Delia and Micheal

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"][quote user="Desert Fox"][quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]But the £6.4m (to the 31st May 2008) spent on the land behind the Jarrold Stand would certainly have bought us a Division 1 player.[/quote]

 What is the land for ?  That does sound like a lot of money. 

[/quote]

1. It is alot of money and I have already explained on this bb. the make up of that figure. The figures can be traced back to NCFC''s Accounts.

2. What is the land for?   To drain money away from the playing side of  the business.

 

[/quote]

Canary Nut,

Regarding your second point, you may be being a bit uncharitable. The investment in non-football infrastucture may have been the Board''s genuine attempt to generate funds for the team, which is what I think Blahblahblah is trying to point out. However, both the development and execution of this strategy have been extremely poor, to the point that have undermined the viability of the very thing they were to trying to support (i.e. the football team).

 

 

 

[/quote]

agreed - this ''cleverer'' strategy may have seemed a good ruse at the time, especially if the board were acting on a precedent - cos the chase land purchase and sale realised £6m - but they should have considered this success was achieved over an extended period of time,,,10 years or more...

it seems to me - that just as chase diverted money away from the playing side - only to come a cropper and for his investments to be cashed in by a later NCFC board, then maybe the current city board are following suit...ie they won''t be the beneficiary of their plan,,,the new owner/s will...when 2016?!?

[/quote]

The sale realised £6.2m BUT £2m had to be spent by NCFC on utilities. So in effect the club received £4.2m net.

As for the Chase purchase, NCFC paid for the land over five and half years INTEREST FREE!  While NCFC were paying £160k per season during that five and half years, they received £50k pa from Carrow Commercials and fees for match day car parking.

 

[2Cakes 0]

[quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]But the £6.4m (to the 31st May 2008) spent on the land behind the Jarrold Stand would certainly have bought us a Division 1 player.[/quote]

 What is the land for ?  That does sound like a lot of money. 

[/quote]

1. It is alot of money and I have already explained on this bb. the make up of that figure. The figures can be traced back to NCFC''s Accounts.

2. What is the land for?   To drain money away from the playing side of  the business.

 

[/quote]I agree with some of things that have been said, but I don''t think it''s

true to say that if this money wasn''t spenton land it would be

available to invest in players. The land has been bought via loans (?).

Whilst it is relatively easy to borrow money to buy land (at least

until very recent times) because the loan can be secured against the

land. It doesn''t mean that the same money could have been borrowed to

buy players.

Only time will tell whether the investing in the land will pay off.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="2Cakes"][quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]But the £6.4m (to the 31st May 2008) spent on the land behind the Jarrold Stand would certainly have bought us a Division 1 player.[/quote]

 What is the land for ?  That does sound like a lot of money. 

[/quote]

1. It is alot of money and I have already explained on this bb. the make up of that figure. The figures can be traced back to NCFC''s Accounts.

2. What is the land for?   To drain money away from the playing side of  the business.

 

[/quote]

I agree with some of things that have been said, but I don''t think it''s true to say that if this money wasn''t spenton land it would be available to invest in players. The land has been bought via loans (?).

[/quote]

Only £2.5m of the £6.4m re the land, spine road etc. was financed by loan. That loan is due for repayment this month....... 

 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

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

Thanks to your informed and reasoned input i`ve realised that the "infrastructure first" policy is working wonders for our club and things couldn`t be better......[Y] [*]

[/quote]

Let me ask you a simple question Mr C - do you think that the team performances we are seeing are worth the 8.5 million that the board have claimed has been invested in them this season ?

I don''t.  And the reason for this is not because of a conservatory, a spine road, or a Diner that was "apparently" rather amusingly funded by a reserve team goalkeeper.  It''s because we''re giving away too many penalties, we''re falling asleep in games and giving away cheap goals, and then losing confidence as a result of those cheap goals.  These are footballing problems caused by football people.  All the board can do is try to fund them to the best of their ability.  Did you foresee the current recession Mr C ?   Did you lose money as a result of your share purchases as a result of the down-turn ?  Because if you didn''t lose money, then you should be on the board of NCFC, or possibly any of the other major companies that are struggling at the moment, because you do in fact know better than the lot of them, and have an amazing form of foresight.

[/quote]

Blah, i have been posting for several years now that whilst the club preaches against "gambling" on the pitch, lack of ambition on the pitch is in itself a gamble and leads to the better players being unsettled and leaving, player and fan unrest, a projected image of an unsettled club going nowhere which puts off potential recruits, more player and fan unrest leading to open revolt.  In other words a downward spiral. This is exactly what has happened.

