Robert Chase

[BigFish 2,282]

Every now and again someone (usually Bly) tries to rehabilitate the reputation of the old fat controller. For me the bete noir of popular memory far overstates how bad he was, but at the same time these were not some kind of golden years. For younger posters it is worth pointing out that we never won anything (execpt the Division 2 championship) under his tenure. The club was resonably well placed (even though in Div 2) having just won its first (and only) significant trophy when he first came to the chair and he was able to follow a buy cheap sell expensive policy for a number of years helped by a flow of youth players and the capability the club had to promote managers from within (Brown/Stringer/Walker).

But whatever reason something died within the club during his reign. There was a strange kind of attitude shift amongst the fans where the claim to have stood in Carrow Road during the protests makes you a better fan who cares more. I don''t remember the same level of vitriol pre-Chase or the desire to protest at the drop of the hat or even anyone claiming City were a big club. The grumbles were still there but kept in proportion.

Now this change may have other causes: the Sky money, Hillsborough and all seater stadiums but I for one would like to get back the club back to a point where the focus is on the pitch.

[Robert N. LiM 6,292]

I think your last sentence nails it. it is much more difficult for clubs like us to succeed these days. One by one they''re dropping out of the Premiership - Norwich, Ipswich, Coventry, Southampton, Leicester - clubs who get around 20,000 fans and are the only club in a medium-sized city. They''re being replaced by clubs with sugar daddies - Middlesbrough, Blackburn, Fulham, Reading, Wigan, etc.So frustrated fans of these clubs are bound to look for reasons for that failure. Hence all the poring through clubs'' accounts, slagging off the board, etc. Undoubtedly serious mistakes have been made since promotion to the Prem. But West Brom went up with us - they''ve done much better, surviving for an extra year, going down, reaching the play-off final and now getting promoted again. Next year, five years after the year they were promoted with us, they will again be looking just to survive. That''s all they can realistically hope for. In contrast, when we won the old Second Division in 1986 we finished fifth in the top flight the following year.Football has changed beyond recognition since Chase''s day, almost entirely for the worse.

[Berkshire Canary 12]

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"]I think your last sentence nails it. it is much more difficult for clubs like us to succeed these days. One by one they''re dropping out of the Premiership - Norwich, Ipswich, Coventry, Southampton, Leicester - clubs who get around 20,000 fans and are the only club in a medium-sized city. They''re being replaced by clubs with sugar daddies - Middlesbrough, Blackburn, Fulham, Reading, Wigan, etc.

So frustrated fans of these clubs are bound to look for reasons for that failure. Hence all the poring through clubs'' accounts, slagging off the board, etc. Undoubtedly serious mistakes have been made since promotion to the Prem. But West Brom went up with us - they''ve done much better, surviving for an extra year, going down, reaching the play-off final and now getting promoted again. Next year, five years after the year they were promoted with us, they will again be looking just to survive. That''s all they can realistically hope for. In contrast, when we won the old Second Division in 1986 we finished fifth in the top flight the following year.

Football has changed beyond recognition since Chase''s day, almost entirely for the worse.


[/quote]

 

I agree completely, the problem is the state of football is going to carry on changing for the worse, can''t see any way back. [:(]

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]I agree completely, the problem is the state of football is going to carry on changing for the worse, can''t see any way back. [/quote]

Nah, there''s nothing to it.  All we need to do is find a billionaire investor with 150 million or so burning a hole in their back-pocket.  Ask anyone in here and they''ll tell you that people like that are ten a penny...

[canary cherub 1]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]I agree completely, the problem is the state of football is going to carry on changing for the worse, can''t see any way back. [/quote]

Nah, there''s nothing to it.  All we need to do is find a billionaire investor with 150 million or so burning a hole in their back-pocket.  Ask anyone in here and they''ll tell you that people like that are ten a penny...

[/quote]

Shades of meaning may not be your bag blah, but hyperbole most certainly is . . .

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="Fat Prophet"]Shades of meaning may not be your bag blah, but hyperbole most certainly is . . .

[/quote]

Very kind FP, quite the nicest feint praise I''ve been damned with today.

have you answered my question yet on the other thread ?  I''m really keen to find out what Hucks meant when he said it was nothing personal, and that there were no hidden agendas...

