Moaning Minnies

[BigFish 1,986]

I am not sure I am in favour of the transfer window. Why? Well this board was dominated by misanthropy, misogyny & paranoia during the last days of Grants reign. The football must come first brigade seemed to want to talk about evertthing but football. Then the window closed, Grant went, Roeder came and we turned a corner. Six wins, four draws and one defeat later and it seemed that football did come first. The Doherty witch hunt died died down and an element of confidence in Roeder developed.Now the window is open and they all come crawling out of the woodwork - even Smudger after he crashed and burned so badly (welcome back Smudge, I admire your backbone). Suddenly Doncaster is the big topic again and a journeyman CB looking for somewhere to run his career down is an absolute must have if the club is to demonstrate "ambition".Eleven games, twenty two points and they are still moaning on ignoring the fact that no club is likely to move on good players if they are palying well in Jan and there is a chance that they will win something/promotion/avoid relegation.You couldn''t make it up[:D]

[corbs 0]

I blame this ''third rate'' Board, they appoint a good Manager, who is clearly to good for ''little Norwich'' so is going to be poached by another Club, leaving us in the lurch again, Sack them all, bring in Di Stephano, take your pots and pans, men only in the Boardroom, release those funds, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah, ................ ''pint of wherry for me''!    

[Chesney Hawkes 0]

Well, speculation about transfers, ins and outs, is 50% of being a football fan.  And I''m sure you can understand why people aren''t exactly optimistic - when was the last transfer window when we pulled something out of the bag?  2003, probably.  And when have we needed strengthening more than now?  Maybe 1997-8, but our current squad (permanent players, not the loans) is paper-thin.We could stick our heads in the sand, of course, and pretend everything''s wonderful, but some of us don''t go to bed every night cuddling our Doncaster dolly.

[Mello Yello 2,277]

I''d rather be a "Moanin'' Minnie" than a "Gullible Gonad"......

[Mr.Carrow 376]

The best way of making us shut-up (and even cheer up and congratulate them) would be if the board demonstrate clearly that the miserly false economy ways of the last couple of years are behind us. It`s what saddled the club with complete wastes of space such as......you know the list by now. It hasn`t really worked has it? A change in approach is all we ask. Quibbling over £250k for Tiny is exactly the sort of attitude that got us into such a mess in the first place and i don`t think you`ll find even 5% of City fans agreeing with your discription of him.

I would be ecstatic if the board proved me wrong in this transfer window. My face is ready and willing to be plastered in egg......[;)]

As for "misogyny" i have to admit i wouldn`t be best pleased if the club signed any ladies.....[:D]

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

The tiny 250k - Its called haggling.  Birmingham want us to pay more we want to pay less.  The player wants to join us (allegedly) so why pay more than we have to.  A bit of toing and froing and we will probably end up meeting somewhere in the middle, especially with McLeish being told he has to sell to buy.  I have no problem with the boards stance regarding this.

Dangerous game though as I think the majority of fans would ease the pressure on them a little if we signed him.

 

[Jack Flash 13]

Do correct me if I''m wrong, but its my understanding that its GR''s decision to hold the Taylor bid at £750K and not the Boards - he has made a judgement how much he wants us to pay for him, and is currently not showing any signs of increasing the Bid. Brinkmanship perhaps, but thats his call and I for one think he''s right and we''ll get our man at a sensible and realistic price. I also believe we will see additional Team strengthening, and I am happy to trust Roeder who has delivered already way beyong expectations.

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="BigFish"]I am not sure I am in favour of the transfer window. Why? Well this board was dominated by misanthropy, misogyny & paranoia during the last days of Grants reign. The football must come first brigade seemed to want to talk about evertthing but football. Then the window closed, Grant went, Roeder came and we turned a corner. Six wins, four draws and one defeat later and it seemed that football did come first. The Doherty witch hunt died died down and an element of confidence in Roeder developed.Now the window is open and they all come crawling out of the woodwork - even Smudger after he crashed and burned so badly (welcome back Smudge, I admire your backbone). Suddenly Doncaster is the big topic again and a journeyman CB looking for somewhere to run his career down is an absolute must have if the club is to demonstrate "ambition".Eleven games, twenty two points and they are still moaning on ignoring the fact that no club is likely to move on good players if they are palying well in Jan and there is a chance that they will win something/promotion/avoid relegation.You couldn''t make it up[:D]

[/quote]bigfish??? sounds like small-pond thinking to me!!!little ole naaarwich is never going anywhere without big club ambition and realistic money to do it.   as for taylor - he''s head and shoulders (literally) above the doc and shax, but if thats moaning, then so be it..........

