That's how to support your team

[No 9 - Bly<P><FONT size=1>Its better to have loved a short girl, than never loved a tall.<FONT><P> 0]

Last night at Luton I witnessed a show of support that would put Smudger et al to shame.

 

We all now that we are currently not good enough but the way the supporters got behind the team must have been a contributory factor in the win.

After both Luton goals, goals, which were scored due to some extremely, suspect defending, there were a few moans and groans BUT the majority of the fans were straight into “On The Ball City”. The Luton fans didn’t even get a chance to give it the “You’re not singing anymore”… because we were, and we continued to do so.Pride of place goes to the group of lads of about 16 who sang for 90 mins, and the lad of a simlar age who turned on the moaning old git and told him to get behind the team.

That’s how to support your team, and for once we got exactly what our support deserved.

 

[Alex Moss 2,167]

[quote user="No 9 - Bly"]

but the way the supporters got behind the team must have been a contributory factor in the win.

That’s how to support your team[/quote]

BINGO!!!!!

[ricky knight 0]

Been there done it mate, i am sure smudger has too, well done to the fans who were there, and i say again whatever side of the issues we are on, we all want city to win football matches.I am happy as the next person we won, and i hope we win every game here on in, still wont change my views, till i see better investment and Grant proves he is the man. If both happen i will be big enough to say i was wrong.

[ca 1]

Well Done to the 1200 who travelled and well done to everyone else who was following their progress by some means.

Cmon Norwich - Barnsley next - We''ll help you !!!

[mbncfc 1]

The scenes in those final minutes were great. The team celebrated Lappin''s goal together. The bench were all up and on the pitch. Once the final whistle went, it was quite apparent what it meant to the entire side and fans.

They are proving that they want to take responsibility, and they don''t have anyone to hide behind. That is the most significant difference between now and games such as Burnley at CR earlier in the season.

[charlies dad 0]

I listened to the game on Radio norfolk I apologise to my neighbours for the language, the howls of anguish, and the bellow of delight/relief as Neil and Chris raised the roof as the free kick hit the net... does anyone know how i could get less stressed out watching/listening to Norwich City?

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Been there done it mate, i am sure smudger has too, well done to the fans who were there, and i say again whatever side of the issues we are on, we all want city to win football matches.I am happy as the next person we won, and i hope we win every game here on in, still wont change my views, till i see better investment and Grant proves he is the man. If both happen i will be big enough to say i was wrong.[/quote]

Likewise Ricky!!

 

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Been there done it mate, i am sure smudger has too, well done to the fans who were there, and i say again whatever side of the issues we are on, we all want city to win football matches.I am happy as the next person we won, and i hope we win every game here on in, still wont change my views, till i see better investment and Grant proves he is the man. If both happen i will be big enough to say i was wrong.[/quote]

Likewise Ricky!!

 

[/quote]

I''ll just change my user name.........[;)]

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,220]

Leeds United have superb away support but languish at the bottom of the league, how do you explain that one away? Just a cheap dig at fellow posters.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="No 9 - Bly"]

Last night at Luton I witnessed a show of support that would put Smudger et al to shame.

 

We all now that we are currently not good enough but the way the supporters got behind the team must have been a contributory factor in the win.

After both Luton goals, goals, which were scored due to some extremely, suspect defending, there were a few moans and groans BUT the majority of the fans were straight into “On The Ball City”. The Luton fans didn’t even get a chance to give it the “You’re not singing anymore”… because we were, and we continued to do so.Pride of place goes to the group of lads of about 16 who sang for 90 mins, and the lad of a simlar age who turned on the moaning old git and told him to get behind the team.

That’s how to support your team, and for once we got exactly what our support deserved.

 

[/quote]

If you put some pressure on the board to stop being "obsessed with off-field projects" (quote:R.Munby) and to put the same effort and cash into the squad, you may just find that our fantastic support gets what it deserves more than just "for once".

[No 9 - Bly<P><FONT size=1>Its better to have loved a short girl, than never loved a tall.<FONT><P> 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="No 9 - Bly"]

Last night at Luton I witnessed a show of support that would put Smudger et al to shame.