[We Love You Huckerby 0]

This is why we need to demonstrate, we got through one bad time through demonstrating (chase) and now I feel it''s time for another to get our beloved club back on the straight and narrow on the road to the premiership.

[InLambertWeTrust! 0]

WE WANT CHASE BACK, WE WANT CHASE BACK [^o)]

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Now if we want to go back to the days when the focus was on the pitch we need to look a bit further back than Chase. Sir Arthur South would be your man. He took over in 1973, fell out with Ron Saunders who had guided the club to the first division for the first time on what can only described as a shoestring budget from Geoffrey Watling. I have never known a time where there was so much investment on football. In came John Bond, Ken Brown, Ted Macdougal, Mel Machin, Phil Boyer, John Sissons,Mick McGuire, martin Peters, Tony Powell, Colin Sullivan, David Jones, Jimmy Neighbour, Kevin Reeves, Martin Chivers, John McDowell and Alan Taylor  to name but a few. Not always for big fees but players of that calibre must have cost a fortune and I don''t remember them being financed by any big money departures. That is until we built the new Riverend and Kevin Reeves was sold for 1m. But then in the 80''s we still brought quality players into the club. Notably Martin O''Neill, Joe Royle, John Deehan, Chris Woods, Mick Channon and Steve Bruce but Justin Fashanu also went for 1m. Anyway, the point I am making and have been meaning to for a while is that I believe Sir Arthur South''s board was the only one in my time to truely put football first but he suffered loads of protesting and fan pressure too. His years were probably the golden years for football and we won a trophy too. But don''t tell Bly.

 

[Mr.Carrow 394]

[quote user="BigFish"]

Every now and again someone (usually Bly) tries to rehabilitate the reputation of the old fat controller. For me the bete noir of popular memory far overstates how bad he was, but at the same time these were not some kind of golden years. For younger posters it is worth pointing out that we never won anything (execpt the Division 2 championship) under his tenure. The club was resonably well placed (even though in Div 2) having just won its first (and only) significant trophy when he first came to the chair and he was able to follow a buy cheap sell expensive policy for a number of years helped by a flow of youth players and the capability the club had to promote managers from within (Brown/Stringer/Walker).

But whatever reason something died within the club during his reign. There was a strange kind of attitude shift amongst the fans where the claim to have stood in Carrow Road during the protests makes you a better fan who cares more. I don''t remember the same level of vitriol pre-Chase or the desire to protest at the drop of the hat or even anyone claiming City were a big club. The grumbles were still there but kept in proportion.

Now this change may have other causes: the Sky money, Hillsborough and all seater stadiums but I for one would like to get back the club back to a point where the focus is on the pitch.

[/quote]

If the boards focus was on the pitch there wouldn`t be the vitriol..........

[BigFish 2,282]

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

Every now and again someone (usually Bly) tries to rehabilitate the reputation of the old fat controller. For me the bete noir of popular memory far overstates how bad he was, but at the same time these were not some kind of golden years. For younger posters it is worth pointing out that we never won anything (execpt the Division 2 championship) under his tenure. The club was resonably well placed (even though in Div 2) having just won its first (and only) significant trophy when he first came to the chair and he was able to follow a buy cheap sell expensive policy for a number of years helped by a flow of youth players and the capability the club had to promote managers from within (Brown/Stringer/Walker).

But whatever reason something died within the club during his reign. There was a strange kind of attitude shift amongst the fans where the claim to have stood in Carrow Road during the protests makes you a better fan who cares more. I don''t remember the same level of vitriol pre-Chase or the desire to protest at the drop of the hat or even anyone claiming City were a big club. The grumbles were still there but kept in proportion.

Now this change may have other causes: the Sky money, Hillsborough and all seater stadiums but I for one would like to get back the club back to a point where the focus is on the pitch.

[/quote]

If the boards focus was on the pitch there wouldn`t be the vitriol..........

[/quote]

You think so Mr Carrow? I don''t think that the board could ever satisfy the protesting element now it is unleashed.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

If the boards focus was on the pitch there wouldn`t be the vitriol..........

