Was life under Mr Chase really that bad?

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Loan City Fc "]

If Delia keeps running this club as she has done for the last few years we will end up relegated , every year we are getting worse and the squad now must rank as one of the worst ever .The Chase era might have turned sour at the end but during his time at the club we had the best teams and most success this club will probably ever see ,nothing Delia has achieved even comes close , but shes a celebrity and a female so most of the Norfolk population think shes a saint and our saviour , she most definately is not.

[/quote]

Out of all the replies to this thread, and there''s been some good ones, Loan City FC sums it up nicely for me.

Good post.[Y]

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="jimmy500"][quote user="kdncfc"]

There is very little to choose between Chase and the current lot imo, both guilty of selling off the better players and replacing them with cheap rubbish, only difference is we are a division lower than we were in the Chase days. Don''t go for all this at least we''ve still got a club stuff either, the fact is that if we carry on how we have done for much longer we''ll end up in league 2, we won''t have a club left to support if that happens.

[/quote]

No, we were relegated under Chase so technically we are in the same division.

[/quote]We were relegated under Chase to this division but we''re now in serious danger of dropping to an even lower division, in fact our lowest position for over 40 years. Who''s to say it won''t get even worse if we carry on in the same vein.

We did have some bad times under Chase but we were competing at a higher level then and as well as finishing third in the league we reached 2 FA cup semis and won the milk cup and also qualified for europe on another occasion but were unable to participate due to the scousers misdemeanours at Heysel. We had debts of 6 million when he left,12 years on  we are nearly 20 million in debt and with a playing squad as weak as anything I''ve known since I started going to games in 1972.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="kdncfc"][quote user="jimmy500"][quote user="kdncfc"]

There is very little to choose between Chase and the current lot imo, both guilty of selling off the better players and replacing them with cheap rubbish, only difference is we are a division lower than we were in the Chase days. Don''t go for all this at least we''ve still got a club stuff either, the fact is that if we carry on how we have done for much longer we''ll end up in league 2, we won''t have a club left to support if that happens.

[/quote]

No, we were relegated under Chase so technically we are in the same division.

[/quote]We were relegated under Chase to this division but we''re now in serious danger of dropping to an even lower division, in fact our lowest position for over 40 years. Who''s to say it won''t get even worse if we carry on in the same vein.

We did have some bad times under Chase but we were competing at a higher level then and as well as finishing third in the league we reached 2 FA cup semis and won the milk cup and also qualified for europe on another occasion but were unable to participate due to the scousers misdemeanours at Heysel. We had debts of 6 million when he left,12 years on  we are nearly 20 million in debt and with a playing squad as weak as anything I''ve known since I started going to games in 1972.

[/quote]

We shouldn''t rewrite history just to make this board look worse than they are. Chase was responsible for the decline to this level. When he left in 1996 we were already struggling in this division and the club was in turmoil when the late great Geoffrey Watling brought his shares. At that point people like Gordon Bennett and Martin Armstrong helped steady a sinking ship and invited Delia Smith and Michael Wyn Jones onto the board. It was 2 years after that when Watling chose to sell his shares to Smith and Jones and if you remember that was the season where the club was at it''s lowest position for nearly 40 years. That was the season where we had just 46 points going into our last 4 games having not won in the previous 14 before being saved with those two 5-0 home wins.

So although we have slipped back after they dragged us back toward our former glorys there''s no way we can blame the decline from those European days on the present board.

 

[Paul Lamberts Disciple 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

Chase was responsible for the decline to this level.

 

[/quote]Absolute rubbish. The current incumbents have been at the helm for around 12 years. 12 YEARS. Any conditions they inherited have long since become irrelevant, and you know it.The current board is 100% responsible for the current state of the club. Both positive (we still have one) and negative (a patethically tiny squad mainly comprised of soon-to-retire 30 somethings and soon-to-leave teenage loanees, no player assets, and no signs of regeneration whatsoever.)If we survive this year, a total overhaul and change in financial strategy is needed. If not, it is literally only a matter of time before we sink to a level of unprecedented depths, from which we are unlikely to recover. Not unreasonable panic, but a reality.I only hope and pray the board realise what is at stake.

