This is why we should sign Sutton...

[DisorientatedCanary 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]

So you''ve not really answered any of the questions. Bit of waffle, plenty of bluff but nothing of any substantiation.

So let me put something of substance down. Sutton has NOT joined any other club despite all this blarney about so called pay as you play. You''ve no real idea what on earth this pay as you play thing is despite your wild speculation.

So here''s another couple of questions.

Can you say whether signing Chris Sutton will involve any signing fee or regular payments irrespective of appearances ?

Can you give any other example of tyhis farcical contract where NO other payments occur ?

You and I both know that you can''t. This is not about Chris Sutton playing for Norwich, merely yet another stick to have a go at the club with. You would have to be terminally stupid or from suffolk* to thing that such nonsense exists. No player would enter into such a contract without a gaurantee of payment and no club would take on such a burden with such a injury ridden old has been like Sutton.

Which when you look at it is where we are now.

 

 

 

 

* not mutually exclusive

 

 

[/quote]

 

 

 

Christian Vieri is a pay as you play deal at Atalanta,

Darren Anderton is on one at Bournemouth

Ole Gunna Solskjear is on one at Man UTD

Hattem Trabelsi is on one at Man City

Rob Lee is on one at Wycombe Wanderers

 

there would be 5 examples i can think of ''farcical pay as you play'' deals. most due to injury problems/age i see.

Can you say whether signing Chris Sutton will involve any signing fee or regular payments irrespective of appearances ? all depends on the offer presented to him, whether he accepts it is another matter intirely, the agents fee''s are of course an issue, i never said they weren''t, but an agent isn''t needed in deals, a lawyer can finalise the paperwork should the player choose, i think Ade Akinbye use''s a lawyer as opposed to an agent.

 

Can you give any other example of this farcical contract where NO other payments occur ? as for this i cant state catogorilly either way, of course i can''t, and you are well awear i can''t since no one here is in a position to have the details of any contracts offered to players, and if they were, letting such info out of the bag would breach so many confidality clause''s in their terms of employment they be on their way to the dole queue. but the fact a president doesn''t exsist doesn''t mean its not viable, everything at some stage must be invented, and since most people on here at looking for the club to be forward thinking in other aspects of the game why is such a contract revelation blown out the water???. the progression of football doesn''t only happen on the pitch.

 

[Saint Canary 0]

Christian Vieri signed a one year "Pay as you play" contract with Atalanta a couple of weeks ago.  If memory serves me correctly he gets paid €1,500 (£1,000 give or take) a month but a lot more if he plays and even more if he scores.  Not a massive risk for a player of his quality. 

I am not suggesting Sutton would or would not sign such a deal but I would suspect that like Vieri he would want some sort of “retainer”.  I really can''t believe Sutton would turn up for training, matches etc for nothing for a whole year.  It effectively make him an "amateur" footballer having to pay his own subs and travel.  No matter how much he loves the club I just can''t see him paying for the privilege but I could be wrong.

On another note, I fully agree with Rude Old!

 

[Fat Barman 0]

I hate to keep this going, but...Someone asked what plan B was for if Earnie got injured - surely it wouldn''t involve replacing him with Sutton? The whole style of play would have to change, so that''s not a reason.Regardless of whether old sulky-boots would want a signing-on fee, or a weekly retainer, or any other sweetener, how do you think the other players would be feeling if he signed? Mightn''t they be just a little peeved to think that whenever he actually got a game, he''d automatically pick up more wages than anyone else at the club - despite not being fit enough to be available to play all season? Christian Vieri he most certainly aint! If it were Teddy Sheringham, or Alan Shearer maybe (and really I wouldn''t take Shearer with his pace and injury history!).Don''t add troublemakers to the squad!

[Carrow89 0]

You''ve actually answered your own questions ''greeno'', and contradicted yourself.

Given that it is you that is proposing this ludicrous idea the onus then falls on you to explain it. The examples you give prove nothing other than sloppy cliche ridden journalism. You accept you don''t know yet hold these up as examples !

Struck for something to attack the club with the usual suspects rallied round the cause of inviting Sutton back at NO cost to the club. How great it would be to have an old favourite at the club without us having to pay a penny - an how awful/useless/corrupt the club was for not taking up the idea.

However as the truth began to emerge that this is just a convenient term for a limited contract where the pay is skewed far more to appearance money than it is towards regular money most have moved on to find another stick.

Unfortunately you are left lumbering along under some misapprehension that we can sign Sutton without it costing us a bean and only pay him when he plays. As already pointed out there would be the matter of training, club discipline and insurance to take into account.

Again I would suggest you see who elser is desperate to sign up this injury ridden hasbeen - probably the same number as there are completely free pay to play contracts.

NONE !

[Canary Boy 0]

Ralph, you are being a little attacking in your replies to GreenoForEngland.

This is meant to be a discussion board, not a place to paint people in as being either stupid, gullable or to make out their comments are useless and not worth reading. I''m not sure if I am reading you quite right, but by the ''tone'' of your comments, it almost seems that you are being contradictory in everthing you say.

