AndyCanary

I gave up with that fecking bunch of degenerates.I had full posting rights in all the forums and was laying down some subtle banter bombs. But every now and then one of the moderators (who''d qualified for the role from having an IQ stretching into double figures - rarity) would ban me. Only for another moderator to apologise and unban me.

Gunn was a scout for how many years? you''d hope that with all the signings he made he''d at least make 1 good signing.. (if only to average out the bad).Was never manager material.. since when does a guy with no management material qualify for what should have been a top Championship side?

Nice one mate. Enjoyed that.Will enjoy the video you make next season when we have even more live coverage to show :D

I loved it when I heard he was making that change.. It makes such a nice change to have a manager in charge with a set of balls and the results to back them up!

+1!The whole Gunn saga was worth it. Even if the only good thing he did was sign Holty!

1/2 not ½

Craig Fleming was on about jumping out of a plane on Twitter recently.

What this topic needs is a reply from birchfest [:P]

Fair point Andy. I see your point with the attitude. But I doubt he didn''t put in 100% on the pitch. Not his style imo.

I''m confused?... So what Doherty was shouting at a police man or something?

[quote user="barclaybabe"]i like i have this arrogant leeds fan and he is trying to convince me that leeds are the best team in the league [/quote] Well of course he''s going to think Leeds are better if he''s a Leeds fan. This thread is hardly proof that he''s wrong because if he was to make the same thread on a Leeds forum it''d have the same results only saying Leeds are best. Only difference is you''d need an Asbo to understand 50% of the Leeds posts.

I always think the people who rant at Deano are totally daft. If he had risen through the NCFC youth program and been with NCFC for years then maybe you could understand their rants. But he is a Crewe protege and came to us because we were a Premiership team offering him good money and a chance to play in the Prem. We got relegated and there was clearly interest from other Prem teams but he signed a contract extension even though it was obvious he had 1 foot out the door (secured us a much better transfer deal). He left and we more or less doubled our money on him and got Earnie in who could do just as much of a good job at Champ level. I don''t understand where the hate comes in..?

Top of league one for me..If we were 4th from bottom then there would be something seriously wrong with what we''re doing... whether it be the manager, players or both.Where we are now everything is going well! If we go up we''ll be in a much better frame of mind than if we survive relegation.

So what would you critisize them for currently? [:^)]

Surely that link can''t be right because it''d mean L1 gets half what Champ does (fair enough) but L2 gets the same as L1.

[quote user="Brendan"][quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Went in and   renewed 3 today. There had been a couple of empty seats near us this season and i tried to move us along one but they have gone already. The lady in the shop said that they were going very quickly. Very good sign should be at least 20 000 then[/quote][Y] However it sadens me, that we get more so called ''Norwich fans'' now we''re top of the league. Dont welcome these people [:(][/quote]Lol so true. But that''s the way it works I guess.I welcome all fans as money > players

He''s a big powerful forward.. Players look for the foul from him.He''s not a dirty player, quite the opposite (despite his recent sending off)..

Yeah but it''s pointless comparing the situation if what you''re saying is tripe.The Mcann analogy isn''t pathetic. It''s daft to think that you''re just being sensitive because of their circumstance.If you want another analogy Peter Andre won a case vs the People newspaper when they said he had a girlfriend before he was divorced. By your reasoning Andre should be happy that the People said he had a girlfriend because by him denying it it gives publicity to the fact that he doesn''t.. Nonsense.

[quote user="morty"][quote user="AndyWhyteUK"]Blue smarties actually*[/quote]Right, my mistake.Beta carotene food colouring makes people hyperactive.Whereas theres an ingredient in blue smarties that turns them into sweary keyboard warriors.[:)][/quote]For a second there I was furious because I thought you''d called me a sweaty keyboard warrior..I can''t describe the wave of relief I received after noticing it was ''sweary''.

Blue smarties actually*

[quote user="canary cherub "][quote user="AndyWhyteUK"][quote user="canary cherub "] Given that they self-evidently were wrong (administration didn''t happen as they said it would) I don''t see what they had to lose by admitting it. But we hdon''t just have to prove that they were wrong, we have to show that the club has been damaged in some way.  Given that our financial woes are no secret, it might prove to be less straightforward than we think.  The most likely outcome is that the court will find in our favour and award an embarrassingly small amount of compensation.  We might have to pay our own costs too.  Not worth the trouble or the expense imo.  No one else cares.[/quote] I think you''re wrong. They shouldn''t have to prove any damages as it''s impossible to prove that potential sponsors looked at other teams instead of you... They''re not claiming for loss of earnings, but for damages. The damages are factual because they were printed in a national newspaper. [/quote] For any club in our situation, rumours of administration are never far from the surface.  If I were representing NotW I might argue that City''s reputation has actually been enhanced, since despite our financial problems - which were already in the public domain - the allegation that we were about to go into admin has been publicly demonstrated not to be true.  We''ve received a sort of backhanded endorsement. The allegations won''t have put off potential investors - quite the reverse in fact.  A club with good infrastructure, large fanbase, football going in the right direction but financially vulnerable, is a very attractive target.   [/quote][Facepalm]Right so just to get this straight you''re saying that because NCFC have financial woes (i.e not making money, but losing money) that we should thank the NOTW for allowing us the chance to bring attention to the fact we''re not going into administration.You should go represent that Portugese dectective who the Mcanns sued... you could use the defence that because he should be thanked for raising awareness that they didn''t kill their daughter.[/Facepalm]

Moses.

Shut up mongloid. A) You''re not funny because I first saw that used as an insult in 2008.. almost as old as Wiki itself.B) 75% of the time SI put factual contract clauses into the game. So why shouldn''t it be contemplated to be real?C) You''re a cnut.

[quote user="canary cherub "]Given that they self-evidently were wrong (administration didn''t happen as they said it would) I don''t see what they had to lose by admitting it. But we hdon''t just have to prove that they were wrong, we have to show that the club has been damaged in some way.  Given that our financial woes are no secret, it might prove to be less straightforward than we think.  The most likely outcome is that the court will find in our favour and award an embarrassingly small amount of compensation.  We might have to pay our own costs too.  Not worth the trouble or the expense imo.  No one else cares.[/quote] I think you''re wrong. They shouldn''t have to prove any damages as it''s impossible to prove that potential sponsors looked at other teams instead of you... They''re not claiming for loss of earnings, but for damages. The damages are factual because they were printed in a national newspaper.

She''s no Geoffrey Watling... but she''s better than most [:D]