In the two parachute seasons the club spent less than £5m per season on wages and transfers (if you take into account the transfer profits) and we ended up with all of the above, and a de-valued, de-invested, de-motivated team which nearly got relegated.  We then lost our two talismanic best players.  If we are spending a bit more this year then it is simply trying to correct the damage done by having our priorities totally wrong for several years.  Unfortunately the rot has well and truly set in and it`s going to take us more than extra couple of £mill. to get out of IMO- and the turmoil is so deep i think the current boards position is untenable.

Did i foresee the recession?  Not really, but i think most people knew the boom could not continue indefinately so it hasn`t come as a suprise.  Have i lost money?  No.  Does that qualify me to be on the board of NCFC?  No.  But maybe you could run me a list of things which qualify the current board to run a football club.....?

[nutty nigel 7,526]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]  But maybe you could run me a list of things which qualify the current board to run a football club.....?[/quote]

I don''t think there is such a qualification judging by boards all over the land. However I guess continually investing their own money into their own judgement calls is maybe a qualification of sorts?

 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]But maybe you could run me a list of things which qualify the current board to run a football club.....?[/quote]

Only 1 thing really matters doesn''t it ?  Money.  Pots and pots of disposable income.  2 million chucked into the pit this season, or was it 4 ?  Did Smith & Jones cover the Turners loans in the end ?  And Delia is going back to work to get another £3 million for next season.

Anyone who wants this club would have to put the money in to buy it, be a guarantor on 20 million pounds worth of debt, and then plough another 2 or 3 million in per year to keep it to the standard it is at now.  Are the people with this kind of money the best people to run football clubs ?  Probably not, as football has a habit of making monkeys of the most successful businessmen - even Abramovich can''t buy the champions league.

[quote]Have i lost money?  No.  Does that qualify me to be on the board of NCFC?  No.[/quote]

Are you Simon Cowell ? Maybe...[;)]

[Desert Fox 0]

Blahblahblah,

Good post.

The key to the club progressing from where it is now is to resolve its debt position. Given the current liquidity crisis, the club''s financial psoition is more dire than many people realise. If we can find a way of clearing the non-football debts and improve the quality of football we play, there is sufficient revenue to support structured debt cost of football related inrastructure such as the Jarrold stand.

Furthermore, as I have stated a number of times, I think non-Premiership football is heading towatds some very difficult times where a third of teams will not be able to carry on as they are. This will create an opportunity for a restructuring of theh natural order whereby well capitalised clubs with large fan base support will be able to pick off the clubs in trouble. Our natural positon ought to be a regular contender for play off positions alongside the likes of Wolves, both Sheffield clubs, Coventry and Southampton (i.e. teams that all are capable of sustaining a 25,000 fan base).

The challnege for the Board is how do we extricate ourseleves from the current position, whilst improving the qaulity of the team so that we can enjoy the kind of league position that our finanical clout ought to assist. If we get this wrong, we face being on the wrong side of the divide when the shake out happens.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

WE had 15,000 crowds or less when the current set up of Directionless took the helm - and we had a 8million quid debt........We made the Premiership and have maintained crowds of 24,000+......We have wasted money, because we are worse off than we were12 seasons ago.....FACT....

Sick of the apologist excuses......[:|]

Common denominator for our failings is the CE and those at at the top. 

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

WE had 15,000 crowds or less when the current set up of Directionless took the helm - and we had a 8million quid debt........We made the Premiership and have maintained crowds of 24,000+......We have wasted money, because we are worse off than we were12 seasons ago.....FACT....

Sick of the apologist excuses......[:|]

Common denominator for our failings is the CE and those at at the top. 

[/quote]

What can you do about it though Mello ?  I''ve attempted to outline the outlay that anyone who wants the club would have to spend to get it.  How deep are your pockets ?

[Beauseant 0]

I think the link below should be of interest.We are not alone....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/championship-credit-crunch-recession

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

I think the link below should be of interest.We are not alone....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/championship-credit-crunch-recession

[/quote]

They are talking about a player wage cap of 50 or 60% of turnover according to that.  Our percentage has been 29% in the Prem, then 36% then 31%.  They don`t give a figure for the last financial year but judging by the previous year it would be well under 40%.

[Desert Fox 0]

Beauseant,

Good spot. This has put into words my views that I ahve held for six months now. However, I diasagree with the article in two respects.

Firstly, I dont see the need for wage caps as the market will effectively sort itself out in time. Player wages will fall becuase more clubs will get into difficulty and competitive demand (which is what has driven up wages) will diminish. Put simply, wages will fall without the need for inteference from administrators. As my post above alludes to, this ought to be god news for teams with bigger fan bases such as ourselves - if we can sort out our current financial predicament.

