Jump to content
Pyro Pete

"Women’s football, I do not watch it. It’s of zero interest"

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, FenwayFrank said:

Top of the page is about the lad that died in Cardiff, if you scroll down a little it’s just under “ Sophie is the first royal to visit Baghdad “

I believe you, it's just not there for me. Maybe it's a geolocation/cookie thing going on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well if Dan has made his company net trading profit of £80m I hope he has a good bonus scheme. 

Don't wind him up anymore....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Well if Dan has made his company net trading profit of £80m I hope he has a good bonus scheme. 

Do you know what the word relative means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Well credit to you, although pardon my scepticism as i'd be interested in a current valuation of Norwich City right now + revenue gained nett from transfers during Webbers time....

The value of the club will doubtless be higher now than it was in April 2017, though probably not significantly higher when you factor in inflation, particularly at current rates.

As for gains from transfers, Transfermarkt has it down as an overall profit since Webber took over as 38.69 million Euros (just under 34 million).

When you consider what's walked out of the door compared to what has come in, that's actually a tad disappointing. In fact, it's basically Buendia, whom we were stupid to sell anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, king canary said:

The amount of energy you're putting into 'providing balance' is a bit weird at this point.

Super weird as big stu would say. I think it's time . Times up SW

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amateur hour from Webber. Professionally his mouth is far too big for his own good. I happen to agree with him - but I wouldn’t say it in his position. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Apologies. Mine is the app and it's nowhere to be seen.

Well done Michael Bailey.

 

 

Mr Bailey told the BBC that there was "no definition in [Webber's] role of just being the men's sporting director".

"I struggle with someone representing a football club to be quite so opinionated on what is effectively one of the teams he is responsible for," he said.

"Not everyone has to like women's football - or any sport - but I think there is a respect that the sport deserves generally in terms of what it is and who it can appeal to."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I believe you, it's just not there for me. Maybe it's a geolocation/cookie thing going on.

I think it is a geolocation thing

I've clicked the link in the post "bbc.co.uk" and the headline can be seen briefly

Then the page reloads as "bbc.com" and there is no sign of it

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Mr Bailey told the BBC that there was "no definition in [Webber's] role of just being the men's sporting director".

"I struggle with someone representing a football club to be quite so opinionated on what is effectively one of the teams he is responsible for," he said.

"Not everyone has to like women's football - or any sport - but I think there is a respect that the sport deserves generally in terms of what it is and who it can appeal to."

 

Yes and I suspect he already knew Webber's view on women's football. Wondered why that question was asked.

Michael Bailey's a shrewd operator. Shame it's behind a paywall but I still have it for a quid a month.

Did I ever mention mbncfc is a PUP?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mengo said:

Mr Bailey told the BBC that there was "no definition in [Webber's] role of just being the men's sporting director".

"I struggle with someone representing a football club to be quite so opinionated on what is effectively one of the teams he is responsible for," he said.

"Not everyone has to like women's football - or any sport - but I think there is a respect that the sport deserves generally in terms of what it is and who it can appeal to."

 

I wonder what those who argued that Bailey wasn’t trying to cause problems think now?  Obvious is obvious. It’s a strange move to try to alienate those at the club.  Some seem to wet themselves whenever the guy is mentioned, but I’m not one of them.

Edited by Branston Pickle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mengo said:

Mr Bailey told the BBC that there was "no definition in [Webber's] role of just being the men's sporting director".

"I struggle with someone representing a football club to be quite so opinionated on what is effectively one of the teams he is responsible for," he said.

"Not everyone has to like women's football - or any sport - but I think there is a respect that the sport deserves generally in terms of what it is and who it can appeal to."

 

So giving 90% is not enough, but he can give his job 60% on the men's side, provided he's doing 40% on the women's side?

This is really iffy semantics. When people hear 'football' they mostly assume 'men's football'. Possibly they shouldn't, but they do. 

Men and women's football are completely segregated with completely different economics. Different coaches, different recruitment teams, the list goes on. It makes no sense for Webber to be responsible for it. It's Flo Allen's job. Besides, not sure the optics are that great for a man to be the head honcho for the women's game at Norwich in that manner anyway.

Edited by littleyellowbirdie
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yes and I suspect he already knew Webber's view on women's football. Wondered why that question was asked.

Michael Bailey's a shrewd operator. Shame it's behind a paywall but I still have it for a quid a month.

Did I ever mention mbncfc is a PUP?

5 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

I wonder what those who argued that Bailey wasn’t trying to cause problems think now?  Obvious is obvious. It’s a strange move to try to alienate those at the club.  Some seem to wet themselves whenever the guy is mentioned, but I’m not one of them.

