Delia doesn't understand what all the fuss is about!

[Greavsy 2,412]

I think they have changed his medication.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Nutty it also came about from Delia taking a complete step back from running the football club and allowing McNally and Bowkett to do everything and, I would argue, it came about almost entirely due to that appointment of Lambert which worked out better than anyone could have imagined. I spoke to Delia in a pub on the day lambert was appointed and she didn''t even know his name because she said McNally had sorted it all and they were not getting involved on the football side any more.

For all the good things McNally and Bowkett did it was primarily the success Lambert brought on the pitch that has enabled the off pitch team to make us debt free and (for now) financially stable.

If you take Delia''s 21 years as a whole then the record is pretty average (if you excluded the period she took a back seat it looks even worse but that would be churlish so we won''t) certainly in comparison to Chase who of course was hugely maligned.[/quote]I find that very hard to believe. That McNally had picked a manager (and even somehow appointed him?) without the owners (and presumably other directors such as Foulger?) even knowing who it was, let alone having authorised the appointment. Especially given that this was the manager who had just engineered the 7-1 defeat that prompted Gunn to be sacked and in doing so had enabled McNally to emphasise his credentials to be the replacement. No board of directors, in football or any other business, would behave like that, leaving itself in the dark over the choice of such a key executive.

[xxxx 0]

Delia,s a whore should ring round Carrow Road , get the drunken old bitch out of this club .

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Indy. I stand by my posts. Are you saying Delia did support Ipswich?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Greavsy"]I think they have changed his medication.[/quote]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.[/quote]

[Greavsy 2,412]

Thanks yet again for singling me out, you forgot to mention my warning this time.

Still not pasted my stalking of you yet, oh yes, coz it doesn''t exist.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Thanks yet again for singling me out, you forgot to mention my warning this time.

Still not pasted my stalking of you yet, oh yes, coz it doesn''t exist.[/quote]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.[/quote]

[Greavsy 2,412]

Grow up, for the sake of the others who wish to enjoy this board.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Grow up, for the sake of the others who wish to enjoy this board.[/quote]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.[/quote]

[Jim Smith 2,314]

@Purple - they had authorised the appointment Purple, i''m not saying it wasn''t done with their final nod but she had to ask us to remind her of the new manager''s name and said that they had not really had anything to do with it and had left it all up to David. Perhaps she was just giving extra kudos to her new CEO appointment but I took what she said at face value. On that day (and on other occasions I have met them) the two of them were great value and clearly enjoyed being able to have a few drinks with other fans. For that reason I find it a little sad that their Achilles heel of oversentimentality/loyalty to failing managers coupled with the whole Times article and Nephew Tom succession plan risks it all turning rather sour.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]@Purple - they had authorised the appointment Purple, i''m not saying it wasn''t done with their final nod but she had to ask us to remind her of the new manager''s name and said that they had not really had anything to do with it and had left it all up to David. Perhaps she was just giving extra kudos to her new CEO appointment but I took what she said at face value. On that day (and on other occasions I have met them) the two of them were great value and clearly enjoyed being able to have a few drinks with other fans. For that reason I find it a little sad that their Achilles heel of oversentimentality/loyalty to failing managers coupled with the whole Times article and Nephew Tom succession plan risks it all turning rather sour.[/quote]

Jimbo. Your first point doesn''t seem to tally with your second. Because it was Lambert''s appointment you''re quite happy to state it was left to McNally. But then as soon as it''s something you disagree with it''s Delia. You can''t have it both ways buddy.

[Duncan Edwards 2,218]

Grow up old boy!!!

Says the bloke spitting his dummy out and not renewing after forty years because we aren''t winning blub blub.