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="kdncfc"][quote user="jimmy500"][quote user="kdncfc"]

There is very little to choose between Chase and the current lot imo, both guilty of selling off the better players and replacing them with cheap rubbish, only difference is we are a division lower than we were in the Chase days. Don''t go for all this at least we''ve still got a club stuff either, the fact is that if we carry on how we have done for much longer we''ll end up in league 2, we won''t have a club left to support if that happens.

[/quote]

No, we were relegated under Chase so technically we are in the same division.

[/quote]We were relegated under Chase to this division but we''re now in serious danger of dropping to an even lower division, in fact our lowest position for over 40 years. Who''s to say it won''t get even worse if we carry on in the same vein.

We did have some bad times under Chase but we were competing at a higher level then and as well as finishing third in the league we reached 2 FA cup semis and won the milk cup and also qualified for europe on another occasion but were unable to participate due to the scousers misdemeanours at Heysel. We had debts of 6 million when he left,12 years on  we are nearly 20 million in debt and with a playing squad as weak as anything I''ve known since I started going to games in 1972.

[/quote]

We shouldn''t rewrite history just to make this board look worse than they are. Chase was responsible for the decline to this level. When he left in 1996 we were already struggling in this division and the club was in turmoil when the late great Geoffrey Watling brought his shares. At that point people like Gordon Bennett and Martin Armstrong helped steady a sinking ship and invited Delia Smith and Michael Wyn Jones onto the board. It was 2 years after that when Watling chose to sell his shares to Smith and Jones and if you remember that was the season where the club was at it''s lowest position for nearly 40 years. That was the season where we had just 46 points going into our last 4 games having not won in the previous 14 before being saved with those two 5-0 home wins.

So although we have slipped back after they dragged us back toward our former glorys there''s no way we can blame the decline from those European days on the present board.

 

[/quote]Ithink they all have to take a proportion of the blame tbh, Chase started the decline, the current board arrested that decline for a time but have now taken us back to a similar level as when Chase left but with over 3 times as much debt and a much better stadium. One thing that is certain  in my mind is that this board have taken us as far as they can just like Chase had all them years ago and it will be difficult or even nigh on impossible without a major cash injection either from inside or outside the club for us to progress.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

 

Interesting Gtg.  I do sometimes think, given the OTT reactions to even the most polite criticism and misleading statements, that the current lot are starting to match Chase in terms of over-inflated egos.  I also wonder if Chase would pass Delias` fit and proper person test......(not that i`d want him back!).

I remember Chase as someone who would pretty much say anything to back up his position, whether true or not, and having as his stated "ambition" for the club, being a nursery for the big clubs.  His driving motivations were selling players and making land/building deals, both of which involve large, complicated sums of money changing hands.......[^o)]  The man now runs a no-questions-asked cheque clearance company......

Any more news on the land development by the way?

[ricky knight 0]

And this board should not be made heroes because of Chase, they are Pathetic and should get out. Its only due to the modern day City fan being easily pleased they get away with being useless.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="jimmy500"][quote user="jas the barclay king"]

Having read Gunnys book it is interesting to see just how Generous Robert Chase was to the players and staff at the football club at the time.. he also seemed to be very well thought of....

jas :)

[/quote]

v.funny tongue in cheek post. (I hope)

[/quote]

Have you read Gunnys book? Nothing tongue in cheek about what i said.. the Players liked Chase and he was generous to them...

jas :)

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Jim Duffy"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Chase was responsible for the decline to this level.

 

[/quote]

Absolute rubbish. The current incumbents have been at the helm for around 12 years. 12 YEARS. [/quote]

Wrong. And absolute rubbish and you obviously don''t know it.

The club changed ownership in 1996 and again in 1998 which was the whole point of my post. This board then arrested the decline and lifted the club back up to a play off final followed by automatic promotion back to the Premiership.

The decline from 2005 to now can be completely blamed on the board. They have to be held responsible because they have been responsible. But the decline in the mid nineties cannot be. Rewriting history and blaming this board for things that happened before their time does nothing to help us in the present. Next time try reading my post before you rubbish it.

 

[BBFF 0]

Looking at both boards now there is little to choose between them.

 

FOOTBALL MUST COME FIRST

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Jim Duffy"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Chase was responsible for the decline to this level.

