Paddy Davitt article

[daly 501]

Delia will not sack AN for some reason only known to herself, could be money, could be she honestly feels he can come good, or she is completely out of touch with what football the fans want to see.

AN has been here almost 2 years now, he inherited a side probably good enough for the top 6 that season. We beat a 10 man Ipswich and went on to beat Middlesbrough in the final.

Since then we have been absolute rubbish spent the whole season in TP with Div. 1 centre backs, no Plan A no Plan B so we got relegated but he has learned nothing we still have no Plan A or B

Time for head in the sand Delia and her cronies to either call it a day or show some bottle and replace this likeable Manager before we are fighting off relegation to Div1

[Jim Smith 2,317]

One of the best things about this board is that despite the fact we may disagree on points any debate is "generally" (sometimes we may stray during moments of extreme frustration) undertaken on a civil basis and with recognition that we are a broad church with varying opinions. Ultimately we all just want the team and club to succeed, we just have differing views of how to best go about it.

[Norfolkn Good 7]

8 of us boycotting the FA Cup game Jim. First time I''ve missed a home FA Cup game since I was too young to go in the 70''s.

Be nice if the other 22000 season ticket holders did it too.....

[morty 0]

Daly do you get through a lot of keyboards, what with the dribble damage?That was honestly like a text version of a call to Canary call.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Norfolkn Good"]8 of us boycotting the FA Cup game Jim. First time I''ve missed a home FA Cup game since I was too young to go in the 70''s.

Be nice if the other 22000 season ticket holders did it too.....[/quote]8 of you?That''ll show em[:D]

[Buh 0]

Don''t usually agree with Paddy on much, I find he remains pragmatic and deliberately negative in an attempt to appear learned, it''s a common trope in the media, but I think he''s bang on here with this article. It feels like a crossroads.

[Highland Canary 76]

Can''t understand wanting to boycott a match involving a PL team. The wilderness is beckoning for us - we may not make it beyond FAC1 next season.

[nutty nigel 7,528]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]One of the best things about this board is that despite the fact we may disagree on points any debate is "generally" (sometimes we may stray during moments of extreme frustration) undertaken on a civil basis and with recognition that we are a broad church with varying opinions. Ultimately we all just want the team and club to succeed, we just have differing views of how to best go about it.[/quote]

Top post! I love you now Jimbo[{][U][}]

[ricardo 7,384]

I don''t do boycotts. Time is running out, who knows how long it will be before we play another Premier League side. This next downswing could very well be a lengthy one.

[nutty nigel 7,528]

[quote user="ricardo"]I don''t do boycotts. Time is running out, who knows how long it will be before we play another Premier League side. This next downswing could very well be a lengthy one.

[/quote]

It''s a home game. You ain''t got any choice.

[morty 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]I don''t do boycotts. Time is running out, who knows how long it will be before we play another Premier League side. This next downswing could very well be a lengthy one.

[/quote]Me neither.I think they got the pricing wrong, but I was unlikely to go, because we''re usually shart in the cups. I''ll go on the odd occasion, then see the team lineup and realise the club has about as much enthusiasm for the cups these days, as I do.

[daly 501]

Morty

Worry about yourself and not me, same article to The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Express, Daily Mail, Telegraph and Times. Was going to post on the Guardian site but realised that newspaper is only read by Reds who obviously would not know who The Canaries are.

Probably think supporting the Canaries is something they could organise a march to Downing Street on if they could spell Canaries

[ricardo 7,384]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="ricardo"]I don''t do boycotts. Time is running out, who knows how long it will be before we play another Premier League side. This next downswing could very well be a lengthy one.

[/quote]

It''s a home game. You ain''t got any choice.

[/quote]I even pre-pay for all cup games Nutty[Y]Ricky aint no fair weather plastic.

[The Unsullied 0]

Will do the game regardless but I agree the downward trend will be with us for years

[deltic31 13]

Really good article by Paddy which I thoroughly agree with.

I wanted to ring Canary call on Friday night to have a rant, but it seems that you have to be a mate of Rob Butler to get on and there''s no way I would want to be in that group!

[deltic31 13]

Oh and me and my son are both boycotting the Southampton game. A small gesture I know but if enough of us do it they may realise that £25 is counter productive!

