Jump to content

venta icenorum

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. [quote user="Canary Poirot"] Seeing as we had a gloating Colchester fan on here last Saturday, just thought I''d inquire that poster how his village team got on this evening? Still firing up the league are we? And how''s the goal difference at the moment considering you had a 12 goal swing your way after the first game. What''s that? We''ve got a better goal difference now? Maybe that''s because you''re a village team and you''re going nowhere this season! Their computers are all broken as they had to go to Ipswich to buy them   [/quote]
  2. Thanks Ricardo. I know what you mean about superstitions. When we had our unbeaten run under Roeder I ate the same thing for lunch every Saturday, a samosa and a peanut roll from REDS on St Benedicts. The day we finally lost there were no samosas left so I knew we''d had it two hours before kick off! I stick with mushy peas from the market (and they stick to me) this season (though curiously not for our infamous opening game!) and it seems to be doing the trick.
  3. Has anyone taken, or know of anyone who''s taken a one year old to a game at Carrow Road? It''s just I may have to take my boy for the Oldham game (no one else to look after him that afternoon). Not sure what he''d make of it. He likes eating , though, so could always feed him a constant stream of matchday pies if he starts bawling! He also has a cool yellow curly wig in his dressing up box which would look just the part. Keeping him still is likely to be the biggest challenge
  4. [quote user="Aza K1CK 1T 0FF"]i agree completely. But lambert never strikes me as loyal. I can see him leaving the club in 1-2 seasons, i don''t think he is long term, just a short term maanger to get us back on our feet. And i don''t know if anyone else notices, but last night on sky it said that paul lambert was caretaker manager!![/quote] Don''t worry! Enjoy the moment as the OP says, we had 4 wins in a row and are playing consistently better football than we have for ages. And if Lambert leaves eventually, our CEO will get us someone else half decent to manage the side. Oh and Sky are always right about everything!?!  Think we''d have heard it somewhere else first, like when he was appointed. As I say, don''t worry!!!!
  5. [quote user="refjezhitchin"] [quote user="barclay_troy"]if sky were not there then i would say no-probs but the cameras seem to jink us. 1-1[/quote] can we put this stupid ''sky'' theory to bed? I don''t think we lost once last season when we were on SKY (granted we only played 2 matches live on the telly but still)   [/quote] I was thinking exactly the same thing. The win against Ipswich last season looked mighty fine on Sky, Croft''s screamer, Roeder''s ''camp'' celebration, they did the cameras proud! We had some good Sky appearances in the Prem too - Man U anyone? (just don''t mention ''Survival Sunday''!!!)
  6. [quote user="nutty nigel"] [quote user="Norwich"]Dronny - I am afraid to say, yes. He is always a liability as I have said a game will not pass without Doc using his legendary bear hug, so for that reason you cannot help but be nervous when a long ball goes over the top. I am sorry, but no-one can dispute that, surely?[/quote] Well I''d dispute it Norwich. And so do the stats unless he has bribed the refs too.[;)]     [/quote] I agree with you NN. Wasn''t Doherty one of the best players in our annihalation of Orient 4 - 0 and the Pirates 5 - 1? Didn''t everyone agree that? Weren''t people asking where are the Doc bashers now? So why are you (Norwich) now saying he is such a liability (based on his errors) despite his recent form? You could go through the whole team in fact and everyone makes mistakes. We missed chances to score more goals and see off the game yesterday, those could have been more of a liability than Doc''s bear hug that conceded a free kick that missed.
