John

[quote user="CDMullins"]What about ''I just cant get enough'' by Depeche Mode? Only joking of course. There is only 1 winner, ''Fanfare For The Common Man'' Emerson, Lake and Palmer.[/quote]I''m guessing the joking didn''t cease after the first suggestion?(B**chy, i know - taste has a nasty streak to it)

Ennio Morricones "The Ecstasy Of Gold".Feels to have the perfect tone for a new dawn for our club in the Premier League...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV0wPBYDQ6Y

I''m baffled as to why there''s a need to post another thread about shopping lists when there''s so many available.You must have an alarming self-inflated sense of importance to do that. The same kind of alarming self-inflated sense of importance that persuades one to write a blog in fact...http://services.pinkun.com/FORUMS/PINKUN/CS/blogs/canary_amongst_seagulls/archive/2011/05/10/2528190.aspx

Thanks for the kind words Iwan - especially when said through such gritted teeth. [;)] [Y]By all means i haven''t covered it all, and i''d certainly expect City fans here, and everywhere, to have their imaginations run wild as the transfer window progresses.Think of it as a ''starter''; i''d hate to see my thorough, all encompassing research and succinct (stop laughing) ability to interpret the market put an end to all the speculation that makes the close season the joy it is. [:)]

I realise how contentious the idea of ''blogging'' can be on this forum; nevertheless i''ve spent awhile articulating a pretentious shopping list for the summer.If you''ve got the time it''s a long read, so i''d suggest preparing with a cup of tea at hand before sitting down and giving it the one over...http://services.pinkun.com/FORUMS/PINKUN/CS/blogs/canary_amongst_seagulls/archive/2011/05/10/2528190.aspx

Why target an out of contract Norris, when time could be spent trying to convince an out of contract Pratley, or Danns, or Moussi?Don''t get me wrong, i was all for us purchasing Alan Lee a couple of seasons ago (regardless of how wrong i was in hindsight), but it seems to be some inadvertent novelty of ours to target Ipswich/former Ipswich players, where in most cases there''s a far better standard of footballer available to us in the market generally.Broaden the horizons people, you won''t meet the edge of the worlds surface at the borders of East Anglia.

[quote user="Carlos Valderrama"]''From the Unibind Premier to the Premier League''. 10/12 years ago he was a tyre fitter playing for Workington. and his career hasn''t always gone to plan. His shot at the big time with Forest went sour and he dropped down to league 2 with Shrewsbury. So for Cody Mac to spend a season down there with Gillingham is no bad thing. Jas, your comment was one of the worst I have seen on here in a while. And really the sort of stupid thing I didn''t expect someone like you to say. Perhaps you aren''t as sharp as i thought.....[/quote]I think more than anything it''s a reactionary comment from Jas, and i think this has been the case with much of the criticism McDonald has come under, with a perception distorted by the extent of which his progress has been covered by a minority of fans, angered somewhat because they feel total focus should be paid to the side lining up at Carrow Road. I''ve defended Cody repeatedly, and yet i''ve been confronted with the same illogical cemented judgement imposed upon him on a weekly basis as an ''average League Two/One player''; this is often stated as if it''s some kind of established certainty, yet in complete disregard for the history and statistics from which we can best learn his chances.He could have been a one season wonder for Gillingham, by all accounts. By the same token he could be in the process of unleashing his potential as an awesome player, and as such he can only conquer what''s infront of him. He could also of course be anywhere in between.There are plenty of prior examples that could suggest an array of paths for Cody; though i can assure any which poster that doubts me that there''s a field of examples that indicate he''ll be a welcome asset to our side, and keeping in tone with the reign of Lambert, he''s unquestionably deserving of our faith in his ability, and perseverance in his footballing career.

OMG!!! It''s Robert Loggia!!!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KXqKHSKDfQ

Go on-loan until January, and see what measure to take from then on.