[/quote]

Sir Arthurs focus was on the pitch but he still got the vitriol..........

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]If the boards focus was on the pitch there wouldn`t be the vitriol..........[/quote]

For some people it doesn''t matter how many mattresses you put down, they will always feel the pea.

[Mr.Carrow 394]

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

Every now and again someone (usually Bly) tries to rehabilitate the reputation of the old fat controller. For me the bete noir of popular memory far overstates how bad he was, but at the same time these were not some kind of golden years. For younger posters it is worth pointing out that we never won anything (execpt the Division 2 championship) under his tenure. The club was resonably well placed (even though in Div 2) having just won its first (and only) significant trophy when he first came to the chair and he was able to follow a buy cheap sell expensive policy for a number of years helped by a flow of youth players and the capability the club had to promote managers from within (Brown/Stringer/Walker).

But whatever reason something died within the club during his reign. There was a strange kind of attitude shift amongst the fans where the claim to have stood in Carrow Road during the protests makes you a better fan who cares more. I don''t remember the same level of vitriol pre-Chase or the desire to protest at the drop of the hat or even anyone claiming City were a big club. The grumbles were still there but kept in proportion.

Now this change may have other causes: the Sky money, Hillsborough and all seater stadiums but I for one would like to get back the club back to a point where the focus is on the pitch.

[/quote]

If the boards focus was on the pitch there wouldn`t be the vitriol..........

[/quote]

You think so Mr Carrow? I don''t think that the board could ever satisfy the protesting element now it is unleashed.

[/quote]

Yeah, because the fans have been SO quick to turn haven`t they......?  [8-)]

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 

[Robert N. LiM 6,292]

Shades of nuanced greyAre black and white zebra''s stripesTo poor old Bly Bly.

[Plastic Scouser 0]

I have to admit, life did seem a lot sunnier under Fat Bob''s reign...whilst we always sold, we somehow always seemed to unearth another gem or pick up a workmanlike player from one of the other teams who subsequently turned into a mainstay of the team...or am I looking back at the team of my youth through rose tinted specs?

[Jerzy Krukowski 5]

[quote user="Plastic Scouser"]I have to admit, life did seem a lot sunnier under Fat Bob''s reign...whilst we always sold, we somehow always seemed to unearth another gem or pick up a workmanlike player from one of the other teams who subsequently turned into a mainstay of the team...or am I looking back at the team of my youth through rose tinted specs?[/quote] I agree things seemed rosier for much of the time, but we were still seen as little old Norwich just as much then though and indeed apart from a few golden years we were a yoyo side. I was more furious at the sale of Reeves, Sutton and Fox than Hucks, maybe thats age for you. Its harsh to blame all of this on the board IMO, football has been highjacked by the rich in all senses and the majority of us are paying for it. Sadly i can feel my interest waning as the years go by. and our chances of competing in any real sense of the word disappear........[:(]

[First Wazzock 1,014]

[quote user="SPat"][quote user="Plastic Scouser"]I have to admit, life did seem a lot sunnier under Fat Bob''s reign...whilst we always sold, we somehow always seemed to unearth another gem or pick up a workmanlike player from one of the other teams who subsequently turned into a mainstay of the team...or am I looking back at the team of my youth through rose tinted specs?
[/quote]

 I agree things seemed rosier for much of the time, but we were still seen as little old Norwich just as much then though and indeed apart from a few golden years we were a yoyo side. I was more furious at the sale of Reeves, Sutton and Fox than Hucks, maybe thats age for you. Its harsh to blame all of this on the board IMO, football has been highjacked by the rich in all senses and the majority of us are paying for it. Sadly i can feel my interest waning as the years go by. and our chances of competing in any real sense of the word disappear........[:(]
[/quote]

Exactly how I feel

[arrdee 2]

[quote user="Steve Burns"]

[quote user="SPat"][quote user="Plastic Scouser"]I have to admit, life did seem a lot sunnier under Fat Bob''s reign...whilst we always sold, we somehow always seemed to unearth another gem or pick up a workmanlike player from one of the other teams who subsequently turned into a mainstay of the team...or am I looking back at the team of my youth through rose tinted specs?
[/quote]

