when did everyones pain start

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]

 I tend to agree with Robert''s verdict on you too Zipper, especially the tactical stuff. Miss your input on the board these days. .[/quote]

Hi gtg - hope you are keeping well;  I still browse daily but find it difficult to get anyone to discuss the football, which is why I come on here to start with  

As I said I struggle to contribute to the whole board debate (pros or cons which I know are clearly evident on both sides of the fence) when the real crux of the problem lies with the management of the playing side;  our current squad was never doomed to relegation from the start of the season and contains the players to push for a play off.  However without clear guidance and motivation from the manager we have ended up with as certain a relegation side as I have seen in years. 

Crucially if we swapped ownership but kept Grant were we more likely to stay up than keeping the board and swapping to Roeder,  remaining unchanged in both and changing everything.   Changing the manager is the key change.   

In know that is not the popular view but then again I have never been a sheep

Roeder is doing all the right things and quite quickly; so the question is wheher there are enough games left to stop this tanker and turn it around?    So again its about can Glen make the squad a team wanting to avoid relegation,  rather than the degree of mismanagement upstairs.

 

[nutty nigel 7,510]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]

 I tend to agree with Robert''s verdict on you too Zipper, especially the tactical stuff. Miss your input on the board these days. .[/quote]

Hi gtg - hope you are keeping well;  I still browse daily but find it difficult to get anyone to discuss the football, which is why I come on here to start with  

As I said I struggle to contribute to the whole board debate (pros or cons which I know are clearly evident on both sides of the fence) when the real crux of the problem lies with the management of the playing side;  our current squad was never doomed to relegation from the start of the season and contains the players to push for a play off.  However without clear guidance and motivation from the manager we have ended up with as certain a relegation side as I have seen in years. 

Crucially if we swapped ownership but kept Grant were we more likely to stay up than keeping the board and swapping to Roeder,  remaining unchanged in both and changing everything.   Changing the manager is the key change.   

In know that is not the popular view but then again I have never been a sheep

Roeder is doing all the right things and quite quickly; so the question is wheher there are enough games left to stop this tanker and turn it around?    So again its about can Glen make the squad a team wanting to avoid relegation,  rather than the degree of mismanagement upstairs.

 

[/quote]

That post is full of common sense ZLF but unfortunately it won''t take away the need for someone for fans to focus their blame on. That need will only disappear when there is an upturn in results and league position. Then and only then will the togetherness start to return.

 

[Robert N. LiM 4,246]

Zipper,

At the risk of this becoming a love-in, please don''t give up coming on to the board to discuss the football. This forum needs all the considered posters it can get. God knows it has more than its fair share of trolls and numpties - surely the best way to combat them is to drown them out with interesting, considered debate.

I think I agree with you that the biggest errors have been made by Worthington, Grant and Duffy: but the board have an opportunity to prove now and in January that they are fully committed to the survival mission - and they mustn''t fail us now.

Fortunately, after the international break, we have five games in 15 days, so there should be plenty of football to discuss.

OTBC

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Hi gtg - hope you are keeping well;  I still browse daily but find it difficult to get anyone to discuss the football, which is why I come on here to start with  

As I said I struggle to contribute to the whole board debate (pros or cons which I know are clearly evident on both sides of the fence) when the real crux of the problem lies with the management of the playing side;  our current squad was never doomed to relegation from the start of the season and contains the players to push for a play off.  However without clear guidance and motivation from the manager we have ended up with as certain a relegation side as I have seen in years. 

Crucially if we swapped ownership but kept Grant were we more likely to stay up than keeping the board and swapping to Roeder,  remaining unchanged in both and changing everything.   Changing the manager is the key change.   

In know that is not the popular view but then again I have never been a sheep

Roeder is doing all the right things and quite quickly; so the question is wheher there are enough games left to stop this tanker and turn it around?    So again its about can Glen make the squad a team wanting to avoid relegation,  rather than the degree of mismanagement upstairs.

