Canary Jules

Still waiting for an answer to my question. If the board goes, due to fan power or whatever, who steps in? If no-one wants to invest, surely we have to stay put with those in the job now. To lose them/sack them/hound them out without someone ready to come on board has to be suicide??

Cluck, I didn''t realise I had paranoia!!! I also have no desperate need to hang on to the present investors as you seem to have interpreted from my last posting. All I asked was a pertinent question about who is there to come in if some fans had their way and sacked the board? In fact, we seem to agree on some aspects. You state; DS is not Norwich City. I assume you mean the ''be all and end all''. - I agree. The next owner would need to invest, just as Delia did. I agree You would not sink one penny of your hard earned into the club and you believe no other business people would. Fine. That just brings me to my point that if no-one else is prepared to sink money into the club, how can you get rid of the present jobholders? So my original question still stands. However, I do think you are doing this current investors an injustice. I wonder where we would be without the tin pot psuedo catering business venture, as you call it, and Delia''s millions. Are you saying Chase should have stayed on or indeed he should have gone but Delia and Co shouldn''t have took over. Again, I wonder where that would have left us.

Cluck, I didn''t realise I had paranoia!!! I also have no desperate need to hang on to the present investors as you seem to have interpreted from my last posting. All I asked was a pertinent question about who is there to come in if some fans had their way and sacked the board? In fact, we seem to agree on some aspects. You state; DS is not Norwich City. I assume you mean the ''be all and end all''. - I agree. The next owner would need to invest, just as Delia did. I agree You would not sink one penny of your hard earned into the club and you believe no other business people would. Fine. That just brings me to my point that if no-one else is prepared to sink money into the club, how can you get rid of the present jobholders? So my original question still stands. However, I do think you are doing this current investors an injustice. I wonder where we would be without the tin pot psuedo catering business venture, as you call it, and Delia''s millions. Are you saying Chase should have stayed on or indeed he should have gone but Delia and Co shouldn''t have took over. Again, I wonder where that would have left us.   I agree she invested in the club amd without someone new ready to invest, there is no-one else

I''ve read all of the threads since I asked who do you replace the board with if they are'' sacked''? I still haven''t seen any answers apart from the comment that we need a thick american to come after us with shedloads of cash. Nice idea but not likely. So for those who want the board out now, take a moment to think where that will leave us. I''m all for fresh blood (and cash) to come in but if the present jobholders left us tomorrow with no-one to step in, doesn''t that leave us in a bigger predicament?

Good point Lurd. Also, if we sack the board, where does that leave us? Who steps in to replace them?

I understand that this is not Grant''s team yet but I do agree with Hardhouse. The stats are poor for Norwich and he could have played 442 but his reason for not doing so seemed a strange one. We played a 4-5-1 formation which is pretty negative. If you read the Canaries website it was a 433??? As a result we had 1 shot on target (according to Sporting Life stats) all game and I''ve just read that PG thought we should have taken all 3 points!! He said we had to play 1 up front as Thorne isn''t fit enough to play two games on the trot and that caused us a problem because we like bodies in the box. So why didn''t he play Jarvis from the off and why are we putting a bloke on the bench who is unfit and who can''t score for toffee? Sometimes, I do believe we have replaced Worthy with his twin brother when I read about negative tactics and see statements that just don''t make sense. We will stay mid table because we haven''t got the bottle to go for it. We play it safe but the problem is, it isn''t safe!!! I''d rather go down fighting than play negative tactics. Yes, it is early days but I do see comparisons with our recently departed manager. I feel sorry for the people that travelled. They are being sold short.