I like the new kit....

[YankeeCanary 0]

 

The facts .....the facts.....Lakey, don''t use words that you don''t understand. Let me make a suggestion for you. Rather than you arguing your nonsense on here why don''t you send one of your famous letters. This one could go to Grant Holt. He thinks he wasn''t the same person under Hughton. Why don''t to explain to him why he was the same person and see how he responds.. Then you can report back to us on how it all turned out. There, now that''s something for you to get your teeth into.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]The facts .....the facts.....Lakey, don''t use words that you don''t understand. Let me make a suggestion for you. Rather than you arguing your nonsense on here why don''t you send one of your famous letters. This one could go to Grant Holt. He thinks he wasn''t the same person under Hughton. Why don''t to explain to him why he was the same person and see how he responds.. Then you can report back to us on how it all turned out. There, now that''s something for you to get your teeth into.[/quote]

[:D] Someone of your age should know that facts are not what make the world go round.   Inspiration, love, character, loyalty - all are more important than "facts".     Facts tell you Holt scored 8 goals that season. They don''t tell you what an influence he was behind the scenes. Only people can do that.  So rather than just shouting "nonsense" at me, I suggest you ask some people closer to Norwich than I am to confirm that my opinions are accurate.

[Katie Borkins 1]

Lakey, the onus is on you to prove your point and not on others to disprove it. For someone who was certain about his influence, you should be able to evidence it somehow, no?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]Lakey, the onus is on you to prove your point and not on others to disprove it. For someone who was certain about his influence, you should be able to evidence it somehow, no?[/quote]

No. The onus is on others to take on board the spirit of what is being said, not try and dissect it with  stats - stats that are not part of the argument.  I have said all along it''s not Holt''s performance on the pitch I have been talking about and yes, he was less of a force on the pitch, yes, he was disappointed with the different style of football and what was being asked of him and yes he wasn''t the same player - but no, it did not change his character and personality.   Holt''s worth to the club went way beyond him as a player - and it is well documented and reported.  I can understand that some people don''t see that in him, that is fine - but whether it''s those that do see it and those that don''t see it, is a matter of  perception, not facts or "evidence".  

It seems to me that Holt''s biggest crime was in not becoming a Norwich man through and through - the way Forbes did, Hucks did, or Goss, or Gunn, etc etc.   He was a legend at the club, but wanted away.  Some will never understand or forgive that.  The rest of us though, will remember a man who was inspirational at club for four years.

[morty 0]

So you talk a load of shart, and the onus is on everyone here to just accept it?

[Yellow Wal 314]

Now this is becoming tiresome ........ and if we are not careful will become even more so.

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

I thought this thread was about the new kit?

Personally I don''t like it. As others have said, a potentially brilliant kit ruined by the Aviva square.

Hopefully the away shirt will be a better and I might get that. The famous 92/94 shirt is definitely on my shopping list though.

[hogesar 9,672]

I still like the new kit [:D].

On another note, I kinda get what LDC is saying, even if it is surrounded by a load of rubbish.

I think you have to say Holt''s 8 goals was a tremendous achievement in a Hughton team, so he couldn''t have been that bad.

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="hogesar"]I kinda get what LDC is saying, even if it is surrounded by a load of rubbish.[/quote]

Then please do the rest of us a favour - take a deep breath, and then try to explain what you think he''s saying?

[hogesar 9,672]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"][quote user="hogesar"]I kinda get what LDC is saying, even if it is surrounded by a load of rubbish.[/quote]

Then please do the rest of us a favour - take a deep breath, and then try to explain what you think he''s saying?

[/quote]

I''ll try [:D].

I think he was trying to say that Holt was an influential figure under Hughton, just as he was under Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to say he was an influential figure under Hughton. He was trying to say he was just as good under Hughton as he was Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to say he was just as good under Hughton as he was Lambert. He was trying to suggest he was just as an integral part to the squad under Hughton as he was under Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to suggest he was just as an integral part to the squad under Hughton as he was under Lambert. 

Clear enough?

