan and Hoolahan etc. come next season?  This despite already telling us that the bulk of agents'' fees in the past year were for signing the pair. 

Spot on.  Easy/cheap option has always been the club''s MO apart from when it''s funding peripheral infrastructure such as photographer pits and the like.  We''ve seen it time and time again - failure to sign Taylor for the want of £250k, appointment of Gunn and further back the replacement of the £2.25m Fox with the £250k Adams.  I reckon about the only people in football who''ve ever sussed the club out are MON and Robbie Earle when he turned down the chance to join us from Port Vale and opted for Wimbledon. 

I can clearly remember my most recent source.  Let''s just say it''s impeccable and still with NCFC today.  BTW how heartening was Doncaster''s latest column today?  I quote "whatever the fates have in store for us on Sunday, the future is bright next season."  Hopefully, with the debate you have kickstarted there are far fewer fans swallowing this condescending tripe from now on. Personally, I think it''s about time that Delia and her husband were reminded that just because they are the majority owners of a club they don''t have to sit on the board of directors.  Owners ostensibly sit on boards to protect their financial interests, but as we''ve heard many times that they are not in it for financial reasons isn''t it about time that they stepped away from the board and let somebody else have a go?

Great thread and pretty much all the salient points documenting our demise are well covered.  What I haven''t seen anywhere, and I''m sure there are plenty who will correct me if I''m wrong, are the circumstances under which Huckerby, Crouch and Harper were signed on loan in our promotion season.  As I recall, rather than being a culmination of the board''s "prudence with ambition" masterplan, the board was rather backed into the corner as Zema Abbey''s knee-knack got the better of him and David Neilsen disappeared to Denmark for a very spurious reason.  As a result, Worthington forced the board''s hand in a League Cup tie against Northampton by playing Henderson and Jarvis up front and amply demonstrated the cupboard was bare.  A few days later Huckerby et al turned up and the rest was history - history that since has no doubt been distorted by the board and board apologists alike when it come''s to doubting the club''s ambition or competence and to their mind epitomises the benefits of their "prudence with ambition" approach.  One final point, some are doubting many of the Big Feller''s more speculative points around the Hamilton/Cooper/Rioch fall-out.  But having heard the very same points made - around Cooper''s and Hamilton''s plotting - from many sources over the past 10 years, I''m sure there must be statistical signifcance attached to the allegations.  To my mind, Rioch was one of the most hard done by managers in our recent history - he had scraped together the nucleus of a decent team only to be denied the funds necessary to mount a promotion challenge.  No surprise when you know that Hamilton was the choice of Delia to succeed Walker and not Rioch.  Makes you wonder how Roeder''s atrocious CV got buried in the selection process following Grant''s demise?

If true, I wouldn''t be surprised if it was something to do with Andrew Cullen leaving the club.  He''s leaving for MK Dons because the Turner''s became too overbearing. 

[quote user="ryank"] A mate saw Doherty in Philip Brown on Sunday, complete with short hair. Does this mean that he will be reporting for training? And thank god he has removed that monk head. [/quote]   Apparently, he has spent the close seasone having a hair transplant. 

The latest Factiva story from The Irish Times, quotes some QPR player or other talking about trying to persuade Hoolahan to sign for them. 

[quote user="Jameswallis"]i think you''re going to be suprised then... he''s coming here.... if i''m wrong then fine but i wouldn''t post something like this unless i was confident of the source... factiva is a business site although its news corp it wont publish idle gossip of maybe a chance of things... i am pretty sure they''ll have concrete evidence. [/quote]   But Factiva is a newsfeed site like anything else.  A bit like Newsnow, but it has subs to the FT, WSJ, Thomsons etc.  So like any other media it''s dependent on the published sources of information.  Factiva even takes a feed from the EDP and that had us signing Earnshaw the day he signed for Forest! So while Factiva may be no better a true source of info than any other of the media, I still believe that Hoolahan will sign.  Too many people claim to know the details on this one for it not to be true.  And if he does sign I''ll be delighted - he looks a great little player from what little I''ve seen of him.  

I heard there were two plans in the offing.  One was for a civic reception in June - balcony at City Hall, big screen with highlights of his career etc.  Hucks was keen but as he''s under contract to Norwich to the end of June the club basically put the block on it.  The other possibility is Hucks featuring as a major part of the Lord Mayor''s celebration procession on the 5th July.  City Council basically think Hucks deserves some appreciation of what he''s delivered to the people of Norwich in the time he''s been here.  Other rumours for you:  Doc may not sign his contract - he may go to play in the US; Fotheringham''s moved from his house and is considering offers from Charlton and a club in Spain as well as our contract offer. 

Interesting question for you which comes from the Doomcaster''s column this morning:  would you regard Ryan Jarvis''s spell at Kilmarnock being a transfer or a loan? 

[quote user="Clint"] Thank you all and well done to the others who backed me up!  I may not have been 100% spot on as is usually the case with these things (no-one except the big cheeses at the club know all the info) but the essence of what I was trying to get across has been substantiated.  To all those doubters, I hope you now realise that I don''t post on here infrequently to spread rumours but only when I have something to say that I think others may find interesting.  The other info I had, is that Strihavka''s agent is the same man as Grant''s which is now irrelevant but could that be a reason as to why he was signed in the first place?!?  I also eluded to the fact that we have no cash and Roeder basically only has available what he brings in, I beleive this has been substantiated to a certain extent by the recent culling of players and the still lack of any decent permanent signings almost 2 weeks into the transfer window (bar Matty, which was funded by Lewis'' imminent departure)! The infamous Barclay King seems conspicuous by his absence, oh well Jaz, I better get back to class now to learn, something you could incorporate into your day of posting 1,000''s of pointless messages on this site!!!      [/quote]   I actually think the story has changed.  Like you say, you can never be 100% aware of all the facts - but I was told twice by two separate people it was a loan - whether I was told it was a loan to expedite a long explanation might back-up the changed position as of today.  BTW - ''tis also true about Grant and Dave having the same agent. Now where were we with other rumours?  Just this one: Joe Lewis held off signing for the Posh because he was hopeful that a leading Championship club with NCFC connections would come in for him.  Again not relevant anymore, but if that had materialised the attitude over his sale would have changed considerably.  Goes to show you how much we are in need of cash right now...