Wings

[quote user="cityangel"] Thats the problem though Wings, investors don''t just come along, you have to do what Ipswich did and go out and find one. Whilst Delia is reluctant to hand over the reins we''re stuck as we are! [/quote] I see your point, CityAngel; but equally how do we know they''re not looking? They did, after all, bring the Turners in. For all we know, the Turners may well be investing their cash as we speak!

[quote user="cityangel"] Thats the problem though Wings, investors don''t just come along, you have to do what Ipswich did and go out and find one. Whilst Delia is reluctant to hand over the reins we''re stuck as we are! [/quote] I see your point, CityAngel; but equally how do we know they''re not looking? They did, after all, bring the Turners in. For all we know, the Turners may well be investing their cash as we speak!

[quote user="Sons of Boadicea"]Cureton is hardly a spring chicken, has not performed as well as he could but he gets to stay....[/quote] Again, presumptuous. As Cureton is still in contract, he''d have to be sold to another team. If he''s still here when the transfer window shuts, your point is valid but until then I think we can''t say so definitively who is staying and who is going.

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]Beds Delia and Michael have bought a lot of shares. If they left tomorrow having sold them then they will have left nothing behind except their time and effort.[/quote] Not necessarily, shares are like all property and can be given away or sold at a reduced price if desired and the articles and memorandum of the company allow it. It doesn''t necessarily mean their investment will be returned.    

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"] So most people are in favour of the board even though they have no reason to be apart from the same old ''NO ONE ELSE WILL HAVE US'' excuse? Bl**dy rubbish and you know it. As the likes of you keep asking the likes of me if i could prove if anyone would like to buy into the club,maybe i could ask you to prove me wrong? I mean, clubs seem to secure a deal sooner or later,just ask the scum, or any other bigger supported club like Reading,Portsmouth,Fulham,Boro,wigan, all the teams in the championship apart from Sheff utd..........[Did you see the irony?]. [/quote] I can prove you wrong. Ring Norwich and ask who their board of directors are. If they say Roger Munby, Delia Smith, Michael Wynn Jones etc etc. then we obviously haven''t had anyone interested. I''m sure that if the right offer came along, our current board would accept it. Until that day, we''re stuck with what we''ve got.

It''s an interesting point, Scott. But it does beg the question why he would do it. After all, essentially when he''s found something wrong with the club on whatever level, he''s come out and said it. And that''s when he had a contract at the club! Now he''s out of contract, he could say anything he liked. Yes, I appreciate he''s angling to return and work for the club one day, but I still don''t think that would stop him for telling the truth. Hucks said yesterday on radio broadland he wanted to be remembered for being honest with the fans (among other things). I doubt he''d really jeopardise that.

Next we''ll be calling for a giant 60'' statute of Huckerby to replace the hotel, made entirely of gold, diamonds and emeralds of the finest quality.

[quote user="Big Dave"]QPR are in for Ramage. As usual we will be picking up the scraps in August that others do not want.[/quote] How pessimistic can you get? The season''s not been finished a week and already you''re saying we''re failing in the transfer market!

There can be no doubting that Roeder has released a player capable of doing a job at this level in a way that has left a very bitter taste in the mouth of many a Norwich fan. But equally we must remember he''s the boss and not only is he entitled to do this, we must have faith that he can and will bring in the right players to take us in the right direction.

[quote user="canaries in Bed"]Simple answer is I support the club. We don''t have any viable options at the moment and I would rather have them, than some numpty like Manderic, who does for his own self asteem and nowt else. I don''t see many other people willing to invest, and this is not an argument about the rights and wrongs of that at this stage. The thing is Arther, I think the majority of fans are in favour of the board, message boards like this, are always going to have people who are more vocal in arguments, most real people are in favour of the board.[/quote] Agree 100% with everything said here.

[quote user="Wings"]You clearly haven''t read this thread at all because I refer in the opening thread to remarks on the forum, not in this thread. How can I start a new thread about remarks in this thread? You''re confused. [/quote] Should read: You clearly haven''t read this thread at all because I refer in the opening post to remarks on the forum, not in this thread. How can I start a new thread about remarks in this thread? You''re confused.

[quote user="Fellas"][quote user="Wings"][quote user="Wings"]  I say quite clearly that I don''t agree with Hucks being released or the way he''s been treated. [/quote] I say quite clearly time after time I don''t agree with Hucks being released... Sorry, making a small amendment to the above to be absolutely clear to Fellas. [/quote] Well I am sincerely sorry for mis-understanding that particular post but I still completely disagree with your first post and think it''s quite frankly ridiculous. Who is actually insulting roeder on this thread apart from the obvious candidate (and school kids who have registered within the last 24 hours).... You are making a mountain out of a mole hill off the words of a crazed ol'' boy. [/quote] You clearly haven''t read this thread at all because I refer in the opening thread to remarks on the forum, not in this thread. How can I start a new thread about remarks in this thread? You''re confused.

