The Iversen Fiasco

[Camuldonum 0]

Perhaps you will hear the Norwich City side eventually.  The Rosenborg stuff is twaddle.

[Grumpy Old Blogger 0]

So how long will it be before our manager throws his toys out of the cot and turns on his paymasters? He has handed out a public flogging to the lad who, just a few weeks ago, was the best thing since sliced Huckerby and now he learns that, despite his assurance to a press conference a week ago, the hold up in the transfer of Iverson would be financial even if they did want to sell him (which they apparently don’t).

 

Presumably finances are organised away from the playing side and an offer was made for the player. The world was informed that the only hold up was that they had not kept their word to the player. Sort that out and it’s plain sailing on the old Newcastle ferry, a drive down the A1, turn left and Robert, as they say, is your mother’s brother. It seems not. So, who got it wrong? Rosenborg? Unlikely, they never accepted the offer in the first place so they say – and why would they lie about that as they have said they won’t sell anyway. Glenn Roeder? His statement was quite unequivocal – it’s not a financial issue.  Maybe it’s our negotiators at board level then. Maybe Rosenborg aren’t the only ones not keeping their word here. They must have known if they had an offer accepted or not. Clearly not. So why was the manager under the impression that he only had to convince them to keep their word?

 

I don’t suppose Steffen Iverson has any particular affinity to Norwich so can anyone else see this getting resolved this week by one of the many clubs above us in the Championship table meeting Rosenborg’s valuation and the player getting his wish to move to England. If so where would that leave us? More loans? Or will our manager finally have had enough and take the long walk quoting liberally from the Bruce Rioch leaving speech. There are a disturbing number of similarities – both respected managers whose record didn’t quite merit their attitude, both starting to get a side together (weren’t we 6^th when Rioch left?). Oh, and wasn’t there a guy called O’Neill who walked for exactly the same reason.

 

Now for the really worrying bit – if he does walk he has not only assembled a whole new team many of whom came to work with him (or so he thinks) he has also completely changed the backroom team so that it now really is Team Glenn……and if the team leader goes…..

[the shark 0]

imo whats going to happen,the transfer window will close,the board will say we tried etc etc.now go and get some rubbish cf  on loan..

[ron obvious 1,502]

Oh Goody! It''s copy & paste time

Grumpy Old Blogger wrote:  He has handed out a public flogging to the lad Perr- leease.   and now he learns that, despite his assurance to a press conference a week ago, the hold up in the transfer of Iverson would be financial even if they did want to sell him (which they apparently don’t).   So why was he so sure he had him?   . So, who got it wrong? Rosenborg? Unlikely, they never accepted the offer in the first place so they say – and why would they lie about that as they have said they won’t sell anyway. Read the article. Nowhere do they say they didn''t accept an offer - in the past. They''re saying he is now too valuable to them as they cannot get a replacement. I was told they were getting a replacement, but it looks like they''ve failed. They must have known if they had an offer accepted or not. Clearly not. So why was the manager under the impression that he only had to convince them to keep their word? See above. I don’t suppose Steffen Iverson has any particular affinity to Norwich so can anyone else see this getting resolved this week by one of the many clubs above us in the Championship table meeting Rosenborg’s valuation and the player getting his wish to move to England. Quite conceivable. There are a disturbing number of similarities – both respected managers whose record didn’t quite merit their attitude, both starting to get a side together (weren’t we 6th when Rioch left?). Oh, and wasn’t there a guy called O’Neill who walked for exactly the same reason.   The similarities are predicated on the supposition that the Board are stitching Roeder up. You are evidently longing for this to be the case. Nothing in the above provides any evidence for this. It won''t stop you trying, though.

[Empty Mirror 0]

There seems to be an assumption that Rosenborg''s statement is a disinterested account of some higher truth. But disinterested they''re not. Very often when people start issuing gratuitous press releases to the effect that "It''s all over, there''s no way we''d do a deal now" it''s merely the public posturing that precedes the final (private) negotiation, designed to get the very best price. Tottenham''s "We''ll keep our £30million pound striker in the reserves rather than sell at your price" may fall into the same category. So, there may still be mileage in the Iverson saga (though I have to say that this Summer''s search for a striker doesn''t encourage me to keep hoping). But, either way, to assume that Rosenborg''s self serving statements are the gospel truth may be naive.