😂👌🏼

[Duncan Edwards 2,218]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]@Purple - they had authorised the appointment Purple, i''m not saying it wasn''t done with their final nod but she had to ask us to remind her of the new manager''s name and said that they had not really had anything to do with it and had left it all up to David. Perhaps she was just giving extra kudos to her new CEO appointment but I took what she said at face value. On that day (and on other occasions I have met them) the two of them were great value and clearly enjoyed being able to have a few drinks with other fans. For that reason I find it a little sad that their Achilles heel of oversentimentality/loyalty to failing managers coupled with the whole Times article and Nephew Tom succession plan risks it all turning rather sour.[/quote]

So handing over to someone they know and trust in Tom risks it all turning sour but presumably if they instead sold up to a Dick or Harry that would come with no risk of sourness at all.

Uh huh.

[Greavsy 2,412]

You''re only making yourself look poor Nigel, as others have already commented.

I''ll save you the time on this one.

Greavsy wrote:

Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.

[Indy 3,283]

I''m not playing with you Nutty, go bug someone else,.

But as you deal in proof only you show me proof that Delias scarf and rosette actually had city colours on the other side and not the interview she gave regarding that day she says she was wearing a hat which had city colours the other side yet all her pictures then as far as I have seen shows no sign of a hat!

You deal with facts only give me hard evidence of that reverse scarf, rosette and so called hat.

No I''m not saying she supports anyone as only she knows who she supports, anything else is based on guess work.

But I''m not playing anymore, you''re obviously on a mission to get people arguing rather than sticking to the threads. Goodbye nutty you don''t exist in my responses anymore.

[Indy 3,283]

Duncan my reasons for not renewing go far dealer than being fickle. I''m bored with football, had family health issues which reverted my focus and if I''m not enjoying something I have the balls to change it rather than just whine!

So do one.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Greavsy"]You''re only making yourself look poor Nigel, as others have already commented.

I''ll save you the time on this one.

Greavsy wrote:

Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.[/quote]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Good point SDP, let''s hope people can stay on topic.[/quote]

[Greavsy 2,412]

Indy gets it. 👍👍👍

[Greavsy 2,412]

If I may quote from Indy

You''re obviously on a mission to get people arguing rather than sticking to the threads

End of ''conversation''

[Jim Smith 2,314]

@Nutty

I''m stating it was almost entirely left to McNally because in that instance I happen to know it was Nutty. She said they were "stepping back" and getting less involved in the football decisions than before albeit of course they still had to sanction any decision whether to hire or fire. The implication was that they had been more personally involved with previous managerial decisions (e.g. Worthy) but they had been advised at that particular time to find a real "football" CEO (McNally) and take a step back.

I''m not even saying the dithering over Hughton was all down to them although they were clearly involved a bit more again at that time because if I recall correctly they went on the radio to defend his continued employment. To my mind though McNally lost the plot that season and didn''t regain it again until he realised Adams needed to go.

In all of these cases in my view the CEO should be making a recommendation to the board and they either accept it or they don''t. The worry at the moment is that we don''t have a CEO and I don''t know whether Stone, as interim CEO, would feel confident enough to try and force the issue if he feels that Delia, Michael and Tom are not keen on acting. If Balls was any use then he would perhaps take the lead and present the case for sacking but he appears to only be interested in self promotion.

Perhaps to be fair I should have said the "achilles heel of Norwich City boards during the current owners'' reign."

[Guest]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]I would have thought Delia has more ambition than the posters on here and other fans. People like to refer to the one season out of twenty we spent in league one as if it''s the benchmark for the whole twenty. Yet when we were relegated to league one Delias ambition got us all the way back to the PL. The best us fans could come up with was a resolution to punish the club by depriving them of money. These facts spoil a good fairytale but they''re also undeniable.[/quote]

To be fair Double N, she was sticking with Gunn until the Colchester farce. That was not ambitious to stick with a manager who had relegated us.[/quote]

Don''t fall for that Pops. Doncaster and Munby resigned in the May. The owners then re- appointed Gunn so he could assemble a football team for the season ahead. and went about the business of finding new executives to run the club. In the June they appointed McNally as CE and then persuaded Bowkett to be Chairman. They then ran the club and stuck with Gunn until the Colchester game. Surely the owners played that right? Or would you have suggested they appoint a new manager and then look for people to run the club?