[Carrow89 0]

" Quibbling over £250k "You''ve absolutely NO idea what the fee is what is really being asked or offered. " that the miserly false economy ways of the last couple of years "Again NO knowledge only your own take on such stuff. A take taht suggests yoy believe the club should be run with the simplicity of your spending of your paper round money and those in charge should fulfill the roles of stage villains between your annual visit to the panto at the Theatte Royal.If ''investment'', ''releasing funds'', ''having ambition'' or whatever witless cliche describes what the club lacks could you please explain to us how Wolverhampton, with all the above, are but a few points above Blackpool  who have spent far call.And maybe accept that some of us who don''t spend our every waking hour whinging about the club and conjuring up fictious plots and dark villiany at Carrow Road are not anymore enamored of Doncaster, Delia than anyone else at the club. We are not blinkered, not are we blinded with hate as so many appear to be on here. If you hate the club so much why not far cough down the road and join in with the eternal whinging binners - at least many of you would have a common interest - supporting the binners !

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Couldn''t care less whether we spend £1 or £10 million, as long as things are going right on the pitch then i''m happy, and that will always remain the case. At the moment i''m very happy, and hope most other Norwich supporters are enjoying the turn around where it REALLY matters.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

It is good to see that Ralph has crawled out from under his stone to impart his wisdom on all things Norwich City. Pray tell us what the latest is on the Taylor transfer saga, let us plebs in on exactly how much the deal will cost us. If you are not actually in possesion of the full facts yourself any chance you could sod off as you really are an annoying little butterball.....

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="Alex"]Couldn''t care less whether we spend £1 or £10 million, as long as things are going right on the pitch then i''m happy, and that will always remain the case. At the moment i''m very happy, and hope most other Norwich supporters are enjoying the turn around where it REALLY matters.[/quote]

Marvellous post, if only because it matches the point I was making!![:)][:D][D]

[ricky knight 0]

remember form is temporary class is permanent, our form is fine, We need much more class, thats or concern, if thats moaning, tell someone who cares.

[Carrow89 0]

Oh dear, poor old SOB it''s personal abuse time.Nope, I can''t tell you the details of any Taylor deal/offer/cost. That is the point I was making. None of us can !Apologies if I seem to be correct, maybe I should take a leaf out of your book and spout some fictious guff that appears to have some basis is fact and lard it up with a healthy dollop of bile.Suggest you relax a bit more SOB..

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="ricky knight"]remember form is temporary class is permanent, our form is fine, We need much more class, thats or concern, if thats moaning, tell someone who cares.[/quote]

Yeah its moaning, Ricky. A post without context or positive suggestions.

Need more class or want more class? This window or the Summer? Who do we need, how much  etc etc etc? Go on, go on.......I''m sure you can write more than 23 words on this. [:D]

Roeder is on the job (in a football sense!).

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wrong"]" Quibbling over £250k "You''ve absolutely NO idea what the fee is what is really being asked or offered. [/quote]Well, that is what the EDP, Pinkun, Waghorn, Karen Brady and co seem to be saying.  So I reckon it is a decent figure to go by.  So we have SOME idea of the figures involved.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]
bigfish??? sounds like small-pond thinking to me!!!

little ole naaarwich is never going anywhere without big club ambition and realistic money to do it.   as for taylor - he''s head and shoulders (literally) above the doc and shax, but if thats moaning, then so be it..........
[/quote]

Do you believe we would have done better over the last 6 games if Taylor had stayed? 10 points 5 goals conceded, hes maybe head and shoulders above them but the performances weren''t. I kept hearing Dublin was head and shoulders above them last season but the performances weren''t then either. Centre back is and area where we need one or two new signings because we are woefully short, but the Doherty/Shackell partnership has been better than any other over bthe last two seasons.

Its always been assumed that our upturn in fortune coincided with Taylor signing but I have been trying to point out for weeks that Mark Fotheringham was the key. He has been the important player in all of this. Since Fozzy came back from injury the games he played have been   P9 W6 D2 L1 F15 A7 Pts20   Compare this to Taylors  P8 W4 D1 L3 F12 A12 Pts13.

I would love us to sign Martin Taylor but he was never the saviour that you and others held him up to be.

 

[ricky knight 0]

Its not about taylor, its about losing a good player over 250 grand, a figure percy''s accepted as being nout for finding out big Dave was not up to it.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

Ralph - And this comes from the man that suggests that all "dissenters" are Ippo fans

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Its always been assumed that our upturn in fortune coincided with Taylor signing but I have been trying to point out for weeks that Mark Fotheringham was the key. He has been the important player in all of this. Since Fozzy came back from injury the games he played have been   P9 W6 D2 L1 F15 A7 Pts20   Compare this to Taylors  P8 W4 D1 L3 F12 A12 Pts13.

