Reasons you support the current Board

[T07 0]

I support the board 100%

I know how much effort they put in for zero return. I know the lengths they

have gone to again and again to sign players only to see it go tits up at the

11th hour through no fault of their own. The director who took out a second

mortgage to help finance the signing of a player (who turned out to be a

disaster). I dont see too many ''fans'' doing that. The off pitch commercial

ventures that have led to record levels of income - which STILL struggles to

cover the fees and wages. Yet people want them to spend even more money we dont

have.

Without the efforts of this board we would never have been in a position to get

promoted in the first place. You need to remember that money WAS available to

strengthen at the star of the Prem season but we got badly shafted by Pompey

and Charlton at the last minute (and again by Wigan

last pre season). It was the coaching sfaff who were at fault for not having

back up targtets for Primus and Harewood. This failure alone was responsible

for our disastrous start.

Credit to them for bringing in Earnshaw. They were faced with a not ideal

contract (not for the first time) or not bring him at all. Prudence disappeared

yet again, I think ambition with prudence was a reaction to the catastrophic

antics of a few other boards who had succeeded in ruining their clubs for the

foreseeable future. It was a sound bite rather than a policy. The accounts are

open for all to see. Nothing is hidden.

Tremendous efforts have gone into seeking investment which has produced a

rather remarkable result. The Turners are serious players. Credit to the board

for that, they weren''t exactly begging at the door, they were convinced by the

board.

On the negative I would question the sanctioning of three or four signings that

were blatantly wrong and a complete waste of money. They do tend to put too

much faith in the coaching staff though of course this is a difficult balance.

Better too much than not enough.... I can just imagine the posts on here if

they blocked a transfer!! I was bitterly disappointed with the silence about

Grant over the handling of Hunter, Jarvis and especially Safri. But then I’ve

been critical of Huckerby when he went public with certain comments so perhaps

they are right, not all info should be in the fans domain. The Safri affair was

particularly disgraceful. Remeber they cannot always respond to citicism. Somethings are definately handled internally. Same as your household......

I really fail to see what they have done wrong. Sack the coaching staff, two

players should have been sacked also over the last 18 months in my opinion. Get

rid the dead wood (which looks at last like it may happen). But don’t remove

the people who do 95% of the work that actually keeps the club going.

OTBC

[arrdee 2]

Now Arto .You lovely old boy , I would love to stop and talk to you , but can''t find the time ,sorry ,must get on to my Free Bet thread and try and help our great clubs Academy .Will try and find you a few mins later next week . If I can''t please forgive , as no doubt you know I try to help my Club as much as I can so I am very busy .

Arto if you could ask your question quickly and clearly and I will try to answer it . If I could just ask you to (now i am not being unkind) to try and spell your message correctly so I don''t have to spend too much time on deciphering it  ,as no doubt  you know my  time is of essence. Regards arrdee. 

[T07 0]

Of course there is another good reason not to oust the board. There aint no queue kicking the door down.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="T07"]

I support the board 100%

I know how much effort they put in for zero return. I know the lengths they have gone to again and again to sign players only to see it go tits up at the 11th hour through no fault of their own. The director who took out a second mortgage to help finance the signing of a player (who turned out to be a disaster). I dont see too many ''fans'' doing that. The off pitch commercial ventures that have led to record levels of income - which STILL struggles to cover the fees and wages. Yet people want them to spend even more money we dont have.

Without the efforts of this board we would never have been in a position to get promoted in the first place. You need to remember that money WAS available to strengthen at the star of the Prem season but we got badly shafted by Pompey and Charlton at the last minute (and again by Wigan last pre season). It was the coaching sfaff who were at fault for not having back up targtets for Primus and Harewood. This failure alone was responsible for our disastrous start.

Credit to them for bringing in Earnshaw. They were faced with a not ideal contract (not for the first time) or not bring him at all. Prudence disappeared yet again, I think ambition with prudence was a reaction to the catastrophic antics of a few other boards who had succeeded in ruining their clubs for the foreseeable future. It was a sound bite rather than a policy. The accounts are open for all to see. Nothing is hidden.

Tremendous efforts have gone into seeking investment which has produced a rather remarkable result. The Turners are serious players. Credit to the board for that, they weren''t exactly begging at the door, they were convinced by the board.