 

We all now that we are currently not good enough but the way the supporters got behind the team must have been a contributory factor in the win.

After both Luton goals, goals, which were scored due to some extremely, suspect defending, there were a few moans and groans BUT the majority of the fans were straight into “On The Ball City”. The Luton fans didn’t even get a chance to give it the “You’re not singing anymore”… because we were, and we continued to do so.Pride of place goes to the group of lads of about 16 who sang for 90 mins, and the lad of a simlar age who turned on the moaning old git and told him to get behind the team.

That’s how to support your team, and for once we got exactly what our support deserved.

 

[/quote]

If you put some pressure on the board to stop being "obsessed with off-field projects" (quote:R.Munby) and to put the same effort and cash into the squad, you may just find that our fantastic support gets what it deserves more than just "for once".

[/quote]

People keep talking about "off - field Projects" but no one will tell me what they mean by this, or give an example, or explain why they are a bad thing.

Can you help Mr C

[No 9 - Bly<P><FONT size=1>Its better to have loved a short girl, than never loved a tall.<FONT><P> 0]

[quote user="Sons of Boadicea"]

Leeds United have superb away support but languish at the bottom of the league, how do you explain that one away? Just a cheap dig at fellow posters.

[/quote]

I disagree SoB. Leeds have a LARGE away support but they are far too quick to get on the players backs and to start on the manager and chairmen, thus negating any positive effect on the teams play

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="No 9 - Bly"]

Last night at Luton I witnessed a show of support that would put Smudger et al to shame.

 

We all now that we are currently not good enough but the way the supporters got behind the team must have been a contributory factor in the win.

After both Luton goals, goals, which were scored due to some extremely, suspect defending, there were a few moans and groans BUT the majority of the fans were straight into “On The Ball City”. The Luton fans didn’t even get a chance to give it the “You’re not singing anymore”… because we were, and we continued to do so.Pride of place goes to the group of lads of about 16 who sang for 90 mins, and the lad of a simlar age who turned on the moaning old git and told him to get behind the team.

That’s how to support your team, and for once we got exactly what our support deserved.

 

[/quote]

If you put some pressure on the board to stop being "obsessed with off-field projects" (quote:R.Munby) and to put the same effort and cash into the squad, you may just find that our fantastic support gets what it deserves more than just "for once".

[/quote]Could not put it better myself Mr Carrow nice one.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Mazy Run 0]

I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   

[Alex Moss 2,167]

[quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

Agreed Mazy Run, where is the evidence that off the field activities predominate over on field matters? If anyones got the evidence I''d like to see it....

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

This covers trust and off the pitch ok. In the summer of 2000 I asked Delia on radio 5 if the board would sell Bellamy to balance the books and she said no. That summer the club put between £1 and £2 mill into refurbishing the restaurant in the Barclay and restructuring the entrance to the upper Barclay for the new restaurant. Then before the season started the board asked the league to play the first game away from home because the restaurant was not finished, this the league approved. After the first game of the new season which was away the board sold Bellamy to Coventry, so we never saw him play a competitive game at Carrow Rd again after Delia denied he was going. That''s trust gone out of the window for one. The team at the time was in need of new quality players but the money went on the restaurant or Bellamy''s money paid for it ether way it was used off pitch when it should have been put into to the squad. Football suffering because of off pitch projects. That is why I will never trust this board again to do their best for Football at Carrow Rd.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Alex Moss 2,167]

[quote user="BB FOOTBALL FIRST"][quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

This covers trust and off the pitch ok. In the summer of 2000 I asked Delia on radio 5 if the board would sell Bellamy to balance the books and she said no. That summer the club put between £1 and £2 mill into refurbishing the restaurant in the Barclay and restructuring the entrance to the upper Barclay for the new restaurant. Then before the season started the board asked the league to play the first game away from home because the restaurant was not finished, this the league approved. After the first game of the new season which was away the board sold Bellamy to Coventry, so we never saw him play a competitive game at Carrow Rd again after Delia denied he was going. That''s trust gone out of the window for one. The team at the time was in need of new quality players but the money went on the restaurant or Bellamy''s money paid for it ether way it was used off pitch when it should have been put into to the squad. Football suffering because of off pitch projects. That is why I will never trust this board again to do their best for Football at Carrow Rd.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Valid points and some evidence. The only thing I would say is every football club in the land deny the sale of players etc, this is nothing to do with bu11sh1tting the supporters...it''s just how clubs run and the sooner people realise that the better. It happens at every club, so for this no one can blame or single the board out for this. Plus one other factor is that at the time she may well of been telling the truth...situations can change very quickly in football. The next board will be NO different in this respect, and you''d better believe it.

