As my login causes problems [ :o) ]

Like Purple I am confused by this backwards and forwards motioning of good or bad. The fact is our owners have control and bring in who they like. They need not answer to anyone apart from the fact that they hope to put together an offering that people (fans, players, TV companies, sponsors etc) would like to be a part of. By my reckoning they are doing that and if the people they choose to assist are part of that then they are doing the task required so may I be allowed to say "carry on everybody"? Now if there is a spare seat at the pre match meal and in the directors'' box I''m free ....

With that voice Mr Worthington will soon be back !

I don''t know I leave it to City Angel and Nutty to tell you all and still some people don''t know what''s happening on Wednesday :o(

Tangi regenerated like a true Dr Who fan didn''t he?

Am I the only one who is happy to take a friend for a beer? Particularly last minute like this £48 was a bit steep.

Yes I heard about the protest. I didn''t see the game as I don''t subsidise clubs through a BT subscription. Funny that.

I never have understood the hero worship he gets. He can be a good shot stopper like Judas Marshall and others before him but on so many levels, crosses under pressure, positioning, kicking out, getting down quick he is lacking. When Bunn took over during his injury he didn''t deserve to win his place back and you wonder what Rudd or the tea lady have to do to get in the side ahead of him. YES drop him now.

Love it !

I think some of you are slipping into who was the best player rather than my wider definition including personality. That is why Stringer, Sutton, Goss etc have not made it FOR ME, although a legend will not be acclaimed by all. I also agree with the reservations on my pick of Culverhouse (no personality to speak of) but I really struggled with right back. To me goalie was clear with Gunn the also ran but goalies are not hot on personality when with City. Both fullbacks are quiet men and Bowen nearly made the team as having more personality but again still quiet maybe Bradshaw should be a "big hitter" for right back but overall I was happy with my two. Central defenders pick themselves for me with Forbes and Bruce who were absolute legends for me. Wingers so many to choose from but never having seen Varco or Curran it had to be Foggo and Huckerby for me. Again there personalities overriding more skilful or faster wingers. Centre midfield if you saw Peters or Paddon play you would never have anyone else and Paddon in a nightclub made boybands look like amateurs! Strikers again I accept the skills of Sutton or Davies were better but Roberts really was zero to hero and MacDougall lifted the Club singlehanded into the glamour of big time. I put Ashman as manager but maybe he could have been full back although I never saw him and so maybe John Bond could take the manager''s suit again for me more on what he was than his achievements where others did more. Finally Nutty you and I will always love the headbanded legend Hockey but although we loved him he can''t really justify inclusion in my team although to bring him on to sort out Muscatt would be my dream!

I actually was thinking of a full blown legends team. So not necessarily the best players for each position but my team of legends through play, service and above all personality! Keelan Culverhouse Forbes Bruce Drury Huckerby Peters Paddon Foggo Roberts MacDougall (OK that may be personal legend) Manager because his overall service was so immense Ashman.

Nostalgia is not what it was .... A lovely ground but for my outlay on an away day out I would prefer better facilities in this day and age. I was really sorry to see Maine Road go and Highbury but now cannot imagine going back to either it is alas progress. Besides as an athletics fan as well the Olympic Stadium has to be preserved and there is no other way than West Ham taking it on for most of the year.