[/quote]

Totally agreee with most of this, I don''t feel the Board have ever loosened the purse strings enough, but in the end it was the appointment of the appalling Peter Grant and his utterly inept assistant which has left us in this mess.  Add to that the ridiculous keeping on of Worthington well past his sell by date.  Who will ever forget his reasons for bringing Helveg and Safri back into tyhe saide against man united....  what a joke he had become, and that was even before the half million signing of Hooves.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Hi gtg - hope you are keeping well;  I still browse daily but find it difficult to get anyone to discuss the football, which is why I come on here to start with  

As I said I struggle to contribute to the whole board debate (pros or cons which I know are clearly evident on both sides of the fence) when the real crux of the problem lies with the management of the playing side;  our current squad was never doomed to relegation from the start of the season and contains the players to push for a play off.  However without clear guidance and motivation from the manager we have ended up with as certain a relegation side as I have seen in years. 

Crucially if we swapped ownership but kept Grant were we more likely to stay up than keeping the board and swapping to Roeder,  remaining unchanged in both and changing everything.   Changing the manager is the key change.   

In know that is not the popular view but then again I have never been a sheep

Roeder is doing all the right things and quite quickly; so the question is wheher there are enough games left to stop this tanker and turn it around?    So again its about can Glen make the squad a team wanting to avoid relegation,  rather than the degree of mismanagement upstairs.

[/quote]

Totally agreee with most of this, I don''t feel the Board have ever loosened the purse strings enough, but in the end it was the appointment of the appalling Peter Grant and his utterly inept assistant which has left us in this mess.  Add to that the ridiculous keeping on of Worthington well past his sell by date.  Who will ever forget his reasons for bringing Helveg and Safri back into the side against man united....  what a joke he had become, and that was even before the half million signing of Hooves.

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

 it won''t take away the need for someone for fans to focus their blame on. That need will only disappear when there is an upturn in results

[/quote]

I know;  even if its the wrong people fans need a victim.

Not sure I like this comments - common sense,  balanced - makes me sound even duller than I really am

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"]

Zipper,

 don''t give up coming on to the board to discuss the football.

[/quote]

No problems there Robert;  will continue to tell it as I see it;  my wife knows I have am  having an affair with this message board, but more importantly NCFC so I cant give either up;   just another typical weak willed male!

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 it won''t take away the need for someone for fans to focus their blame on. That need will only disappear when there is an upturn in results

[/quote]

I know;  even if its the wrong people fans need a victim.

Not sure I like this comments - common sense,  balanced - makes me sound even duller than I really am

[/quote]

So, nobody''s really responsible for us being bottom of the championship by 6 pts in mid-November, eh?

It''s those d*rn inconvenient fans. They ''need'' a ''victim''.

Yep.

Give over, lads.

OTBC

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

The joy started for an excited 14 year old in the River End on a cold, January day in 1959 when City tanked Southend for four in the old third division - scoring 3 in the first 12 minutes - and lording it like Brazil for the rest of the game.

The pain started in 1996 with the failure to sign Dean Windass and the departure of Martin O''Neil. We''ve never really been the same since.

OTBC  

 

[nutty nigel 7,510]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 it won''t take away the need for someone for fans to focus their blame on. That need will only disappear when there is an upturn in results

[/quote]

I know;  even if its the wrong people fans need a victim.

Not sure I like this comments - common sense,  balanced - makes me sound even duller than I really am

[/quote]

So, nobody''s really responsible for us being bottom of the championship by 6 pts in mid-November, eh?

It''s those d*rn inconvenient fans. They ''need'' a ''victim''.

Yep.

Give over, lads.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Somebody must be responsible,  or it could be many people, Holty played his part, and then Worthy, a bit of Robinson Hooze and Etuhu, and then of course Doc, and Granty and now the cook and her cohorts. Yes we have to blame someone [:@] so were we right to blame some of those people all of the time or all of those people some of the time [*-)] And why has the buck only started to stop at the top this season?

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]The pain started in 1996 with the failure to sign Dean Windass and the

departure of Martin O''Neil. We''ve never really been the same since.[/quote]I''m fairly sure that Old Shuck has put you right on this one in the past - Windass wasn''t the reason O''Neill left.

[Man-E-Faces 0]

My first game was the Milk Cup 2nd rd, 2nd leg against Preston and we thrashed them 6-1 on the way to winning the trophy. I was only 7 and I thought every game was going to be like that! We consequently got relegated that season!

[VAUX 0]

Home game vs Man City when we went 2.0 up after 20mins then lost the game 2.3 it was then that the dream of staying in the prem had died. Tears all the way home to Cambridge. Still hurts.

The play-offs came a close second, felt truely gutted for over a week, totally knocked wind out of the sails.

