BroadstairsR

[quote user="Canaries Utd"]I think he injured himself in the goal celebration, he used muscles in it that hadn''t been used for some considerable time!?!?[/quote] Nasty.   At least he didn''t cost £3m. I''m prepared to stick with him for some silly reason. I think he''ll turn out to be a reliable stalwart for a few years, He can''t score but he can play a game of football.

[quote user="City1st"]" I hope we are not whippin ourselves into a frenzy for no reason here......" Given that is the behaviour of many on here I shouln''t let this latest bout of over exitement bother yourself too much. Why should it cost Peterborough if we fail to go up? A deal is a deal and should not have anything at all to do with the subsequent performaces of the buying club " That is one of the silliest comments of the season. The logical counter points is why shouldn''t Peterboro benefit if we do go up ? Almost every single contract is conditional. We sold Lewis to Peterboro believing that he would not only be a top class keeper but a future england keeper. Peterboro bought a good keeper who was not first choice here. So conditions are written into the contract that allows us to be paid the full value if Lewis turns out as good as we claimed and Peterboro only to pay the fee for what he was worth at the transfer date if he turns out not to be. Likewise with any sell on clause. Any figure quoted now will be the cost of buying out CMS current contract, plus whatever Peterboro feel they should get for his value plus agents fees plus signing on fee, plus future contract fees plus bonuses sell on fees etc. If you want the true fee then pick one, some or all of the above and you will have the true figure. All that can be said is that club accounts have proved time and time and time again that the ridiculous figures quoted are invariably way, way off the truth and are merely nonsense spouted by the terminally stupid in the same way simple people threw stones at the moon because it made it seem as if they knew something.[/quote]   I have to reply to that nonsense. Presumably if Peterborborough fail to go up we pay them a million.   I repeat a "deal is a deal." How can it possibly formulated upon the prospects of either partners?   I think you seem to have been influenced by the Barry Fry way of thinking. If we go up, it will be a team and management effort. Not as a result of the efforts of one ex-Peterborough player. He will be a cog.

If we are not promoted?   Why should it cost Peterborough if we fail to go up? There are a lot more factors to be taken into account in our promotion surge surely.   A deal is a deal and should not have anything at all to do with the subsequent performaces of the buying club. If we fold, why should Peterborough be worse off?

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="BroadstairsR"] Peterborogh are looking good for promotion themselves. Selling this player would very much jeopodise their current position and thus cost them money. It would also be a kick in the teeth to their fans.    It seems they are making the right noises by doing everything they can to hang onto the player for the rest of this season. They probably know £3m is more than fair, if not slightly ridiculous, but have to weigh up the damage and cost to themselves.   Fry has admitted that they would not hold him back next season.   Peterborough''s stance is correct and totally in the interests of  the Club. [/quote] I disagree. The noises coming out of P''Boro suggest they want to keep this thing alive. They know that after the deadline passes we won''t be coming back with anything like the present offer. If they hang on to him until the summer there will be no rush to buy him at £3 million. The promotion issue is a double edged sword for them. They have no guarantee that they will go up even if they keep him. Its just as much of a gamble for them as it is for us. They will be lucky to get half that sum in the summer and if we go up he won''t even be on our radar. [/quote]   May be you are right, but you do discount Peterborough Football Club rather easily. They have ambitions the same as us and I am sure that their fans are every bit as much for promotion as us lot. The sale of M-S would have most of them crying in their beer.   We have been on the wrong end of bigger clubs snapping up our stars at  pertinent times to appreciate this. They have a  gamble too ie. the increased income of being in a higher league. That''s the system.

I will add.   If we were offered £5-6M for Holt at the moment by a Wigan etc. : same deal loan leading to purchase, would anybody on this Board be in favour?   Grant ain''t worth that normally, but he''s worth double that to us now.