[Branston Pickle 3,654]

The thing is that people will automatically assume all elements of these (negative) rumours are true if Iversen doesn''t sign now, whereas the truth could well be different.  At the end of the day, the deal has been looking rocky for some time now; Roeder clearly expected to have his man here by now but the club he is at have been difficult - that is clear for all to see.  There may well also be disagreements over finances involved in the mix, but to me that is and has not been the main factor - which is that Rosenborg want to keep their player.   

It seems to me that there was always a strong possibility of it not happening well before any of these rumours came up. IMO there is no reason to believe every element to the rumours if we don''t get the guy...I''m not saying that they aren''t true, merely that they aren''t necessarily completely true.

 

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

The thing is that people will automatically assume all elements of these (negative) rumours are true if Iversen doesn''t sign now, whereas the truth could well be different.  At the end of the day, the deal has been looking rocky for some time now; Roeder clearly expected to have his man here by now but the club he is at have been difficult - that is clear for all to see.  There may well also be disagreements over finances involved in the mix, but to me that is and has not been the main factor - which is that Rosenborg want to keep their player.   

It seems to me that there was always a strong possibility of it not happening well before any of these rumours came up. IMO there is no reason to believe every element to the rumours if we don''t get the guy...I''m not saying that they aren''t true, merely that they aren''t necessarily completely true.

 

[/quote]

I believe this is still an ongoing situation and for that reason I don''t want to say too much but you might all ask yourselves why Rosenborg (who received the Norwich offer some weeks ago) did not *then* say it was unsatisfactory rather than leaving it to the last week of the transfer season.  Also the Director of Sport was the very same who assured the player that if a team outside of Scandinavia came in for him they would not stand in his way, something he apparently either forgot to mention to the EDP or they forgot to print.  Whatever.

Unfortunately the arrangements with Iversen were verbal only and the agent Rodney U-Plonkersson didn''t get them written in the contract..........

Rosenborg did their best to block Fredrik Stoor last month....and that WAS written in the contract.  Ask Fulham what they think of them.....

For all I know there are faults at the Norwich end but, good story though it would be for the EDP,  I think it a little early to be blaming Delia, Doncaster or Roeder for the current situation. "At this moment in time" as Nige might have put it.

 

 

 

 

 

[yellow hammer 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Branston Pickle"]

The thing is that people will automatically assume all elements of these (negative) rumours are true if Iversen doesn''t sign now, whereas the truth could well be different.  At the end of the day, the deal has been looking rocky for some time now; Roeder clearly expected to have his man here by now but the club he is at have been difficult - that is clear for all to see.  There may well also be disagreements over finances involved in the mix, but to me that is and has not been the main factor - which is that Rosenborg want to keep their player.   

It seems to me that there was always a strong possibility of it not happening well before any of these rumours came up. IMO there is no reason to believe every element to the rumours if we don''t get the guy...I''m not saying that they aren''t true, merely that they aren''t necessarily completely true.

 

[/quote]

I believe this is still an ongoing situation and for that reason I don''t want to say too much but you might all ask yourselves why Rosenborg (who received the Norwich offer some weeks ago) did not *then* say it was unsatisfactory rather than leaving it to the last week of the transfer season.  Also the Director of Sport was the very same who assured the player that if a team outside of Scandinavia came in for him they would not stand in his way, something he apparently either forgot to mention to the EDP or they forgot to print.  Whatever.

Unfortunately the arrangements with Iversen were verbal only and the agent Rodney U-Plonkersson didn''t get them written in the contract..........

Rosenborg did their best to block Fredrik Stoor last month....and that WAS written in the contract.  Ask Fulham what they think of them.....

For all I know there are faults at the Norwich end but, good story though it would be for the EDP,  I think it a little early to be blaming Delia, Doncaster or Roeder for the current situation. "At this moment in time" as Nige might have put it.

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Cam, I am quite surprised by your categorical dismissmal of the rumours, earlier in this thread. You certainly haven''t left yourself any room to manoeuvre.

[quote] No, that is totally and utterly untrue regarding Iversen.  We have an "in" on the Iversen situation and that is completely wrong.....However, I can say your information  on Iversen is totally incorrect

[/quote]

Is the source of your "in" the Norwich City Press Department by any chance? If this is the case then it is hardly surprising they would claim otherwise. If you''ve been chatting to Roeder then perhaps it was just wishful thinking on his part?

 Surely, as journalist  you need to have an equally valid "in" at Rosenbourg if you''re really interested in getting to the truth?

Perhaps those who were in such a hurry to dump on the OP, need to slow down a little bit.

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="yellow hammer"]

Is the source of your "in" the Norwich City Press Department by any chance? If this is the case then it is hardly surprising they would claim otherwise. If you''ve been chatting to Roeder then perhaps it was just wishful thinking on his part?