On the negative I would question the sanctioning of three or four signings that were blatantly wrong and a complete waste of money. They do tend to put too much faith in the coaching staff though of course this is a difficult balance. Better too much than not enough.... I can just imagine the posts on here if they blocked a transfer!! I was bitterly disappointed with the silence about Grant over the handling of Hunter, Jarvis and especially Safri. But then I’ve been critical of Huckerby when he went public with certain comments so perhaps they are right, not all info should be in the fans domain. The Safri affair was particularly disgraceful. Remeber they cannot always respond to citicism. Somethings are definately handled internally. Same as your household......

I really fail to see what they have done wrong. Sack the coaching staff, two players should have been sacked also over the last 18 months in my opinion. Get rid the dead wood (which looks at last like it may happen). But don’t remove the people who do 95% of the work that actually keeps the club going.

OTBC

[/quote]

The record levels of income were solely down to the £32million Sky money since promotion and £16million player sales since we were relegated, the off-pitch stuff has been a massive drain on resources in this period. Player wages as a percentage of income were actually far higher in the season we got promoted than they have been ever since and the club made big profits in the transfer market even whilst receiving £14.2million in parachute payments. They have had other priorities in this period (buying land, infill, new pitch/ticket office/office facilities/a road etc.) and this has lead to the situation we are now in. Ever wondered how, given the income listed above, we have ended up with a squad which cost less than £5million to assemble? Our entire squad cost less than the value of the players we sold in the summer. What does that say?

You`ve been fed a line mate and swallowed it hook,line and sinker, but believe whatever you`re comfortable with. Everyone else does.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="T"]Mr C - I think you have some entirely legitmate questions which the board should explain but many other clubs have also put their money into facilities so there is nothing wrong with that per se. It is the balance which given the current league position clearly has not been right.[/quote]

T, the "balance hasn`t been right" argument comes up quite alot and basically i agree with that. I do however see it as a total understatement. The club have recieved £14.2million parachute payments over that last two years and sold players to the value of £16million in the same period and the current squad cost less than £5million to assemble. Even allowing for the club running at a loss, cost of loan players etc. it doesn`t even begin to add up.

To me it seems obvious that the board have deliberately run the team on a shoestring in order to invest maximum amounts elsewhere and as such they should take 100% of the blame for the position we are now in.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]d £14.2million parachute payments over that last two years and sold

players to the value of £16million in the same period and the current

squad cost less than £5million to assemble[/quote]...And approx 8 million a year in wages.  Why do you always forget the wages ?  They''re the biggest part of player expenditure. [:)]

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?

[/quote]

Ok.. come on Arto ... produce the post where I have accused you of being Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [:^)]

Every so often you go on a rant like this at me for no reason[:''(]

This time I suggest you either put up or shut up [:#]

But then again... maybe.....

And as I went home on Tuesday night as drunk as drunk could be
I saw a post on the board where my old post should be
Well, I called me wife and I said to her: Will you kindly tell to me
Who wrote that post on the board where my old post should be

Ah, you''re drunk,
you''re drunk you silly old fool,
still you can not see
That''s just some fuzzy felt that me mother sent to me
Well, it''s many a day I''ve travelled a hundred miles or more
But felt on a messageboard I never saw before.

[B][B][B][B][B][B][B][B][D][D][:^)] ...hic! [Y]

 

 

[/quote]

I''m sorry NN i must say you don''t actually call me names, you are one of those posters that would rather make snide insults towards me without actually name calling. All a little silly of course. I may not be the most intelligent poster on here and i might have a drink [although very occasionally these days] but i still think I''m one of the only people on here who saw the trouble coming with this board so i think I''m pretty sharp when it comes to knowing my football, unlike most on here who when proven wrong will revert to silly insults.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="Bigmarkcanary"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"][quote user="fuzzyfelt"]

I''m guessing most of us are fairly fed up with the board, with prudence with ambition, and so on.  But we know why we feel this way, and have aired those views to death.

Equally, most people seem to be anti-protests at this stage.  That doesn''t necessarily make them pro-board.  What interests me is when posters here make statements such as "I''m 100% behind the board", and they are challenged as to why, the silence is deafening.

So here''s an opportunity for anyone who is behind the current board (T07 for one) to tell us why they feel the current board deserve our continued support.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Yep come on squit, Hartson Gut, Big M, NN, Ardee to name but a few, Why Exactly are we .....Fools,Traitors, Scum,Binners, Moaners,Codgers,C#!ts,To@@ers ect ect [yes i have been called them all]? Im fed up of the smug comments against my views bearing in mind when i talk to people outside the City they''re surprised we havent taken action against the current board already! [ ask anyone about Norwich and they will say about Delias Rant and our fall from being a very good club to a S?@t one] Go on i beg you, some off you might actually realise that we have fallen big time. But never mind hey?