I would love us to sign Martin Taylor but he was never the saviour that you and others held him up to be.

[/quote]

You would have noticed he was improving with every game Nigel, he also contributed a couple of goals and was a serious threat from set pieces.  So YES, I think we would have improved our results.  His more recent record of 4 wins in his last 5 games for us - happening after the turning point of the Plymouth game which everyone seems to enjoy using when showing Roeder''s record is most impressive.  In fact we only conceded 4 goals in those games.

 

But I agree Fozzy is having a similar, if not greater effect than Safri in goings on.  proving yet again that if you put out a side without a player of genuine passing ability in the central midfield you are always going to struggle.

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Its not about taylor, its about losing a good player over 250 grand, a figure percy''s accepted as being nout for finding out big Dave was not up to it.[/quote]

Well done, 30 words this time![:D]

[ricky knight 0]

[quote user="BigFish"]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Its not about taylor, its about losing a good player over 250 grand, a figure percy''s accepted as being nout for finding out big Dave was not up to it.[/quote]

Well done, 30 words this time![:D]

[/quote]

truth dont take long its BS and spin that need many words.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]" Quibbling over £250k "

You''ve absolutely NO idea what the fee is what is really being asked or offered.

" that the miserly false economy ways of the last couple of years "

Again NO knowledge only your own take on such stuff. A take taht suggests yoy believe the club should be run with the simplicity of your spending of your paper round money and those in charge should fulfill the roles of stage villains between your annual visit to the panto at the Theatte Royal.

If ''investment'', ''releasing funds'', ''having ambition'' or whatever witless cliche describes what the club lacks could you please explain to us how Wolverhampton, with all the above, are but a few points above Blackpool  who have spent far call.

And maybe accept that some of us who don''t spend our every waking hour whinging about the club and conjuring up fictious plots and dark villiany at Carrow Road are not anymore enamored of Doncaster, Delia than anyone else at the club. We are not blinkered, not are we blinded with hate as so many appear to be on here. If you hate the club so much why not far cough down the road and join in with the eternal whinging binners - at least many of you would have a common interest - supporting the binners !
[/quote]

I assume this is aimed at me......Where is the hatred in my post Ralphy? Read my post and then read your own and see if you can spot where the vitriol is. As for "supporting the binners", well done, in three words you have managed to destroy your own credibility.

Do the board have a record of playing hardball but eventually getting their man on the cheap in recent years? If they have then the likes of me haven`t got a leg to stand on. Were the likes of Thorne, Colin, Louis-Jean, Robinson etc. the managers top targets? Or all he could afford at the time? Might Roeders` insistance on only paying a certain fee for Taylor be in any way linked to the amount of money he has been given to spend by the board? Going for the cheap option every time has proved to be false economy in every way-most of the freebies and cheapo`s have contributed nothing but have, over a period, been very costly to the club in a spell when it has been in freefall on the pitch. Have the board demonstrated a willingness to push the boat out a bit to secure real quality? In fairness, yes, but only when financed by the share issues (Huckerby, Ashton) or a massive profit on a player sale (Earnshaw).

The Taylor issue just smacks of the same old miserly attitude but as i have said i WANT the board to prove me wrong. Please feel free to crow and rub it in if we do sign him and a couple of others before the end of the window, as i will be happy to take it in the knowledge that we would be moving in the right direction again.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

Are we moaning minnies or do we just not believe all the crap like people like you? Gullable or niave maybe sums you up.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"][quote user="BigFish"]

[quote user="ricky knight"]Its not about taylor, its about losing a good player over 250 grand, a figure percy''s accepted as being nout for finding out big Dave was not up to it.[/quote]

Well done, 30 words this time![:D]

[/quote]

truth dont take long its BS and spin that need many words.

[/quote]Over-simplification is spin. That takes few words.

[ricky knight 0]

i bow to your superior knowledge on spin as you are an expect at believing it 7rew.

[A Load of Squit 5,116]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]Are we moaning minnies or do we just not believe all the crap like people like you? Gullable or niave maybe sums you up.[/quote]

Hey Arthur, thought you''d like to see someone being "Gullable or niave" you obviously don''t know what it is. 

 http://new.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1130648/ShowPost.aspx

 

 

 

 

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]

 His more recent record of 4 wins in his last 5 games for us - happening after the turning point of the Plymouth game which everyone seems to enjoy using when showing Roeder''s record is most impressive.  In fact we only conceded 4 goals in those games.