Peterborogh are looking good for promotion themselves. Selling this player would very much jeopodise their current position and thus cost them money. It would also be a kick in the teeth to their fans.    It seems they are making the right noises by doing everything they can to hang onto the player for the rest of this season. They probably know £3m is more than fair, if not slightly ridiculous, but have to weigh up the damage and cost to themselves.   Fry has admitted that they would not hold him back next season.   Peterborough''s stance is correct and totally in the interests of  the Club.

Add: Decent post Mr. Moy and made more so by the talk of £3m for a Peterborough playerwith no experience beyond one year in the Champs.

Barry Fry rates him @ £5m.   Seriously, Cody has turned into a good piece of business for us, thanks to Bryan Gunn.   I don''t think he could quite make it any higher level than League 1, although I am beginning to fancy him more should we not get promoted. Something about late developers... and there have been a few.    At the very least,  if he keeps scoring for the Gills it could well mean a tidy £750, 000 for us. 

£3m for him. Absurd price. I do not actually believe that our bid was anywhere near in the region of this. Add-ons and sell-ons and a concession on Lewis''s eventual sale might well have been involved, but still nowhere near this nonsensical rumour.   Barry Fry makes a habit of over-valuing his sought after players and in his market stall way seems to invent a demand by suggesting that half of the Football League is desperate for them. McNally won''t fall for this.   Everything about McNally''s (and Lambert''s) dealings thus far would refute this rumour.   I would begin to think about that kind of fee fora Ched, a Long or a Graham. Not this lower league trier, whose own fans rate him as being miles away from Prem. class. 

[quote user="......and Smith must score."] They dropped two so twice as nice...... [/quote]   Well spotted Sir.

New threat (with games in hand,) Burnley dropped a point against a vulnerable Coventry last night, so we are not the only one''s to faulter against so-called "lesser" sides.   The only difference was, they failed in front of less than 14, 000 supporters. Suggesting to me that they are not deserving of Premieship football in any case.  

[quote user="Raymond Getärd"][quote user="BroadstairsR"]   Shane Long, Ched Evans and Watford''s Graham ( who will surely be snapped up by someone soon) all seem better buys at this level of fee. How do you know we have not already tried to get them? Perhaps their Directors of Football are not quite so prone to opening their mouth''s as Big Barry is...  Striking strength is a slight weakness. It could cost dearly. Since we lost Chris Martin we have averaged two goals per game, that''s way above championship winning form. [/quote][/quote]   I never said that we may not have tried to get these players, just that they would seem better buys for the sort of money being mentioned. Our goals tally is not at all bad. I think most agree, however, that a top class striker would be a bonus right now.

To be honest, I''m not too upset about this, although I would have fancied loaning him for the rest of the season.   I instigated a post recently which was entitled, "Lambert hasn''t got a clue when signing forwards." It was too strongly put really should have been "Lambert hasn''t had too much success when signing forwards." This would have been more factually correct. However, the post generated much debate with it''s provocative title and some agreed. Most expressed some disappointment with the forwards brought in by PL uptil now.   Based upon the fact that he doesn''t seem to have had much succes, I am distinctly nervous about the idea of paying upto £3m for this player.   Shane Long, Ched Evans and Watford''s Graham ( who will surely be snapped up by someone soon) all seem better buys at this level of fee.   In sum, it looks very much as if we are actively seeking a named striker at a fee. Let''s hope that we get one sooner rather than later then, as we are now in a position where our Championship fate is well and truly in our own hands. Striking strength is a slight weakness. It could cost dearly.

Come on Barry! You can have Simeon Jackson in part exchange ... eight clubs have been after him lately.