[/quote]

Just because I am not in favour of any protest, that does NOT mean that I support the board. I certainly do not support them, and have not shown them any support at all in what I''ve posted on this site.

You clearly have a serious problem with my posts Arthur - it''s either that, or it''s the wording in my signature bit. Maybe it''s both.

Whatever the reason, just try and ignore them. Why don''t you post something useful, like a post paying respect to the late Graham Paddon and all your condolences to his family and friends, in the thread stickied at the top of this page? Six pages, and not a single one from either yourself, Cluck or Smudger. If Ricky and Wiz etc can find it within themselves to do so, I''m sure you can as well.

Fuzzyfelt, I think you''ve opened up a right little can of worms with this one...

[/quote]

I think you will find I''ve said i will not not support a protest under the current sad circumstances of the death of a great man Big M.  It was far to early for him to go and i agree in a postponement of a protest so we can all remember the Great player without the backdrop of a protest against the board.

[nutty nigel 7,527]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

I''m sorry NN i must say you don''t actually call me names, you are one of those posters that would rather make snide insults towards me without actually name calling. All a little silly of course. I may not be the most intelligent poster on here and i might have a drink [although very occasionally these days] but i still think I''m one of the only people on here who saw the trouble coming with this board so i think I''m pretty sharp when it comes to knowing my football, unlike most on here who when proven wrong will revert to silly insults.

[/quote]

Arthur

Stop playing all hard done by, I''m didn''t intend them to be snide insults, I reacted to you coming on here bringing my name onto a thread that I hadn''t even posted on. It appeared a drunken rant to my eyes hence my post.

Intelligent posters? How do you measure that?? Is it like loyal fans??? If so then I''d like it to be known that I''m holding back my intelligence, like some sort of boycott, but you''ll all thank me for it oneday! [:P]

 

[Cheerio 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

the off-pitch stuff has been a massive drain on resources in this period. .........

[/quote]Not according to the accounts I read....... would you care to elaborate? Did you see how much profit the catering side alone made?[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

 They have had other priorities in

this period (buying land, infill, new pitch/ticket office/office

facilities/a road etc.) ..........

[/quote]You mean taking steps to ensure we maximise attendances week in week out. What do you think accounts for our attendances? Electric football in spite of a shoddy stadium and facilities. A ''special breed'' of loyal fans?Come on, try harder

[Arthur Whittle 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

I''m sorry NN i must say you don''t actually call me names, you are one of those posters that would rather make snide insults towards me without actually name calling. All a little silly of course. I may not be the most intelligent poster on here and i might have a drink [although very occasionally these days] but i still think I''m one of the only people on here who saw the trouble coming with this board so i think I''m pretty sharp when it comes to knowing my football, unlike most on here who when proven wrong will revert to silly insults.

[/quote]

Arthur

Stop playing all hard done by, I''m didn''t intend them to be snide insults, I reacted to you coming on here bringing my name onto a thread that I hadn''t even posted on. It appeared a drunken rant to my eyes hence my post.

Intelligent posters? How do you measure that?? Is it like loyal fans??? If so then I''d like it to be known that I''m holding back my intelligence, like some sort of boycott, but you''ll all thank me for it oneday! [:P]

 

[/quote]

Ok NN we''ll forget about all the other smug comments between you and the wonderful Ardee towards me, [ the silly little poems etc etc]. Try seeing things from a paying customer towards a once great football club who is really peed off about the crap we watch week in and week out and you might just realise why i find such comments somewhat unjustified. I sometimes question if people come on here for the right reasons. Difference of opinion is fine but pompous smug comments......?

[Vern 0]

Ken Bates, Peter Ridsdale. Luton Town, Wimbledon (remember them?)......That is why I support the board.........cos it could be a damn sight worse.

Rather be cautious and sensible than have no club in five years time. Hate being bottom of the league but anyone with half a brain can see that Glenn is sorting that as we speak.

All adoo about nothing.........We will survive.....