Yes it’s very clear how much MB was trying to catch Webber out with his question:

"How do the women's team build on the success of the game at Carrow Road?"

Such a tough question served as an excellent curveball for Webber, who fell completely for the bait, having little choice but to go on a rant about him having zero interest in women’s football, him only doing it for Flo, insulting the quality of the women’s game and totally patronising their efforts. MB is truly on another level.

Or perhaps he just offered him a softball question about the team’s successes and growth and expected an answer of a similar vein? And was quite shocked with what Webber went with… that, instead? and has quite rightly reported it as such?

Have to say this is the first time I’ve read about MB being such a stirrer, his word on here has widely been taken as gospel over the years… but now he’s just trying to trip Webber up? Strange.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yes it’s very clear how much MB was trying to catch Webber out with his question:

"How do the women's team build on the success of the game at Carrow Road?"

Such a tough question served as an excellent curveball for Webber, who fell completely for the bait, having little choice but to go on a rant about him having zero interest in women’s football, him only doing it for Flo, insulting the quality of the women’s game and totally patronising their efforts. MB is truly on another level.

Or perhaps he just offered him a softball question about the team’s successes and growth and expected an answer of a similar vein? And was quite shocked with what Webber went with… that, instead? and has quite rightly reported it as such?

Have to say this is the first time I’ve read about MB being such a stirrer, his word on here has widely been taken as gospel over the years… but now he’s just trying to trip Webber up? Strange.

 

Way to go to miss the point entirely. Well done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yes it’s very clear how much MB was trying to catch Webber out with his question:

"How do the women's team build on the success of the game at Carrow Road?"

Such a tough question served as an excellent curveball for Webber, who fell completely for the bait, having little choice but to go on a rant about him having zero interest in women’s football, him only doing it for Flo, insulting the quality of the women’s game and totally patronising their efforts. MB is truly on another level.

Or perhaps he just offered him a softball question about the team’s successes and growth and expected an answer of a similar vein? And was quite shocked with what Webber went with… that, instead? and has quite rightly reported it as such?

Have to say this is the first time I’ve read about MB being such a stirrer, his word on here has widely been taken as gospel over the years… but now he’s just trying to trip Webber up? Strange.

 

Behind all this is an expectation that people should give bullsh*t answers to questions. He's not interested. He doesn't have to be interested. He was interested enough for the women's team to be brought in house at Norwich City and for Flo Allen to be appointed General Manager at Norwich for the women's team. On the face of it, a General Manager sounds like a more traditional approach where there isn't the separation of duties between a Sporting Director and a head coach. That implies that it really isn't relevant to Webber's job. Possibly, Michael Bailey should consider asking Flo Allen what Webber's responsibilities are on the women's side.

Edited by littleyellowbirdie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Men and women's football are completely segregated with completely different economics. Different coaches, different recruitment teams, the list goes on. It makes no sense for Webber to be responsible for it. It's Flo Allen's job. Besides, not sure the optics are that great for a man to be the head honcho for the women's game at Norwich in that manner anyway.

Well, quite.  Obviously no one thinks he didn’t go over the top and speak clumsily, I doubt he was vaguely meaning to belittle the women’s team.  But to try to assert that he’s responsible for that team in itself belittles the work of Flo Allen, so way to go Mr Bailey.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yes it’s very clear how much MB was trying to catch Webber out with his question:

"How do the women's team build on the success of the game at Carrow Road?"

Such a tough question served as an excellent curveball for Webber, who fell completely for the bait, having little choice but to go on a rant about him having zero interest in women’s football, him only doing it for Flo, insulting the quality of the women’s game and totally patronising their efforts. MB is truly on another level.

Or perhaps he just offered him a softball question about the team’s successes and growth and expected an answer of a similar vein? And was quite shocked with what Webber went with… that, instead? and has quite rightly reported it as such?

Have to say this is the first time I’ve read about MB being such a stirrer, his word on here has widely been taken as gospel over the years… but now he’s just trying to trip Webber up? Strange.

 

I’d like Michael Bailey. He’s not going to continue his career by toeing the line, but doesn’t cross it either. He chose his questions carefully with Webber and I found him very effective, if wanting a few questions more.

He did a very good piece last year dissecting the failings of signings by Webber for our last EPL campaign, the rationale of why he bought so many players and so forth. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, it’s hard isn’t it because the Bailey interview has not been heard unlike the pinkun or the bbc. Or am I making that up. 
 

I might be being unkind but Bailey maybe needs a story to justify the Athletic having a Norwich city reporter or he needs to move into being a general football journalist rather than a Norwich city reporter.