Don''t forget this is a place to Norwich City fans to come together, talk about the good of the club, point out improvements, tactics, team morale, bad or poor play, manager''s decisions and transfer news/signings rather than a place of squabbling and picking peoples comments to pieces.

I do respect what you say, and read carefuly, as I do with all posters...but this post has somewhat lost it''s way.

All I said was, Sutton is available, we are short up front (especially if Earnie gets injured) and could we sort out a temporary deal going based on appearances/goals.

[USAcanary 0]

[quote user="Fat Barman"]I hate to keep this going, but...

Someone asked what plan B was for if Earnie got injured - surely it wouldn''t involve replacing him with Sutton? The whole style of play would have to change, so that''s not a reason.

Regardless of whether old sulky-boots would want a signing-on fee, or a weekly retainer, or any other sweetener, how do you think the other players would be feeling if he signed? Mightn''t they be just a little peeved to think that whenever he actually got a game, he''d automatically pick up more wages than anyone else at the club - despite not being fit enough to be available to play all season? Christian Vieri he most certainly aint! If it were Teddy Sheringham, or Alan Shearer maybe (and really I wouldn''t take Shearer with his pace and injury history!).

Don''t add troublemakers to the squad!
[/quote]

Fat barman this is a great point except we bid 2 million for the BC guy.

What was the plan then? Was the guy going to sit on the bench or would we change to a more traditional 4-4-2 ?

I would love to know the thinking behind that bid?

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[QUOTE]I would love to know the thinking behind that bid?[/QUOTE]

He would have provided cover / competition for Earnshaw and Croft, being able to play as right winger and striker.  At 18 and an international he has a lot of potential.  12 million for Theo Walcott means that the best young players go for silly money. 

I believe that Worthington believes that he can cover the current gaps with loan players or our current squad, which is why Cotterill was our only bid.  Also bearing in mind that our reserve team is a "development team" according to Keith Webb, and currently features mainly under 20 year olds, any senior players not playing in the first team will not get match practice, you don''t want too many players picking up a cheque to warm a bench.

[DisorientatedCanary 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]You''ve actually answered your own questions ''greeno'', and contradicted yourself. Given that it is you that is proposing this ludicrous idea the onus then falls on you to explain it. The examples you give prove nothing other than sloppy cliche ridden journalism. You accept you don''t know yet hold these up as examples ! Struck for something to attack the club with the usual suspects rallied round the cause of inviting Sutton back at NO cost to the club. How great it would be to have an old favourite at the club without us having to pay a penny - an how awful/useless/corrupt the club was for not taking up the idea. However as the truth began to emerge that this is just a convenient term for a limited contract where the pay is skewed far more to appearance money than it is towards regular money most have moved on to find another stick. Unfortunately you are left lumbering along under some misapprehension that we can sign Sutton without it costing us a bean and only pay him when he plays. As already pointed out there would be the matter of training, club discipline and insurance to take into account. Again I would suggest you see who elser is desperate to sign up this injury ridden hasbeen - probably the same number as there are completely free pay to play contracts. NONE ![/quote]

 

no Ralph i responded to your questions, i don''t remember asking any of my own???. a careful read of my posts will see they are a quote of yours. people have to two eyes, two ears and one mouth for a reason, to look and listen before you speak. and i don''t remember attacking this club, i love the club, which is why i pay for my season ticket, why im going to Coventry on sat after finishing a 12 hour night shift at 8am sat morning, and why i waited on the phones to get tickets for the Southend game. oh and as i''ve said before i didn''t say signing him was the right thing to do i just answered afew questions people. but im sure you''ll over look this fact as you seem to many others you don''t agree with.

[USAcanary 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]

[QUOTE]I would love to know the thinking behind that bid?[/QUOTE]

He would have provided cover / competition for Earnshaw and Croft, being able to play as right winger and striker.  At 18 and an international he has a lot of potential.  12 million for Theo Walcott means that the best young players go for silly money. 

I believe that Worthington believes that he can cover the current gaps with loan players or our current squad, which is why Cotterill was our only bid.  Also bearing in mind that our reserve team is a "development team" according to Keith Webb, and currently features mainly under 20 year olds, any senior players not playing in the first team will not get match practice, you don''t want too many players picking up a cheque to warm a bench.

[/quote]

Your argument breaks down because you seem to foget we put big bids in for Rob Hulse and Lutons Howard, both target men.

That was "plan A" if yourecall.

Obviously with those bids in mind Worthy was not thinking of 4-5-1.

[Canary Boy 0]

Interestingly, Neil Adams admitted today on CanaryCall that Chris Sutton is just down the road and that a pay-as-you-play deal could be an option, but he also said we would probably never know the reason why Worthy won''t sign him.

Today proved how much we need a Target Man as Earnshaw up front on his own looked lost.

What do we do? Possibly risk waisting our short supply of money on a loan striker who we''ll have to give back or go for a local hero, who just 6 months ago was playing in the Premiership and according to Mark Lawrenson, was the best player on the park.