Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

I was going to post something similar, saved me the job. The good old days where the owner royally pissed off one of the best managers in the game at the time so he left us for Leicester, years later Leicester win the Premier League and we are saddled with the   Suffolk Socialists, all roads to the start of the demise of NCFC lead to Robert Chase 😀.............

15 years between O'Neill leaving Leicester and them winning the Premier League, bit of a stretch! 

He won a couple of league cups with them though didn't he? Perhaps that would have been us! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on boys - time to move on. Today the Club is run exactly as per RC. We develop a promising player and if a good offer comes along we sell. As a self sufficient Club, that's the way it is. In case anyone is in doubt Robert Chase did not sell Maddison, Godfrey, Lewis, Buendia, Brady and the Murphy's. To survive in Football you have to be a wheeler dealer and be very economical with the truth when you get close to transfer talk. As has been pointed out things were much more evenly balanced in the past. Clubs had to rely on the Banks for money  who employed professional lenders who were not prepared to throw their clients money in to the whirlpool of football finance. So Chase was always struggling to balance the books. Does anyone think you should want to put money into a business where the owner pays up £8 million just to get rid of a very unsuccessfull manager. Similar arrangements are widespread. Over recent years the Canaries have received substantial monies from Sky yet barely a penny has been spent on ground improvements. Correct me if you will but RC dealt with all significant ground improvements.  Of course the underlying problem is that once the Club receive a few bob the supporters cry for it to be spent on another very overpaid player. RC was a good typical leader, but it is a fact that the doers in this world will not get everything right. You only have to ask Messrs Farke and Webber.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vos said:

Come on boys - time to move on. Today the Club is run exactly as per RC. We develop a promising player and if a good offer comes along we sell. 

Chase flogged players to fund stadium redevelopment though.

We need owners who during their reign deliver a new City Stand, and we can thank Delia and MWJ for doing their bit here... but Tom Smith will never meet that need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Chase flogged players to fund stadium redevelopment though.

We need owners who during their reign deliver a new City Stand, and we can thank Delia and MWJ for doing their bit here... but Tom Smith will never meet that need.

I thought the only development work they were involved with was the disposal of some land, well suited to increasing ground capacity, to someone to build an hotel !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vos said:

I thought the only development work they were involved with was the disposal of some land, well suited to increasing ground capacity, to someone to build an hotel !!

They rebuilt the South Stand, and made the Barclay end look a lot posher on the outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

That's the first time I've ever seen the 'or family' bit added the 'no one individual' when discussing the share ownership.

Is this poster correct?

Well I guess the person who said it about one person added the rider 'but no problem if we have a married couple as majority shareholders'. As if they would?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Chase flogged players to fund stadium redevelopment though.

We need owners who during their reign deliver a new City Stand, and we can thank Delia and MWJ for doing their bit here... but Tom Smith will never meet that need.

The River End was built years before Chase was the Chairman.

The City Stand was built with insurance money due to the fire.

The Barclay was redeveloped with a grant from the Football Trust.

The South Stand he let rot away until it virtually failed a safety certificate a few short years after he quit.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TIL 1010 said:

The River End was built years before Chase was the Chairman.

The City Stand was built with insurance money due to the fire.

The Barclay was redeveloped with a grant from the Football Trust.

The South Stand he let rot away until it virtually failed a safety certificate a few short years after he quit.

Did the fire happen on his watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

The River End was built years before Chase was the Chairman.

The City Stand was built with insurance money due to the fire.

The Barclay was redeveloped with a grant from the Football Trust.

The South Stand he let rot away until it virtually failed a safety certificate a few short years after he quit.

Bought Colney though didn't he, which is at the heart of everything we do as a club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Did the fire happen on his watch?

Chase joined the board in 1982. The fire was October 1984. Chase became chairman in 1985 . 
Depends what you mean by “his watch” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Bought Colney though didn't he, which is at the heart of everything we do as a club.

To be fair the land he bought behind the South Stand was also what ultimately helped fund the rebuilding of it.

mustn’t forget the David Phillips Under Soil Heating as well! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Did the fire happen on his watch?

