Canary Jay

Not really sure why you''ve linked to a post that is a) old and nothing to do with my content and b) seems to be "song related" My post was mostly to remind people who seemed to be super-mega-effing-peed off that we''ve not signed anyone that we''re doing ok. But no, you''re right - I''ll trawl through all kinds before voicing an opinion in future. Apologies :(

To all those that are disappointed that we didn''t bring anyone in, yes, it was a shame. However, Mr Lambert paved the way for this when he said he wouldn''t go get anyone in for the sake of it. We''ve lost Nelson to Scunthorpe, which is probably a good move for the player himself, albeit disappointing to lose a good player. But on the plus side, how nice was it not have a day of "Hoolahan to X", "Martin to Y", "Holt to Z"? We''ve let a lot of players go out on loan to get first team experience, we''ve got the equivalent of a new signing in Surman when he''s back in the squad...things could be a LOT worse. McNally knows what the club is capable of financially, Lambert picks players on what''s available in the coffers. He targetted the lad from Brighton, but it wasn''t to be. When you look at the crazy money spent this evening (not putting us in the same bracket, just thinking of debts and such), I think we''ve had a good window. Money was there, it wasn''t wasted - and it''s there for a rainy day. Plus there''s loan options to consider. I say we''re in good shape :)

Bennett? He died in "Commando", didn''t he? Steel tube through the chest, "Let off some steam, Bennett"... No? Different guy...

Just to clarify...NCFC are making an announcement at 22:30..or "someone" is making an announcement at 22:30?

[quote user="City1st"]"that Sky Sports News can be so lax in the way they just report any old BS they read on fans forums " and you still tune in to it[/quote] Nope, don''t recall saying that I even have Sky anymore. I am aware of the way the channel works, having once had a sub to it. Nothing changes on that network unless you make a balls up and get caught for it. Or was that a question without the ?

What grinds my gears more than that is that Sky Sports News can be so lax in the way they just report any old BS they read on fans forums and manage to string it out into anything more than 20 minutes. The same old crap happens each transfer window - they end up sending a reporting to stand outside a ground or a training facility and basically have him (or her, Andy Gray) talk nonsense and pad something that was already summed up by the link setup by the studio presenter...grrr!

"Massive lump" LOL

Dick and Dom would be alright at this point in time too...

Surely quitting smoking doesn''t prevent him from attending a game? ;)

...isn''t it? You''d think so with this carry on. The number of times people have openly admitted that they know the manager will not finish his career with us, yet at the first sign of him upping and leaving, people start wetting their pants. Just remember the sh1tty circumstances under which we came to employ Lambert. Many would say it would be just desserts were he to leave - what goes around comes around. And as for the club not keeping the fans informed? They released a statement. The manager added that he would not talk about anything other than the next match. What more can they do? Get on twitter or facebook and constantly update us with what is happening? There is a game to prepare for - perhaps Lambert would rather concentrate on his job...? Having said that, he''s clearly off to West Ham or Liverpool. Not Burnley. I couldn''t resist.

Still, it was a nice little jibe about how long it took Ipswich to get the first win last season...

