BroadstairsR

They both seem to generally singled out as the two poorest performers in a truly poor side. By Gunn''s refusal to start with any of Gow, Carney or Killen, are we to conclude that these three are even worse? If this is the case, who do we blame for putting them on the, already inflated, wages bill? In this case, the buck stops at the manager. The transfer window, after all, was the last chance to improve the squad. Nothing seems to have gone right at this club since we were last relegated. Nothing at all.

Not only should Cureton not be in the team, he should not have been brought back to Carrow Road in the first place. Since not being considered good enough for Norwich years ago, he has plied his trade as a decent goalscorer in the lower leagues. No more, no less. He was re-signed on the basis of one good season for Colchester and we paid too much for him. His modest contribution since coming back here is on a par with all expectations based upon his career as a whole. Furthermore, his best years are behind him. It did not take Roeder long to realise all this. Jamie has not let us down. Those who have continually picked him as our main striker have done this. Over to you BG. and please explain why you have put four new players on the payroll, but hardly use them?

I too am more optimistic than most seem to be. I genuinly think we have been putting in some decent performances since Gunn took over. The last four games have all been against teams with aspirations of promotion, to a greater or lesser degree. The better teams in the League. We know we are not in that category. From these games, two home, two away, we have two draws. The two defeats were by single goals and one of those defeats was probably brought about by poor refereeing decisions. A clearer appraisal of our current playing quality can be gleaned from today''s game. On paper this fixture appears an easier game, despite Coventry''s current run. By tonight we will have a clearer picture and can decide whether we have to be truly pessimistic or whether we can be encouraged by the fact that we are not quite THAT bad.

"Gone With The Wind" if you went to the Lanchow first. Seriously: "A Man For All Seasons" "Blow Up"

I don''t think our board think that deeply about footballing matters AJ. Unfortunately, they seem to just muddle along from one crisis to another. "Prudence" is the sum total of their forward thinking. I hope I''m wrong.

With further reagard to Doncaster''s "playing budget." Does this budget include all the extras who don''t actually play? The squad photograph on this site includes the following non-players: Goal Keeping Coach. Head of Player Recruitment. Head of Strength and Conditioning. Strengthening Coach. Masseuse. Performance Analyst. Kit Manager. Physiotherapist. Reserve Team (?) Manager. Plus the Manager and Asst. Manager (and the Chief Executive?) and probably a few more. All with generous wages. Presumably all these are deemed necessary nowadays, but at what a cost? We are not Manchester United.

The most alarming statement in this article is his affirmation that, "The playing budget is still more than double what a club with a supporter base that Norwich enjoys should expect" How many clubs get 50,000 crowds regularly? We must have been consistently getting the worst value for money players than any other club in the the entire Football League. How on earth does the quality of our playing staff justify such an assertion? Those responsible for some of these deals could teach the bankers a lesson or two in waste. Presumably the "playing budget" includes the setting up of expensive loan deals .... which have mostly been of limited succes. Eg. None of the four recent loanees was in the starting line-up last Saturday. Please Gunn. No more than three next season and use them. Presumably the "playing budget" includes academy costs. Let us hope that this expense proves justified because if we do go down we will be best served unloading a few (all?) expensive non achievers and relying on our own youth.

Look on the bright side. Clearly we''ve troughed too early and the only way is up.

"Boy''s Own" stuff! Do the players get any remuneration for lending their names to this rubblsh?

It would be terrible to go down. LITMUS TEST: What would the majority of Ipswich fans wish for us? Yes, to be relegated. Their mirth would be unbound. They would not be envious of our positive step backwards. We must cling onto our championship status for dear life.

Have we really missed out that much. At 24 and not established in an average Stoke side, to the extent that they continually loan him out and look for better replacements.

Why poke fun at a scheme that is designed to HELP the club??

Too much is expected of Jamie Cureton at this level. He was, and still probably is a decent goalscorer at lower league level. He was not seen as a prospect first time round at Norwich. WE let him go. He has had a decent career scoring goals in the lower leagues. Now, on the basis of one good season at Colchester he has been elevated into a goal machine a la Earnshaw. He is no Earnie. It is said of Earnshaw that he is Championship level, not Premiership. For Cureton, go down a league. Jamie''s age is not on his side. On this one I agree with Roeder. We all like Cureton for his loyalty. His return here has had some good moments. He should not be our first choice striker. 