No but Sir Arthur South resigned over the contract to rebuilt it being awarded to R G Carter and it was actually built on Chase's watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

No but Sir Arthur South resigned over the contract to rebuilt it being awarded to R G Carter and it was actually built on Chase's watch.

 

58 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Did the fire happen on his watch?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

No but Sir Arthur South resigned over the contract to rebuilt it being awarded to R G Carter and it was actually built on Chase's watch.

 

Just that fires and insurance have a long linked history.

Perhaps Chase didn't have a great infrastructure investment record but there was a suggestion that he acquired some property investments that were quite helpful to the Club though I don't know the detail.

As for S&J they have been there for more than twice the amount of time than Chase and have the South Stand and Training Ground to their credit. In both instances they relied on fan finance but with radically different nature and ultimately in the last instance in TV money which is radically different to Chase's day. 

Perhaps not such a clearcut call as some people would suggest?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, essex canary said:

You appear to be more familiar than me given the attribution to Geoffrey Watling.

Given the eminence of  Geoffry Watling in Club history it would have been good if his views had been respected in what transpired even if not initially then perhaps subsequently?

Geoffrey Watling was very happy selling his shares to Smith and Jones after there was no interest from anyone else for 18 months. 

But which other shares would you prefer Smith & Jones not to have? The ones they got in 1996 when approached by Martin Armstrong? Or the ones they had to buy for underwriting share issues? Or perhaps the ones they got through converting loans to get rid of debt?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

Geoffrey Watling was very happy selling his shares to Smith and Jones after there was no interest from anyone else for 18 months. 

But which other shares would you prefer Smith & Jones not to have? The ones they got in 1996 when approached by Martin Armstrong? Or the ones they had to buy for underwriting share issues? Or perhaps the ones they got through converting loans to get rid of debt?

 

I wish they had 1,000 more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

 

Just that fires and insurance have a long linked history.

Perhaps Chase didn't have a great infrastructure investment record but there was a suggestion that he acquired some property investments that were quite helpful to the Club though I don't know the detail.

As for S&J they have been there for more than twice the amount of time than Chase and have the South Stand and Training Ground to their credit. In both instances they relied on fan finance but with radically different nature and ultimately in the last instance in TV money which is radically different to Chase's day. 

Perhaps not such a clearcut call as some people would suggest?

 

 

Well Smith and Jones never wrote to me to see if I was dead in order to hoover up as many of the small shareholdings as possible. Guess who did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Geoffrey Watling was very happy selling his shares to Smith and Jones after there was no interest from anyone else for 18 months. 

But which other shares would you prefer Smith & Jones not to have? The ones they got in 1996 when approached by Martin Armstrong? Or the ones they had to buy for underwriting share issues? Or perhaps the ones they got through converting loans to get rid of debt?

 

Should have approached Neil Armstrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

No but Sir Arthur South resigned over the contract to rebuilt it being awarded to R G Carter and it was actually built on Chase's watch.

i remember The Fire and the chase days 

So much anger and hate remember standing on Carrow road when it  really was out of control front windows smashed nearly a full on riot 

Did they ever find out what caused the Fire ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Greavsy said:

This article states "most controversial figures in the club's history after a string of high profile sales which led to mass protests".  Interestingly the current owners have made a string of high profile sales and NOBODY HAS SAID A WORD !! Dunno why anyone is getting excited about £1.35 million for a property, you nearly get that for a terrace house in London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i remember The Fire and the chase days 

So much anger and hate remember standing on Carrow road when it  really was out of control front windows smashed nearly a full on riot 

Did they ever find out what caused the Fire ?

Something burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The for's and against's of Robert Chases tenure are compelling!

 

The clubs most successful spell which included highest League finishes of 3rd, 4th and 5th happened under Robert Chases Chairmanship!