[/quote]

Much of what you say may be feasible but I''m not sure it is completely correct.

We have to agree on the hierarchy of the club. The chairman is not what he was at one time. Balls has proven that. And it appears the CEO may have disappeared from our club and is likely to be swallowed up into a combined role.

That makes the owners the real power.

Bryan Gunn was more bizarre an appointment than Neil Adams. At least Adams had won something with a team he managed/coached. I believe there was a great deal of sentiment in that appointment which makes me wonder whether the owners are as calculating as you think.

Ideally, the CEO should work at the pit face with the manager but dine with the owners. And maybe in this age, the CEO is very important. but I still think the main man at the football club is the manager.

Britain has just adopted a different approach to running the clubs with the advent of the courts making decisions, agents negotiating rather than an ex pro becoming manager and expected to handle fiscal matters.

So I believe the first aim of that new era in L1 was to win football matches to satisfy the season ticket holders who had already pledged to stay with the club. Obviously expecting a season of success. And the opening day disaster was the least expected event and sent a shockwave through the club.

Surely the appointment of Lambert, the architect of that shockwave, couldn''t have been contrived before.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Indy"]But as you deal in proof only you show me proof that Delias scarf and rosette actually had city colours on the other side and not the interview she gave regarding that day she says she was wearing a hat which had city colours the other side yet all her pictures then as far as I have seen shows no sign of a hat!

You deal with facts only give me hard evidence of that reverse scarf, rosette and so called hat.

No I''m not saying she supports anyone as only she knows who she supports, anything else is based on guess work.  [/quote]

As I said Indy, the alternative is she lied about what happened. That''s too much of a stretch for me. Anyway this is what she said and I quote : -

"We''ve

said it before but let''s just trot it out one more time I was NOT at Wembley! I

was working for Multi-coloured Swap Shop and the joke was my rosette and hat

were turned round to reveal the Norwich colours amidst very loud booing as we

were filming in Christchurch Park, Ipswich."

And of course it''s well documented that Delia supported Norwich for many years before 1978. 

I never understand the motives of folk who spread this stuff around.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]@Purple - they had authorised the appointment Purple, i''m not saying it wasn''t done with their final nod but she had to ask us to remind her of the new manager''s name and said that they had not really had anything to do with it and had left it all up to David. Perhaps she was just giving extra kudos to her new CEO appointment but I took what she said at face value. On that day (and on other occasions I have met them) the two of them were great value and clearly enjoyed being able to have a few drinks with other fans. For that reason I find it a little sad that their Achilles heel of oversentimentality/loyalty to failing managers coupled with the whole Times article and Nephew Tom succession plan risks it all turning rather sour.[/quote]Jim, fine, but that was not at all the impression you were giving posters here with the earlier post, which was that Delia had no idea who McNally had chosen as the new manager. That she had never been told his name, which can only have been because she had  not been involved at all in the appointment:I spoke to Delia in a pub on the day lambert was

appointed and she didn''t even know his name because she said McNally had

sorted it all..Having to be reminded, although I find that a bit hard to believe, is nowhere near the same as never having known, is it? As with another false "fact" post a day back, it may seem nerdy to pull posters up on this kind of stuff, but left unchallenged it gets round the internet as "the truth" very quickly.That McNally had recommended Lambert and sorted the basics of the deal out is no surprise (it fits in with what little I knew from that time) but Smith and Jones and the other directors had to have approved the choice, as you now acknowledge.