[nutty nigel 7,527]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]

Ok NN we''ll forget about all the other smug comments between you and the wonderful Ardee towards me, [ the silly little poems etc etc]. Try seeing things from a paying customer towards a once great football club who is really peed off about the crap we watch week in and week out and you might just realise why i find such comments somewhat unjustified. I sometimes question if people come on here for the right reasons. Difference of opinion is fine but pompous smug comments......?

[/quote]

Ok Arthur, I take it you mean this thread http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1067487/ShowPost.aspx and I apologise if there is something there that caused you offence although to be honest mate I don''t see what.

Do you assume that I don''t get peed off at times too? I am a paying customer too and I have been for 40 years. You and I probably have more in common than we realise. It''s quite possible that we have met at some point over those 40 years.

On your ''EEN Column'' thread you suggested people should lighten up a bit.. well maybe you should take your own advice because at the end of the day nobody is totally right and nobody is totally wrong and we are all united in our support for The Canaries.

I too wonder if people come on here for the right reasons. It''s not just a protest board for likeminded Mr Angry [:@]types to have a love in[U] but it''s also a place for City Fans[Y] to discuss all manner of things concerning the club we all love.

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]d £14.2million parachute payments over that last two years and sold players to the value of £16million in the same period and the current squad cost less than £5million to assemble[/quote]

...And approx 8 million a year in wages.  Why do you always forget the wages ?  They''re the biggest part of player expenditure. [:)]
[/quote]

Blah, believe it or not if you run a professional football team you have to pay the players. The income the club has received has been massive over the last two seasons and the only way wages would be worth mentioning would be if they had grown in line with that additional income. They haven`t, as you have admitted. In fact, they were only £1million higher last year than in the promotion year (and thats excluding promotion bonuses) despite income being £10million higher. Tells a story if you look at it in an unbiased way doesn`t it?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

the off-pitch stuff has been a massive drain on resources in this period. .........

[/quote]

Not according to the accounts I read....... would you care to elaborate? Did you see how much profit the catering side alone made?

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

 They have had other priorities in this period (buying land, infill, new pitch/ticket office/office facilities/a road etc.) ..........

[/quote]

You mean taking steps to ensure we maximise attendances week in week out. What do you think accounts for our attendances? Electric football in spite of a shoddy stadium and facilities. A ''special breed'' of loyal fans?

Come on, try harder


[/quote]

Most clubs make extra money from catering even if it`s just ale and pies on matchdays. Consensus of opinion puts catering profit at around £700k, not bad but not exceptional. I`m more refering to things like a new pitch/ticket office/land etc. Are you happy that the board have spent £3million on land? And how exactly is that growing income?

You have to bear in mind that without the £7.1m parachute payment and £3m profit in the transfer market in the last financial year the club would have made a £9million loss. Where you think all that extra money went because it certainly didn`t go on strengthening the team or player wages?

In terms of attendances the club are in an exceptionally lucky position. Football is trendy and NCFC have a captive market of over 1 million people in Norfolk and North Suffolk with no competition. By the way, the late, great G.Paddon would have played in front of plenty of 25-30,000 crowds in the hoolie-haunted `70`s-our current crowds are not in any way remarkable in historical terms.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Vern "]

Ken Bates, Peter Ridsdale. Luton Town, Wimbledon (remember them?)......That is why I support the board.........cos it could be a damn sight worse.

Rather be cautious and sensible than have no club in five years time. Hate being bottom of the league but anyone with half a brain can see that Glenn is sorting that as we speak.

All adoo about nothing.........We will survive.....

[/quote]

Ummm, all those clubs are still in existence and Wimbledon simply metamorphasised into something else and are doing very well- ie. showing ambition at the level they are at and reaping the benefits. If big clubs had gone bust or sunk to the conference then your argument would stand up, but most of the famous "cash-strapped" clubs are doing far better than us. Relegation could well see our club in serious financial difficulties and the sad thing is they have brought it on themselves by ditching ambition in favour of supposed prudence. The whole approach of our club is negative and it should suprise no-one that we see negative results.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Most clubs make extra money from catering even if it`s just ale and pies on matchdays. Consensus of opinion puts catering profit at around £700k, not bad but not exceptional. I`m more refering to things like a new pitch/ticket office/land etc. Are you happy that the board have spent £3million on land? And how exactly is that growing income?

You have to bear in mind that without the £7.1m parachute payment and £3m profit in the transfer market in the last financial year the club would have made a £9million loss. Where you think all that extra money went because it certainly didn`t go on strengthening the team or player wages?