Secondly, I think the first thing that will give way in the new econominc reality is not wages (which I realise contradicts my first point) but transfer values. In other words, more players will become free transfers of playes under contract becuase clubs cant aford their wages. I would guess that this means we could pick up Lita for circa £1M or less, if we can find the cash. Ultimately, reduced transfer fee circulation to smaller clubs will trigger a collpase in player wages, but I suspect that thsi will take place over a longer period.

 

[blahblahblah 2]

I''m all for a salary cap, but it needs to be at all levels of the game, or the skills gap will just widen further.  If a cap didn''t include Prem sides, then Premiership squad sizes will just increase in size, as players will flock to the likes of Fulham, Wigan, and Blackburn to sit on a bench for an even greater comparitive salary, when compared to that of a 50 game season in the championship.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]I''m all for a salary cap, but it needs to be at all levels of the game, or the skills gap will just widen further.  If a cap didn''t include Prem sides, then Premiership squad sizes will just increase in size, as players will flock to the likes of Fulham, Wigan, and Blackburn to sit on a bench for an even greater comparitive salary, when compared to that of a 50 game season in the championship.[/quote]

 

Couldn''t agree more.Any changes have to include the Premiership,although I can''t see much will for a salary cap there at present. I think that the likelihood is that the likes of Abramovich and the Abu Dhabi crew would be more likely to simply take their balls home rather than scale down and restructure for the long term good of the English game. I really think it will need Premier clubs to crash before anything will be done to stop the mad merry-go-round.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Nutty, one of the reasons why i accuse you of lack of integrity is you are quite happy to twist other peoples arguments and present them as something totally different.  You know i have never said "all off-pitch spend is bad" and have defended the Hotel and accepted that the Jarrold was necessary.  Not everything Chase threw money at was bad but he definately put infrastructure before the team and i`ve heard plenty of whispers as to why.  The current board did not do that until `02-`03 so fair enough, when i said "The current board continued the Chase`s policy`s" it was badly worded- after an encouraging hiatus they repeated his mistakes and even admitted to an "obsession".  We finished our parachute payments with a squad which cost less than what we received for selling just one player and were frequently regaled with "All money received for transfers is available to be re-invested in the squad".......

"The real problem is that the club is asset-rich but cash-poor",  a quote by the real saviour of the club which should haunt those who failed to learn the lessons of our recent past and those who tried to shout down those who saw the problems coming.  I believe G.Bennett described the club as "All fur coat but no knickers"- another quote which still applies- but it might be my memory playing up.

Yes, in the real world the projects got built and we recently had Munby telling us their policy`s have been "So successful for the last 12 years".  No sign of any recognition that they`ve had the club on the wrong path in the last four years, so i assume no change in approach.  You obviously don`t think fan pressure has any effect (despite evidence to the contrary with Chase), but don`t you think we have a duty to at least TRY to get out of this downward spiral by putting pressure on the policies (and personel) at the top?  If not, more of the same IMO.  Enjoy.....

[/quote]

And like you don’t twist things Mr Carrow. You are the master of it. I know I’m going to regret getting bogged down in this debate with you, but I’ll give it one more go. (I wish we could talk about football sometimes). You are reactive to the now. You probably didn’t protest against Chase during those heady days of the early 90’s (but if you did I’m sorry for the assumption). Most people protested when it all fell apart. It was the fans disappointment of our fall from the top of the Premiership and Europe through relegation and finally being near the bottom of the Championship that really caused the protests against Chase, not the mistakes he made. The seeds for the disaster were sown in the late 80’s. Players were sold and replaced by substandard ones. Fans were upset but we had a clutch of great players come through the youth team and we could rely on them. When Ken Brown was sacked the two Daves (Williams & Stringer) took our football to a level that I never saw before or since so naturally fans were happy and didn’t question too much what was going on behind the scenes. By the time fans did question the policies, like now, it was too late. The decisions had already been made. They can’t be changed because the money is committed and the work is in progress. Chase didn’t have the luxury of being able to flip-flop his policy because of disappointment like the fans did. He’d already committed the money off the field but the biggest mistake he made for me was allowing Williams to walk away when Stringer resigned. He was obviously clueless where to go next. He should have moved heaven and earth to keep Dave Williams at the club but he let him go and so nearly appointed Phil Neal before handing the job to Mike Walker. Walker was manager for just 18 months and he managed to motivate the players he inherited, and had been coached so well by Williams, to play to the best of their abilities and we had an unbelievable 18 months. When Walker went and it all fell apart it was through the policies taken on and mistakes made in the late 80’s early 90’s. It was too late to change anything. But we still had good young players coming through the youth set up, and that had probably been Chase’s get out of jail card ever since 1985. But Chases legacy wasn’t all bad you know. Fans concentrate on his mistakes but his commitment to a production line of youth talent was his equivalent of this boards commitment to off the pitch revenue streams. A lot of what he set up has been dismantled, early on because he left the club in such a state that all available money had to be channelled into the here and now. But then later the FA’s new laws on travelling time for youngsters put paid to ever replacing some of the networks he set up.