[quote user="Mick Dennis"]Morning, Y''army. Back home in Herts late and went to bed. Now up to watch it all again on Sky+ but can I commend this to you all: http://www.footballforums.net/forums/showthread.php/272407-Late-goal-watch-at-Norwich-City Sorry to be a pseud, but Thomas Jefferson said: "I find that the harder I work the more luck I seem to have". With NCFC it is about the manager making positive changes and not settling for a point, about opposition teams wilting, eventually, under pressure and about players and crowd keeping the faith. See some of you at Hull -- and next season at Old Trafford, the Emirates etc.[/quote]   You learn something new every day. I always thought it was Gary Player who said words to that effect. At least that''s what the sign at the entrance to the driving range I go to says. 

I thought last night''s goals were relatively early.   I expected at least one more in injury time.   This late goal thing seems to have become a major talking point in football circles. It was continually mentioned on Sky last night. I know Man U. seemed to do it for a bit, but our exploits in this respect make their''s seem minute. Personally, I think more is being read into it than should be, but if it makes our opponents nervous in the dying minutes of a game, this is a good thing.   Two quotes: "Other supporters call it lucky, but an injury time goal is the same as a goal any other time." I think I read that on this Board.   "I expect Norwich to win (against Bristol City) with a goal by Grant Holt in the 17th. minute of injury time."  Amusing sarcasm from "Tractorboys."  

I think Jackson would fit in very well at Peterborough.   It would take some sting out of the Mickail-Smith fee, should this signing happen for us.   For various reasons, Jacko has just not come off and would be totally surplus to requirements should we go up (as I suppose a few others would.)  He would virtually be that if we get M-K and do not go up.   His non-attempt at a header in the second half finally did it for me and, as I said above, I was praying for Lansbury to replace him. Dion would have put tha chancet in, let alone Mickail-Smith.

I thought that he had a good and lively first half, without luck. A couple of decisions went against him too.   He was quite poor in the second half and I for one was willing PL to bring Lansbury on.   Then it happened.   I think Simeon lacks confidence big-time, so nothing goes right for him. He is, however, on borrowed time, I fear.     

They play Burnley tomorrow, ao may be in dsarray to Burnley''s agdvantage.   On the other hand ......

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="BroadstairsR"] The acquisition of Grant Holt, if very little else, elevates Bryan Gunn into the category of all-time great City managers.  [/quote] I agree, a much better manager than Worthy who could only sign players of the calibre of Jason Jarrett and Andy Hughes. [/quote]   My post was in jest. Get it!

I''m enjoying this gamet. On "B" now and put forward Bryceland and Bolland.   Beat that!    

Maybe its Norfolk folk being themselves. They turn up in their thousands and annually achieve record season ticket sales. A truly marvellous support and the envy of many another club.   I am an exile now and I know full well that the "Man of Norfolk" (for all his many attributes) is a bit under-cooked and likes a good moan. In fact, he is at his most happy when having a good bitch. Norwich City Football Club, and it being successful is his right, not his privelege.   It comes on at a certain age in the evolution of being fully Norfucked (if you excuse the expression.)   That is why all the real noise comes from those areas of the ground where the youngsters sit. They might sing stupid songs and fight a bit, but they do create the much needed atmosphere.   I have long been in favour of issuing free amphetamine pills to all inhabitants of the Jarrold upon entry. Unfortunately this would not be allowed.    My point:  Monday has suddenly become one of those BIG occasions in the esteemed history of this club because of today''s results and Q.P.R''s legalities.     As the O/P suggests, let''s go mad for once and turn it into a cup final.   

[quote user="morty"][quote user="BroadstairsR"] Not at all. I am anxious to go through the alphabet on this theme. I start with Abbey because I do not think Zema counts as a "z."  Second names only please. [/quote] Lol, are you seriously THAT bored? [/quote]   No actually. Watching the golf on Sky, which is worthwhile, but this board is a welcome diversion on my way to the fridge. B = Barry Butler .... or are you too young? I am, but reputations last.  

Please appreciate "tongue in cheek comments" before resorting to text-like responses. 

Not at all. I am anxious to go through the alphabet on this theme. I start with Abbey because I do not think Zema counts as a "z."  Second names only please.