I''d see us snap up Darren Pratley in a flash if i could.Kazenga LuaLua would be awesome, but i suspect it''s come to a point where it would be almost impossible to tempt him away from making his move to Brighton. He regularly attended Brighton games after his loan finished, and has said unless he''s granted assured first team football at Newcastle next season, he''ll be playing at the Amex; i should think it''d take a heft sum and a lot of promises to tempt him away from his path.Would however be every bit as sensible a move as Matt Phillips was for Blackpool if it did happenOtherwise, i''d like to see us make an attempt for Kieran Westwood, David Nugent and Jay Bothroyd, and it may be worth giving Guy Moussi, Neil Danns, James McFadden, Michael Kightly and Steve Thompson a look-in.Give Johan Elmander a go as well, just for comic effect if he happened to come.

Very endearing comments, though the ignorance of a notable few is beggers belief. Bizarre even.I suppose it''s indicative of how detached the Premier League has become from English football. Never has the state of English football illustrated to me in such emphatic fashion. What a shame.

It wasn''t immediate, but it did cross my mind not long after. [;)]As for your predictions, that is pretty much what i''d expect (or at the very least, the ratings generally sound reasonable).

[quote user="Power Hamster"]I think we need to beware of  tinkering too much with a winning team. This is a side that has only lost two Championship games since Xmas, and looking at some of the creaky defences and mis-firing strikers near the bottom of the Premier League, I think we are easily up to that standard already. I still maintain that the biggest mistake made when we went up in 2004 was getting rid of Malky Mackay, and as it turned out it was our defence that let us down in the top flight. If there is an area to be looked at it is the way we give away too many careless goals, and (despite last night) our inability to keep clean sheets even at Championship level is rather worrying. Midfield and up front I really think we are just about there on both quality and depth.[/quote]I certainly agree with that.I think what we need to do concerning the strongest area''s of our team (i.e. midfield and striking positions) is to look at a minor scale injection of quality, whilst retaining what''s there, which is what i gander Lambert will do. Losing the key elements that made our season what it is will be to the detriment of our team in the long term, just as it was the last time we were promoted to the Premier League.What we need to be is defensively orientated in the market. We were the top scorers in the league, though 7th (?) defensively, and so suggests our position was attained in spite of our flaws in that department.I''m entirely against an upheaval in any respect in our side, and it is of course worth understanding that we waive defensive duties at times for the sake of our attacking prowess, so the gap is more than probably smaller than is otherwise percieved through statistics. Nevertheless, it is an area worth enhancing in the face of stronger and more clinical opposition, and quite clearly best fit for improvement as we look to do so during the close season.

[quote user="pete"]CM only 12 months left on contract, if loaned for another season and succesful will be allowed to move for nothing.  Must sign CM for another year just in case we are relegated next season as CM may be a gem if in C''ship 2012-3.  Gillingham won''t pay what CM is worth probably £300m plus based on his goals return.  Sign him up PL guaranteed money in bank.  The Prem will be a step too far for CM at present. [/quote]Interesting comment.I certainly wouldn''t be adverse to Lambert offering him a 2 or 3 year contract, then perhaps incentivise him by offering him a loan spell at a Championship club like Coventry, Watford or Brighton for 3 to 6 months, with the opportunity of making the bench in the Premier League if he impresses during his time away. [quote user="Smudger"]Cody Mac will not be a Norwich City player next season - not good enough simple as!!![/quote]And can you please stop making statements as if you possess some sort of authority over the matter Smudger.It gives off an unhealthy impression of delusion.