 I agree things seemed rosier for much of the time, but we were still seen as little old Norwich just as much then though and indeed apart from a few golden years we were a yoyo side. I was more furious at the sale of Reeves, Sutton and Fox than Hucks, maybe thats age for you. Its harsh to blame all of this on the board IMO, football has been highjacked by the rich in all senses and the majority of us are paying for it. Sadly i can feel my interest waning as the years go by. and our chances of competing in any real sense of the word disappear........[:(]
[/quote]

Exactly how I feel

[/quote]

Yep exactly how I feel Steve , I have I feel started to drift away from this board , I think I have just about had enough of it now the Free Bet has ended, shame, arrdee[:(]  

[BigFish 2,282]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[alex_ncfc 686]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

Hmm and remind me how many years we''ve spent in the top flight under Smith

[arrdee 2]

Now you lovely old boys , let me think ,  Robert Chase , yes lovely old boy , err... yes I remember him well ... one hell of a right back . I loved to see a left winger try to take him on , and when Bob had cleared him up into the crowd he would look down on him and say "You have no stomach for a fight " and "I am putting you on the back burner" , what a player he was , never will forget him . wonderful. [;)] arrdee.   

                                   

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="alex_ncfc"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

Hmm and remind me how many years we''ve spent in the top flight under Smith

[/quote]

Exactly so Alex.

OTBC

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

FFS, stop joking.

Fail 0/10.

Bottom of the class.

OTBC

 

[macdougalls perm 0]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

FFS, stop joking.

Fail 0/10.

Bottom of the class.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Easy now Robert, or Cluck, or whatever your name is.

[mr carra 0]

[quote user="alex_ncfc"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

Hmm and remind me how many years we''ve spent in the top flight under Smith

[/quote]

 

Sorry, but the Premiership has changed all that for clubs like us (and Leicester and Saints and Coventry and Ipswich etc etc). It was designed to load the dice against us. The fact that we have spent less time in the Prem under Delia says nothing whatsoever about the relative merits of the Boards concerned and everything about the changing nature of football.  If that isn''t obvious to you then you don''t know anything about football and are clearly posting on the wrong message board. If Chase had been in charge for the last 10 years we would be bankrupt and in League 1 (maybe League 2) and would have been for years.  In fact, he rather notably bankrupted us when the financial odds WEREN''T stacked against us to the extent that they are now.

[BigFish 2,282]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

FFS, stop joking.

Fail 0/10.

Bottom of the class.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Lol. Please list all the trophies, silver ware, championships won , Cup finals won etc etc under Chase.

Was that one second division championship Bly.

Do the same for Smith.

Is that one second division championship.

Is that the same?

You really crack me up Bly, well done [:D]

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

FFS, stop joking.

Fail 0/10.

Bottom of the class.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Lol. Please list all the trophies, silver ware, championships won , Cup finals won etc etc under Chase.

Was that one second division championship Bly.

Do the same for Smith.

Is that one second division championship.

Is that the same?

You really crack me up Bly, well done [:D]

[/quote]

South, Watling and Chase kept us substantially in the top tier, and often looking up.

Smith has kept us substantially in the second tier and often looking down.

You''re in denial BigFish, your sad attempts to make spurious points are obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense.

Mais, c''est la vie.

OTBC

 

 

 

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="BigFish"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Boo![:)]

Watling, South and Chase were winners.

Smith is a loser.

End of story.

OTBC

 [/quote]

Chase won no more than Smith.[:P]

QED

[/quote]

FFS, stop joking.

Fail 0/10.

Bottom of the class.

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Lol. Please list all the trophies, silver ware, championships won , Cup finals won etc etc under Chase.

Was that one second division championship Bly.

Do the same for Smith.

Is that one second division championship.

Is that the same?

You really crack me up Bly, well done [:D]

[/quote]

South, Watling and Chase kept us substantially in the top tier, and often looking up.

Smith has kept us substantially in the second tier and often looking down.

You''re in denial BigFish, your sad attempts to make spurious points are obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense.

Mais, c''est la vie.

OTBC