I reckon the new south stand, hotel and associated infrastructure expenditure decision was made way back when you were happy with the boards performance or at least essentially neutral. Much of that expenditure was forced upon them. Remember the old south stand and surrounding areas? As someone who knows little about these things it seems to me that they have looked to maximise any revenue they can while bringing this area up to the standard it is now. But is it finished now? Is there more of this expenditure going on? And is it now bringing in revenue? And where would we be now if it hadn’t happened?

Many changes were made at the club in the summer. Not least on the football side by Glen Roeder. If his changes, especially in the recruitment of young players, bear fruit then someone else will get the credit. That’s the nature of football I’m afraid. The short term decisions like buying a player or appointing a manager are there for all to see and scrutinise but the long term policies are not obvious at the time they are put into place.

The trouble with fan pressure is that it comes too late Mr Carrow. Fans are only motivated into action through disappointment of results and performance. Often the reason for this is through things that happened and decisions that were made years earlier. I guess if things turn really ugly and Smith&Jones suffer the personal abuse that Chase and Worthy had to contend with then they may walk. But then what will you ultimately have achieved?

But if that’s “your bag” then enjoy……….

[/quote]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,526]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

[/quote]

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

This policy has been going on since 1985. 23 years and no sign of an end to it. The only time in all the years I supported the club that the focus has been on the pitch was the 10 years of Sir Arthur South and even then we sold Kevin Reeves to build a stand. But we didn’t spend anything much else off the field. We put red and blue seats in the South Stand I assume because they were cheap and would leave more money to spend on players. The likes of Martin Peters, Ted MacDougall, Phil Boyer, Mel Machin, Jimmy Neighbour, Dave Jones, Martin O’Neill, Joe Royle, Chris Woods, John Deehan, Dave Watson, Chris Woods, Mick Channon, Steve Bruce, Kevin Drinkell, Mick Phelan, David Williams Ian Culverhouse, and so many more. We didn’t spend much on infrastructure then and we didn’t mind the poor facilities because Sir Arthur bought quality players into the club year in year out without really selling too many.

But as soon as we got relegated in 1985 and then made a poor start in the next season letters were flooding the newspapers complaining about the way Sir Arthur ran the club. It’s performance that fuels the protest but even the protest apologists seem to admit that if the protesters get the change they want ultimately nothing really changes.

So stand up and take a bow you protest apologists. Glory in getting Chase out and Smith in. Glory in getting Worthy out and Grant in. You didn’t do us a lot of good but you got your pound of flesh. Jolly well done old boys.

A charlatan is a swindler. Someone who seeks to gain an advantage via some form of pretence or deception. Sort of like quoting disinformation off Wikipedia to prove a point on here.

Vescere bracis meis

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

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

I think the link below should be of interest.We are not alone....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/championship-credit-crunch-recession

[/quote]

They are talking about a player wage cap of 50 or 60% of turnover according to that.  Our percentage has been 29% in the Prem, then 36% then 31%.  They don`t give a figure for the last financial year but judging by the previous year it would be well under 40%.

[/quote]

Its not so much the player wages but the off the pitch cost structure that needs a good prune!

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Beauseant"]

I think the link below should be of interest.We are not alone....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/championship-credit-crunch-recession

[/quote]

They are talking about a player wage cap of 50 or 60% of turnover according to that.  Our percentage has been 29% in the Prem, then 36% then 31%.  They don`t give a figure for the last financial year but judging by the previous year it would be well under 40%.

[/quote]

Its not so much the player wages but the off the pitch cost structure that needs a good prune!

