HUCKERBY

[John 0]

[quote user="Beaker"][quote user="Huddy "]

[quote user="Beaker"]

but basically they were put off by his wage[/quote]

or the factthat Huckerby would never have joined them in a million years?!

[/quote]

not when they were in the prem and we were languishing?

[/quote]EEERRRRRRR, he rejected an approach from Liverpool in our Premiership season! He also turned down Celtic in his prime, and Sunderland and Wigan Athletic in his latter years, i think he''d have absolutely NO problem turning down Sheffield United!He''s a massive fan of City now, and the last thing he would ever have would done is turn his back on the club. He loves us to the utmost, and it''s just a shame that we were the ones that turned our backs on him in the end....Like Roy Keane said during the Ronaldo saga "It''s no good saying players these days aren''t loyal to their club, cos it works both ways"

[AndyJR 0]

[quote user="John"][quote user="Beaker"][quote user="Huddy "]

[quote user="Beaker"]

but basically they were put off by his wage[/quote]

or the factthat Huckerby would never have joined them in a million years?!

[/quote]

not when they were in the prem and we were languishing?

[/quote]EEERRRRRRR, he rejected an approach from Liverpool in our Premiership season! He also turned down Celtic in his prime, and Sunderland and Wigan Athletic in his latter years, i think he''d have absolutely NO problem turning down Sheffield United!He''s a massive fan of City now, and the last thing he would ever have would done is turn his back on the club. He loves us to the utmost, and it''s just a shame that we were the ones that turned our backs on him in the end....Like Roy Keane said during the Ronaldo saga "It''s no good saying players these days aren''t loyal to their club, cos it works both ways"[/quote]Well said John.

[The Saturday Boy 0]

[quote user="AndyJR"][quote user="The Saturday Boy"][quote user="AndyJR"][quote user="The Saturday Boy"][quote user="AndyJR"]I think it''s almost been universally agreed that Roeder simply made an error of judgment where Huck''s was concerned. [/quote]err... no it''s not. he was a great player in his prime but is well past it now. turned it on only a few times last season and even if he would''ve taken a pay-cut would still been our best paid player, and we''ve probably got two or three players by saving his wages. It was the correct decision in my book, but could''ve been handled better to give the fans a chance to say a proper goodbye.[/quote]Am I the only person he didn''t tell, what he was paid whilst at Norwich?[/quote]Am I the only person you didn''t ask when you got your ''universal'' agreement that Glenn was wrong?[/quote]''almost universally''.  [/quote]So I was the only person you didn''t ask, and everyone else agreed with you then? Or are your opinions so good that you just assume people will agree with you. I know many a fellow fan who doesn''t.

[AndyJR 0]

[quote user="The Saturday Boy"][quote user="AndyJR"][quote user="The Saturday Boy"][quote user="AndyJR"][quote user="The Saturday Boy"][quote user="AndyJR"]I think it''s almost been universally agreed that Roeder simply made an error of judgment where Huck''s was concerned. [/quote]err... no it''s not. he was a great player in his prime but is well past it now. turned it on only a few times last season and even if he would''ve taken a pay-cut would still been our best paid player, and we''ve probably got two or three players by saving his wages. It was the correct decision in my book, but could''ve been handled better to give the fans a chance to say a proper goodbye.[/quote]Am I the only person he didn''t tell, what he was paid whilst at Norwich?[/quote]Am I the only person you didn''t ask when you got your ''universal'' agreement that Glenn was wrong?[/quote]''almost universally''.  [/quote]So I was the only person you didn''t ask, and everyone else agreed with you then? Or are your opinions so good that you just assume people will agree with you. I know many a fellow fan who doesn''t.[/quote]Nope evidently not everyone agrees and my statement was therefore incorrect.  I certainly don''t consider my opinions to be any more valid than any other fan, hope that helps.

[ca 1]

[quote user="Beaker"]was on £22,000 a week. no wonder he was released, nowhere near value for money[/quote]

 

Rubbish it was more like 15k per week [:@]

[shortfatb 0]

I heard that McVeigh had to go because he was on 22 matchday pies a week.

[Frank6 0]

you should get your facts right before posting,or just make it up like you did

[Camuldonum 0]

Absolutely untrue for certain.  When Norwich kissed him goodbye, the hapless Colchester United were one of countless clubs who offered to match or improve his wages in the hope of getting him. I know what his Agent told Colchester Utd his wages were in 2007-8 season and the figure you quote is Utar Bolocks.

[ncfcstar 288]

Spill the beans then Cam, how much was he on then?