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"][quote user="hogesar"]I kinda get what LDC is saying, even if it is surrounded by a load of rubbish.[/quote]

Then please do the rest of us a favour - take a deep breath, and then try to explain what you think he''s saying?

[/quote]

I''ll try [:D].

I think he was trying to say that Holt was an influential figure under Hughton, just as he was under Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to say he was an influential figure under Hughton. He was trying to say he was just as good under Hughton as he was Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to say he was just as good under Hughton as he was Lambert. He was trying to suggest he was just as an integral part to the squad under Hughton as he was under Lambert. But he wasn''t trying to suggest he was just as an integral part to the squad under Hughton as he was under Lambert. 

Clear enough?

[/quote]

[H] Naah.....totally wrong.    Regardless of his on pitch form (which with Holt was always only half the story) Holt was a figure at the club everyone looked up to throughout his time at Norwich - including fans - except for a few sour faced fans who couldn''t handle him wanting a better contract - or even wanting to leave..........oh - and those who were convinced he was overweight when he proved he wasn''t........oh - and those who thought he was never fit enough even though he proved otherwise, time and time again.....oh and those who think that because he didn''t like Hughton''s tactics he didn''t try hard enough.........

If bor and any others don''t "get" what I''m on about, then you never will.  Presumably players only exist to you when you see them on the pitch and have no worth off it.  In Holt''s case, despite the change over from Lambert to Hughton,  he carried on being totally professional, carried on being a super club captain behind the scenes, did his best to fit in with the new regime and was a credit to the club right up to the day he left.  And you don''t have to look far to find plenty of accolades of that nature from people more in the know than me.

Or you can carry on thinking that because of the different regime he somehow didn''t give as much to the club - but that would be an insult to the big man. 

[Katie Borkins 1]

[quote user="lake district canary"]Regardless of his on pitch form (which with Holt was always only half the story) Holt was a figure at the club everyone looked up to throughout his time at Norwich - including fans - except for a few sour faced fans who couldn''t handle him wanting a better contract - or even wanting to leave..........oh - and those who were convinced he was overweight when he proved he wasn''t........oh - and those who thought he was never fit enough even though he proved otherwise, time and time again.....oh and those who think that because he didn''t like Hughton''s tactics he didn''t try hard enough.........[/quote]

So everyone looked up to him apart from those who didn''t.

Clear so far.

[quote user="lake district canary"]

In Holt''s case, despite the change over from Lambert to Hughton,  he carried on being totally professional, carried on being a super club captain behind the scenes, did his best to fit in with the new regime and was a credit to the club right up to the day he left.  And you don''t have to look far to find plenty of accolades of that nature from people more in the know than me. [/quote]

I haven''t seen any such accolades.  He did the job he was paid to do and with a hefty pay rise from the new contract he negotiated in the aftermath of Lambert leaving, it is the least I would have expected him to do.[quote user="lake district canary"]Or you can carry on thinking that because of the different regime he somehow didn''t give as much to the club - but that would be an insult to the big man. [/quote]

He didn''t give as much to the club, as his goal tally and assists tally showed.  Everything else is conjecture and opinion.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"][quote user="lake district canary"]Regardless of his on pitch form (which with Holt was always only half the story) Holt was a figure at the club everyone looked up to throughout his time at Norwich - including fans - except for a few sour faced fans who couldn''t handle him wanting a better contract - or even wanting to leave..........oh - and those who were convinced he was overweight when he proved he wasn''t........oh - and those who thought he was never fit enough even though he proved otherwise, time and time again.....oh and those who think that because he didn''t like Hughton''s tactics he didn''t try hard enough.........[/quote]

So everyone looked up to him apart from those who didn''t.

Clear so far.

[quote user="lake district canary"]

In Holt''s case, despite the change over from Lambert to Hughton,  he carried on being totally professional, carried on being a super club captain behind the scenes, did his best to fit in with the new regime and was a credit to the club right up to the day he left.  And you don''t have to look far to find plenty of accolades of that nature from people more in the know than me. [/quote]

I haven''t seen any such accolades.  He did the job he was paid to do and with a hefty pay rise from the new contract he negotiated in the aftermath of Lambert leaving, it is the least I would have expected him to do.[quote user="lake district canary"]Or you can carry on thinking that because of the different regime he somehow didn''t give as much to the club - but that would be an insult to the big man. [/quote]

He didn''t give as much to the club, as his goal tally and assists tally showed.  Everything else is conjecture and opinion.