[/quote]This is kind of my point Mr Carrow.  If you''re referring to things like a new pitch / ticket office / land etc., then why start with the "we''ve had 28 million in 4 years and blown it " line ?  If you costed out the things you think are unneccesary, and point to those things in these arguments, rather than going for the headline figures all the time, I think you''d convince more people. I reckon that it''s more likely that you''re looking at 1 or 2 million per season that is in your eyes unneccesary spending, and which could have gone on the team instead.If the land is an investment, then I can kind of understand it.  Land prices have shot up over the last 20 years, the level of inflation probably doesn''t come close to the amount of money we could have made if we''d stayed in the Premiership though.  Would you be happy if NCFC was reliant solely upon the TV money bubble ?  It must burst sooner or later, surely ?  That''s the gamble that the board took I guess, and which they appear to have lost.

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Blah - This is where I so wish they would find some middle ground. It seems to me that the board have concentrated so much on the long term future of the club that they are in danger of destroying it. Given the situation at the club in the 90''s it''s maybe understandable that they have tried to build a secure future that''s not over reliant on TV revenues. But the TV revenues are the "here and now" and we have to compete in the "here and now". Relegation would be a disaster for our long term future as I believe the club is budgeted on a worst case scenario of a mid-table finish and being knocked out of both cups at the first stage.

I am hoping that the reality of our situation right now will mean the board find that middle ground and if they do that it''s not too late. But there''s not much we can do except wait and see.

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Blah - This is where I so wish they would find some middle ground. It seems to me that the board have concentrated so much on the long term future of the club that they are in danger of destroying it. Given the situation at the club in the 90''s it''s maybe understandable that they have tried to build a secure future that''s not over reliant on TV revenues. But the TV revenues are the "here and now" and we have to compete in the "here and now". Relegation would be a disaster for our long term future as I believe the club is budgeted on a worst case scenario of a mid-table finish and being knocked out of both cups at the first stage.

I am hoping that the reality of our situation right now will mean the board find that middle ground and if they do that it''s not too late. But there''s not much we can do except wait and see.

[/quote]Your position on this is where I see myself too nutty, if not where others see me.

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

I have read the posts on here and wonder how much input the various board members have. Does Delia and her husband contribute to the daily running of the club, do the Turners advise daily on what should be done, does Mumby have a daily input ? Whilst I cannot answer these questions one person who is charged with the job of Chief Executive is Doncaster and I lay most of the blame at his door, many executives who receive his salary are held accountable.

What do we here from this person spin after spin after being beat by Sheff Wed  "we were beaten by a rejuvinated Sheffield side" when he should have said we were second best. After the Watford defeat " we were beaten by an excellent Watford side" sorry Mr D but Watford were a fit, organised Championship side that will come straight down again if promoted.

We have a Chief Executive who is reported as saying in an earlier post that we are still looked at as a well run club - looked at by whom surely the well run football club has a spirited football team all pulling in one direction on the pitch. Huckerby has stated what many supporters have said that this is the weakest team Norwich City have had in some time I again place the blame at the Chief Exec''s door allowing silly sell on clauses that do nothing to protect the interest of this football club.

We are told that money is available yet I find it ironic that Grant said that the players he was after were all playing at sides in the top three I believe that perhaps prudence had a say there.

We are told that Mr Doncaster spends a lot of time answering fans questions, at £170k a year that is not prudence.

We are told that the Turners are looking at Doncaster performance well lets hope it doesn''t take too long. If we got a straight talking no nonsense Chief Executive cutting out the bullshit perhaps the club could move forward in the right direction.  

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

After you Claudette.

No, no, after youuuuuu Claudette.

OTBC

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Most clubs make extra money from catering even if it`s just ale and pies on matchdays. Consensus of opinion puts catering profit at around £700k, not bad but not exceptional. I`m more refering to things like a new pitch/ticket office/land etc. Are you happy that the board have spent £3million on land? And how exactly is that growing income?

You have to bear in mind that without the £7.1m parachute payment and £3m profit in the transfer market in the last financial year the club would have made a £9million loss. Where you think all that extra money went because it certainly didn`t go on strengthening the team or player wages?