I really do hope so. I can see Birmingham buying a center half as a matter of priority if they stay up, so I am hoping they do it - unlikely as it may seem.

To be fair, information from the Grant regime leaked like a sieve. We knew exactly who was coming at least a good three days before. Under Roeder, information is very much more difficult to come by. If signings are in the frame, we won''t know until they''re made.

[quote user="Wings"]  I say quite clearly that I don''t agree with Hucks being released or the way he''s been treated. [/quote] I say quite clearly time after time I don''t agree with Hucks being released... Sorry, making a small amendment to the above to be absolutely clear to Fellas.

How can you hope to have a reasoned argument with me if you don''t read anything I write? It''s like selective reading. Read back throughout my posts - I say quite clearly that I don''t agree with Hucks being released or the way he''s been treated. But equally I can see why he has been released - and it''s a compelling argument. People shut off to this aren''t being objective and are letting emotion cloud things.

[quote user="Fellas"][quote user="Wings"] It''s not defending the indefensible because their quite clearly is quite a compelling argument for his release. It''s a shame you''re too stubborn and blinkered to see it. [/quote] There is quite a compelling argument for his signature. It''s a shame you''re too stubborn and blinkered to see it. [/quote] I''d refer you to... [quote user="Wings"] You can''t doubt Hucks goals and assists record. It''s top quality - and a great reason why I think we should''ve kept him. [/quote] Try reading my posts before actually replying to them.

[quote user="Yellow Rider"][quote user="jas the barclay king"] Nothing to do with the fact Iwan and Hucks are mates then? jas :) [/quote] Spot on Jas - again! Still, nice to know that you, me, Kick it Off and many others are clearly........''ignorant and stupid''! [/quote] It wouldn''t bother me quite so much if others weren''t blinkered in their views. Like Ricky described it, he said it was "defending the indefensible". What a load of BS! It''s obvious to me that Roeder has done this not to be spiteful but for the better of this football club.

[quote user="ricky knight"]Sorry dont agree, Lennon, Walcott, Downing, study them playing and how long has Hux lacked these skills in your opinion, check his goals and assists record, was he not the most fouled premiership player, you dont get tackled with your hands on hips, this is garbage backed up by Percy''s trying to defend the indefensible.[/quote] I''m not sure what you''re trying to say, Ricky. That appears to me as a lot of waffle. Lennon, Walcott and Downing. Of those, two of them (Walcott and Lennon) don''t actually play for their respective teams all that often. Why? Because they do exactly what Huckerby does. Their game is based on pace and control because they don''t have the physical attributes to compete. That''s why they''re used more as impact subs than anything else. Downing is different because Boro don''t have the same size of squad as Arsenal and Tottenham. He does contribute to the overall team play. I bet you''ll never see Downing stand there, hands on hips watching as the opposing player runs by him. You can''t doubt Hucks goals and assists record. It''s top quality - and a great reason why I think we should''ve kept him. He''s still got that in him. And yes, Huckerby was the most fouled premiership player. Three years ago. Again, we should stop living in the past and acknowledge he isn''t the player he was in that season. It''s not defending the indefensible because their quite clearly is quite a compelling argument for his release. It''s a shame you''re too stubborn and blinkered to see it.

Totally agree with the sentimentality of this post.  No one player will ever be bigger than the club. At the end of the day, Huckerby has moved on - and Roeder has done it for the good of Norwich City FC. Only time will tell whether this is the case.

[quote user="Bomber"] Probably so but that is what Roeder is trying to sort out or is that beyond your thinking.  [/quote] Elementary, my dear Bomber.

Maybe in years gone by, Ricky, the wingers job you described was accurate. Today, though, the modern wingers needs to have an element of every aspect of the game about him. Huckerby simply doesn''t have that. Again, I don''t agree with Roeder. But equally the reasons why he''s released Huckerby are compelling. He doesn''t add enough to the team and his form hasn''t been good enough to really warrant another contract. Releasing Hucks in this fashion wouldn''t have been a problem if it was, say Lee Croft. It''s just because of Huckerby''s history that this ridiculous sentimental and outright hostile emotional reaction has occured.

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]Totally agree, Roeder has been a spineless coward.  Lumping Hucks send off with the likes of Jarvis, Cave-Brown, Smart and co...[/quote] Don''t quote me and use it as an excuse to call Roeder a spineless coward. Besides, coming from a load of people intent on sitting on a message board behind fake names, calling someone a spineless coward is hypocritical to say the least. I read your posts on the WotB under the name Phrankin, and believe me, you above all are completely hypocritical for calling anyone a spineless coward.

haha, love it!

[quote user="AndyJR"]Roeders selfish for not giving us the chance to bid Huck''s farewell in the rightful manner.  [/quote] That''s football, I''m afraid Andy. Doesn''t make Roeder selfish. Far from it.