[Len 74]

[quote user="Prem1"]Delia,s a whore should ring round Carrow Road , get the drunken old bitch out of this club .[/quote]Steady on old chap. I''m no fan of Delia, but there''s no excuse for using that kind of language about a woman.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

@Purple - she knew he was called Paul if that makes you feel any better ;-)

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="keelansgrandad"][quote user="nutty nigel"]I would have thought Delia has more ambition than the posters on here and other fans. People like to refer to the one season out of twenty we spent in league one as if it''s the benchmark for the whole twenty. Yet when we were relegated to league one Delias ambition got us all the way back to the PL. The best us fans could come up with was a resolution to punish the club by depriving them of money. These facts spoil a good fairytale but they''re also undeniable.[/quote]

To be fair Double N, she was sticking with Gunn until the Colchester farce. That was not ambitious to stick with a manager who had relegated us.[/quote]

Don''t fall for that Pops. Doncaster and Munby resigned in the May. The owners then re- appointed Gunn so he could assemble a football team for the season ahead. and went about the business of finding new executives to run the club. In the June they appointed McNally as CE and then persuaded Bowkett to be Chairman. They then ran the club and stuck with Gunn until the Colchester game. Surely the owners played that right? Or would you have suggested they appoint a new manager and then look for people to run the club?

[/quote]

Much of what you say may be feasible but I''m not sure it is completely correct.

We have to agree on the hierarchy of the club. The chairman is not what he was at one time. Balls has proven that. And it appears the CEO may have disappeared from our club and is likely to be swallowed up into a combined role.

That makes the owners the real power.

Bryan Gunn was more bizarre an appointment than Neil Adams. At least Adams had won something with a team he managed/coached. I believe there was a great deal of sentiment in that appointment which makes me wonder whether the owners are as calculating as you think.

Ideally, the CEO should work at the pit face with the manager but dine with the owners. And maybe in this age, the CEO is very important. but I still think the main man at the football club is the manager.

Britain has just adopted a different approach to running the clubs with the advent of the courts making decisions, agents negotiating rather than an ex pro becoming manager and expected to handle fiscal matters.

So I believe the first aim of that new era in L1 was to win football matches to satisfy the season ticket holders who had already pledged to stay with the club. Obviously expecting a season of success. And the opening day disaster was the least expected event and sent a shockwave through the club.

Surely the appointment of Lambert, the architect of that shockwave, couldn''t have been contrived before.[/quote]

I wasn''t talking about what we have now. I was talking about what we had then Pops and I''d be really interested in what part isn''t correct.

As for the now it would seem there''s to be restructuring. I have no idea what form this will take. I could guess at Steve Stone and a Football man in combined roles but that''s just a guess. I don''t think the manager will go anywhere until that restructuring is sorted. And I''m not convinced he will even then. At that point one of two things will happen. Either we''ll start regularly winning football matches which will be put down to the new CE''s appointment. Or we will continue not winning enough football matches which will be put down to Delia keeping the manager too long.

[Indy 3,283]

Where''s the fact in that? You for some reason turned on me today so where''s the photo or video to back that up?

I''ve read that too and she goes on to say the Ipswich supporters booed, I''ve not seen that!

I''ll leave it there as you can''t prove to me that she wasn''t supporting the binners on that day, I can''t prove she wasn''t, is she a Leeds fan first, well she allegedly supported them before changing allegiances to us, but who knows back in 78 football might not have been hey no 1 focus!

So if you can''t prove it don''t dig at me, again I can''t be arsed to argue, this board isn''t all about you, you have some chip that Morty got banned and you''ve taken on some one looking for a fight, it won''t be me. Goodbye

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Indy"]Where''s the fact in that?  [/quote]

It''s a direct quote Indy. 

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Given the amount of games she goes to and I suspect reading the local media I do not buy that she does not understand the growing resentment of many if not most supporters but I think she is surrounded by a little group in a bubble who choose to ignore it

[Indy 3,283]

So you believe quotes? But if someone else quotes something you disagree with you take exception to it! What if she was lying? Thought you only dealt in facts?