[/quote]

This is kind of my point Mr Carrow.  If you''re referring to things like a new pitch / ticket office / land etc., then why start with the "we''ve had 28 million in 4 years and blown it " line ?  If you costed out the things you think are unneccesary, and point to those things in these arguments, rather than going for the headline figures all the time, I think you''d convince more people. I reckon that it''s more likely that you''re looking at 1 or 2 million per season that is in your eyes unneccesary spending, and which could have gone on the team instead.

If the land is an investment, then I can kind of understand it.  Land prices have shot up over the last 20 years, the level of inflation probably doesn''t come close to the amount of money we could have made if we''d stayed in the Premiership though. 

Would you be happy if NCFC was reliant solely upon the TV money bubble ?  It must burst sooner or later, surely ?  That''s the gamble that the board took I guess, and which they appear to have lost.
[/quote]

Surely a dedicated, concerned supporter would get to the root of such things themselves rather than rely on a cynical anti-boarder like myself to furnish them with the facts? [^o)] To be honest i don`t believe you have to look too far beyond the headline figures to see where the problems are, they really are quite astonishing. Income was £10million higher last season than in the promotion season yet, taking into account the profit on selling players, the club spent less money on the team than it did when we went up. Do you think all that extra revenue went on things vital to the existance of the football club? Don`t you think the board should be held to account for their decisions which have brought the club to it`s knees, both in football and financial terms?

[corbs 0]

I think the onus should be on the Anti-Delia/Anti-Board folk (if the 2 are the same thing?) to explain what their Strategy is. What is the plan and who do you have in mind to replace the current crop of associated business types that seem to make up football Boards. Please do not tell me that we just want a wealthy person to ''take over''. This is not a Strategy. Any ''protests'' have to have a purpose e.g If you are protesting against human rights abuses in Burma, the aim to to replace the Military with the democratically elected leader/goverment. At this exact juncture in our history, the only change which I see as vital is the incorporation of a ''fan'' on the Board a la Barca (slowly, slowly). As they say in Burma ''Water flows down''.

 

[garyspruce 0]

You seem to have all the figures mr carrow so could you tell me how much the club lost the season

we went up ,as this seems to get over looked. why was the corner infill a waste of money i am

sure the disabled supporters wouldn''t agree with you . Would we have got to the premiership with out

hucks ,where did the money come from to buy him .

[gazzathegreat 0]

Gary, a share issue was released in the promotion season in order to fund players, also a private individual put a lot of his/her own money into buying Huckerby. Worthington was so convinced Hucks wasn''t coming to us he went out and bought McKenzie.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="garyspruce"]

You seem to have all the figures mr carrow so could you tell me how much the club lost the season

we went up ,as this seems to get over looked. why was the corner infill a waste of money i am

sure the disabled supporters wouldn''t agree with you . Would we have got to the premiership with out

hucks ,where did the money come from to buy him .

[/quote]

We made a loss of £3million in that season Gary-but that doesn`t include the £2million+ (i think?) from the share issues which is treated as "exceptional".

I wouldn`t say the infill is a waste of money as such, just that the timing was wrong. We should have focussed all resources and efforts on staying up and then used some of the extra cash on facilities. Instead we comitted so much to infrastructure that we couldn`t afford Crouch or Ashton at the start of the season and couldn`t even afford to rebuild when we came back down-even with help of £7.1million parachute payments and millions in player sales. I`ve got a disabled mate who doesn`t even use the facility, prefering to be out at the front of the Jarrold stand so i think that justifying a £4million outlay to please a few dozen supporters is a bit much.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="corbs"]

I think the onus should be on the Anti-Delia/Anti-Board folk (if the 2 are the same thing?) to explain what their Strategy is. What is the plan and who do you have in mind to replace the current crop of associated business types that seem to make up football Boards. Please do not tell me that we just want a wealthy person to ''take over''. This is not a Strategy. Any ''protests'' have to have a purpose e.g If you are protesting against human rights abuses in Burma, the aim to to replace the Military with the democratically elected leader/goverment. At this exact juncture in our history, the only change which I see as vital is the incorporation of a ''fan'' on the Board a la Barca (slowly, slowly). As they say in Burma ''Water flows down''.

 

[/quote]

If i`m anti anything mate it`s anti-"spending vast amounts of money on stands/land/new pitch/ticket office/a road/offices/corporate facilities, when the team is in rapid decline". Anyone who bothers to look into things for themselves will realise quickly that this is what has happened, and about the only defence i hear is that we should shrug our shoulders, forget about it, keep quiet and hopefully the board will realise their mistakes and not just endlessly repeat them. And this from supposedly loyal, passionate City fans [:^)]?