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="ROBFLECK"]

 Well, Ricardo , you''ve always been the level headed bloke on this forum...but it is getting a teetsy weetsy bit frustrating even for you isn''t it? ;-) I was angry ''bout Tom, but I feel the truth Paddy writes in his article is hurting...''cause it''s the truth ... not?[/quote]

Its not like we haven''t been here before is it Rob, the article voices the frustrations of many but is careful not to overstate any hidden knowledge of behind the scenes activity. I fail to get energised when I see some of the "teenage scribblers" on this Forum getting over irate before the kettle has come fully to the boil.

At the weekend we had many waiting with bated breath expecting the imminent announcement of AN''s demise when it was quite plain to see that we are some way off that point. Friday nights Boo-fest was very low key and that tells me that he still hasn''t lost the majority. Couple that with the Boards obvious desire not to get trigger happy then any rational analysis must come down to the view that he is still skating because the ice isn''t yet thin enough. The time may or may not come when he falls through and then to quote the Nobel Laureate, "You won''t need a weather man to know which way the wind blows".

[/quote]

Depressing but true... AN just looks like a broken man to me.  I am an optimistic sor,t but even under new management I can''t see us getting close to the automatic playoff places now, whereas even Neil Adams left us high enough up the table at the start of January to come very close.  And as things stand with AN, even the playoffs look beyond us, which with this squad is criminal.

 

The article by Paddy is a pretty clear statement of how things are going IMO.

Will they all knuckle down after the January transfer window and improve our results under AN... now, that is optimistic talk.

[......and Smith must score. 1,341]

This Archant turn is puzzling.The local press reporters/columnists were pretty much fence sitters even in the death throes of Bob Chase''s reign when police horses were pinning people up against Carrow Rd walls. It couldn''t have got much worse but still no one wanted to/dared to swerve off the party line.More recently guest columnist Steve Gedge spoke sense but he disappeared. Now it seems like everyone at Archant''s grown a pair and got the knives out for Carrow Rd. Not before time too.Are Archant taking a gamble that if they all turn there''s no way they''ll all get banned from Carrow Rd ? Could be an interesting fans forum on January 10th.....

[komakino 272]

The club needs Archant more than the other way around.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="komakino"]The club needs Archant more than the other way around.[/quote]Like other posts of yours, that simply isn''t accurate. It used to be true that football clubs and the local press needed each other roughly equally. But with cyberspace that balance has shifted greatly. Clubs nowadays do not need the local press anything like as much, if at all, because there are so many other ways in which they can communicate with fans, and by which fans can get information and opinions.

[komakino 272]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"]The club needs Archant more than the other way around.[/quote]Like other posts of yours, that simply isn''t accurate. It used to be true that football clubs and the local press needed each other roughly equally. But with cyberspace that balance has shifted greatly. Clubs nowadays do not need the local press anything like as much, if at all, because there are so many other ways in which they can communicate with fans, and by which fans can get information and opinions.[/quote]

On the contrary, cyberspace is exactly why Archant doesn''t need the club like they used to. The information out there is available on - and off - the record.

If Archant and the club needed other so badly - there wouldn''t be the honest and brutal reporting from Davitt and Bailey.

A far cry from the Waghorn''s reporting, which ultimately led to him not getting his contract renewed.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="komakino"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"]The club needs Archant more than the other way around.[/quote]Like other posts of yours, that simply isn''t accurate. It used to be true that football clubs and the local press needed each other roughly equally. But with cyberspace that balance has shifted greatly. Clubs nowadays do not need the local press anything like as much, if at all, because there are so many other ways in which they can communicate with fans, and by which fans can get information and opinions.[/quote]

On the contrary, cyberspace is exactly why Archant doesn''t need the club like they used to. The information out there is available on - and off - the record.

If Archant and the club needed other so badly - there wouldn''t be the honest and brutal reporting from Davitt and Bailey.

A far cry from the Waghorn''s reporting, which ultimately led to him not getting his contract renewed.[/quote]You are still wrong. As evidenced by the number of clubs that have banned newspapers or limited their access in the recent past. With their own websites and even TV channels clubs know they don''t need newspapapers anything like as much as they used to.