  7. [quote user="Fellas"][quote user="sgncfc"][quote user="Fellas"][quote user="sgncfc"][quote user="NCFC_Shaun"] [quote user="Fellas"]This is why I can''t wait for the band-wagon fans to get bored and find a new play thing. You go to Carrow Road these days and half of the fans there don''t have a clue about anything. They think Daydream believer is a nice pick-me-up before the game, that Wes Hoolahan (or insert other name here) is the most talented player to ever play for the club and that Iwan Roberts was a player who scored a few goals a long time ago. McVeigh is the most talented player (maybe minus Dean Ashton, Thomas Helveg and maybe maybe Huckerby) to have played at this club in the past decade. He''s an old bor now, not so quick (he never was a fast player) but he has more skill and talent in one pinky than Hoolahan does in that left peg of his. I like Hoolahan I think he''s a good player, one for the future and a good talent but I''m under no illusions he''s never going to be as good as McVeigh. He''ll never be able to play completely out of position (like McVeigh), play with his weaker foot, be the top goal-scorer for this club, be a great corner kick taker or acheive the same heights at the club that McVeigh has. So in answer to this thread, anybody who dare say McVeigh is a waste of space not only insults him as a player, Paul Lambert as a manager who can actually assess good talent, but also the fine pleasure it was to be a city supporter watching Iwan, WLY, Holt, Francis, Huckerby and Crouch put teams to the sword those seasons ago. McVeigh aint the quickest, the fittest or in his prime but nobody at the club now, or in the foreseeable future will be able to pick out the perfect pass time and time again like this lad. [/quote] Very true. McVeigh was a class act back then when we reached the playoff final and won the league two years later. But I wouldn''t say that he still posseses more ability than Hoolahan. However, I agree that he''s far from a ''waste of space'' - and if only for his achievements for us in the past, he doesn''t deserved to be called one. As for Daydream believer, I actually like that being played again. Reminds me of the days that we were a decent championship side [;)] [/quote] What a load of utter tosh. I can only assume your mention of Thomas Helveg in the same sentence as Ashton and Huckerby is the clue that this is a wind up. I too loved WLY way back, as I did Fox, Sutton, Paddon, Peters, Eadie etc but to say he has more talent than Hoolahan is simply nonsense. Huckerby was twice the player McVeigh ever was and I can''t believe you are serious. McVeigh is no longer good enough for League One - he was released by a relegated Luton, not because he cost too much money but because they thought he couldn''t cut it, yet Mr Gunn, solely for sentimental reasons saw fit to give him a contract because he impressed in training. You are right that Lambert is no fool and McVeigh will not feature in the first team squad once he has put together his own. I love him for what he did but he is now, unfortunately, a waste of space. Why not give Mulryne a contract too? - he was also a decent player for us once.[/quote] So Hoolahan has played in the premiership? He''s played for a successful team in the championship? Hmmm... He is 27 and has yet to get anywhere near the a mid-championship team, I feel that speaks volumes about his ceiling. Hoolahan has skill, but if you can''t even the touch the ball with your weak foot then not only are you gonna struggle to achieve a good level but you simply are a bit of a lazy professional footballer. Why does he beat his man over and over again? Because he''s waiting to be able to play the ball with his left foot and unwilling to play the ball with his right foot. As to your attack on McVeigh, well I feel for you because you can''t enjoy watching football that much. Pre-season and in his recall to the team McVeigh rolled back the years to a good extent. He has a superb touch, great vision, and a fantastic set-piece and cross, all of this after being out of the game for a while, playing out of position and well past his prime and playing in a completely new team. So a few laboured performances were on the cards. Quite frankly I love watching good football, and McVeigh provides that in a league of hoofers, hackers and bodge players we see in league 1. Whilst Daley is still not quite there yet, Whaley seemingly un-settled here and a lack of real other options out right except an out-of-position Martin (or Smith), a lot to ask of young fragile players (see Jarvis etc), then I can see us relying on McVeigh for some hefty minutes. So less of the boo-boys, scape-goat dirt. [/quote] Wow! You have some issues, Fellas! "Boo-boys, scape-goat dirt?" What the hell is that about? [/quote] Well dodged... Considering Doc has made a strong comeback, Cureton is scoring and semmy isn''t in the team, we''ve gotta lay into somebody haven''t we? [/quote] Well said, Fellas, I am in complete agreement with you. This isn''t the first anti - McVeigh  thread on here, some people just aren''t happy that we''ve won 3 games in a row for the first time in years (when was the last time anyway?!) and feel that obviously Lambert''s selection policy is flawed as results haven''t been good enough! It really is unbelievable. Paul McVeigh may not be quite the player he was and maybe he isn''t having the best spell of form at the moment but he still warrants a place in the matchday squad as he brings class and experience, ie something a bit different from many of our players. If you asked Huckerby, Safri and Etuhu (our midfield back when we were high champs standard) their opinions on WLY you would hear some very high praise indeed - Etuhu actually said that McVeigh was ''one of the best players he''d ever seen'' and Hucks himself reportedly had a part to play in WLY''s return to Carrow Rd this time round. Let''s just enjoy the fact that no-one is to blame for once as everything is going right for a change!
  8. I just find your opinion on McVeigh a bit narrow minded, he is still a quality player. As you say, he hasn''t scored like the impressive Martin has, but I wouldn''t necessarily expect him to score that many playing on the wing. Neither would I expect them to be competing for one place. We need a decent squad and McVeigh is a good squad member to have around, he has the experience to balance the side too. If he''s fit enough for Lambert to pick him then what has his weight/build got to do with it? Do you think he''s too short to play for Norwich too?
  9. [quote user="King Korey"]So you would say that he is better than Spillane and Askou. Im afraid i disagree[/quote] Doc makes a few mistakes but then so does everyone in the team but no-one seems hell-bent on keeping a running total with any other player. Askou gave away a penalty today, if that had been Doc there would be threads started on here about it slating him for a perceived weakness. He does get involved in the game and a good thing too, someone needs to be good in the air and luckily he is.
  10. [quote user="hugoagogo"]David Beckham or Chubbs McVeigh. ha McVeigh would struggle for lynn[/quote] Stop picking on players who have gifts you could only dream of and get behind the team, saddo.
