Arthur Whittle

[quote user="Tom NCFC"] Personally I think a large number of Leicester''s signing are utter crap! While Kishishev may make good additions to the backline, I think Leicester are wasting there money with signings like Shaun Newton and Carl (Where''s the fish in ASDA) Cort! It''s all about quality, not quantity.... Quality is stamped all over the Norwich Signings! [/quote] Your post on Dave striker- Reading the pinkun fact file on him makes good reading, he''s a former Under 19 Czech international, was the highest scoring in the Czech Republic and he''s only 24, on top of the fact he''s signed a 4 year contract will us, i''ve think he''s blossom into something pretty damn amazing..... maybe the next Jan Koller! I know its wikipedia but they liken him to Dimitar Berbatov! This is going to one of the best signings in recently times for us! On the Ball City! We probably know more about the leicester players, you havent seen Dave striker play yet compare him to Jan Koller and  Berbatov, because Dave joined us hes marvellous, i bet Freddy Eastwood, Varney and Sharp are crap because they didnt sign for norwich. Take a reality check. I cant believe i get slagged off for being realistic. Unbelievable!

[quote user="lappinitup"] A letter appeared in tonights EEN accusing the board of NCFC of telling lies. No proof was offered nor were there any examples of that accusation given. The writer then ''calculated'' that Peter Grant had £6m to spend in his transfer budget but instead chose to spend money on ''''third choice benchwarmers''''. The letter was ended with the threat of a protest !! Arthur Whittle. You entered this forum saying you were going to take over the protest from Lee Oliver then you grandly announced Part 1 and part 2 of your grand scheme to have the board removed which quite frankly was a total joke. Since then you have mellowed quite a bit and have joined in with football related posts while still  holding your anti-board views (which you are entitled to) and views which I respect even though I don''t particulary agree with them. But the letter in tonights paper suggests to me that there is more to your efforts to de-stabilize this club than meets the eye. There is no point in me asking you what evidence you have of the board ''lying'', or of the proof of available funds or how you are so sure that the new signings will fail because you never answer questions do you arthur, you only ask them !! I''ll ask you a question anyway. As a self acclaimed success in business, have you a vested interest in having this board removed or...... Are you simply a senile old git looking for a little bit of glory !! Either way you do not come across as a Norwich City supporter Arthur. I, along with a lot of others believe the corner has been turned, and that there are better times ahead. I have faith in this board, manager and team and believe that Norwich City are on the way back to the top. It might not be this season but it will come. Letters like the one in tonights evening news simply show the futility of your campaign. If you must continue asking questions you must also provide answers Arthur. lappinitup       [/quote] Yes i believe the board have lied. The figures bandered about are not being spent. We have signed 6 players and let 7 go in the process-if safri goes 8. We havent turned a corner more like a bend on a roundabout.  If you think wanting success at our club makes me a "senile old git" then yes i am, i take you are happy to remain as a mid table championship outfit. It makes me laugh that people are having a pop at leicester saying there signings are crap and unknown, because we all know about our new signings dont we, oh yes we watch czech tv and scottish footy all the while and everyones an expert on crewe and rochdale are they not? Its a prime example of the yellow and green rose tinted glasses brigade and how they operate on this site. As for being being called a senile old git i could quite easily call you a sheep who believes everything they hear but lets stop the name calling shall we? As for having a vested interest in removing the board well yes i have, do you mean in respect of investing money or pure ambition. You point out my business success well this is due to me taking risks and having ambition. Delias money has been invested how i see it is as a play thing, and as for the Turners its still hard to see what there main purpose is so we cant really call this fresh investment. Personally if i was them with there finances i would have invested a hell of a lot more. On another note-Freddy Eastwood, because we didnt pull off his signing everyone is now saying hes crap and overated and will be back at southend in 18 months yet if we had signed him he would have been labelled the new fleck. To question my Norwich fan status because im not fooled by the patronising board is unbelievable.You say theres no proof  that the transfer funds are 6m well yes there is Marshall bid was 500,000 and Sharp 2m plus before the Earnshaw transfer which we were promised would go into the team, the prof is in the Delias pudding-that makes 6m for christ sake, are you seriously questioning that fact. Give me a good reason why we dont have 6m and why we cant spend it. Grant has his tied by the board and has to wheel and deal and settle for 2nd best. Please prove me wrong! Maybe Doncaster should not have come out and said all the earnshaw transfer fee would go in the kitty!