As for having a strategy, as part of the Chase out protests i have heard it all before. There were plenty of people back then who criticised those protesting saying "there`s no-one there to take over" who subsequently jumped for joy when G.Watling saved the club and passed the shares onto Delia. Hypocrites.....? Surely not[^o)]!

 

[T07 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Instead we comitted so much to infrastructure that we couldn`t afford Crouch or Ashton at the start of the season

[/quote]That is absolutely not true and I challange you to provide the source for this rubbishFact. Crewe would nt sell Ashton at the start of the season, he was at that stage being followed by (amongst others) Liverpool and Tottenham. They made it very clear they would auction him in January ONLY if they felt they were safe. Liverpool and Totenham both withdrew citing lack of pace and a concern about his hamstrings. We were the only team to bid and Ashton fell well short of the £6m valuation they tried to slap on him. They only just survived without him I seem to recall.As for Crouch, where do I start? I saw Doncaster and another director I couldn''t name at Villa Park and know he was there on at least five other occasions - search the archives for my comments on this at the time. Villas valuation was more than double ours, he eventually went to Southampton for near enough the amount we''d offered. His agent, Bruce (father) whom I''ve worked with in the past, told me about Peters arival at Carra a month before it was announced when we were in Newcastle together. I was aware of the amazing efforts made by the board to secure Crouch as they did with Hucks (in itself an astonishing achevement at the time lest you forget). It was never going to happen. Peter himself wasn''t keen to return favouring his chances at cracking the Villa first team.Stop making up utter cobblers

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="T07"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Instead we comitted so much to infrastructure that we couldn`t afford Crouch or Ashton at the start of the season

[/quote]
That is absolutely not true and I challange you to provide the source for this rubbish

Fact. Crewe would nt sell Ashton at the start of the season, he was at that stage being followed by (amongst others) Liverpool and Tottenham. They made it very clear they would auction him in January ONLY if they felt they were safe. Liverpool and Totenham both withdrew citing lack of pace and a concern about his hamstrings. We were the only team to bid and Ashton fell well short of the £6m valuation they tried to slap on him. They only just survived without him I seem to recall.

As for Crouch, where do I start? I saw Doncaster and another director I couldn''t name at Villa Park and know he was there on at least five other occasions - search the archives for my comments on this at the time. Villas valuation was more than double ours, he eventually went to Southampton for near enough the amount we''d offered. His agent, Bruce (father) whom I''ve worked with in the past, told me about Peters arival at Carra a month before it was announced when we were in Newcastle together. I was aware of the amazing efforts made by the board to secure Crouch as they did with Hucks (in itself an astonishing achevement at the time lest you forget). It was never going to happen. Peter himself wasn''t keen to return favouring his chances at cracking the Villa first team.

Stop making up utter cobblers
[/quote]

To be honest TO7 this is exactly the sort of stuff i hope to flush out with my posts. I am quite happy to be shown where i have got it wrong and your post goes alot further towards this than the usual "you must be a binner/you can`t criticise Delia" rubbish.

On Crouch, i have a clear memory of him stating "if i leave Villa, i want to move to Norwich", and within a few weeks Worthington stating "at this moment in time the overall package for Crouch is too expensive for NCFC". If memory serves he then joined S`oton within a few games of the start of the season. The questions are obvious. If we put bids in why were they not publicised at the time, or after to show we made the effort? And why could we afford £2.5m at the start of the season but not a few weeks later when S`oton came in?

On Ashton, to be honest i have heard so many things i don`t know what to believe. I don`t however recall us being linked with him at all at the start of that season and there was certainly no bid that was made public. As for Crewe "refusing to sell", well, that`s what they all say isn`t it? Perhaps putting in one bid and then backing out wasn`t quite trying hard enough eh? And again, if they made a decent effort why are they so coy about it? They should tell us!

Believe it or not i actually supported "prudence" in the prem and my criticisms centre around the appalling "attempts" to get back up again with the benefit of £14.2m parachute payments and some £16m in player sales. People focus on the managers but basically they bought as good as they could afford with the money available to them, which (with the exception of Earnie), was bugger all.

Most of the above is,of course, conjecture but one thing which is a fact is that the club have spent some £30m on fixed assets in the last six financial years. Do you think their priorities have been right?

[corbs 0]

No noise from the non-Strategy boys.