Ok, I''ll bite. This post has had a number of views without reply, probably because it''s a just a good ol'' British moan. Whereas I agree with some of your points, I think you *must* see why football is like it is now and why it *has* to be like this? Firstly, football IS better to watch nowadays. 100%. You only have to look at an on-form Arsenal to see that the English game has improved tremendously since the injection of overseas players. It is a much more refined spectacle that it was in the 70s and 80s. Players have technicolour boots because of a) they want to stand out from the other players on the pitch b) they believe that the features of their boots enhances their game (remember when Craig Johnston "introduced" the original Predator and all the fuss that caused?) and c) endorsements from boot suppliers i.e. money. The rules of the game have changed, yes, it is still a contact sport but the idea is to stop deliberate infringement. You must see the difference between a referee spotting a player deliberating obstructing i.e. "cheating" and a genuine situation between two players going for the same ball? Yes, the keeper does have an invisible shield around him at times from the officials, but that''s their call on if a challenging player has illegally tried to prevent the keeper from doing his job for the sake of it ("was never going to get to the ball") rather than actually attempting to get to the ball first. As for the idea of parents moaning about their children being subjected to foul language from other supporters, that''s a tricky one. Foul and abusive language is kind of frowned upon in any situation - why should it be dealt with any differently at a football ground? Is there something magical that allows grown men (or women!) to shout curses in ear shot of a youngster, only because they cannot articulate their frustration/vocalise their support withount the use of a swear word? Yes, both the family and football fan''s money are as good as the other''s, but honestly, no-one should have to listen to someone shouting curses at a player who probably couldn''t even hear it - it''s noise pollution for those around them. Barclays or not the Barclays, swearing isn''t pleasant for those not participating in the one-way verball slanging match. I do agree with you on the naming of the disabled section. That is just the PC police doing their job though. Whereas you find it patronising, I am sure there are others who do find it unpleasant to be referred to as "disabled". There was probably some market research done on this with the aid of the PC police and it probably considered "the right thing to do" to re-brand. Don''t forget, other areas of the ground have been renamed, albeit for marketting reasons. I think you use the word "hate" too strongly when referring to the stewards who are doing their job. We are instructed to sit not only for safety reasons but one of courtesy. If you have someone that is standing up, it forces the people around to stand so that they can watch the game they paid to watch. You cannot allow people to stand for those reasons. We observe those rules in cinemas, so why is football any different. We''ll probably never return to the days of the terraces. We all have seats for safety reasons and comfort - some fans cannot stand for 90 minutes and would not attend a match if expected to have deal with the swaying that occurs with standing room only events. Sponsorship = Money. Money not only makes the world go round - but it also funds football. It''s not JUST a sport - it''s a business. Executive boxes. Ok, I''ll agree to some extent, but if they want to pay the money for a warm box and a meal before the game, let them. It''s their money, that beomes are clubs''. It''s good business, good business equal more money for the club. Parking = rip off no matter what/where/when. Don''t get me started on that! I agree with the "pundits" comment to an extent. Anything ITV does with football is generall abysmal. I expected more from BBC but to be fair, Claridge is there because he''s "salt of the earth journey man type chap" but in all honesty, any ex football is going to come on with the same repetitive cliches. I think the Football League show gets a bad rep on the Pink''Un because they generally gloss over us a team, our success and the amount of air-time we get. Try and look for the positives. Football is still an enjoyable spectacle despite rule changes, multi-coloured boots, our team is doing well, we are almost certainly going up as champions. Most of the things you identify is related to money, greed and all things nanny state. Unfortunately, this is the way the world is and football is just a tiny part in the grand scheme of things but inherits these things as a necessity.

Don''t get me wrong EM - I think that the arrival of McNally and Lambert (and I''d like to include the appointment of Chairman Bowkett) has certainly given the club a boot up the backside and change in direction it needed. I don''t doubt these appointments, combined with players who clearly want to play for the management staff, are the reasons for the jump back to a league we were in. The previous off-the-pitch "team" were clearly not on the same page as each other. That and some very dubious decisions around loan players (and those being sanctioned) is what lead to the relegation in the first place. The point I was making is that it whilst things look a lot rosier than they were under Doncaster and Roeder (I can''t blame Gunn - he was guilty of wanting to manage the club he loves; the responsibility for appointing him lies elsewhere), there''s nothing to say that this combination will be as effective next season. I''ll agree with you that we seem to be in pretty good shape, all things considering, but without an bottomless pit of money, I think we''ll remain in the Championship for many years to come. If that happens, we WILL lose one or the other - McNally will say something along the lines of "taking the club as far as he could take it" and Lambert will follow his personal ambitions if he feels that Norwich is not the vehicle to satisfy those goals. It just worries me that some folks are getting carried away with just how good they feel the current managment of the club is without retaining a *little* bit of pessimism, with an eye on the past. Perhaps it''s just because my glass is half empty today :(

Why would retaining the services of both McNally and Lambert result in us "more likely" to gain promotion than relegation? We haven''t actually won anything yet since McNally and Lambert arrived and having both on board does not equal success. Look at what happened with Worthington guiding the club to promotion to the top flight out of a much tougher league that we have played in this season. Just because he got the players getting the results we needed to get promotion, it didn''t necessarily mean that more success would follow. It didn''t, the same fans that hailed him turned on him and he was axed. Things are going well at the moment, but this is a p1ss-poor league and one we should never have been in in the first place. I''ll be cheering at County Hall just as I was last time, but let''s not be too hasty to pat ourselves on the back and regard two people as potential messiahs - this is/was League One. We couldn''t even win the JPT for goodness sake... I don''t think we will ever get back in to the Premier League. Something MAJOR in the way of investment would have to happpen. Money talks. We don''t have it.

No - the best team won. There''s a reason we won yesterday and a reason we lost at Elland Road. Qe did all the right things at the right time, just as Leeds did on the away game I know we ''didn''t deserve to lose'' at their place, but you only have to look at Man Utd to see how sometimes a team gets a result against the run of play by digging till the end It''s probably that reason (with our ''habit'' of scoring late) that has us branded as ''jammy Norwich'' in some circles. Who cares - a win is a win is a win.