[/quote]

Absolute rubbish. The current incumbents have been at the helm for around 12 years. 12 YEARS. [/quote]

Wrong. And absolute rubbish and you obviously don''t know it.

The club changed ownership in 1996 and again in 1998 which was the whole point of my post. This board then arrested the decline and lifted the club back up to a play off final followed by automatic promotion back to the Premiership.

The decline from 2005 to now can be completely blamed on the board. They have to be held responsible because they have been responsible. But the decline in the mid nineties cannot be. Rewriting history and blaming this board for things that happened before their time does nothing to help us in the present. Next time try reading my post before you rubbish it.

[/quote]

nutty, I presume that you echo cousin Delias'' position. No wonder we''re up sh*t street.

It''s called being in denial!

But you really are a ''good and faithful servant''.

OTBC

 

[Paul Lamberts Disciple 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Jim Duffy"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Chase was responsible for the decline to this level.

 

[/quote]Absolute rubbish. The current incumbents have been at the helm for around 12 years. 12 YEARS. [/quote]

Wrong. And absolute rubbish and you obviously don''t know it.

The club changed ownership in 1996 and again in 1998 which was the whole point of my post. This board then arrested the decline and lifted the club back up to a play off final followed by automatic promotion back to the Premiership.

The decline from 2005 to now can be completely blamed on the board. They have to be held responsible because they have been responsible. But the decline in the mid nineties cannot be. Rewriting history and blaming this board for things that happened before their time does nothing to help us in the present. Next time try reading my post before you rubbish it.

 

[/quote]You said "the decline to THIS level". Well, fighting relegation to the third tier of English football is THIS level, in case you hadnt noticed. Chase is not responsible for that. The current board is. Very simple.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Jim Duffy"]
You said "the decline to THIS level". Well, fighting relegation to the third tier of English football is THIS level, in case you hadnt noticed. Chase is not responsible for that. The current board is. Very simple.
[/quote]

I said decline to this level because I meant decline to this level. The current owners brought this club at the end of the season where we were staring relegation in the face just as we are now. Sorry to repeat myself but you seem to have a hearing problem - toward the end of the 97/98 season we had just 46 points going into our last 4 games having not won in the previous 14 before being saved with those two 5-0 home wins. They then turned things around and finally got us back to the Premiership. We started the final game of that Premiership season outside the bottom 3 with our fate in our own hands. This was above fans expectations. However the defeat in the Fulham game and our subsequent fall back to where we are now was below our expectations and there is no hiding place for the current board regarding the decline from 2005 onwards.

Robert Chase was responsible for our decline in the 90''s, it''s well documented and I''ll explain it further if you want. This board is responsible for recovering from that but also our decline since 2005. It''s as simple as that and if you rubbish my post again maybe you would be good enough to back it up with more than hot air.

 

[Mello Yello 2,280]

Life under Robber Chase wasn''t that bad....Till he got ''found out''. I think his replacement''s are getting ''found out''.....

It just feels like we''ve gone in a large loop - and back to square ''uno''.......

Maybe we''re actually deeper in the financial ''cack'' - than folk maybe actually think we are.....

 

[vos 155]

Nutty. I really think you are nutty. Ok Chase may have had one bad year but you seem to be totally overlooking the many good years. How many provincial clubs could match his record ?? We did beat Bayern Munich away etc etc, or can''t you remember that. The club under him was not in desperate financial trouble it was more a case of the Bank getting nervous because of the protests etc.He was a great dealer in the transfer market. He may have been a bit dictatorial but he was a far better "football businessman" than the current regime who are led by a solicitor and PR man.

I accept the football world has changed considerably over recent years and it is not really possible to make true comparisions in many areas. Overall Chase put an enormous amount of time and effort into the club and if he enjoyed a few perks - so what.

 

[nutty nigel 7,509]

Vos, I never doubt that Robert Chase was a City fan. I have posted on here time and time again that I believe we have been lucky in that throughout my time as a fan the clubs owners have all been fans too. I maybe nutty and I don''t mind people saying it but I do have a good memory where as yours is, to be kind, selective. I can remember us winning in Munich in 1993 and I remember us winning at Old Trafford in 1967. The only point I have continually made on this thread is that when this board took over in 1998 we were already at the level we are today. They then turned it around for a few years getting us back to the Premiership before, and as Mello said 1998 to 2008 ia a big loop back to where we were. The demise this board is responsible for is that from 2005 to today. The demise in the mid nineties was down to Robert Chase and the mess that was left for the likes of Watling, Lockwood and Bennett to sort out.