[/quote]

I would say we`ve probably got one of the lowest player wage: turnover ratios in the country and the link above backs that up.  Yet we have a CE who blames our problems on the fact that "We pay our players too much" and then for some reason they don`t give us a figure in the latest report......[^o)]

I wonder if non-football wages are now higher than player wages?  It was getting pretty close in `06-`07.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

[/quote]

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

This policy has been going on since 1985. 23 years and no sign of an end to it. The only time in all the years I supported the club that the focus has been on the pitch was the 10 years of Sir Arthur South and even then we sold Kevin Reeves to build a stand. But we didn’t spend anything much else off the field. We put red and blue seats in the South Stand I assume because they were cheap and would leave more money to spend on players. The likes of Martin Peters, Ted MacDougall, Phil Boyer, Mel Machin, Jimmy Neighbour, Dave Jones, Martin O’Neill, Joe Royle, Chris Woods, John Deehan, Dave Watson, Chris Woods, Mick Channon, Steve Bruce, Kevin Drinkell, Mick Phelan, David Williams Ian Culverhouse, and so many more. We didn’t spend much on infrastructure then and we didn’t mind the poor facilities because Sir Arthur bought quality players into the club year in year out without really selling too many.

But as soon as we got relegated in 1985 and then made a poor start in the next season letters were flooding the newspapers complaining about the way Sir Arthur ran the club. It’s performance that fuels the protest but even the protest apologists seem to admit that if the protesters get the change they want ultimately nothing really changes.

So stand up and take a bow you protest apologists. Glory in getting Chase out and Smith in. Glory in getting Worthy out and Grant in. You didn’t do us a lot of good but you got your pound of flesh. Jolly well done old boys.

A charlatan is a swindler. Someone who seeks to gain an advantage via some form of pretence or deception. Sort of like quoting disinformation off Wikipedia to prove a point on here.

Vescere bracis meis

[/quote]

Wikipedia is indubitably far more reliable than your memory! Of that you can be sure.

A charlatan may also be defined as a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill - unless, of course, you think that The Concise Oxford Dictionary is also providing disinformation.

Now what would you say that skillfully editing out my cross-references from your post above when copying my post for your response amounts to? Twisting the argument ad usum maybe?

Now see if you can google a foreign phrase for use in your riposte![:S]

One love.

OTBC

P.S. Apparently nigel''s phrase vescere brasis meis in internet terms translates to ''eat my shorts''. Just to save y''all googling it and maybe getting disinformation![:)]

[nutty nigel 7,526]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Nutty, one of the reasons why i accuse you of lack of integrity is you are quite happy to twist other peoples arguments and present them as something totally different. You know i have never said "all off-pitch spend is bad" and have defended the Hotel and accepted that the Jarrold was necessary. Not everything Chase threw money at was bad but he definately put infrastructure before the team and i`ve heard plenty of whispers as to why. The current board did not do that until `02-`03 so fair enough, when i said "The current board continued the Chase`s policy`s" it was badly worded- after an encouraging hiatus they repeated his mistakes and even admitted to an "obsession". We finished our parachute payments with a squad which cost less than what we received for selling just one player and were frequently regaled with "All money received for transfers is available to be re-invested in the squad".......

"The real problem is that the club is asset-rich but cash-poor", a quote by the real saviour of the club which should haunt those who failed to learn the lessons of our recent past and those who tried to shout down those who saw the problems coming. I believe G.Bennett described the club as "All fur coat but no knickers"- another quote which still applies- but it might be my memory playing up.

Yes, in the real world the projects got built and we recently had Munby telling us their policy`s have been "So successful for the last 12 years". No sign of any recognition that they`ve had the club on the wrong path in the last four years, so i assume no change in approach. You obviously don`t think fan pressure has any effect (despite evidence to the contrary with Chase), but don`t you think we have a duty to at least TRY to get out of this downward spiral by putting pressure on the policies (and personel) at the top? If not, more of the same IMO. Enjoy.....

[/quote]