 

The investment in land around Carrow Road and purchasing Colney training ground has benefited the club in recent years although in the 1990's contributed to the clubs lean spell through trying to subsidise the playing side cheaply, the results of which still to a point hinder the club now. - Chases policy of buy cheap, sell on for handsome profit and produce youngsters to sell on for handsome profits worked up until 1994 when it started to unravel at the same time the Premierships money streamlines exploded and we saw the influx of foreign players that went with it. Norwich City's demise occurred at a bad time cause Norwich were left behind and like I've said before haven't gotten back to the heights of the 1980's ever since although the club is now in a stable position that most others professional clubs would like to be in even if the playing side is currently frustrating. Chase needed to change tactics during the 1993/94 season, tried harder to keep Mike Walker and the squad, added to the squad but chose to keep following the policy of being a selling club at a time when like I said the landscape of the Premiership changed.

 

Even after the relegation in 1995 Chase had the opportunity to rectify matters when he managed to attract Martin O Neil to the club only to fall out with him not long after only a few months. - Look at Leicester City's promotion in 1995, then 4 successive  top 10 top flight finishes, 2 League cup wins and one runners up in the 5 years O Neil spent at Leicester after falling out with Chase. - Could that of been Norwich City had O Neil stayed at Carrow Road? - Possibly but its almost definite to suggest that had Martin O Neil stayed at Norwich from 1995 till 2000 the outcome would have very likely been much better than what actually happened which subsequently would have put the club in a stronger position than it is today. Look at Leicester today a club who without all the investment I would consider a smaller club than Norwich cause they get smaller crowds than us out of the top flight!

 

As for the stadium Chase overall played a major role in replacing the burnt down old main stand in 1986 and old Barclay stand shed in 1992. The City stand was built and still has the foundations for a 2nd tier which would wrap round joining up the upper tier tiers of the Barclay and River End stand. The new Barclay stand was paid for with money from the Football League trust I believe so the club didn't pay anything for it which was a masterstroke on Chases part. The old Barclay could have been kept in tact for another 2 years but the grant money wouldn't have been given to pay for its replacement. I think the installation of seating in the River End lower tier in 1992 two years before the rules enforced it may also have had something to do with receiving grant to pay for installing them. The old Barclay was an old shed with no non football income streams and would have been awful with seats bolted onto it.

 

The only part of Chases development of the City Stand and Barclay stand I can criticise is why wasn't the Barclay stand roof cantilevered when instead it was built in an identical way to what the River End stand was in 1980 with view obstructing posts?

 

But for the mid 1990's downfall of the clubs fortunes and relegation Chase would have built a new South stand around the 1995-2000 era. 

 

 To summarise for me personally because of the above reasons I loved and hated Robert Chases tenure at Carrow Road!

Edited by kingsway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

The River End was built years before Chase was the Chairman.

The City Stand was built with insurance money due to the fire.

The Barclay was redeveloped with a grant from the Football Trust.

The South Stand he let rot away until it virtually failed a safety certificate a few short years after he quit.

Leaving Smith and Jones to do something about it, and it was the loans from Axa and the Bank of Scotland needed to pay for the rebuilding that were a significant factor in the financial troubles that surfaced a bit over a decade ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vos said:

Dunno why anyone is getting excited about £1.35 million for a property, you nearly get that for a terrace house in London

The article is from 2010, so prices would be more relative then I'd guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day given he only owned 34% of the Football Club and appointed a high profile managersuch as Martin O'Neil, Chase ended up in a weak position. It was easier for smaller clubs from the mid 80's to the mid 90's, nevertheless the achievements during that period look pretty impressive overall. What was the other 66% of the shareholders doing when there were difficulties?

S&Js tenure divides into 2 specific halves. The first, leaving the Nigel Worthington period aside was relatively unsuccessful. The last 12 years given the different football climate must be regarded as successful. Football personalities such as McNally and now Webber should however always be complemented by a strong administrative team as Ed Balls advocated plus more clarity and visibility of Board members roles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Duncan Edwards said:

I wish they had 1,000 more. 

Always available for a price. I could use the 25% annual return that bondholders got for a guide and still claim I was being generous on account of the higher risk profile of ordinary shares. Feel free to ask an economist for an explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...