[quote user="Tom NCFC"] Personally I think a large number of Leicester''s signing are utter crap! While Kishishev may make good additions to the backline, I think Leicester are wasting there money with signings like Shaun Newton and Carl (Where''s the fish in ASDA) Cort! It''s all about quality, not quantity.... Quality is stamped all over the Norwich Signings! [/quote] But whats to suggest the likes of Ostembor,Gilks,Brellier,and big Dave the striker are any better? If we had now signed 10 new players i get the impression people on herewould be going nuts about how the board are showing ambition. Im not for one minute suggesting our signings are''nt better than leicsters its just a little double standards. Players like Maybury and De fries have played for leicster and didnt make the grade so whats to suggest Brellier is any better? Newton has played in the prem has Otembor? [a spell in the reserves at liverpool hardly counts] Izzy Mcleod or big dave? who knows? By all means be positive but im still keeping my feet on the ground.It pains me to say it but with the loss of Earnie and now safri no doubt, this could still go horribly t@ts up.

[quote user="mbncfc"] Day-v the str-eye-ker But, if you want to call him his unofficial name, I think the one above is right: Stree-hav-ka. I imagine it wouldn''t be too good an idea to rely on the Canaries World pronounciation [:P] [/quote] LOL im with you on this one.

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"] Ive moderated my stance with regards to the board [Pictures of delia in a scum scarf ect ect] because i realised it wasnt the way things are done on here, Also with regards to the anti board demo leader or wharever it is you call me, i think you will find im merely saying im prepared to take over where Lee left off if and when a campaign is needed as Lee is unable to do it now. Ive made mistakes on here when i first started posting but most people have got over it and reply in a civilised manner, you on the other hand are intent to carry on going over old ground. So i would suggest that you should ignore my posts as they clearly irritate you to an extent that you have to reply to them in such a manner. [/quote] Fair enough Arthur, consider the slate wiped clean. I got quite annoyed with your reluctance to answer the questions asked of you by various posters in the threads that you started but I guess there''s no point raking over old ground. My disappointment came from the fact that at the time I thought your threads detailing your problems with the board could be quite beneficial for everybody. No hard feelings....but I reserve the right to make sarcastic comments about you if the mood so takes me! [/quote] Ditto and slate wiped clean.

[quote user="a1canary"][quote user="Cobain18"]Completely agree with this post, however i think that the club will not raise teir bid because lappin is capable enough to cover for drury in that position, we need to concentrate on a new centre back more.[/quote] "We need to concentrate on a new centre back more" - Agree "Lappin is capable enough to cover Drury" - Disagree! If we can get him for 150k, i think we should. [/quote] I agree left back is a position we seriously need to look at for cover and if we could get him for 150k i would take him, failing that what about the young ex man city player Stephen Jordan? is he still available on a free? rated very highly at one stage. But the really big issue in my opinion is '''' WHY ARE WE NOT GOING FOR A NEW CENTRE BACK PG''''? AARRRRGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!

Simple question.... Where do you believe we will end up this season if we stick with the current signings added to the squad ie..Big Dave,semmy,Cureton,gilks,marshall and the judge? And who do you think will be the hidden jem amongst them? Im going for around 10-12th and i reckon Marshall will be the boy,and brellier will be the new fans fave purely for his up and at em attitude.