And like you don’t twist things Mr Carrow. You are the master of it. I know I’m going to regret getting bogged down in this debate with you, but I’ll give it one more go. (I wish we could talk about football sometimes). You are reactive to the now. You probably didn’t protest against Chase during those heady days of the early 90’s (but if you did I’m sorry for the assumption). Most people protested when it all fell apart. It was the fans disappointment of our fall from the top of the Premiership and Europe through relegation and finally being near the bottom of the Championship that really caused the protests against Chase, not the mistakes he made. The seeds for the disaster were sown in the late 80’s. Players were sold and replaced by substandard ones. Fans were upset but we had a clutch of great players come through the youth team and we could rely on them. When Ken Brown was sacked the two Daves (Williams & Stringer) took our football to a level that I never saw before or since so naturally fans were happy and didn’t question too much what was going on behind the scenes. By the time fans did question the policies, like now, it was too late. The decisions had already been made. They can’t be changed because the money is committed and the work is in progress. Chase didn’t have the luxury of being able to flip-flop his policy because of disappointment like the fans did. He’d already committed the money off the field but the biggest mistake he made for me was allowing Williams to walk away when Stringer resigned. He was obviously clueless where to go next. He should have moved heaven and earth to keep Dave Williams at the club but he let him go and so nearly appointed Phil Neal before handing the job to Mike Walker. Walker was manager for just 18 months and he managed to motivate the players he inherited, and had been coached so well by Williams, to play to the best of their abilities and we had an unbelievable 18 months. When Walker went and it all fell apart it was through the policies taken on and mistakes made in the late 80’s early 90’s. It was too late to change anything. But we still had good young players coming through the youth set up, and that had probably been Chase’s get out of jail card ever since 1985. But Chases legacy wasn’t all bad you know. Fans concentrate on his mistakes but his commitment to a production line of youth talent was his equivalent of this boards commitment to off the pitch revenue streams. A lot of what he set up has been dismantled, early on because he left the club in such a state that all available money had to be channelled into the here and now. But then later the FA’s new laws on travelling time for youngsters put paid to ever replacing some of the networks he set up.

I reckon the new south stand, hotel and associated infrastructure expenditure decision was made way back when you were happy with the boards performance or at least essentially neutral. Much of that expenditure was forced upon them. Remember the old south stand and surrounding areas? As someone who knows little about these things it seems to me that they have looked to maximise any revenue they can while bringing this area up to the standard it is now. But is it finished now? Is there more of this expenditure going on? And is it now bringing in revenue? And where would we be now if it hadn’t happened?

Many changes were made at the club in the summer. Not least on the football side by Glen Roeder. If his changes, especially in the recruitment of young players, bear fruit then someone else will get the credit. That’s the nature of football I’m afraid. The short term decisions like buying a player or appointing a manager are there for all to see and scrutinise but the long term policies are not obvious at the time they are put into place.

The trouble with fan pressure is that it comes too late Mr Carrow. Fans are only motivated into action through disappointment of results and performance. Often the reason for this is through things that happened and decisions that were made years earlier. I guess if things turn really ugly and Smith&Jones suffer the personal abuse that Chase and Worthy had to contend with then they may walk. But then what will you ultimately have achieved?

But if that’s “your bag” then enjoy……….

[/quote]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

[/quote]

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

This policy has been going on since 1985. 23 years and no sign of an end to it. The only time in all the years I supported the club that the focus has been on the pitch was the 10 years of Sir Arthur South and even then we sold Kevin Reeves to build a stand. But we didn’t spend anything much else off the field. We put red and blue seats in the South Stand I assume because they were cheap and would leave more money to spend on players. The likes of Martin Peters, Ted MacDougall, Phil Boyer, Mel Machin, Jimmy Neighbour, Dave Jones, Martin O’Neill, Joe Royle, Chris Woods, John Deehan, Dave Watson, Chris Woods, Mick Channon, Steve Bruce, Kevin Drinkell, Mick Phelan, David Williams Ian Culverhouse, and so many more. We didn’t spend much on infrastructure then and we didn’t mind the poor facilities because Sir Arthur bought quality players into the club year in year out without really selling too many.

But as soon as we got relegated in 1985 and then made a poor start in the next season letters were flooding the newspapers complaining about the way Sir Arthur ran the club. It’s performance that fuels the protest but even the protest apologists seem to admit that if the protesters get the change they want ultimately nothing really changes.

So stand up and take a bow you protest apologists. Glory in getting Chase out and Smith in. Glory in getting Worthy out and Grant in. You didn’t do us a lot of good but you got your pound of flesh. Jolly well done old boys.

A charlatan is a swindler. Someone who seeks to gain an advantage via some form of pretence or deception. Sort of like quoting disinformation off Wikipedia to prove a point on here.

Vescere bracis meis

[/quote]

Wikipedia is indubitably far more reliable than your memory! Of that you can be sure.

A charlatan may also be defined as a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill - unless, of course, you think that The Concise Oxford Dictionary is also providing disinformation.

Now what would you say that skillfully editing out my cross-references from your post above when copying my post for your response amounts to? Twisting the argument ad usum maybe?

Now see if you can google a foreign phrase for use in your riposte![:S]

One love.

OTBC

P.S. Apparently nigel''s phrase vescere brasis meis in internet terms translates to ''eat my shorts''. Just to save y''all googling it and maybe getting disinformation![:)]

[/quote]

The reason I didn''t "quote" half the thread is because it clogs up the page like this! But here you are, here is today''s episode linked together in its entirety. And some pretty red bits instead of your exciting blue.