Religation into the 3rd tire of English football 2008..... to be continued. 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Meeky"]

How many times?

 

Ashton was not available from Crewe in the summer before the premier season. Crewe wanted to establish themselves in the division before he was sold. We bought him in January when they thought they were relatively safe, but nearly got it wrong when they only just stayed up the last day of the season. We were the only Premier side interested in taking a gamble on him and Crewe relented and let him come to us. If he had been available that summer then the club would have bought him then!

[/quote]

Crouch was available at the start of that season and Worthington stated publically that the club couldn`t (wouldn`t?) afford him so to suggest we would have spent a similar figure on Ashton had he been available is highly dubious. I think you will find there were precisely no bids for Ashton in January, so Crewe`s "We`re ambitious, we`re not going to sell Ashton" stance was just the usual bravado clubs go through before selling their best players.

[nutty nigel 7,510]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Meeky"]

How many times?

 

Ashton was not available from Crewe in the summer before the premier season. Crewe wanted to establish themselves in the division before he was sold. We bought him in January when they thought they were relatively safe, but nearly got it wrong when they only just stayed up the last day of the season. We were the only Premier side interested in taking a gamble on him and Crewe relented and let him come to us. If he had been available that summer then the club would have bought him then!

[/quote]

Crouch was available at the start of that season and Worthington stated publically that the club couldn`t (wouldn`t?) afford him so to suggest we would have spent a similar figure on Ashton had he been available is highly dubious. I think you will find there were precisely no bids for Ashton in January, so Crewe`s "We`re ambitious, we`re not going to sell Ashton" stance was just the usual bravado clubs go through before selling their best players.

[/quote]

Of course Ashton was available at the start of the season. We just didn''t try. We always say our players aren''t available and then sell when the bid is good enough, it started with Ron Davies for me and has never changed.

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]

[quote user="Canary Nut"]The PAIN started when we spent £7,036k on tangible Fixed Assets during the 2004/05 season instead of buying Ashton before the season started. [/quote]

Slightly misleading as that''s called the Jarrold Stand, which they started building the previous season and obviously had to pay for as they went along. Nevertheless, I am interested in finding out when they actually acquired the various land holdings around the ground, as I''ve got the feeling that we''ve never been told the true storey on that one. I too fail to believe no money was available to buy Ashton before the season started

[/quote]

You could well be right, but to be honest for most supporters the Jarrold stand isn`t the issue. It was pretty much neccessary but the millions on the infill, new pitch, land, new ticket office, office facilities, road etc.,etc. were not. I believe ZLF stated on this thread that discussing the off-pitch stuff is all supposition. £28million spent on fixed assets between `02 and `06 (p.8 `06 annual report) is not supposition, it is fact.

This thread highlights why the board have got an easy job in deflecting attention away from the enormous gamble they have taken in throwing money on off-pitch stuff whilst the team slides in decline. People are unable, or unwilling, to see the bigger picture and instead take the easy option by focussing on the failings of free and cheap players, who are laughably expected to be world-beaters, and managers who are doing a virtually impossible job with both arms tied behind their back.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]You could well be right, but to be honest for most supporters the

Jarrold stand isn`t the issue. It was pretty much neccessary but the

millions on the infill, new pitch, land, new ticket office, office

facilities, road etc.,etc. were not. I believe ZLF stated on this

thread that discussing the off-pitch stuff is all supposition.

£28million spent on fixed assets between `02 and `06 (p.8 `06 annual

report) is not supposition, it is fact.[/quote]How much of that 28 million was neccesary, and how much wasn''t ?  You say the Jarrold stand isn''t the issue, and then give a figure that includes the costs of the Jarrold stand.  [quote]This thread highlights why the board have got an easy job in deflecting

attention away from the enormous gamble they have taken in throwing

money on off-pitch stuff whilst the team slides in decline.[/quote]Even easier when you refuse to give the costs of the stuff we don''t need, preferring to hide them with the costs of the stuff we do to make a bigger, scarier number.

[Feathers 0]

I started supporting Norwich when I saw the 1-1 draw with Bayern Munich on TV. I didn''t even LIKE football before then. It was very exciting... I was 11 years old and quickly learnt about aggregate scores and what had happened in Munich beforehand. I remember people watching the Inter Milan games after that in high school, I don''t think I was too bothered we lost though.