 

[vos 155]

Nutty. OK Bayern Munich is a bit selective so I will go on. Did we not play in the Premiership/Div 1 for many years. Did we finish 4th one year. Did we reach two FA Cup Semi-Finals. Most importantly despite the transfer dealings we invariably improved and played entertaining attacking football. If it was not for Chase''s flour mill deal the Club would currently be some additional 5 million in debt i.e. bringing it up to around 27 million in all.

As I said before the football world has changed significantly over recent years and is it is now all about big money. I doubt if we will ever see the return of the "Chase Golden Years"

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="vos"]

Nutty. OK Bayern Munich is a bit selective so I will go on. Did we not play in the Premiership/Div 1 for many years. Did we finish 4th one year. Did we reach two FA Cup Semi-Finals. Most importantly despite the transfer dealings we invariably improved and played entertaining attacking football. If it was not for Chase''s flour mill deal the Club would currently be some additional 5 million in debt i.e. bringing it up to around 27 million in all.

As I said before the football world has changed significantly over recent years and is it is now all about big money. I doubt if we will ever see the return of the "Chase Golden Years"

[/quote]

This is all very well and good Vos. But if you read my posts I am saying that our fall from those days was nothing to do with the current board. Robert Chase engineered our down fall in the mid-nineties and left us in a mess that had to be sorted out by Geoffrey Watling, Martin Armstrong, Barry Lockwood and Gordon Bennett maybe others too but I don''t remember them all. At this time Delia Smith and Michael Wyn Jones were invited on the board in a similar way to the Turners were last year. In 1998 Geoffrey Watling sold the majority shareholding to Smith and Jones. Now the damage was already done by then Vos and the new owners then brought about a recovery that saw us stabilise and then reach the play-offs, just miss the play-offs and then win this division and get to the Premiership where we then got relegated in 2005. So despite everything you say to the contrary this board was not responsible for the fall from the "Chase Golden Years" Robert Chase himself was. This board were responsible for our recovery and return to the Premiership. Unfortunately they couldn''t sustain it and our now responsible for our decline from 2005 to where we are now.

Now I agree we did play some wonderful attacking football during the Chase years, especially when David Williams was first team coach. I believe the biggest of all the mistakes Chase made was when he allowed Williams to leave when Stringer resigned. Although we had a very succesfull season and a half under Walker I believe this was Williams legacy. However this is only my opinion where as the first part of my post is surely fact?

 

[vos 155]

Nutty. I am still having difficulty in following you. Can''t remember exactly how many years Chase was at the helm was it around 10 - 12 years. Anyway even accepting he had a bad final six months that still leaves several very good years. Any businessman with that sort of record would be considered to be absolutely marvellous.

The new regime have had plenty of time to sort things out. They have had a couple of good years and might (hopefully not) be on the brink of a very disastrous one. I can''t see why Chase should in any way be blamed for their performance. You are beginning to sound like the government blaming the Tories for the housing market cockup.

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="vos"]

Nutty. I am still having difficulty in following you. Can''t remember exactly how many years Chase was at the helm was it around 10 - 12 years. Anyway even accepting he had a bad final six months that still leaves several very good years. Any businessman with that sort of record would be considered to be absolutely marvellous.

[/quote]

See this just isn''t true Vos. Chase didn''t have just a bad final six months. The protests against Chase went on for a year after we were relegated before he finally left the club in the mother of all messes in 1996. However I still recognise the good he did and you won''t actually hear me criticising him for all the things that many do. I have always said he was a fan but he got it very wrong at the end. However, Chase and controversy were never far apart. He took over in controversial circumstances in 1985 and I remember a very hostile EGM being called when he sacked Ken Brown in 1987. There were protests throughout his time and his appointment of Mike Walker as manager back in the summer of 1992 was greeted with more derision from the fans than any other manager I remember. I still believe it was a mistake and that he should have fought to keep David Williams at the club. But for 18 months Walker did the business and the acrimony was forgotton.