You didn''t answer about the Charlton game? Will you be with Smudger hopeing for a cup exit on the 50th anniversary of 1959? Don''t forget to quote the whole post now [:O]

 

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Nutty, one of the reasons why i accuse you of lack of integrity is you are quite happy to twist other peoples arguments and present them as something totally different. You know i have never said "all off-pitch spend is bad" and have defended the Hotel and accepted that the Jarrold was necessary. Not everything Chase threw money at was bad but he definately put infrastructure before the team and i`ve heard plenty of whispers as to why. The current board did not do that until `02-`03 so fair enough, when i said "The current board continued the Chase`s policy`s" it was badly worded- after an encouraging hiatus they repeated his mistakes and even admitted to an "obsession". We finished our parachute payments with a squad which cost less than what we received for selling just one player and were frequently regaled with "All money received for transfers is available to be re-invested in the squad".......

"The real problem is that the club is asset-rich but cash-poor", a quote by the real saviour of the club which should haunt those who failed to learn the lessons of our recent past and those who tried to shout down those who saw the problems coming. I believe G.Bennett described the club as "All fur coat but no knickers"- another quote which still applies- but it might be my memory playing up.

Yes, in the real world the projects got built and we recently had Munby telling us their policy`s have been "So successful for the last 12 years". No sign of any recognition that they`ve had the club on the wrong path in the last four years, so i assume no change in approach. You obviously don`t think fan pressure has any effect (despite evidence to the contrary with Chase), but don`t you think we have a duty to at least TRY to get out of this downward spiral by putting pressure on the policies (and personel) at the top? If not, more of the same IMO. Enjoy.....

[/quote]

And like you don’t twist things Mr Carrow. You are the master of it. I know I’m going to regret getting bogged down in this debate with you, but I’ll give it one more go. (I wish we could talk about football sometimes). You are reactive to the now. You probably didn’t protest against Chase during those heady days of the early 90’s (but if you did I’m sorry for the assumption). Most people protested when it all fell apart. It was the fans disappointment of our fall from the top of the Premiership and Europe through relegation and finally being near the bottom of the Championship that really caused the protests against Chase, not the mistakes he made. The seeds for the disaster were sown in the late 80’s. Players were sold and replaced by substandard ones. Fans were upset but we had a clutch of great players come through the youth team and we could rely on them. When Ken Brown was sacked the two Daves (Williams & Stringer) took our football to a level that I never saw before or since so naturally fans were happy and didn’t question too much what was going on behind the scenes. By the time fans did question the policies, like now, it was too late. The decisions had already been made. They can’t be changed because the money is committed and the work is in progress. Chase didn’t have the luxury of being able to flip-flop his policy because of disappointment like the fans did. He’d already committed the money off the field but the biggest mistake he made for me was allowing Williams to walk away when Stringer resigned. He was obviously clueless where to go next. He should have moved heaven and earth to keep Dave Williams at the club but he let him go and so nearly appointed Phil Neal before handing the job to Mike Walker. Walker was manager for just 18 months and he managed to motivate the players he inherited, and had been coached so well by Williams, to play to the best of their abilities and we had an unbelievable 18 months. When Walker went and it all fell apart it was through the policies taken on and mistakes made in the late 80’s early 90’s. It was too late to change anything. But we still had good young players coming through the youth set up, and that had probably been Chase’s get out of jail card ever since 1985. But Chases legacy wasn’t all bad you know. Fans concentrate on his mistakes but his commitment to a production line of youth talent was his equivalent of this boards commitment to off the pitch revenue streams. A lot of what he set up has been dismantled, early on because he left the club in such a state that all available money had to be channelled into the here and now. But then later the FA’s new laws on travelling time for youngsters put paid to ever replacing some of the networks he set up.

I reckon the new south stand, hotel and associated infrastructure expenditure decision was made way back when you were happy with the boards performance or at least essentially neutral. Much of that expenditure was forced upon them. Remember the old south stand and surrounding areas? As someone who knows little about these things it seems to me that they have looked to maximise any revenue they can while bringing this area up to the standard it is now. But is it finished now? Is there more of this expenditure going on? And is it now bringing in revenue? And where would we be now if it hadn’t happened?

Many changes were made at the club in the summer. Not least on the football side by Glen Roeder. If his changes, especially in the recruitment of young players, bear fruit then someone else will get the credit. That’s the nature of football I’m afraid. The short term decisions like buying a player or appointing a manager are there for all to see and scrutinise but the long term policies are not obvious at the time they are put into place.