My first game was the 5-4 home defeat to Southampton in 1994. What a game! We came back from 3-1 down to be winning 4-3, but then typically lost in the dying moments. I think I should have taken heed then, I think I even cried a bit. The following season I saw lots of games but of course we got relegated, I must be a jinx or something! I then got a job in one of the kiosk bars as a student and worked there for 4 years, I saw a lot of second halfs for free. When they stopped people watching the games I quit, naturally. I think the highlight of that time was the 2-0 win over Man Utd or 4-4 draw with boro.

The pain continues...

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]You could well be right, but to be honest for most supporters the Jarrold stand isn`t the issue. It was pretty much neccessary but the millions on the infill, new pitch, land, new ticket office, office facilities, road etc.,etc. were not. I believe ZLF stated on this thread that discussing the off-pitch stuff is all supposition. £28million spent on fixed assets between `02 and `06 (p.8 `06 annual report) is not supposition, it is fact.[/quote]

How much of that 28 million was neccesary, and how much wasn''t ?  You say the Jarrold stand isn''t the issue, and then give a figure that includes the costs of the Jarrold stand. 

[quote]This thread highlights why the board have got an easy job in deflecting attention away from the enormous gamble they have taken in throwing money on off-pitch stuff whilst the team slides in decline.[/quote]

Even easier when you refuse to give the costs of the stuff we don''t need, preferring to hide them with the costs of the stuff we do to make a bigger, scarier number.
[/quote]

We`ve been through all this before Blah, it seems a bit pointless me endlessly reminding people of it when they`d much rather ignore it......

The projected cost of the South stand was £8million although Doncaster has since said altogether it cost "closer to £10million". So around a third of the overall figure. As for the other things listed, do you think they were absolutely neccessary? Some things-such as the £1.5million road-became neccessary to comply with regulations linked to purchase of land/development etc. which just seems to paint a picture of spiralling costs associated with these projects. I would question whether the club will make any money from these costly and time-consuming deals once all these other costs are taken into account.

Now here`s a thought, maybe they should just concentrate on the football??

[gazzathegreat 0]

Exactly, I don''t remember Mr Chase ever saying players were not available if the price was right. Money talks, our initial offer presumably wasn''t to Crewe''s liking.

Ambition, but with a healthy dash of prudence perhaps. Seems we got rid of him when a very healthy offer came in from W Ham though.

[gazzathegreat 0]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]

 I tend to agree with Robert''s verdict on you too Zipper, especially the tactical stuff. Miss your input on the board these days. .[/quote]

Hi gtg - hope you are keeping well;  I still browse daily but find it difficult to get anyone to discuss the football, which is why I come on here to start with  

As I said I struggle to contribute to the whole board debate (pros or cons which I know are clearly evident on both sides of the fence) when the real crux of the problem lies with the management of the playing side;  our current squad was never doomed to relegation from the start of the season and contains the players to push for a play off.  However without clear guidance and motivation from the manager we have ended up with as certain a relegation side as I have seen in years. 

Crucially if we swapped ownership but kept Grant were we more likely to stay up than keeping the board and swapping to Roeder,  remaining unchanged in both and changing everything.   Changing the manager is the key change.   

In know that is not the popular view but then again I have never been a sheep

Roeder is doing all the right things and quite quickly; so the question is wheher there are enough games left to stop this tanker and turn it around?    So again its about can Glen make the squad a team wanting to avoid relegation,  rather than the degree of mismanagement upstairs.

 

[/quote] I am fine thanks Zipper. Hope to see you on this board more, maybe more posts will follow purely about football. As to your observation re changing the board and keeping Grant. I don''t know who the mysterious new board might have consisted of, but I doubt they would have kept that particular contract running for long. I would rather try (and I will) to accept the board for the present, if it means Mr Roeder can FULLY implement all his plans for our club. However, I can''t let this going without saying that should the board have concentrated on football in the first place maybe we would not have to guarantee our survival on obtaining several loan players.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]We`ve been through all this before Blah, it seems a bit pointless me endlessly reminding people of it when they`d much rather ignore it......[/quote]

Not at all Mr C, if you have a legitimate complaint, then you should have legitmate figures to back it up.

If you were to tell me that we wasted 14 million over 4 years on unneccesary off-pitch investments that had no hope of financial return instead of putting money on the pitch, I''d be bloody angry with the board, never mind 28 million.  Is this true, or has this money been used to grow income ?  Has anyone actually sat down and analysed what is and isn''t necessary ?

