wooster

As long as we are three points from mid-table in January we know things will end well. Oh, hang on .....

I meant Redmond of course

One for the early part of the season: £5 for every player in the following list who is still with us after the transfer window closes: Bassong Olsson Tettey Fer Redmod Pilkington Hoolahan Snodgrass Hooper Van Wolfswinkel

In the last World Cup & Euros England has: beaten - Sweden, Ukraine & Slovenia drawn with - France, USA & Algeria lost to - Italy & Germany. I think Uruguay are probably between France/USA (the draws, ignoring a poor result against Algeria) and Italy/Germany (when we lost). Playing in South America should give Uruguay an advantage, hence my pessimism. I hope I''m wrong.

Sorry to be a wet blanket but I''m surprised so many people expect England to get out of its group - I''m not convinced that we have the nous to outperform Italy and Uruguay, when have we displayed that recently?

Going into administration is a lottery and Southampton were lucky with their subsequent owners, managers and the continued development of young players. At Norwich the club is (rightly) proud of having cleared its debts but, presumably, this was a financial drain that Southampton did not endure.

There is an interesting point of comparison with Southampton for Norwich. At the start of the 2009-10 season Southampton started on -10 points - they narrowly missed the play-offs and Norwich, of course, topped Division 1. Four season on .......

I should maybe have put the word - "more" gung-ho than Hughton, that''s all. More is superfluous - you couldn''t be less gung-ho than Hughton

Like others I hope Adams does well. But am I the only person to think it''s surprising that we''ve appointed someone whose most senior position, at the age of 48, was coaching the U18s? He might have ambition and desire now but I think it must have emerged relatively recently.

Parma, Much is made of the promise of our cup-winning youth team and I hope that is well-placed though I have no knowledge of the frequency with which promising players come through the ranks, as opposed to being transferred at early stages of their careers. Looking at the ''82/3 cup-winning youth team, only Jeremy Goss seems to have become an established first-team player. Admittedly that was 30 years ago, but have the probabilities changed materially since then?

I don''t think aiming to be in the top 10 is as unreasonable as it seems for clubs who have got promoted and then consolidated. As NN says the top 7 are pretty much fixed but that does leave 3 other places to go for - this year filled by Southampton, Stoke & Newcastle. Accepting that the 3 promoted clubs will just be looking to survive, there are 10 teams potentially aiming for these 3 places. As we saw this year there will be slow starters who effectively rule themselves out (Fulham, Sunderland, WBA and Norwich) so the competition reduces to perhaps 6 teams fighting for those 3 spots - though I don''t think Villa were aiming for anything more than survival this year as well. So it''s not so unreasonable an aim for a club like West Ham - though I agree the Board are playing to the gallery as well.

GMD/T, Parma Ham wrote and long & interesting piece (back in March I think) on how CH had bought the wrong players for his system - perhaps CH hoped that they would be good enough to adjust - and (for instance) how he should have bought a Peter Crouch type player rather than RVW. It''s fairly obvious but poor management decisions can exacerbate a weak position and, as GMD suggests, good management such as PL''s (or Pulis''s) player motivation can paper over the cracks. One only needs a few years of over-performance to materially increase the financial well-being of the club and to improve one''s likelihood of survival. We''d still be outgunned by Man City, Chelsea, etc but should be able to survive more comfortably against the other 10-11 PL clubs. I think this is where finance sets the general trends over time but one''s place (outside the mega-rich) can be enhanced with something other than money.

T, I accept my knowledge of football is limited but I don''t think that means I should not have an opinion - it may be uninformed and worthless but it will be what I have concluded based on what I see before me. It would help folk like me if you were able to explain things, like an indulgent parent but without being patronising, so that we can all benefit from your insight. I find your observations interesting and to summarise in one line it seems to be - on the balance of probabilities success in football in dependent upon the financial resources available. I think you''ve also said that anomalies may occur (eg Swansea & possibly Southampton) but the prevailing winds are against smaller clubs like Norwich. But is that it? Rather than just waiting for a sheikh or an oilgarch are there other smaller changes that we can make that might improve our position relative to our peers and, if so, what are these?

As a long-term exile whenever I''m asked who I support people always smile when I say Norwich and I''ve never heard anyone say a bad word about the club (though not the football, particularly recently). Most "big club" fans then proceed to be very patronising about us - and the outside world generally associates in-breeding with Norfolk, not Suffolk.

LDC Surely Southampton and Swansea have shown that newly-promoted teams don''t have to adopt the approach CH took - you can play attractive football and survive. I''d rather follow that template than the absolute pragmatism you seem to believe is a prerequisite.

Should have added that I can''t think of any obvious candidates even if we were to do different.

"Do different"?

Whereas as Southampton will be mid-table in the EPL, so what''s your point?

I like the idea of a common standard of football at all levels - within reason. Each team should be free to play to its strengths and as it wished for specific games but the principle of a relatively common style across the club ultimately should help bring on the younger players. If we do well and get back up I''d rather be relegated playing a decent style than the dull and pragmatic football than didn''t win over anyone and ultimately didn''t work.

Arsenal can still end up 3rd though it would require Chelsea to lose both their games (against us at home & Cardiff away) and Arsenal winning both their games (WBA at home & us away). So in the unlikely event we beat Chelsea we may encourage Arsenal to try harder in the final game. Chelsea won''t want to go though Champions League qualifying so ......

I thought Shearer was in charge when they got relegated.

I don''t understand - are you suggesting there is a queue of wealthy individuals chomping at the bit to buy Norwich? I haven''t heard anything, have you?

It was generous to sack CH when we did as it allowed him to avoid having a relegation on his CV and to allow him to maintain that he would have kept us up. It is a shame that his approach didn''t work at Norwich but I imagine we''ll be counting the cost longer than he will.

Parma Ham wrote a very convincing piece a while back suggesting that Peter Crouch would have been a better signing for us with CH''s style of play, rather than RVW. I''m not having a go at CH but I do think our style of play hasn''t suited RVW and thus his confidence has been undermined over the season. With a new regime it would be nice to see a revitalised strike force but I guess that''s for next season.

"I''m delighted to have Gordon and Shay to assist me in preparing the team for Saturday, which is what the whole group is focused on," said Lambert.