[quote user="lappinitup"]A well reasoned post by Ivor to continue a discussion which by PinkUn standards has been excellent, showing both sides of the debate. I was therefore somewhat shocked reading a post on a similar thread on Norwich Talk by Mr Robin Sainty, chairman of The Canaries Trust, and Archant columnist which read as follows......."That''s the point. I read the thread on the Pink''un about this subject and found it to have been totally sidelined by the usual triumvirate who see themselves as better fans than anyone else. It has been shunted into an argument about benefitting away fans rather than home fans when the real issue is rising costs for EVERYONE. Nothing will change while clubs fill grounds but there has to be a tipping point when more people are priced out than can (or are prepared to ) afford to go.Rather than carp about minutiae I think its important that fans get the message across that watching prices rise continuously while Premier League players and their agents soak up even more TV money isn''t particularly enjoyable. Saturday will, in itself, change nothing, but if nothing happens to highlight fan disquiet we will just have more of the same.Edited 38 minutes ago by Beauseant " I find it extremely sad that the chairman of an organisation who claims they want to give fans a voice, should treat some of those fans with such disdain and contempt and be unwilling to hear some of those voices even resorting to insults, simply because they hold different views to him. He clearly only wants to give those fans that agree with him a voice. The fact that he has read this thread and disagreed with a lot of it should have been a good enough reason for him to join in and set the record straight rather than slope off and complain elsewhere. Where''s the leadership there? In his second sentence he says "It has been shunted into an argument about benefitting away fans rather than home fans when the real issue is rising costs for EVERYONE.". Er, isn''t the campaign about "Twenty''s Plenty for AWAY tickets"? Surely if it''s about ALL ticket prices it should have been called just that. Who''s doing the shunting Mr Sainty?Finally, who is this ''triumvirate'' you allude to? Clearly I am one of them but as you''ve put it out there, I think you should name the other two.[/quote] Wow I am missing out on this other message board where we apparently comment on threads over here, an interesting concept and I feel compelled to dash off somewhere else and post a response, well maybe not. So the challenge appears to have been thrown down to enter the debate on this message board and clarify some of those remarks, at least who are the Triumverate that rule the Pink Un message board is it really Caesar, Pompey and Crassus?

[quote user="Ivor Know"]Trying to move this having regards to the issues raised by the "be fair to home supporters" line of reasoning. First, if you''re talking about casual prices only, a consequence of that line of thinking would be that you''re actually seeking to end the policy of grading games. That may find favour with the fans from the top six or seven clubs who whinge about always being charged Grade A prices, but would that necessarily find favour with the other thirteen or fourteen clubs? I suspect not. Second, concessions. At the moment the club has four grades in standard seats (with adults prices only in premium seats) adults, 65+, under 17 and under 12. So, what options would the club have, bearing in mind that they would almost certainly seek to recoup some of the lost income? Charge more for the casual prices for premium seats is clearly one option. Not sure how much additional income that would actually generate? Another option would be to increase the prices of season tickets within standard and premium areas. Widening it to all fans will never work because the clubs simply won''t allow it. Discuss.[/quote] Firstly Mr Know I apologise for the editing of your post above but as I am a page late in responding I thought it was as well to remind everyone what I am responding to with the meat out of your rather watery stew. There is a big assumption that the wider fan base actually feel football to be overpriced. Yes there are many examples of people who cannot afford to attend games of a PARTICULAR club. Well get used to it you cut your cloth to suit your means I can''t afford to eat at Jamies Kitchen so I choose to go to Pizza Hut, my mate can''t afford Pizza Hut so chooses McDonalds. If you can''t afford to attend Chelsea go to QPR, if you can''t afford league football attend the excellent non-league variety. Believe me I have watched some of my best games at the Walks or Aldis Park. Once we attend clearly we have a choice over the expense of the ticket and whether we want free biscuits, programmes, meals or just dodgy toilets in the River End. We can also choose whether to sit low or high or at the end of the pitch or on the side. Ahh there is a theme developing here over choice. So ticket prices are influenced by the level of the club, what other clubs are around it and where we sit. Now one we cannot choose and that is our age, but does anyone see a fault with charging less for "new" younger supporters to encourage them to commit their loyalties and future earnings to that club, no. It may not be kids for a quid these days but we know we are still reaping the larger attendances built by that policy of years gone by. As for older fans getting concessions it seems reasonable to me that those who endured the years gone by should get a discount now. So hey what am I saying is you pays your money and takes your choice if you are a home fan, and if you prefer you have good old Chris Goreham at a very reasonable outlay or a local hostelry showing a snowy picture or on those awful timed kick offs maybe one in Sky/BT HD surround sound. Alas for us oldies you could go down memory lane and read a Pink Un report that evening and imagine the game in your head. BUT whatever we think of ticket pricing be it football, theatre, cinema or just Wiz''s bus to the bingo it reflects an economic model for the provider, so stop bleating make your choice and pay or don''t pay. So when I go to my next away game I will pay my petrol, buy my overpriced meals, a few drinks that are probably cheaper than where I drink on home games, buy my ticket and go and have a great day out. Oh and as I have a large family I will probably subsidise some of my offspring and live on baked beans for a month afterwards because what you all forget is that away games are bloody good fun whatever the cost!