[Highland Canary 76]

Purple is correct. Clubs have little need for, or interest in, local newspapers. Arguably, for PL clubs match day revenue is also of much less significance. For clubs in our situation with parachute payments dwindling and on a relegation trajectory match day income begins to assume a greater importance but even this is mitigated by the insurance of such a large numbers of season ticket holders. There also appears to be a belief that the board are at all uncomfortable that we play championship, league one or even league two football. Assuming some people turn up and clap this seems to be the the limit of the ambition for a small, community club like ours. Thank goodness we''re not in the greedy PL or among the PL aspirants in the championship. We can challenge Ipswich, Peterborough, Luton or Cambridge when we find our level.

[komakino 272]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"]The club needs Archant more than the other way around.[/quote]Like other posts of yours, that simply isn''t accurate. It used to be true that football clubs and the local press needed each other roughly equally. But with cyberspace that balance has shifted greatly. Clubs nowadays do not need the local press anything like as much, if at all, because there are so many other ways in which they can communicate with fans, and by which fans can get information and opinions.[/quote]

On the contrary, cyberspace is exactly why Archant doesn''t need the club like they used to. The information out there is available on - and off - the record.

If Archant and the club needed other so badly - there wouldn''t be the honest and brutal reporting from Davitt and Bailey.

A far cry from the Waghorn''s reporting, which ultimately led to him not getting his contract renewed.[/quote]You are still wrong. As evidenced by the number of clubs that have banned newspapers or limited their access in the recent past. With their own websites and even TV channels clubs know they don''t need newspapapers anything like as much as they used to.[/quote]

I''ll agree to disagree on this one. It depends how you look at it, but the club surely aren''t happy with Archant''s ''objective'' and factual reporting.

If NCFC ''banned'' Archant, it would be a PR disaster for the club and isolate them even more than they already are by trying to manipulate the local press.

It would be Archant 1, Norwich 0. Another defeat you could say.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

Rather ironic that Richard Balls is actually related to our current ''Cha Cha Cha Chairman'' Ed Balls?

[Woodman 92]

Paddy''s comments haven''t exactly mellowed in today''s "midweek Q&A" in the EDP.

[Canary Wundaboy 1,359]

Copy and Paste?

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="komakino"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="komakino"]The club needs Archant more than the other way around.[/quote]Like other posts of yours, that simply isn''t accurate. It used to be true that football clubs and the local press needed each other roughly equally. But with cyberspace that balance has shifted greatly. Clubs nowadays do not need the local press anything like as much, if at all, because there are so many other ways in which they can communicate with fans, and by which fans can get information and opinions.[/quote]

On the contrary, cyberspace is exactly why Archant doesn''t need the club like they used to. The information out there is available on - and off - the record.

If Archant and the club needed other so badly - there wouldn''t be the honest and brutal reporting from Davitt and Bailey.

A far cry from the Waghorn''s reporting, which ultimately led to him not getting his contract renewed.[/quote]You are still wrong. As evidenced by the number of clubs that have banned newspapers or limited their access in the recent past. With their own websites and even TV channels clubs know they don''t need newspapapers anything like as much as they used to.[/quote]

I''ll agree to disagree on this one. It depends how you look at it, but the club surely aren''t happy with Archant''s ''objective'' and factual reporting.

If NCFC ''banned'' Archant, it would be a PR disaster for the club and isolate them even more than they already are by trying to manipulate the local press.

It would be Archant 1, Norwich 0. Another defeat you could say.[/quote]The club didn''t have any hesitation about banning Look East for some years over that story about Mackail-Smith, and only caved in when it became obvious they weren''t ever going to get their way. Which anyone who knew anything about the BBC could have told them, and saved what did indeed become a bit of an embarrassment. But not more than that. It certainly wasn''t a PR disaster for the club, although I grant you a ban on Archant would create worse publicity than Look Eastgate did.But as I understand it the club (we are talking about when McNally was CEO) also punished Archant/its reporters privately in lesser ways than a total ban, and presumably felt able to do so because, as I said at the outset, the balance of power is now much more in the hand of clubs than newspapers.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

I heard the Club confiscated the Archant Reporter''s crayons......Ooh, so mean!

[Diane 500]

[quote user="Canary Wundaboy"]Copy and Paste?[/quote]

You can find it here, though cant make it a clicky

http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/the_norwich_city_debate_join_in_at_1pm_1_4821791