[/quote]

You plainly don''t understand the word "give".  "Giving" isn''t the same as "achieving".  

 

[Katie Borkins 1]

True, it isn''t.

But you have no way of knowing he achieved or gave as much for the club in that last season.  I think you''re imagining a lot of "behind the scenes" stuff, to be honest.  There''s simply no way you can know how influential he was behind the scenes.  He might well be as influential as you suggest, yes.  But nobody except the players at the time and Houghton will absolutely know for sure, and even their opinions will be tainted by personal prejudice.

Secondly, in most businesses, if you give someone a big pay rise after they threaten to leave, and in return they give you the same as previous, it would be considered relative underperformance.

Grant Holt was a player I loved watching - a marauding centre forward who put it all into every performance, and a bit of a rogue with it. I will always look at his time with us fondly, but that last season was painful and not least because he was effectively neutered by Houghton''s tactics and the lack of supply.

Well, maybe not neutered, but certainly missing one testicle.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

Going back to the ''was Adam''s a mistake?'' debate. I personally feel that it boils down a couple of simple questions-

1. Would we have been promoted under Adam''s?

Our ever-decreasing away form and general downward spiral from October would suggest most definitely not- maybe we could have scraped in to 6th place?

2. Would not being promoted have been considered a success?

I think that, with a squad widely touted as the best in the league, not getting promoted or not challenging for the top 2 would surely have been considered a failing on our part.

With this in mind I conclude that, yes, the Adam''s appointment was a mistake.

Although he didn''t fall anywhere near as short as many expected/hoped him to. His passion and footballing ideas won him much respect and even more so after his humble resignation. Which I think is perhaps the catalyst to why people are still very supportive towards him.

But based on our performances we would have most likely continued to stagnate rendering him a mistake in my eyes.

It would be interesting to see, however, how he would''ve faired had he had Bassong on board from day 1....and a fully fit Hoolahan....

[lharman7 39]

nutty nigel wrote the following post at 05/07/2015 9:54 PM:

lharman7 wrote:

Hugely disagree on a few points NN. Hughton HAD lost the players. In fact he had lost them very early on in the season. You could just see in there confidence and the demeanour the way they played. Hughton had sapped the life out of the players and to say otherwise is simply being blind.

Nutty, i don''t quite understand why you emphasize the relegation wage drop. Not for one minute did i think any of our players play for money or that the money really matters. If the wage drop (money) had any bearing on the players than i suspect we would have seen more players leave than we did instead of staying for the championship fight. Oh and look who did leave, Fer, Snodgrass! I believe it did matter to Bassong who took over from Hughton. If it had not have been Adams, Bassong would not have uttered the (alleged) comment towards a different manager. Would think especially Lennon. So no, Bassongs reaction would not have been the same. Other than that NN i agree with you for the rest.

Chris Hughton still had the support of the players in the first team. In fact the players built up a siege mentality and by the end were playing for Hughton in spite of the fans. There were many spats with fans before after and even during games that will bear this out. I''m not blind buddy. I just post what i see and hear.

Bassong''s reaction was totally because of Hughton''s sacking. Hughton was his father figure and mentor. Listen to his interviews that season.

Norwich players in the main are top professionals who buy into the club''s community spirit and happily give back to the community. Russell Martin is the best example of this. Again listen to the interviews. It''s not suggesting they are mercenary to understand that a 40% wage cut is unsettling. It''s a short career and earnings are important to them. Remember Ruddy''s spat with the fan in the Barclay as he laid it on the line that relegation affected the players livelihood. And even if by some miracle the players weren''t unsettled by a 40% cut how do you reckon their wives felt? Imagine going home to your missus and saying "I''m getting a 40% pay cut next year but I''m not bothered because |I work for Norwich"! And then you get the agents involvement and the possibilities of earning more elsewhere. It''s not until after the January window closes that these unsettling distractions go away. And of course there was the words of praise for Bradley Johnson and how he''d settled down and got on with Championship football. The fact that he was singled out for this praise surely must mean there was another side to the coin.