Surely you should be looking at towns/cities without a premiership team who have a wealthy backer and would move us there. I quite fancy becoming Staines Canaries FC.

"We''re calling upon football clubs at all levels of the game to recognise and reward the amazing contribution of away fans" So no it isn''t recognising the amazing contribution of any fans other than those who travel away from when it is brought in and those that go to expensive other grounds. Believe it or not lower league games can often cost less than £20 already so there is no gain for those supporters. As I said earlier it is to subsidise people going to Old Trafford and Stamford Bridge the most. Not very socialist is it?

Ahh I don''t post for ages and then we get a really good topic with some quite good intellectual contributions and I find myself coming back more than once. For that thank you Ivor although like Nutty I do find myself frustrated by this "T" like anonymity particularly when you enjoy your cryptic name dropping in such a mick taking fashion. To the subject in hand. I am firmly of the belief that a club that can afford it should reward faithful fans with concessions, hence when games are postponed or coach trips go wrong a promotional price for a future game for those affected has to be applauded as in the case of several games pushed by City. Equally where the Club fears away support may be low they should use trusted marketing tactics to boost support which again inevitably means subsidised ticketing. However what I cannot accept is that a potentially sold out trip to Stamford Bridge or Old Trafford should receive this treatment, nor that a neighbour who gets his tiicket from Anfield should pay half what I would pay some ten seats away (should I choose to sit in the Jarrold) even though he is standing! At this rate I could go to the Palladium for £20 instead of paying £50 to go to the Theatre Royal, now there''s an idea. PS I only really posted to give you the opportunity to get your literary brain back into gear with more Kentish references.

A little bit of mischief from young purple there as Ivor does remind us all that I have never hidden who I am although few people call me "Dave". I accept my major fault is in using absurd examples to make points and God forbid a shopkeeper should win the lottery, but my point on "giving back" Newmarket winnings is probably more reasonable. The fact is that because you have a windfall gain, it does not mean that it goes back to the customer. Anglia TV had a "licence to print money" back in the 60s and 70s but alas not all went back to the viewer. There is no correlation and as such I do not expect Joe armchair viewer to subsidise me going to Stamford Bridge. However I do expect him to subsidise keeping Newport County in business! I still fail to see why those people who choose to travel the country to support their team away feel that they should be subsidised. Will someone subsidise me going to a City preseason tour game in the US or when we reach Europe me going to the Camp Nou? I would much MUCH rather we subsidised tickets for underprivileged children or Iraq veterans or maybe (revolutionary here) give the money to proper charities to distribute. So Ivor New Login I will not be joining your protest and wonder why organisations with different priorities are pandering to a few travelling fans.

I feel at a disadvantage Ivor in that I don''t think I know who you are, ah the days of anonymity live on in Pink Un land. My three points: The relevance to organisations, I fear I am in danger of rekindling a fire that was best left out in that I do feel that where an organisation is set up with a certain rationale - standing at grounds, share ownership, socialising etc it should stick to that. Otherwise it has a duty to go back to its members and seek to change its constitution and name and then publicise that to the wider public. If that has happened for those organisations I apologise but suggest the publicity bit fell short! The second price related point and your argument on TV revenues is of course totally wrong. It suggests that as a shop keeper if I had a lucky win on the lottery/horses I should immediately reduce the price of my bread. Or maybe charge extra to my customer who had a lucky win. Life as we all know is not like that, however most share their good fortune with those less fortunate and tend to do it in charitable ways like for instance our own club does through the CSF. My third distasteful point may be for a small group but where I am going to an event that not everyone can afford and the refugees certainly can''t I would feel it very difficult to explain to them why my £200 trip to Stamford Bridge should only cost me £160 whilst throwing a couple of quid in a bucket to feed their family ! As has been said in the thread it matters to people when they add up the money they spend on away trips but it is a choice, and a choice that includes the burgers, beer, etc which is their choice to spend just don''t expect to be subsidised by people who have no choice in it.