 Surely, as journalist  you need to have an equally valid "in" at Rosenbourg if you''re really interested in getting to the truth?

Perhaps those who were in such a hurry to dump on the OP, need to slow down a little bit.

[/quote]Thing is, my ''in'' is - & has been for a month - saying exactly the same thing. Since they are completely different sources the case for this being close to the truth is strengthened. Also, you are making assumptions about Cam''s confidant(s); you obviously have little regard for his journalistic nous if you think he would take their word on trust. I think he''s been around a bit too long to be that naive.

[paul ncfc 0]

Is it just my wishful thinking Ron,or do you  think that this potential deal is far from dead ?

[ron obvious 1,502]

I wish I knew. It seems all very confused down there at the moment. From what I understand,  I don''t think Steff did himself any favours with the International cock-up.One thing I''m certain of is that he wants to be in England!

[paul ncfc 0]

I keep checking Newsnow for snippets and the Rosenborg website and thought things were on the move with the signing of Berisha plus the interest in Prica,but the goalposts move quicker than when Jamie takes a penalty at the moment!It just depends on the result Thursday night now,by the way was it Djurgaardens who signed Jonson?

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="yellow hammer"][quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Branston Pickle"]

The thing is that people will automatically assume all elements of these (negative) rumours are true if Iversen doesn''t sign now, whereas the truth could well be different.  At the end of the day, the deal has been looking rocky for some time now; Roeder clearly expected to have his man here by now but the club he is at have been difficult - that is clear for all to see.  There may well also be disagreements over finances involved in the mix, but to me that is and has not been the main factor - which is that Rosenborg want to keep their player.   

It seems to me that there was always a strong possibility of it not happening well before any of these rumours came up. IMO there is no reason to believe every element to the rumours if we don''t get the guy...I''m not saying that they aren''t true, merely that they aren''t necessarily completely true.

 

[/quote]

I believe this is still an ongoing situation and for that reason I don''t want to say too much but you might all ask yourselves why Rosenborg (who received the Norwich offer some weeks ago) did not *then* say it was unsatisfactory rather than leaving it to the last week of the transfer season.  Also the Director of Sport was the very same who assured the player that if a team outside of Scandinavia came in for him they would not stand in his way, something he apparently either forgot to mention to the EDP or they forgot to print.  Whatever.

Unfortunately the arrangements with Iversen were verbal only and the agent Rodney U-Plonkersson didn''t get them written in the contract..........

Rosenborg did their best to block Fredrik Stoor last month....and that WAS written in the contract.  Ask Fulham what they think of them.....

For all I know there are faults at the Norwich end but, good story though it would be for the EDP,  I think it a little early to be blaming Delia, Doncaster or Roeder for the current situation. "At this moment in time" as Nige might have put it.

 

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Cam, I am quite surprised by your categorical dismissmal of the rumours, earlier in this thread. You certainly haven''t left yourself any room to manoeuvre.

[quote] No, that is totally and utterly untrue regarding Iversen.  We have an "in" on the Iversen situation and that is completely wrong.....However, I can say your information  on Iversen is totally incorrect

[/quote]

Is the source of your "in" the Norwich City Press Department by any chance? If this is the case then it is hardly surprising they would claim otherwise. If you''ve been chatting to Roeder then perhaps it was just wishful thinking on his part?

 Surely, as journalist  you need to have an equally valid "in" at Rosenbourg if you''re really interested in getting to the truth?

Perhaps those who were in such a hurry to dump on the OP, need to slow down a little bit.

[/quote]

None of it comes from Norwich - all from the other side plus Fulham as to what they are like to deal with. Norwich City press office have not said a word about the Iversen situation.  All questions are met with the standard: "We never comment on transfer speculation." whether it is Iversen or anyone else.

[Badger 0]

So basically, they are holding us to ransom over this. Should we stand for it...?

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="Badger"]

So basically, they are holding us to ransom over this. Should we stand for it...?

[/quote]

Anybody got a spare long boat and a few horned helmets?

Fancy a bit of pillage, can''t remember what else it was the Danes did[6] but it would be good to raid some Scandinavians back.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="Badger"]

So basically, they are holding us to ransom over this. Should we stand for it...?

[/quote]

Anybody got a spare long boat and a few horned helmets?

Fancy a bit of pillage, can''t remember what else it was the Danes did[6] but it would be good to raid some Scandinavians back.

[/quote]

Go for it,Butler,and bring back the bacon!!  : )