[quote]Now here`s a thought, maybe they should just concentrate on the football??[/quote]

That sounds great.  2-1 to us on Saturday then ?[:)]

[Syteanric 1]

the pain for me started about 10 years ago... dislocated my left knee if a football accident (twice in fact) and it hasnt been right since, still feel it sometimes in the cold weather.. but it doesnt hurt that much

jas :)

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]We`ve been through all this before Blah, it seems a bit pointless me endlessly reminding people of it when they`d much rather ignore it......[/quote]

Not at all Mr C, if you have a legitimate complaint, then you should have legitmate figures to back it up.

If you were to tell me that we wasted 14 million over 4 years on unneccesary off-pitch investments that had no hope of financial return instead of putting money on the pitch, I''d be bloody angry with the board, never mind 28 million.  Is this true, or has this money been used to grow income ?  Has anyone actually sat down and analysed what is and isn''t necessary ?

[quote]Now here`s a thought, maybe they should just concentrate on the football??[/quote]

That sounds great.  2-1 to us on Saturday then ?[:)]

[/quote]

Yes i have got legitimate figures to back my argument up and have probably posted them 20 times or more, i really can`t be bothered to do it again. And yes they have wasted millions which have not, as yet, grown revenue but drained money from the club. And yes we should all be bloody angry. How, for example, is spending £3million+ on land and then sitting on it growing the clubs income?

Whether these things ever make the club money depends largely on that thing they have ignored in the last few years-having a decent team on the pitch. Will the £4million infill be full if we are in the lower leagues for the foreseeable future? The executive boxes? Will the lovely new ticket office be busy? I`m sure these things would be raking it in if we were in the top six in this league but as the team slides they look more and more like white elephants don`t you think?

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Meeky"]

How many times?

 

Ashton was not available from Crewe in the summer before the premier season. Crewe wanted to establish themselves in the division before he was sold. We bought him in January when they thought they were relatively safe, but nearly got it wrong when they only just stayed up the last day of the season. We were the only Premier side interested in taking a gamble on him and Crewe relented and let him come to us. If he had been available that summer then the club would have bought him then!

[/quote]

Crouch was available at the start of that season and Worthington stated publically that the club couldn`t (wouldn`t?) afford him so to suggest we would have spent a similar figure on Ashton had he been available is highly dubious. I think you will find there were precisely no bids for Ashton in January, so Crewe`s "We`re ambitious, we`re not going to sell Ashton" stance was just the usual bravado clubs go through before selling their best players.

[/quote]

Of course Ashton was available at the start of the season. We just didn''t try. We always say our players aren''t available and then sell when the bid is good enough, it started with Ron Davies for me and has never changed.

[/quote]

On this we can agree, Nutty.

OTBC

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 it won''t take away the need for someone for fans to focus their blame on. That need will only disappear when there is an upturn in results

[/quote]

I know;  even if its the wrong people fans need a victim.

Not sure I like this comments - common sense,  balanced - makes me sound even duller than I really am

[/quote]

So, nobody''s really responsible for us being bottom of the championship by 6 pts in mid-November, eh?

It''s those d*rn inconvenient fans. They ''need'' a ''victim''.

Yep.

Give over, lads.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Somebody must be responsible,  or it could be many people, Holty played his part, and then Worthy, a bit of Robinson Hooze and Etuhu, and then of course Doc, and Granty and now the cook and her cohorts. Yes we have to blame someone [:@] so were we right to blame some of those people all of the time or all of those people some of the time [*-)] And why has the buck only started to stop at the top this season?

[/quote]

Untrue, Nutty.

OTBC

 

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]The pain started in 1996 with the failure to sign Dean Windass and the departure of Martin O''Neil. We''ve never really been the same since.[/quote]

I''m fairly sure that Old Shuck has put you right on this one in the past - Windass wasn''t the reason O''Neill left.
[/quote]

Blah cubed.

Did I say that one caused the other?

The two events occurred in close proximity to one another. Fact.

I still contend that if we had signed Windass and retained O''Neil, our history since 1996 would have been entirely different. Entirely. Little doubt. Hence my pain.

OTBC

 

 

[Feathers 0]

On reflection I think my pain started when I was born on a hunk of earth called ''England''...