[quote user="mbncfc"] I might do a survey of all 92 professional clubs, and see if any of them feel they''re not a player short in a position somewhere. It''s always the way. Personally, I expect us now to have around £3m which could be loosely described as a transfer budget, with any players who now leave (not loans) to be replace. I also think we need to bring in another centre back before the season starts. I''m not sure whether to be depressed or impressed by the rest of the thread. [:D] [/quote] I agree a big CB is a must in my opinion. If like you say we have 3m i believe we should be looking at spendig half that on a proven CB or at very least a quality loan in the Callum Davenport mould. I  understand the point about being a player short and most fans will always say there team could do with more depth here or there,but have we signed players/replaced the older ones with better talent? Time will tell i suppose thats why im not going to say the team will be competing for honours this season and like the last few before it.

[quote user="kevin brighton"]Fine! Now there is some substance to your point. Now ask the board the questions, ask Neil Doncaster who is open to receiving emails. At the end of the day its all about making decisions. Personally I believe we were one player short of staying in the premier league. Was that the board or the manager’s fault? I believe the manager was responsible. He put together the team for the premier league, he let Malky and Ewan go too early in my opinion. Malky would have prevented a goal and possibly scored one or two. Ewan would have notched a goal or two in my opinion. A couple of extra points in my opinion. But its all about decisions not unsubstantiated allegations or recriminations. The board have invested the money where they believe it should have been invested maybe not to our liking. The fact is that we have obtained some talented players for free by exploiting Bosman that does not mean that the players are no good does it? The issue I have with many posts is that they are full of unfounded allegations because the board will as some suggest hide the money.      [/quote] Maybe your right mate but how many times are we going to be short of a player here or there. People have suggested we are 3 players short of a play off team this season. no doubt they thought that the year before and the year before that. The point is how long do you give it until one day you realise we are always going to be that player short? I personally have given up and i blame the board for that,but it doesnt mean i dont want PG to prove me wrong.

[quote user="Bigmarkcanary"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="Bigmarkcanary"][quote user="Millo"] [quote user="lobster catcher"]Has anyone been on a leeds forum recently,bet they are all pleased with the success they had by spending big,is 4 years of success worth maybe 20 years of nothing or even no club at all,all you anti board people should put up or shut up,i defy anyone of you to find a billionaire to buy them out[/quote] How many times are people going to use leeds as a reason we shouldnt spend money. Im all for debate but this "look what happened to Leeds" is really p''ssing me off. [/quote] Is that because it''s true and cannot be argued with? lobster made a very good point in my opinion. [/quote] Fulham? [/quote] Is that the best reply you can muster? Oh dear Arthur, and there was me thinking that it was actually to do with the performance on the pitch during the Fulham game - particularly the ill-fated second half [:''(] Obviously I am very much mistaken [:|] [/quote] I was using Fulham as an example of what can happen if you spend big as a point against the Leeds debate.

[quote user="lobster catcher"]Has anyone been on a leeds forum recently,bet they are all pleased with the success they had by spending big,is 4 years of success worth maybe 20 years of nothing or even no club at all,all you anti board people should put up or shut up,i defy anyone of you to find a billionaire to buy them out[/quote] in my opinion you really are scrapping the barrel by constantly using Leeds, for heavens sake they spent a 100m under O,leary! No one in there right mind are suggesting we do the same. I would like to use Derby as an example- 5 different investers all investing 5m each, sraight up to the prem,didnt go OTT in the transfer market and now the lucky owners of our ex best player. For every Leeds,Oxford ect ect you could argue there is a Deby,Portsmouth. This current prudence with ambition outllook is in my opinion total folly and you only have to look at the last few seasons to see that.

[quote user="Bigmarkcanary"][quote user="Millo"] [quote user="lobster catcher"]Has anyone been on a leeds forum recently,bet they are all pleased with the success they had by spending big,is 4 years of success worth maybe 20 years of nothing or even no club at all,all you anti board people should put up or shut up,i defy anyone of you to find a billionaire to buy them out[/quote] How many times are people going to use leeds as a reason we shouldnt spend money. Im all for debate but this "look what happened to Leeds" is really p''ssing me off. [/quote] Is that because it''s true and cannot be argued with? lobster made a very good point in my opinion. [/quote] Fulham?

