Jump to content

danielsroundabout

Members
  • Content Count

    387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by danielsroundabout

  1. LDC, by claiming that your two posts do not contradict one another, you are making yourself look a prize plonker. Just admit that you are talking complete garbage in one or other (maybe both) of the posts.
  2. The old sense of humour by-pass was a complete success then, Lincoln.
  3. Rhubarb, why don''t you and TIL 1010 embark on an exchange of e-mails for the benefit of everyone else on here? Or is it that you would lose the audience that your inane posts attract, an audience that is clearly so important to you?
  4. "If you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, " Looks like another Russell Martin scapegoat thread.
  5. The idea of picking one or other of Pritchard and Maddison goes to illustrate the breadth of opinion among supporters. For me, they would be the first two names on the sheet, always, sorting out the system would come later. As for Murphy, I have long been critical of his refusal to compete for any ball where there is the slightest chance of him getting hurt. In the last home game before yesterday, was it Preston? He was put clean through (Barclay end) one on one with the keeper. At one point it looked a 60:40 ball in his favour but not liking the look of the advancing keeper, he finished up arriving late and not contesting what was a very good scoring opportunity. It is such a shame because he has electric pace, can beat players without trying and has a decent shot but when things are not going well he becomes a total liability. Incidentally, I think Newcastle have paid £12m. for much the same package because his brother avoids tackling in just the same way.
  6. It was enlightening to read the OP and to learn how people like to pass their assets on to family members. None of us had realised this. It was also interesting to read that this action, in relation to DS/MWJ and TS, would serve to "protect" the asset. Has the asset been holding its value these past two or three years and will Tom be able to continue to protect its worth? Seems to me that a well-timed exit would have been of benefit to all concerned. Money into the club for future development and cash into the Smith family for Tom''s inheritance. Just maybe, Delia''s past refusals to consider sale/external investment were in fact, part of a David Davies style negotiating tactic and she is hell-bent on getting rid after all.
  7. Nutty Yes, always best to read a post "properly" before issuing your response. Perhaps, had you have done so, you would have realised that I had been supporting Cameron Jerome on here, at a time when a particular individual was constantly abusing him. As for your reference to confrontation, do you not see how you start such situations by half-reading posts and then publishing your distorted view of what the poster has written? Generally, I''m not a miserable guy but do go a bit that way when I get categorised by you on here.
  8. I trust NN is suitably impressed with the development of his original thread and that it has given him full opportunity to give it his confrontational best. Foolishly, early in the thread, I posted my brief thoughts on why I would say more people post after a poor run than after a string of positive results. Nothing more, nothing less. Next thing, NN decides to print my words along with his own interpretation of what I said and criticism of what motivates me to post. Facts are, I was speaking of the motivation of posters in general and why I considered the traffic to flow as it does. I didn''t really expect to be called out and labelled in the way that I was by the individual in question but I guess I should have known better from his track record. For somebody who supposedly only posts to criticise following defeats, its surprising that my last involvement prior to this thread was to register my thoughts about the poster who was seeing fit to constantly abuse Cameron Jerome.
  9. I would have thought it''s pretty obvious why supporters have more to say when we''re not performing than they do when we''re winning. Why would posters be critical when we are playing well? Would you expect to see calls for changes when the team is winning? It''s when we are not performing over a period that people begin to get restless and start posting with their opinions on what is wrong and what they think needs to be done to get back on track. Why would you want to call for changes to a winning team?
  10. It''s the other side of dealing that has been our problem. We get decent money on disposals but have a catalogue of disasters on the acquisition side of things. A club of our size/wealth cannot afford to fritter millions on such as RVW, Naismith and so many others. Yes, there will always be successes and failures when bringing new players in but we have had a lot more Naismiths than we have Maddisons.
  11. I agree with all that Wolf says, especially in relation to Klose. Its a long time since I''ve seen that level of commitment from a Norwich CB.
  12. Good question Tiger. Through a combination of recruitment decisions and injuries, we find ourselves totally reliant on Cameron Jerome for the present and immediate future. So what good are all these abusive posts from the Canarymoon character? Not generally considered the best way of motivating somebody on whom your success depends but I suppose its different.
  13. Ray, I''m not surprised that Morrison was critical of those calling for Martin''s removal. Along with any other striker in the Championship, they all know that they are hardly likely to be given a rough time if he is in the centre of the Norwich defence. As for his other comments, I do agree that Saturday wasn''t one of Martin''s worst days but many regular supporters have seen him these past couple of seasons and are heartily sick of the fact that we continue to persevere with him. Morrison suggests that he is an easy target because he is captain and has been there a long time. Again Ray, I can''t agree with you (and Morrison) on either of those thoughts. He does not get stick because he is captain, he gets stick because he is an awful leader on the field and this is because he is in such a beleaguered state with his own game. As for having been there for a long time, I don''t hear the crowd calling for Wes''s head very often and he''s been around a fair few years. I agree with you and the small band of Martin supporters on here, that booing him and calling for his removal during a game is simply not on, but I also understand the frustration that has built up over a long period. This frustration will not be relieved by today''s Archant suggestion that with the arrival of Hanley, Farke might well go with three at the back. They suggested Hanley, Klose and yes, Russell Martin.
  14. The small band of supporters who rear up on here whenever words of criticism are directed at our hapless captain really do destroy any credibility they might otherwise have had when they argue his merits as an on-field leader. Example will always form a significant part of good captaincy. What example can Martin possibly set when his own game is in such dire straits? I too spent a few hours earlier this week with a former player although clearly not the one referred to a few posts back. This particular ex-Canary could not have been more scathing of Martin as a CM and as a leader on the pitch.
  15. I haven''t read all the pages of this thread, so apologies if I am repeating a point already made. The point that has always aggravated me as far as Lineker is concerned is that he does not find it possible, for the money he is paid, to present MoD2 on Sundays. Why not?
  16. At his age and given that he was said to have a number of clubs interested in signing him, I would have expected him to go somewhere with the likelihood of regular involvement. The Ipswich midfield will give him little in this respect as he watches ball after ball launched over his head. He''ll have to settle for a spectating role along with the other 12,000.
  17. LDC writes: Not worried about this at all. If he wants to stay, it means his heart is in the job, if he wants to go to Sunderland, it frees up his wages. It''s win/win either way. No LDC, wrong on both counts. If he wants to stay it will be to take the money our club foolishly contracted to pay him. If he leaves, all the transfer fee and wages to date will have been for sweet football association. It''s lose/lose either way.
  18. Branston has not seen a poll of 35k supporters, the majority of whom would wish to see the back of Martin. Well you obviously will never get an opinion from that number of people. The nearest you are likely to get is this week''s response in the EDP to their question "Which 15 players would you keep next season?" Players like Pritchard and the Murphys had a percentage in the high 90''s. Martin was about 45% and not in the top 15. Scalewise, that''s as big a poll as you are likely to get and obviously gives the answer you were saying you had not seen.
  19. He could have meant "no, Wagner is not coming" just like "no we are not having a snap general election."
×
×
  • Create New...