I never like it when a decent topic which has turned into an interesting debate deteriorates into personal spats with two or more contributors exchanging insults. This happens a lot. No names mentioned.

Very true.  I had got into the habit of expecting a defeat, especially away. My interest was waining. It was no fun. Early days of course, but I am beginning to think that Gunn has got a lot of what it takes. I like Bryan.

It looks like Jamie is the next in line after all. Boo boys at the ready. How opinions can change so quickly. He was welcomed back with open arms from Barnsley and Roeder was the culprit then.  

I don''t think they''re brave enough to actually do it in person.

Seemingly, all soccer crowds single out a player for "stick" when things are going badly for their team. It even happens in the better times. Norwich supporters do this too --- with knobs on. We always seem to need a scapegoat on the pitch. Ironically, it only seems to be players who are at the club for a fairly long stint. No sooner had Hughes gone, than Doherty was in the frame. I believe he was temporarily relieved of the honour by Coco. Thinking back, who else has had the treatment at Carrow Road? How did they handle it? I believe Hughes cracked just once, when he went for a "supporter". Doherty seems oblivious to it all and maybe is about to lose the mantle to Fozzie in any case. Past anti-heroes?  Roberts at first, I remember. Before that Sutch. Before that?  I go back to Bill Punton (or "Mary" as he was cruelly labelled at first). He won the crowd over and became an absolute favourite. My father, a typical Norfolkman and now approaching ninety took it a stage further with an individual stance. He had it in for Ian Crook would you believe.  Unable to see the good side of Crook''s play, he picked out the negatives. He was convinced he lost the ball too often in midfield, surrendering possession and leaving us vulnerable to counter-attack. "Crook again"  was his favourite grumble throughout the game, at every slight mistake the player made. This even extended to the kick-about before the match. On one occasion, Crook sliced a playful cross into the stand and so near to where we were sitting that we had to duck. "Crook again" was the old boy''s response. And he meant it. Still "you pays yer money" etc.   Sorry to go off the current subjects, Ian Crook''s arrival has reminded me of happier times.    

I believe Croft cost £600,000 as a slightly risky Worthington signing. He has had his ups and downs, fans and critics, but overall it was a good signing. He is a better player now than when he came. Therefore to make a loss on the player makes no sense. Maybe WBA take into account his shortening contract. But if the player   excites interest from  others (eg. Sheff. Utd..)  then he becomes more valuable. One million would be reasonable for us bearing in mind we now have Bell and Croft could walk in a few months. Would Croft''s contribution in the coming months be worth more than this? What could Gunn do with an extra £1m? Football managers never had all these calculations to make in the "good" old days and I have not even mentioned a sell-on clause. 

For Grando: "I can''t believe it''s not Butterworth."

Appointing a football club manager is a shot in the dark. There are multiple examples every season of seemingly good and appropriate appointments going wrong. Who would have forecast Alladyce failing at Newcastle? Ince seemed a good bet last time out. Megson seemed a shocker. Harry has taken Spurs back to the bottom .  And so on and so on. I see the necessary positives in Bryan Gunn''s (temporary) appointment. The Board are thinking in "opposites" again.  ie. Grant -- no experience -- failed, Roeder, experienced, brought in.                                                                          Roeder -- unable to connect with the club or fans, club stalwart Gunn appointed. I fail to see it as a "knee jerk" appointment following the 4-0 victory. There must have been other things that impressed about Gunn''s bearing on Saturday, not least the obvious player/manager empathy which apparently they had got used to not seeing. I am happy with Gunn in charge, and with his back ups, especially Crook. The alternatives appear to have been: Boothroyd -- mixed reviews. Brief success really. No genuine pedigree in management. Ince -- a bit flash and a million miles removed from the Norfolk way. Limited succes really. Exposed in the big time. Dowie -- see Coventry, Q.P.R.. Very experienced  in Championship -- so what! Calderwood -- who? Hareide -- somewhat warmed to this idea. A bit of a relaxed and calculating character. No tantrums. "Experience" can be overrated and can just as easily back-fire as any other asset. There are multose other factors. Gunn has been connected to the club (football) for 22 years, I call that experience in itself. There is no magic formula. I see no particular creedence in the thinking that our position is dire so therefore we need an experienced hand to improve things. I see positives in Gunn''s appointment and believe he will lead the club to safety. Whether to the Promised Land, I reserve judgement.        

One forward?? Did Roeder pick this side?   Gunn out!

Col. Tom Parker

Like your humour, but surely three. One for cup games.