[myarse 0]

If 22k is correct that would work out the we were paying him about 7% of the entire wage bill for NCFC, complete rubbish, i think you will find out that it was more like 5k, lets not forget that a large number of our 1st team playing squad are earning no more than 3k !

[Bobert 0]

I don''t care what he earned. He as a lovely fella, true to the Club and to himself, brought excitment to the fans every game he played in........ and Quakes are just going into an eight match unbeaten run.

[Houston Canary 0]

Quakes are just going into an eight match unbeaten run. - Bobert

....and Norwich is undefeated in 3.  So what''s your point?  Ha ha, just kidding.

  So, to those who say he was past his prime and playing on a dodgy hip, he looks pretty damned good at the moment.  Fast, quick, mobile and playing on all cylinders.  You wrote him off WAY too early.

[Belinda Carlisle 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

  So, to those who say he was past his prime and playing on a dodgy hip, he looks pretty damned good at the moment.  Fast, quick, mobile and playing on all cylinders.  You wrote him off WAY too early.

[/quote]Way to early for the footballing equivalent of the Blue Square Premier, yes.

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="AndyJR"]I think it''s almost been universally agreed that Roeder simply made an error of judgment where Huck''s was concerned. [/quote]Without doubt Roeder stuffed this one up big time, injury and fitness wise he''s obviously not finished, and last season was just a blip as he had the hip problems. Exactly as i predicted he''s carried his end of season form on and would definitely have been a positive member of the squad.Can anyone really say with any real conviction that they dont think having Hucks on the bench to bring on as a striker for Hoolahan to feed would not get us goals and win us matches?I would have played Hucks up front and not left wing and given im a free role from the left, at the moment we have no cutting edge and no end product, Hucks and Sibierski would have been perfect, just like the Crouch/Hucks partnership.

[tribes 0]

I have put date of arrival of San Jose shirts on "Huckerby at San Jose" sub forum.

[Mook 0]

[quote user="Stevie Wonder"]

[quote user="Old Boy"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="AndyJR"]I think it''s almost been universally agreed that Roeder simply made an error of judgment where Huck''s was concerned. [/quote]Not in my Universe, I''m afraid. And I was one of Hux''s biggest fans.[/quote]Not in any other universe either. Hux made an error of judgement where Roeder was concerned, is nearer the mark. If he''d played up to his billing (and his bill apparently) he''d still be here. But he basically took the piss for the last couple of seasons.[/quote]

Oh dear lord! I know this is digging up long dead news but are you serious?

Yes, he clearly took the piss a couple of seasons ago when he was player of the year and was quite sensational (as good as when he first arrived) playing a large part in our survival. I distinctly remember walking ou of CR after the Birmingham, Leeds, Stoke etc etc games and thinking "Jesus Hucks is really taking the piss at the moment we should get shot of him as soon as possible...". Even last year he was far more effective and productive that Messrs Croft, Chadwick etc even with a dodgy hip.

No wonder this club is going to the dogs. With fans like you who needs Binners!!

[/quote]Knowing the Old Boy as I do, I know what he''s trying to say. You''ve quoted 3 games in which he proved pivotal. At a stretch you could probably name 10 games in the last two seasons (92 games plus cup games) where he''s made the difference. And what was he doing in all the others? Otherwise we''d have finished a lot higher in the table, right?Not just that, but the team has a much more solid shape than with Hucks - ok, it will when Roeders convinced Hoolahan where to stand. And so will hold up better defensively.Having said all of that - to have Hucks coming off the bench for this season would have made a massive difference. I would like to have seen him stay, but if his wages are covered by 2 younger, promising players (eg Hooli and Bell) then it''s been worth it.

[ron obvious 1,502]

A bit odd, perhaps. but my one serious beef about Delia & the Board is the way they just let him go - NOT Roeder, as he, personally, owed Hux nothing. However, the fantastic performances he put in for the previous years & his incredible loyalty to the club should surely have counted for something with Delia - purely as a fan of exciting football  if for no other reason - & I think it would not have been difficult to organise a decent send-off for him. She went down a bit in my eyes with that one.

[Houston Canary 0]

Way to early for the footballing equivalent of the Blue Square Premier, yes. - Belinda Honeychild

It;''s suspicious how when he first signed with MLS, the "glad Huckerby''s gone" crew was saying MLS was like Championship, then 1st Division and so on downwards.  The better Huckerby does, the lower the quality of MLS gets for you.  It would be more reasonable if you just admitted letting him go was a mistake instead of continually trying to justify it by adjusting your standards.