For me, i don''t think we''re torn in an either/or situation here, and i think it unfortunate that it''s seen like that.Unlike goalkeepers, attacking position are not so exclusive, do not require similar dramatic judgements of it being one way or the other, and Lambert is constantly moulding 4-4-2''s, 4-3-3''s, 4-2-4''s, and i''ve even seen alternations into 3-2-5 formations in his time here, late on in games.As has been said, Cody has the kind of personality and work ethic that will fit in very appropriately with this current squad. He''s also got upcoming quality, having won the League Two Player of the Season award, and competed for the Golden Boot, scoring over 20 goals in his first season in the league, hitting the kind of form at the same age Davide Somma did last season, scoring some outstanding goals, and showing his ability as a natural goalscorer to finish in an array of fashions.Simeon Jackson started the season well having come in from a struggling League One side, with an average scoring ratio; though having shown flashes of quality during his time there, he was headhunted by a list of relatively big clubs. After a promising start, where he was listed statistically as one of the top 5 prolific goalscorers in the country early in the season here, his brief bits and starts within the side stuttered his form. It took awhile, but when he eventually made the most of one of his sub appearances he was given the chance he had hoped for, exhibiting to us all what he''s really about, scoring 9 goals in his last 7 games.Look at each situation individually, and you''d be daft to dismiss either flat-out as a fan with the interests of Norwich at heart. Unfortunately we have both, and as anyone sensible could well predict, the typical desire to compare from your average football fan comes into the equation, and no one bats eye-lid in the midst of it''s absurdity.

I can''t put into words just how much i love this club, and everyone who occupies it (even Cluck - sorry Cluck, you''ll just have to live with that one).

The fact we''re going to be playing against Sir Alex of Manchester United, the stars of Chelsea, Lampard, Terry, Drogba, Torres, Wenger of Arsenal, a Liverpool side heralded into a new era by it''s hero, and the millions of Manchester City, and the stars that it fields...It just won''t sink in!!!!!!! I can''t fudgin'' believe this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I''m shaking. This is unbelievable. [:''(]

Still a long way to go. Cardiff have the most talented forward line outside the Premier League, and could well of had as many as 4 goals themselves in that half.

I should say for the sake of whatever dignity and credibility i may have left, the irony in the latter part of my comment isn''t lost on me.

[quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="John"][quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="John"][quote user="YankeeCanary"] [quote user="John"][quote user="Legend Iwan"]Graham and Long are not out of contract.[/quote]Apologies, my mistake. [:$]Only goes to show the pitfuls in relying on the Pink ''Un for ''factual'' analysis.[/quote] John, if you want others to read what you write then you need to 1) ensure your spelling is reasonably accurate ( it''s pitfalls ) and 2) you need confirmation from a second source when citing "facts." [/quote]In the first instance, my only excuse is that i do suffer from a ''pitfall'' of my own (dyslexia), and wasn''t expecting a joyless, sanctimonious, pedant to pick me up on it. Secondly i realise i should research topics (in this case, i.e. the contractual status of players) before posting with any sort of authority on the matter.Mind you, i''d gander the amount that does so would comprise of little more than 10% of this forum.[/quote] John, what I gave you was good advice. What you gave me in return was an insult. Incidentally, if your condition is your excuse for not understanding the difference between "pitful" and "pitfall" it did not seem to obstruct you from using words like sanctimonious and pedant. Nevertheless, my advice for you still stands, that is if you wish to encourage others to read what you write. [/quote]Dyslexia isn''t a matter of consistency, but of inconsistency. It wasn''t for example a result of poor linguistic and grammatical study and teaching that i failed to correctly spell ''pitfall''; i''m sure i''ve come across the term on plenty of occasions. I did however inadvertently rely on my immediate sensory interpretation of the word before phrasing it, rather than my learned understanding of it. Hence, my being able to spell ''sanctimonious'' and ''pedant'' is fairly insubstantial in relation to the condition of dyslexia, at least in this instance (from what i understand it takes a variety of forms, and by no means is my condition exclusive - should you happen to highlight a whole new batch of flaws in this particular comment).My fault, yes, and one that has caused me great discomfort in academia. But for me i''ve persevered, and like a great proportion of dyslexic people my age, i have to some extent been able to disguise my condition. I do however let it slip, just as you pinpointed earlier. As for the ''facts'', in this case i simply made the mistake of relying on what was considered a ''given'' by most on the occasions any conversation has been struck on either Graham or Long on here. I''d tell you i''m ''usually'' relatively well researched on matters i discuss on here (i''m not adverse to referencing to sources like Football365, ESPN Soccernet, BBC Website... etc.), but then what truthful advice could you bestow upon me if you were to believe me? I apoligise for insulting you Yankee; when in fact i should have concentrated on your ''advice'', i couldn''t avoid the character that decided it was best fit to intervene with an ill judged and disconcerting lecture.And i would be humbled if i were to hear candidly that your initial intentions were nothing other than good in the first place. Though if i am to derive anything from the manner in which i see you converse with others on here, and have with me in the past, i believe i''d best remain doubtful of seeing the good in you above anyone else on this forum.[/quote] John, it may be difficult for you to believe but my comments were well intentioned because, my thinking was, you must enjoy writing as you have a blog. I get criticised quite often on here when I pull people up on poor spelling or grammar. I''m willing to accept that criticism because I believe tolerating mediocrity in that area, particularly from the young, makes us all responsible for what, in my view, is a fast track towards unrecognisable English. I have faults myself in those areas but nothing like to the degree I see on this forum, just as one example.That comment, of course, is in no way directed to you. You have no need to be humble and, equally, I have no need to apologise to you because I was totally unaware of your condition. Now that I am I will not react that way with you in the future. However, at the risk of annoying you, I will repeat once more if, as appears to be the case, you enjoy writing for others then it may be wise of you to use the tools available to ensure your content will continue to attract others to what you write.   [/quote]I wouldn''t dare ask you to apologise for not knowing what you were not expected to know Yankee, and (don''t consider this ''one-upmanship'') i don''t believe i did, only going so far as to highlight my dyslexia, and how it has become vastly (and frustratingly) intertwined with my writing.In some ways i imagine i''m just as overtly against the newer contingents excusing bad grammar on account of what they perceive this forum to be, or reverting to some ''mobile text speech'' equivalent, as you; i also don''t want the flaws in my attempts to write to the best of my abilities to count against the virtues in opting for a sensible use of English.I take on board what you have to say, in that i should take a more studious approach to the topics i discuss on here (although i won''t the hide the fact that i have always endeavoured to do it as often as i can in this department). However my approach to blogging is very different, and i assure you that i spend almost as much time on search engines as i do writing when constructing them. You can feel free to assess the validity in that particular remark (in saying that, i''m not trying to ''advertise'' my blogs here), but i will go so far as to say i''m confident of the foundations that support the content.As for you receiving criticism Yankee, you come across as very accomplished in your understanding of linguistics, and authoritative. The problem i personally find is that you seem rather officious, and at times dare i say, assuming. That is in no way meant as an insult, only that i find that in the arguments i''ve seen you hold, it frequently starts with other posters taking a defensive stance, seeming to construe your comments as a cold display of arrogance. Unfortunately one way discourse (your advice for example) often has that type of characteristic attached to it, and while it''s accepted in things like academia (the student/teacher relationship), it''s awkward territory for it''s use outside of such institutions.If your approach were to be more subtle, and a little more social rather than tutorial, i myself would gander you''d end up in far less verbal conflict, for overall i do perceive you as one of the more intelligent posters in here, littered with ideas that encompass many of the best debates, detracted only by the short tolerance you have for those outside of it.

[quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="John"][quote user="YankeeCanary"] [quote user="John"][quote user="Legend Iwan"]Graham and Long are not out of contract.[/quote]Apologies, my mistake. [:$]Only goes to show the pitfuls in relying on the Pink ''Un for ''factual'' analysis.[/quote] John, if you want others to read what you write then you need to 1) ensure your spelling is reasonably accurate ( it''s pitfalls ) and 2) you need confirmation from a second source when citing "facts." [/quote]In the first instance, my only excuse is that i do suffer from a ''pitfall'' of my own (dyslexia), and wasn''t expecting a joyless, sanctimonious, pedant to pick me up on it. Secondly i realise i should research topics (in this case, i.e. the contractual status of players) before posting with any sort of authority on the matter.Mind you, i''d gander the amount that does so would comprise of little more than 10% of this forum.[/quote] John, what I gave you was good advice. What you gave me in return was an insult. Incidentally, if your condition is your excuse for not understanding the difference between "pitful" and "pitfall" it did not seem to obstruct you from using words like sanctimonious and pedant. Nevertheless, my advice for you still stands, that is if you wish to encourage others to read what you write. [/quote]Dyslexia isn''t a matter of consistency, but of inconsistency. It wasn''t for example a result of poor linguistic and grammatical study and teaching that i failed to correctly spell ''pitfall''; i''m sure i''ve come across the term on plenty of occasions. I did however inadvertently rely on my immediate sensory interpretation of the word before phrasing it, rather than my learned understanding of it. Hence, my being able to spell ''sanctimonious'' and ''pedant'' is fairly insubstantial in relation to the condition of dyslexia, at least in this instance (from what i understand it takes a variety of forms, and by no means is my condition exclusive - should you happen to highlight a whole new batch of flaws in this particular comment).My fault, yes, and one that has caused me great discomfort in academia. But for me i''ve persevered, and like a great proportion of dyslexic people my age, i have to some extent been able to disguise my condition. I do however let it slip, just as you pinpointed earlier. As for the ''facts'', in this case i simply made the mistake of relying on what was considered a ''given'' by most on the occasions any conversation has been struck on either Graham or Long on here. I''d tell you i''m ''usually'' relatively well researched on matters i discuss on here (i''m not adverse to referencing to sources like Football365, ESPN Soccernet, BBC Website... etc.), but then what truthful advice could you bestow upon me if you were to believe me? I apoligise for insulting you Yankee; when in fact i should have concentrated on your ''advice'', i couldn''t avoid the character that decided it was best fit to intervene with an ill judged and disconcerting lecture.And i would be humbled if i were to hear candidly that your initial intentions were nothing other than good in the first place. Though if i am to derive anything from the manner in which i see you converse with others on here, and have with me in the past, i believe i''d best remain doubtful of seeing the good in you above anyone else on this forum.

[quote user="YankeeCanary"][quote user="John"][quote user="Legend Iwan"]Graham and Long are not out of contract.[/quote]Apologies, my mistake. [:$]Only goes to show the pitfuls in relying on the Pink ''Un for ''factual'' analysis.[/quote] John, if you want others to read what you write then you need to 1) ensure your spelling is reasonably accurate ( it''s pitfalls ) and 2) you need confirmation from a second source when citing "facts." [/quote]In the first instance, my only excuse is that i do suffer from a ''pitfall'' of my own (dyslexia), and wasn''t expecting a joyless, sanctimonious, pedant to pick me up on it. Secondly i realise i should research topics (in this case, i.e. the contractual status of players) before posting with any sort of authority on the matter.Mind you, i''d gander the amount that does so would comprise of little more than 10% of this forum.

[quote user="Legend Iwan"]Graham and Long are not out of contract.[/quote]Apologies, my mistake. [:$]Only goes to show the pitfuls in relying on the Pink ''Un for ''factual'' analysis.

[quote user="Smudger"]I would much rather we spent £2 million to £3 million on Steve Morison than Craig Mackail Smith.I think that Morison is a good player and he is also young and has the ability to step up another level.  He would bring real competition to Holty for his place in the starting line up in my opinion and with time on his side has the potential to become the first choice target man at City for the next few years (even if that does include playing most of that time in the Premiership).Would be a marvellous signing!!![/quote]If it''s age that concerns you i think it''s worth noting Morison is older than Mackail-Smith. Admittedly it''s only a few months that seperate the two, both now aged 27, but seeing as we''re comparing them, age surely has little reason to come into the equation?Personally i''d vye for Smith out of the two. I firmly believe Mackail-Smith now has enough in his locker to make a step up (or two), and exhibits the kind of assets that would better compliment our game (primarily in his "unbelievable" work-rate).However there''s no assurance that either will make the step up, and i were given free reign over the budget i personally wouldn''t go for either with them both at the £2 to £3 million mark. Any two forward orientated players from Ched Evans, Gary Madine, Francisco Sandaza (out of contract), Shane Long (out of contract), James McFadden (out of contract), Billy Sharp, David Nugent (out of contract), Kazenga LuaLua (out of contract), Simon Cox (out of contract) and Danny Graham (out of contract) could be aquired at a comparitively cheaper, or similar price, and have just as good a chance of performing for us in my opinion.