NN, there was no evidence at all that says Hughton had the support of the first team. Where was this ''siege mentality'' you speak of? The spat with fans can easily be put down to enormous frustrations throughout a terrible season of dire football and dire mismanagement from Hughton. I believe Grant Holts comments after he left regarding Hughton''s management style will atone to this.

Which brings me to my next point, players will never ever say anything derogatory towards there manager unless they really want out of the club. That goes for all players.

I agree with you that Bassong had a bad reaction to Hughton''s sacking for all the reasons you stated but it definitely had more to do with who was then put in charge. Someone in the mold as Neil Lennon would certainly have commanded more respect than Bassong gave to Adams when he was appointed! So no, he would not have behaved whoever was brought in.

The next point you make regarding our top professionals and them having club community spirit whilst giving back to the community TOTALLY contradicts your ''siege mentality'' over Hughton comment. Do you not see the contradiction there?

Yes a 40% wage cut can be unsettling but i dare say more so for a paper boy than a profesional footballer. I still firmly believe that the majority of our players would have felt more hurt and disappointed with having been relegated than a 40% wage decrease, wife or no wife!

Nutty, you say you post on what you see and hear, well i tend to post on something i regard as very important, experience (albeit a lower level).

[nutty nigel 7,534]

That''s me back in my box. I can clean bogs though ;)

[mrs miggins 0]

...well at least you admit you''re talking bollox

[nutty nigel 7,534]

There''s nowt wrong with being a bog cleaner Miggo.

 

Me and Harmy have different views which have been documented on here. Mine are from my experience as a bog cleaner and his from his experience as a footballer. Mine would prevent me from criticising a bog cleaner at a higher grade while his would presumably prevent him from criticising a footballer at a higher level. Or I think that''s how it works....

 

 

[mrs miggins 0]

literally have no idea what you''re on about

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

There''s nowt wrong with being a bog cleaner Miggo.

 

Me and Harmy have different views which have been documented on here. Mine are from my experience as a bog cleaner and his from his experience as a footballer. Mine would prevent me from criticising a bog cleaner at a higher grade while his would presumably prevent him from criticising a footballer at a higher level. Or I think that''s how it works....

 

 

[/quote]

 

In the end all footballers have to go to the bog.

[mrs miggins 0]

perhaps he''s just taking the pi$$?

[firststeps 0]

Just come to have a look at the last page of this thread to see what on earth can be talked about 8 pages later...

But as usual it''s gone down the toilet ;-)

[nutty nigel 7,534]

Yes Yankee!

All I need to do is clean the bogs at Colney and my opinion will have a little weight. I wonder if they have any use for a bingo caller.....

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Yes Yankee! All I need to do is clean the bogs at Colney and my opinion will have a little weight. I wonder if they have any use for a bingo caller.....[/quote]

 

Don''t think so Nutty. No footballer likes to know their number is up.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

But some do. I could announce the substitutions....

"The garden gate is replaced by two little ducks"

 

 

[mrs miggins 0]

Has anyone seen Aston Villa''s promotional slogan for their new kit?

"The players have a duty, a responsibility. This is a big club"

LOL. Link below:

http://neymar-avfc.tumblr.com/post/123487670393/this-is-a-big-club-dying-does-anyone-here-even

[nutty nigel 7,534]

http://neymar-avfc.tumblr.com/post/123487670393/this-is-a-big-club-dying-does-anyone-here-even 

 

[:D]

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

But some do. I could announce the substitutions....

"The garden gate is replaced by two little ducks"

 

 

[/quote]Howson replaced by Redmond, that''s an interesting substitution Nigel.

[mrs miggins 0]

Cheers for doing the clicky linky thing Nutty.

Probs the most cringiest kit promo ever.