[No 9 - Bly<P><FONT size=1>Its better to have loved a short girl, than never loved a tall.<FONT><P> 0]

[quote user="BB FOOTBALL FIRST"][quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

This covers trust and off the pitch ok. In the summer of 2000 I asked Delia on radio 5 if the board would sell Bellamy to balance the books and she said no. That summer the club put between £1 and £2 mill into refurbishing the restaurant in the Barclay and restructuring the entrance to the upper Barclay for the new restaurant. Then before the season started the board asked the league to play the first game away from home because the restaurant was not finished, this the league approved. After the first game of the new season which was away the board sold Bellamy to Coventry, so we never saw him play a competitive game at Carrow Rd again after Delia denied he was going. That''s trust gone out of the window for one. The team at the time was in need of new quality players but the money went on the restaurant or Bellamy''s money paid for it ether way it was used off pitch when it should have been put into to the squad. Football suffering because of off pitch projects. That is why I will never trust this board again to do their best for Football at Carrow Rd.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Surley you are not that naive BBFF. Did you really expect any other answer but no. Even if they were desperate to sell Bellamy to balance the books they would hardly admit it otherwise bang goes any barganing power they might have.

A couple of other points:-

1. Bellamy has admitted that he was despeperate to leave NCFC

2. The fact that he was sold around the same time that the resturant was refurbished proves nothing, its all just circumstantial eveidence

3. How do you know that the restaurant hasn''t made more than enough profit to cover what was spent on it, it''s certainly expensive enough to have done so .

 

 

[blahblahblah 2]

Only badly run restaurants make no money.  The standard charge for a meal (a quote from no less than Jamie Oliver (oo, get me, knowing stuff about food...), mentioned in his school dinners programme) is cost of ingredients plus 65%.  If you can''t manage to keep some of that 65% between cooking the meal and delivering it to the table, then you''re a very poor businessman.

[BBFF 0]

It made a profit long before the £mills were spent on it, the only thing to suffer was FOOTBALL.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[BBFF 0]

[quote user="No 9 - Bly"][quote user="BB FOOTBALL FIRST"][quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

This covers trust and off the pitch ok. In the summer of 2000 I asked Delia on radio 5 if the board would sell Bellamy to balance the books and she said no. That summer the club put between £1 and £2 mill into refurbishing the restaurant in the Barclay and restructuring the entrance to the upper Barclay for the new restaurant. Then before the season started the board asked the league to play the first game away from home because the restaurant was not finished, this the league approved. After the first game of the new season which was away the board sold Bellamy to Coventry, so we never saw him play a competitive game at Carrow Rd again after Delia denied he was going. That''s trust gone out of the window for one. The team at the time was in need of new quality players but the money went on the restaurant or Bellamy''s money paid for it ether way it was used off pitch when it should have been put into to the squad. Football suffering because of off pitch projects. That is why I will never trust this board again to do their best for Football at Carrow Rd.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Surley you are not that naive BBFF. Did you really expect any other answer but no. Even if they were desperate to sell Bellamy to balance the books they would hardly admit it otherwise bang goes any barganing power they might have.

A couple of other points:-

1. Bellamy has admitted that he was despeperate to leave NCFC

2. The fact that he was sold around the same time that the resturant was refurbished proves nothing, its all just circumstantial eveidence

3. How do you know that the restaurant hasn''t made more than enough profit to cover what was spent on it, it''s certainly expensive enough to have done so .

 

 

[/quote]Sad state our club must be in when its considered naive to expect the truth from the board! and the old resturant always made a profit....maybe it was more of an ego trip?