 

[/quote]

Sorry CJF but I don''t agree. That turning point after the Plymouth game coincided with the return of Fotheringham and the change in style that he made possible. But you are entitled to believe what you want and we can''t prove eachother wrong. All I would ask you is to explain the drop in performance in the two christmas games if you believe Taylor was responsible for our improvement.

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"]bigfish??? sounds like small-pond thinking to me!!!little ole naaarwich is never going anywhere without big club ambition and realistic money to do it.   as for taylor - he''s head and shoulders (literally) above the doc and shax, but if thats moaning, then so be it..........[/quote]

Do you believe we would have done better over the last 6 games if Taylor had stayed? 10 points 5 goals conceded, hes maybe head and shoulders above them but the performances weren''t. I kept hearing Dublin was head and shoulders above them last season but the performances weren''t then either. Centre back is and area where we need one or two new signings because we are woefully short, but the Doherty/Shackell partnership has been better than any other over bthe last two seasons.

Its always been assumed that our upturn in fortune coincided with Taylor signing but I have been trying to point out for weeks that Mark Fotheringham was the key. He has been the important player in all of this. Since Fozzy came back from injury the games he played have been   P9 W6 D2 L1 F15 A7 Pts20   Compare this to Taylors  P8 W4 D1 L3 F12 A12 Pts13.

I would love us to sign Martin Taylor but he was never the saviour that you and others held him up to be.

 

[/quote]evening nutty.  stats are always open to different interpretations - but to use them to suggest taylors performances were at a level below the doc and shax is wide of the mark imo.  for me, he a real and proper defender, expertly schooled by steve bruce - with a pedigree to match, helping brum outa this division last year.   he''s a top 6 central defender imo.  only a fool would deny the part that fozzy has played in our recent run of form, but having a rock sold central defence behind you imo shifts the focus of the midfield/team away from overly protecting the back 4, to  helping the front 4 create goal scoring opportunities.  adams alluded that taylor was bringing this type of assuredness ( and better ball distribution outa defence) to the city defence and therefore assisting the team in going forward and winning matches.  also  fozzy can go missing when he tires  (stoke 2nd half)  as can most players to be fair, but more and more he is looking like a 90minute player - so big-up to him for working hard on his fitness.but if you''re asking  to compare city''s performances during taylors loan and after, then surely it has to be ''like for like,'' to reveal a fair, reasonable and proper comparison. so, in that case, both sets of stats must be compared post- plymouth away, where roeder dropped most of the underperformers and .  i''ll leave it to you trawl through the stats on this basis, but i''m betting, you''ll see a different picture to what your previous stats revealed.from memory (i could be wrong here) i am happy to concede taylor was implicated in mistake for both the ipswich goals on his debut for us, but after an assured 2nd half performance, the boy didn''t look back, and i don''t think he was at fault for any of the goals we conceded after that.   certainly, we''ve been conceding far too many goals at set-pieces - basically down to individual errors, where opposition forwards get the better of their markers.  certainly, the goals conceeded against buty and palace were criminal, in both cases the oppositions top scorer was left unmarked for a free header on the edge of the 6 yard box - i don''t know who was responsible, either shax, doc or dion i assume.  as far as i know, taylor was not at fault during any set-pieces during his stay here.  we all know the doc lost his man for the plymouth match at carra rd, and dion lost his player twice at stoke away.  also, the doc is guilty of not filling in behind, which previously has put extra stress on shax.  he did it again on saturday, leading to the barnsley goal.also, since taylor left, we''ve not kept a clean sheet.all in all, i believe the case for taylor is a compelling one.

    

[nutty nigel 7,509]

LGT - The stats are open to any interpretation you want to put on them. I only quote the stats to back up what I see with my own eyes. You are right that Taylor was at fault for goals we have conceded, so has Doherty and Shackell and Dublin. If there were no mistakes we would concede no goals. All defenders at all clubs make mistakes. My point is that defence hasn''t been our problem this season. Our problem has been creating chances and lately converting chances.

Last season I was at Deepdale where Fotheringham played central midfield and we got the ball down and passed in one of our better away performances even though we lost. Not many saw it but those that did were impressed. He then featured in the opening 2 league games this season where we drew at Preston and beat Southampton. He was probably man of the match in those games and he was also possibly mom in the 5-2 win over Barnet. He was then injured and the levels of performance dropped until he came back after the Plymouth game. Our performances were much better until the 2 games over christmas where he was injured again. He came back at Palace and that game and the Barnsley game saw our performance levels improve again. These are things that I have seen and the stats back them up. We lost one game this season where Fotheringham featured and that was the late goal at Stoke. We have only won once when he didn''t feature and that was the home game against Palace.

There are no stats to back up any improvement that Taylor made to our performances, only fans seeing what they wanted to see.