 

Share this post


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

Way to go to miss the point entirely. Well done.

In my eyes it is clearly Webber who stirred the pot, MB is the messenger but I don’t see any ill intention from MB’s original questioning or the way in which he has reported it. 

With your logic wouldn’t it always be the journalist’s fault for reporting on something negative? What was MB supposed to do? Cross out all the negative things Webber said and not report it? Not mention any of it? I don’t get it.

If MB truly thought that Webber was such an **** to just go on a rampage with such a simple softball question, and gift Bailey the perfect article he wanted, then doesn’t it only really prove how much MB is correct about Webber being an ****? I don’t think this was MB’s play at all, but it’s interesting if you think it is, that he lacks the tact to even answer the most basic of questions.

I actually quite enjoyed Webber’s interviews the past week or so, they’ve given me a fresh bit of hope for the next season and it sounds like he’s seriously determined to put things right. The quotes about him seeing Norfolk as his home and wanting to come back to Carrow Road to see where the club is in 20 years time were quite moving…

But these comments are incredibly stupid, and nothing good can come from them. 

The idea that posters are bending over backwards trying to find a reason to have a pop at him is laughable. The only posters on here I see with an agenda are those praising his ‘honesty’ as if what he said was remotely useful to anyone.

Honesty is great, if you’re someone like Alex Neil fessing up in an interview that the players weren’t good enough, and you’re not making excuses about your own performance. But when you’re simply insulting an entire branch you are effectively in charge of (directly or indirectly) with absolutely no redeeming qualities to the criticism (what are the women’s team meant to take from these comments I do not know), then you really do deserve the flak you get.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yes it’s very clear how much MB was trying to catch Webber out with his question:

"How do the women's team build on the success of the game at Carrow Road?"

Such a tough question served as an excellent curveball for Webber, who fell completely for the bait, having little choice but to go on a rant about him having zero interest in women’s football, him only doing it for Flo, insulting the quality of the women’s game and totally patronising their efforts. MB is truly on another level.

Or perhaps he just offered him a softball question about the team’s successes and growth and expected an answer of a similar vein? And was quite shocked with what Webber went with… that, instead? and has quite rightly reported it as such?

Have to say this is the first time I’ve read about MB being such a stirrer, his word on here has widely been taken as gospel over the years… but now he’s just trying to trip Webber up? Strange.

 

Mad isn't it?

These guys seem to have genuinely convinced themselves Webber fell for a machiavellian plot by Bailey.

Anything but acknowledge the reality.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Mad isn't it?

These guys seem to have genuinely convinced themselves Webber fell for a machiavellian plot by Bailey.

Anything but acknowledge the reality.

Which guys?

Share this post


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

Yes and I suspect he already knew Webber's view on women's football. Wondered why that question was asked.

Michael Bailey's a shrewd operator. Shame it's behind a paywall but I still have it for a quid a month.

Did I ever mention mbncfc is a PUP?

Oh yes nutty. Tell you what I quoted what apparently  Michael said. The Big percentage  on here need to get a grip. It's a meltdown about webber. Tell you what. It's ridiculous the **** that is being stirred up. He needs to take a step back. 

Personally nutty I thought the in-house was the best of the lot. I'm sure also I spied Alice peeping out from one of those pillars🤣😉🙃. SO your correct it was from N. 🇰🇷 Korea. 

Who was the guy who did that interview,  any ideas. Find out please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Mad isn't it?

These guys seem to have genuinely convinced themselves Webber fell for a machiavellian plot by Bailey.

Anything but acknowledge the reality.

Not at all, even remotely, certainly not from me. I don’t particularly like either Webber or Bailey.  My complaint all along was about context - this is crucial.  If you read what Webber said, properly in context, it has a pretty different ‘flavour’ than if you cherry pick.  By saying what he has here, Bailey has deliberately misused that context.  

If you can’t/don’t see that, that is absolutely your prerogative.

Edited by Branston Pickle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

So giving 90% is not enough, but he can give his job 60% on the men's side, provided he's doing 40% on the women's side?

This is really iffy semantics. When people hear 'football' they mostly assume 'men's football'. Possibly they shouldn't, but they do. 

Men and women's football are completely segregated with completely different economics. Different coaches, different recruitment teams, the list goes on. It makes no sense for Webber to be responsible for it. It's Flo Allen's job. Besides, not sure the optics are that great for a man to be the head honcho for the women's game at Norwich in that manner anyway.

You need to get a grip. I'm quoting MB.

This **** with superman webber is beyond a joke now. I'm not interested  in egos ,webber does this club no favours.