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[Alex Moss 2,167]

[quote user="BB FOOTBALL FIRST"][quote user="No 9 - Bly"][quote user="BB FOOTBALL FIRST"][quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

This covers trust and off the pitch ok. In the summer of 2000 I asked Delia on radio 5 if the board would sell Bellamy to balance the books and she said no. That summer the club put between £1 and £2 mill into refurbishing the restaurant in the Barclay and restructuring the entrance to the upper Barclay for the new restaurant. Then before the season started the board asked the league to play the first game away from home because the restaurant was not finished, this the league approved. After the first game of the new season which was away the board sold Bellamy to Coventry, so we never saw him play a competitive game at Carrow Rd again after Delia denied he was going. That''s trust gone out of the window for one. The team at the time was in need of new quality players but the money went on the restaurant or Bellamy''s money paid for it ether way it was used off pitch when it should have been put into to the squad. Football suffering because of off pitch projects. That is why I will never trust this board again to do their best for Football at Carrow Rd.

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[/quote]

Surley you are not that naive BBFF. Did you really expect any other answer but no. Even if they were desperate to sell Bellamy to balance the books they would hardly admit it otherwise bang goes any barganing power they might have.

A couple of other points:-

1. Bellamy has admitted that he was despeperate to leave NCFC

2. The fact that he was sold around the same time that the resturant was refurbished proves nothing, its all just circumstantial eveidence

3. How do you know that the restaurant hasn''t made more than enough profit to cover what was spent on it, it''s certainly expensive enough to have done so .

 

 

[/quote]Sad state our club must be in when its considered naive to expect the truth from the board![/quote]

Sadly, no. It''s been clearly explained to you why the board have good reason not to reveal whether they''re going to sell a player or not. It''s not just ''our'' club either, it''s ALL clubs.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="Mazy Run"]I don''t understand the objection some people have to off-field activities. If they make money that goes back into the club, what''s the problem? Clubs have had shops selling replica kits etc for decades - what''s the difference? Where''s the evidence that they are coming ahead of the football? And don''t say "because Roger Munby admitted it", because what he actually said was that some people accused the board of being obsessed - now those same people have leapt on that quote, taken it out of context and throw it around as though it''s a fact.   [/quote]

Roger Munby`s statement was something like "some people accuse us of being obsessed with matters off the pitch,and to an extent we are". "if they make money that goes back into the club,whats the problem?"-very naive im afraid. IF these projects make money (there`s about as much guarantee of this happenning as buying a player and making a profit on him...) the money would obviously go back to the club-but not neccessarily to the team. On the evidence so far the board would simply find another off-field project to invest in.

Have you or Alex had a good look through the accounts? £4 million spent on "infrustructure costs" and "other operating costs" (ie. off-pitch) £6 million higher than the season we were promoted and even higher than the Prem season. They`re certainly finding things to spend the parachute/Ashton/Green income on but it certainly isn`t on the pitch folks.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]Have you or Alex had a good look through the accounts? £4 million spent

on "infrustructure costs" and "other operating costs" (ie. off-pitch)

£6 million higher than the season we were promoted and even higher than

the Prem season. They`re certainly finding things to spend the

parachute/Ashton/Green income on but it certainly isn`t on the pitch

folks.[/quote]Hang on Mr. Carrow, we''ve been through this loop before.  We only had 3 stands for most of the season we were promoted.  Attendances were higher as a result of the stand being completed in about February of that season, and the infrastructure that needs to be in place to support 24,000 people coming in and out of Carrow Road (as opposed to 16,000) is going to cost more.  As for why it''s more expensive than when we were in the Premiership - simple.  We play 5 more home matches.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

So one new stand and infill means a £6 million rise in operating costs? Sorry but i`m not even slightly convinced. However if this is in fact the case then i think it is the most compelling argument yet as to why this board is so very wrong to concentrate on infrastructure whilst the team stagnates. They are not prepared to risk spending a reasonable amount on the pitch but in doing so are quite happy to risk stagnation,poor form, acrimony,protests and a possible disastrous relegation. Pathetic.