An interesting debate (far too few on here recently hence why I seldom post) and one worthy of input. Firstly I agree that this campaign would be one in tune with the BEProjekt but cannot see how it falls within the remit of some of the other organisations getting behind it. The campaign is in my opinion misguided as it doesn''t recognise the price of entertainment generally and football specifically where Ryman league now costs £9 to stand in the cold on the touchline so a comfy seat with facilities to hand is going to cost more before you get to the quality of the entertainment. Of course the biggest issue is supply and demand and until clubs are faced with empty stands and decide that a lower price might produce higher total revenue it just isn''t going to happen. Lastly with a collection for penniless refugees happening at the same time most fans are going to find this protest a little distasteful so it will actually work against the image of anyone involved. Shame.

I have a team that all used to post on the old NCFC Official bulletin board so can we join in the message board trophy Nutty? If not we will have to be the Pink Un third team :o)

[quote user="Newton"]The absolute twaddle and pathetic back slapping on this thread is so funny I have nearly wet myself 3 times reading the posts - what utter rubbish Get real guys we were relegated for 2 x reasons Houghton tried to change our whole Forward line over 1 x summer - signed flops and we did not score any goals The manager should have been changed around Christmas but for some explicable reason the board stuck with Houghton until the ship was almost under water -took the step when it was too late That''s why we were relegated - and I am very sad to say its all factual[/quote] Always difficult to take things as "factual" and that we should "get real" when a "fan" doesn''t even know the name of a recent manager! I believe the real factual spelling should be Hughton.

I would have thought anything that brings the views of different people be they fans or the bloke/lady down the street to our papers and screens is a good thing. To be honest I am a little weary of the same people popping up every time on Canary Call, youtube or in print speaking on behalf of everyone else so bring on some new faces. I just hope one of them is one of the people in the background at Colney a couple of transfer windows ago as they had a different outlook to many of us :)

A phenomenally big WELL DONE to you City Angel. I suspect there were a few people who were waiting to see you fall flat on your face and didn''t think you could do it. Little did they know what a terrier you are. I am really pleased for you and for all the NCFC fans who will gain out of this. Thank you very much.

To be fair to the lovely City Angel I don''t think she was imagining all 26,000 attendees to be wanting to be part of this and if only a small number of people get it off the ground I''m sure a good time can be had by all.. There is no doubt that when a forum is organised with good speakers people do turn out, equally quiz nights etc do have support and a nominal fee is willingly paid. I suspect even a good old debate between us old gits where we reminisce about whether Alan Black, Geoff Butler, Clive Payne, Mel Machin or Nutty Nigel was the best full back of a generation would at least get a bit of bar revenue for whatever public house was prepared to host it! I say give it a go, and let''s see what support it gets.

Well this certainly got me thinking as someone who grew up going to the old Social Club every week, with Dad playing snooker or Bar Billiards down there and Mum loving the bingo and dancing. It really was a good club back in the 60s and 70s. To be fair not everyone went to games but were certainly like minded and it served a great purpose. I think you''re right that the overheads of having your own premises are not viable any more but using the Club and also getting rooms "on the road" make a lot of sense. Certainly some of the ideas you put forward plus ones added beneath by others would get some support and serve as a focal point for like minded people to get together. You know I think NCISA/INCSA got too detracted by being political when it had a place to bring together supporters and maybe this run by non-political types could fill part of the vacuum left behind. So I hope it does get off the ground. I am worried that the Supporters Trust seems to be trying to reinvent itself as NCISA so if this does get going please lets have a one line constitution that says it will not get political. :o)