You have difficulty following me because you assume I''m trying to exonerate the current board from the mess we are in now. That''s not the case. This board are responsible for are fall from grace since 2005. If you look to where I entered the thread it was to dispell the myth that when Chase left we were at a higher level than we are now. That''s not true.

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="vos"]

Nutty. I am still having difficulty in following you. Can''t remember exactly how many years Chase was at the helm was it around 10 - 12 years. Anyway even accepting he had a bad final six months that still leaves several very good years. Any businessman with that sort of record would be considered to be absolutely marvellous.

The new regime have had plenty of time to sort things out. They have had a couple of good years and might (hopefully not) be on the brink of a very disastrous one. I can''t see why Chase should in any way be blamed for their performance. You are beginning to sound like the government blaming the Tories for the housing market cockup.

[/quote]

It''s called dis - connect.

Uncureable, I''m afraid.

Shame, such a nice chap really. .

OTBC

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="King Juan of Spain"]

Which meant that under Delia, we''ve never had any money

[/quote]

 

YOU MUST BE JOKING!

What about the millions received in The Premiership season and the two parachute receipts?

 

IT''s THE TEAM, STUPID!

 

 

 

 

[corbs 0]

The reason why I am a Delia fan is because I remember the CHASE ERA only to well. I thought Sir Arthur was bad until ''he''s fat he''s round'' took over! 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="corbs"]The reason why I am a Delia fan is because I remember the CHASE ERA only to well. I thought Sir Arthur was bad until ''he''s fat he''s round'' took over! [/quote]

Chips?

Shoulders?

Who in their right mind would prefer to see City playing in the 2nd tier rather than the top tier - with a couple of cup runs and European adventures thrown in?

OTBC

[Wings 0]

Was the Chase era really that bad? Yes. Is this era any better? IMO, not much.

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="King Juan of Spain"]

Under Chase we were in the black.

Then he left us in the red.

Which meant that under Delia, we''ve never had any money

But at least we haven''t gone bust.

End of story.

[/quote]Under Delia we have a turnover 5 or 6 times as much as when Chase was here, we have three times the debt but at least we haven''t gone bust yet, but they''re working on that one, watch this space.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="King Juan of Spain"]

Which meant that under Delia, we''ve never had any money

[/quote]

Actually under Delia we''ve had a combined turnover of more than £150,000,000.

Of which approximately 3% is currently invested in our first team. (And that''s assuming we got a generous £5m if we sold them all and seeing as how half don''t even belong to us and two of our best are set for retirement at the end of this season how we''d ever get £5m for the team is beyond me. Value our team at a more realistic £2.5m saleable value and the percentage of turnover reinvested in the current squad drops to under two percent.

 One can only speculate where we might be now if we''d set a sensible and moderate figure such as 10% of turnover to be available for transfers each year. I don''t know which business model this Club is following but if it were made by Airfix I''d be taking it back to the shop complaining thereare several very important parts missing.

 

 

 

 

[king canary 7,578]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

[quote user="corbs"]The reason why I am a Delia fan is because I remember the CHASE ERA only to well. I thought Sir Arthur was bad until ''he''s fat he''s round'' took over! [/quote]

Chips?

Shoulders?

Who in their right mind would prefer to see City playing in the 2nd tier rather than the top tier - with a couple of cup runs and European adventures thrown in?

OTBC

[/quote]

 

And who was it under that we came to this level?

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="Properly not Property"][

Of which approximately 3% is currently invested in our first team. (And that''s assuming we got a generous £5m if we sold them all and seeing as how half don''t even belong to us and two of our best are set for retirement at the end of this season how we''d ever get £5m for the team is beyond me. Value our team at a more realistic £2.5m saleable value and the percentage of turnover reinvested in the current squad drops to under two percent.

 

[/quote]

Do you honestly believe this?

 

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

[quote user="corbs"]The reason why I am a Delia fan is because I remember the CHASE ERA only to well. I thought Sir Arthur was bad until ''he''s fat he''s round'' took over! [/quote]

Chips?

Shoulders?

Who in their right mind would prefer to see City playing in the 2nd tier rather than the top tier - with a couple of cup runs and European adventures thrown in?

OTBC

[/quote]

THAT WAS 15 YEARS AGO.