Bring Daniel back as SD and get the imposter gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Behind all this is an expectation that people should give bullsh*t answers to questions. He's not interested. He doesn't have to be interested. He was interested enough for the women's team to be brought in house at Norwich City and for Flo Allen to be appointed General Manager at Norwich for the women's team. On the face of it, a General Manager sounds like a more traditional approach where there isn't the separation of duties between a Sporting Director and a head coach. That implies that it really isn't relevant to Webber's job. Possibly, Michael Bailey should consider asking Flo Allen what Webber's responsibilities are on the women's side.

He doesn’t need to be interested in the team to answer the question though does he? He can just give a generic positive answer and move on? 

I’m amazed that posters seem to think the only options were;

1) Lie and big up women’s football when he doesn’t really mean it 

2) Be ‘honest’ and insult the entire team, the quality of women’s football and proclaim his lack of interest 

How about something like this?

’’

I thought it was great because it brought a completely new fanbase to the stadium to see what this business offers. There are plans to maybe have two games here next year. But we also have to remember it’s like a new club being formed and it costs a lot of money to put a game on here. We have to keep the demand because it doesn’t work if we have 1,500 people (at Carrow Road). That’s not good for the pitch to be used. Flo Allen (generalmanager) has done some incredible work and she’s a real rising star. I love working with Flo and helping her.

It’s a really slow journey. We’ve got to organically build it. We don’t want to go too fast then people get turned off, just to try to win a popularity contest on Twitter.

We’re not going to get Carrow Road full for the women’s team with 40-to-60-year-old drunk men. It’s about recognising that and going after who it is for. My son loved it — the atmosphere, music being on during the game — but that’s not for everyone.

For the girls, it was amazing. They were living their dream. They aren’t professionals. They were maybe working in the police that morning, and then running out like a hero to that crowd.

‘’

Shouldn’t be hard should it? It’s just Webber’s original answer with the main irrelevant and patronising comments removed. It’s genuinely amazing that Webber’s PR skills are this bad. It’s also equally as amazing how many posters are tying themselves in knots defending such objectively stupid comments.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

You need to get a grip. I'm quoting MB.

This **** with superman webber is beyond a joke now. I'm not interested  in egos ,webber does this club no favours.

Bring Daniel back as SD and get the imposter gone. 

I know. I simply replied to you because his quote was in your comment. I think it's a great opportunity for Flo to raise her profile.

Norwich Women's General Manager Reacts Angrily to Misogynistic Press: "I don't need a man there telling me how to do my job".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Plus side 

Webber has done more for Womens side of things but when Mcnally was here womens football was not as big

Mcnally told the women's side that the club would not put money in due to not making any money out of selling players etc 

Then you had Hemp leave and another who is my friends daughter who is also a professional ,

 Webber should not discount that Women's football has grown and will continue and money will and can be made if successful 

not as much but still money for the club ,

The Down side 

Webber might be Honest but he can not open his mouth without insulting someone 

he does not like it when people say his recruitment lacks quality but is quick to say others lack quality 

drunk 40 to 60 year old men ? who says that about customer base 

divorcee comment  maybe if he lost his house and children he would not say thinks about the subject that effects many 

He represents the club & owners and someone needs a word with him 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Oh yes nutty. Tell you what I quoted what apparently  Michael said. The Big percentage  on here need to get a grip. It's a meltdown about webber. Tell you what. It's ridiculous the **** that is being stirred up. He needs to take a step back. 

Personally nutty I thought the in-house was the best of the lot. I'm sure also I spied Alice peeping out from one of those pillars🤣😉🙃. SO your correct it was from N. 🇰🇷 Korea. 

Who was the guy who did that interview,  any ideas. Find out please.

I thought Paddy's was the best because I learned most from it. Even that NCFC has a Portuguese twitter feed just for where you live.

Michael hit the jackpot with the ladies team question. He's a City Fan through and through so I don't get the criticism of him doing it. He's a Journo and there was a story. It must be a difficult balance sometimes but I'd trust him to get it right. Like I said he's a PUP.

The club interviewer was Kim Jong Un. He's not a PUP.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hogesar said:

I'm not even really defending, just adding balance.

‘’Good honest answer from a Sporting Director who has been part of actually building the women's side of football for our club. Far more than any predecessor. 

He is completely correct about trying to target a different audience and accepting the poor quality standard at the moment. He said it was exciting but the quality poor. He was spot on.’’

Doesn’t really read like ‘adding balance’ to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem I have with all of this is that Webber is the same man he was in 2017. He hasn't got worse. 

So what's the end game here. Is it to get him sacked? Would it have been better to sack him after 2017/18?

 

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...