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"] Firstly this whole debate was for peoples opininions not for the likes of you to get personal. [/quote] But that''s the problem Arthur. When people like you, and Mr Oliver before you, come on here full of their own self importance it''s difficult to resist having a couple of digs. When your first act is to introduce yourself as the new leader of an anti-board group and you then invite questions from people that you have no intention of answering then you''re asking for it. What I said about your business was a little joke, if you find that too ''personal'' then I suggest you stop taking yourself so seriously. Or alternatively stop posting ''personal'' information. [/quote] Ive moderated my stance with regards to the board [Pictures of delia in a scum scarf ect ect] because i realised it wasnt the way things are done on here, Also with regards to the anti board demo leader or wharever it is you call me, i think you will find im merely saying im prepared to take over where Lee left off if and when a campaign is needed as Lee is unable to do it now. Ive made mistakes on here when i first started posting but most people have got over it and reply in a civilised manner, you on the other hand are intent to carry on going over old ground. So i would suggest that you should ignore my posts as they clearly irritate you to an extent that you have to reply to them in such a manner.

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Millo"][quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Millo"] If Grant wasnt interested in Eastwood why did he make an offer last week? I read it on the home page we had entered the bidding? [/quote] In PG''s most recent interview on the subject he was quoted as saying that he had not enquired about Eastwood, are you calling him a liar? Newspapers always claim that clubs have ''entered the bidding'' for certain players but that doesn''t necessarily mean it''s true. Unfortunately some people are more susceptible to this kind of ''spin'' than others, it''s a good job us ''realists'' are here to set you straight! [/quote] Southend United claim they have rejected a £1.5million offer from Norwich City for striker Freddy Eastwood. “Norwich have made a bid for Freddy but I have told them that they are not offering enough,” club chairman Ron Martin said yesterday. City''s Eastwood bid rejected - claim- 22/06/2007 13:51:00 Southend United today claimed they had rejected a £1.5million offer from Norwich City for striker Freddy Eastwood. “Norwich have made a bid for Freddy but I have told them that they are not offering enough,” club chairman Ron Martin told the Southend Echo. From the evening news 24 archives, unless you are calling them liars? [/quote] Mmm, Southend knew they had no chance of keeping Eastwood so clearly it is in their best interests to start a bidding war. Were they perhaps using us to help with this? They certainly had more to gain from spinning the truth than our manager does. [/quote] I think you will find it is illigal for Southend to say we''ve put a bid in for a player when we actually havent. Its also a bit naive to suggest a clubs chairman would actually do that. If it was the case surely our board would of set the record straight. Either way its not good, in one case we have a board who bottled it in the transfer in the other case we have a board who will let the clubs name be attached to something it has nothing to do with.

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]Couldnt agree more, The board seriously lacks the balls to get things done. During our last prem season we gave the impression we were one happy awe struck family just happy to have the likes of Sir Alex grace our little friendly stadium. I bet you all my money that most of the managers walked away from the Carrow road experiance wishing they could do it every week![/quote] Nothing there but hyperbole and rhethoric.  I''m fairly certain that if any of the players who were here at the time read that, they''d feel that their integrity as professionals was being questioned. And didn''t we beat Man Utd 2-0 at home, making them look pretty ordinary in the process ? [/quote] And the paying supporter doesnt have the right to feel aggrieved after walking away from Craven Cottage at the end of the season? Im not questioning any of the players during that season, the manager and the board signed them and ultimatly they were not good enough. Im not just refering to on field activities, i was refering to the whole day in Norwich experience. I dont want people coming here with that kind of mentality,id rather the clubs came here win lose or draw and then cant wait to get the hell out of CR, i want the place to be a cauldron of passion and make other clubs feel worried [not in an aggresive manner] about coming here. As for the Man utd result, in my opinion it somes up the poor season we had when all we can remember about it was that one result as good as it was.