[Being Jan Kristiansen... 0]

Here are a couple of quotes from a recent article about him in a San Jose publication:

"It wasn''t about money," said Huckerby, who has an 18-month contract with the Quakes. "Don''t get me wrong, I''m well-paid and I''ve been that way throughout my career. But there was literally 20 times when I could have left Norwich for more money. They could have offered me 10 times what I was making and it wouldn''t have mattered because Norwich meant that much to me."

"I wanted to come to America forever," Huckerby said. "I already had made up my mind that if I couldn''t play for Norwich, I was never going to play for another team in England. I''m a very loyal person. I know that sounds silly. But I guess I''m just a bit strange that way."

http://www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_10353094?nclick_check=1

You might be strange Hucks but we will always love you for it.

[hardley 0]

I have followed Norwich City since 1946 and have had many stars amongst my heroes but none as dynamic and exciting as Huckerby runing at defences and causing panic.

The man is a legend

[XXL16 0]

http://web.mlsnet.com/news/team_news.jsp?ymd=20080831&content_id=184470&vkey=news_sje&fext=.jsp&team=t110

He even score goal by his head! He was Norwich legend after Iwan Roberts.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

Way to early for the footballing equivalent of the Blue Square Premier, yes. - Belinda Honeychild

It;''s suspicious how when he first signed with MLS, the "glad Huckerby''s gone" crew was saying MLS was like Championship, then 1st Division and so on downwards.

[/quote]That''s because since he joined, we''ve actually had a reason to watch the highlights and see how pants it is.  If you think he could play like this in the Championship, you''re sadly deluded.

[canary cherub 1]

I watch the highlights to see a player really enjoying his football in a fledgling league that is on the up.  Hucks is doing for SJE what he did for us five years ago, and he''s also becoming an ambassador for overseas players, who have gained a reputation for lacking commitment and being more interested in lifestyle than football (mentioning no names . . .).  He''s already being spoken of as a shoe in for the MLS team of the season.

It''s so obviously the right move for him and I''m absolutely delighted.  You don''t have to be in the "Hucks should have stayed" camp to follow his progress in the SJE.

 

[Houston Canary 0]

That''s because since he joined, we''ve actually had a reason to watch the highlights and see how pants it is.  If you think he could play like this in the Championship, you''re sadly deluded. - Mister Chops

No, it''s because you''re to stubborn to admit you are wrong.  MLS is no slower than the English league, and Huckerby is running past defenders there like he did in England.  Many of you wrote him off because of his injury but it is obviously not affecting him in the least bit. You were wrong, and those who refuse to "get over it" were right.  It was a bad move to not sign him.  If MLS was so bad, why is England national team player Beckham playing there, as are several memebers of a good American national team?  There are other American national team players in Coca Cola and Prem. and they are not always our best players. 2 of our top strikers are in MLS as are most of our defenders. We''ve got players in England that are not even regulars on the national team which means MLS players get chosen ahead of them. MLS all star team beat Chelsea last year and West Ham this year.  You KNOW that MLS is not nearly as bad as you want it to be, and the fact Huckerby is tearing it up the way he tore up the Prem 4 years ago clearly means he is back.

Meanwhile we sign Sibierski, a player who is just approaching his prime, right???  

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

That''s because since he joined, we''ve actually had a reason to watch the highlights and see how pants it is.  If you think he could play like this in the Championship, you''re sadly deluded. - Mister Chops

No, it''s because you''re to stubborn to admit you are wrong. 

[/quote]No it isn''t.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

Meanwhile we sign Sibierski, a player who is just approaching his prime, right???  

[/quote]Totally different kind of player.  Did you oppose us signing Dublin?

[Houston Canary 0]

To be honest, I had no idea who Dublin was at the time. And I am not protesting Sibierski, I am pointing out the hypocrisy in signing him while claiming an obviously still fantastic player like Huckerby is let go, and the commenters who take anything and everything the team throws at them as reason to believe we are getting better excuse it by saying he is past his prime and playing on a gammy leg. Then they welcome an older player to be striker?

[colneycanary 0]

If this league is that easy as some people are making it out to be, why isn''t a certain David Beckham making headlines??????? And he''s STILL playing for England!!!!  Let''s face it Huckerby is over his injury problems he had last season and is now back to his best, creating chance after chance and scoring for fun!

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="colneycanary"]If this league is that easy as some people are making it out to be, why isn''t a certain David Beckham making headlines??????? [/quote]He is, numpty.  Look him up.MLS is league two at best.

[Houston Canary 0]

He is, numpty. - Mister Chops

No, he really is not any more. MLS is Coca Cola or better. It is not the same style of play as to what you are used to, and maybe that is why you think they are no good, but they really are.  We beat Chelsea for God''s sake. How did Norwich do against them the last 3 times?