  11. [quote user="NCFC-47"]Was going past tesco up ipswich road & i saw this range rover with the Registration 16 RK 16 his number at united and RK his intials what was he doing here? [/quote] Where is he living ? Didn''t he live/stay in Durham whilst at Sunderland, so he obviously prefers charming historic Cathedral cities with good facilities to bleak run down towns. If he lives anywhere in the Waveney valley area he could easily come up to Norwich for a spot of shopping, miles away from the hostile binners lurking in the shady streets of Ipswich.
  12. [quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="SimonOTBC"] [quote user="Mustachio Furioso"]Thanks Cam, at least there is someone else on here who understands how the Cambridge entry system works.[/quote] I understand perfectly how the Oxbridge entry systems work. I was questioning what you thought would stop him getting in? I didn''t say he would per se, but one would imagine on paper he''s good enough, and then the interview, well who knows? I don''t see how you can say that he wouldn''t get in that''s all. As far as I see it he''d have as good a chance as anyone else. [/quote] I''m not sure that this is the place to discuss the oft criticised Oxbridge entry selection but it remains a fact that that you can have more "points" than a rival but be failed by the interview board for, if you wish, a lack of charisma in the interview.  That''s just the way they hope to choose their select.  It is a very difficult situation - all courses have their minimum points but the problem is what to do with those who double those minimum points and there are still not enough places for all of them. Oxbridge resort to the "personality selection" as a sort of tie breaker.  The Girl Upstairs chose not to go the Oxbridge route although she applied to both and was granted initial interviews "but didn''t like the look of the process." Instead she went to an Oxbridge equivalent, Trinity College, Dublin, who for most courses use a different system - and just as much open to criticism.  They merely choose the the highest points scorers to fill the available places and after that the door closes.  At the Freshers induction as part of the "Please Don''t Waste Your Time Here" lecture she was told that for everyone in the room "fifteen have been turned away." Personally I would go for first past the post myself but in any event there is not a personality option. The Girl Upstairs was State School throughout prior to Trinity Dublin  but her Musician Sister was entirely different and there was not a State School which could cope with her.  We had absolutely no help at all from the state system in coping with a very gifted and very focussed daughter and so we had to go private - or at least enter her for Chetham''s, Manchester, who took her on board when she was 13 and while she had a Scholarship we had to foot the bill for all the rest of it (fair enough).  It still cost us a fortune in private lessons from the age of nine and on her instruments.  Fortunately we were in a financial position to do so but if not there wouldn''t have been any help from the Department of Education. Come to think of it you could argue it is flawed all the way round.[;)] [/quote] Yes I was interviewed at Oxford (didn''t get in) and one panel member claimed ''not to like music at all'' before accusing me of drug taking. I can remember one question where I spent what seemed like 5 minutes trying to think of a reply, it seemed like the most impossible question! Yet on paper I probably seemed like an ideal candidate. They certainly did their best to disorientate me. I wasn''t very competitive as I wasn''t sure if it was the right Uni for me - certainly not something they wanted to hear! Good luck to Mr Adeyemi though, particularly in ignoring all the advice and choosing the path which he believes is right for him personally.
  13. [quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Mello Yello"] [quote user="Camuldonum"]Lincoln are looking for experienced players - we''ve enough "promising youngsters" to sink a battleship in the Sincil Canal.[/quote] It''s Sincil Drain.....actually. [/quote] It''s the oldest CANAL in Britain, built by the Romans to harness the foaming waters of the River Witham at Roaring Meg. [:|] [/quote] I''ve always known it as Sincil Drain....and my Lincoln colleagues also call it Sincil Drain..... [/quote] You''re both right, it is known locally as Sincil Drain but it is a man made canal that runs from the River Witham in the St Catherine''s area of the city, past the football ground before heading East and running parallel with the Witham about 7 miles to Bardney lock where it rejoins the river. For such a manky looking stretch of water, complete with shopping trolleys and the like, it always used to amaze me that it seemed to be teeming with fish, including quite large pike and chub. Quite why i''m posting this, i don''t know! Not sure why WLY would be going to Lincoln, maybe he likes pike fishing in dodgy canals/drains!
  14. [quote user="ricardo"][quote user="venta icenorum"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Mello Yello"] [quote user="Norwich4Evz"]http://carrowroad.net/cnews/modules/news/article.php?storyid=770[/quote] Is it going cheep? [/quote] Well it doesn''t look to be on higher perches. [/quote] Eggsactly....Don''t know how much someone will shell out for it? [/quote] It''ll be no yolk if he can''t sell it. [/quote] It might have to go for a poultry sum! [/quote] No more than chicken feed, I expect. [/quote] But a potential nest egg, a good run for your money.
  15. [quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Mello Yello"] [quote user="Norwich4Evz"]http://carrowroad.net/cnews/modules/news/article.php?storyid=770[/quote] Is it going cheep? [/quote] Well it doesn''t look to be on higher perches. [/quote] Eggsactly....Don''t know how much someone will shell out for it? [/quote] It''ll be no yolk if he can''t sell it. [/quote] It might have to go for a poultry sum!
  • Create New...