The trouble with fan pressure is that it comes too late Mr Carrow. Fans are only motivated into action through disappointment of results and performance. Often the reason for this is through things that happened and decisions that were made years earlier. I guess if things turn really ugly and Smith&Jones suffer the personal abuse that Chase and Worthy had to contend with then they may walk. But then what will you ultimately have achieved?

But if that’s “your bag” then enjoy……….

[/quote]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

[/quote]

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

This policy has been going on since 1985. 23 years and no sign of an end to it. The only time in all the years I supported the club that the focus has been on the pitch was the 10 years of Sir Arthur South and even then we sold Kevin Reeves to build a stand. But we didn’t spend anything much else off the field. We put red and blue seats in the South Stand I assume because they were cheap and would leave more money to spend on players. The likes of Martin Peters, Ted MacDougall, Phil Boyer, Mel Machin, Jimmy Neighbour, Dave Jones, Martin O’Neill, Joe Royle, Chris Woods, John Deehan, Dave Watson, Chris Woods, Mick Channon, Steve Bruce, Kevin Drinkell, Mick Phelan, David Williams Ian Culverhouse, and so many more. We didn’t spend much on infrastructure then and we didn’t mind the poor facilities because Sir Arthur bought quality players into the club year in year out without really selling too many.

But as soon as we got relegated in 1985 and then made a poor start in the next season letters were flooding the newspapers complaining about the way Sir Arthur ran the club. It’s performance that fuels the protest but even the protest apologists seem to admit that if the protesters get the change they want ultimately nothing really changes.

So stand up and take a bow you protest apologists. Glory in getting Chase out and Smith in. Glory in getting Worthy out and Grant in. You didn’t do us a lot of good but you got your pound of flesh. Jolly well done old boys.

A charlatan is a swindler. Someone who seeks to gain an advantage via some form of pretence or deception. Sort of like quoting disinformation off Wikipedia to prove a point on here.

Vescere bracis meis

[/quote]

Wikipedia is indubitably far more reliable than your memory! Of that you can be sure.

A charlatan may also be defined as a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill - unless, of course, you think that The Concise Oxford Dictionary is also providing disinformation.

Now what would you say that skillfully editing out my cross-references from your post above when copying my post for your response amounts to? Twisting the argument ad usum maybe?

Now see if you can google a foreign phrase for use in your riposte![:S]

One love.

OTBC

P.S. Apparently nigel''s phrase vescere brasis meis in internet terms translates to ''eat my shorts''. Just to save y''all googling it and maybe getting disinformation![:)]

[/quote]

The reason I didn''t "quote" half the thread is because it clogs up the page like this! But here you are, here is today''s episode linked together in its entirety. And some pretty red bits instead of your exciting blue.

You didn''t answer about the Charlton game? Will you be with Smudger hopeing for a cup exit on the 50th anniversary of 1959? Don''t forget to quote the whole post now [:O]

[/quote]

Not at all nigel. Nothing I like more than a good rollicking cup run. Just another thing that''s sadly gone missing in the Smith years! Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!......Shhh11........Hush!

Here''s the deep pink that I know you really prefer. Oops  now, I''ve gone and let out your little secret.

OTBC

 

 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="Mello Yello"]

WE had 15,000 crowds or less when the current set up of Directionless took the helm - and we had a 8million quid debt........We made the Premiership and have maintained crowds of 24,000+......We have wasted money, because we are worse off than we were12 seasons ago.....FACT....

Sick of the apologist excuses......[:|]

Common denominator for our failings is the CE and those at at the top. 

[/quote]

What can you do about it though Mello ?  I''ve attempted to outline the outlay that anyone who wants the club would have to spend to get it.  How deep are your pockets ?

[/quote]

Why should I do anything more about it? Haven''t I done enough (and are continuing to do so) within my financial constraints to do my bit for NCFC? 

What are you going to do about it then? Maybe you can send them a regular cheque for the price of ''admit one'' for a regular non-attendee, plus a few quid for refreshments that you''d maybe consume, including a programme - for those many games that you''re unable to attend?.....There are those who are unable to attend games for whatever, but do they put cash directly into the Carra coffers? I don''t control the fuggin purse strings at NCFC. My pockets have been deep enough for many a year - to contribute what I could within my disposable income into NCFC.

These so called business folk who were not press-ganged into being Directors of NCFC have under-performed, shunned accountability and responsibility when questioned - and wasted substantial amounts of big money. I guarantee they wouldn''t let their business or company be run like NCFC .....Maybe if the CE took a wage cut from his handsome salary to help the finances - I may be a tad sympathetic.....(If his salary was performance related - he''d be on less than half of what he''s on now).

Why should a prospective financial saviour pay for their financial f''cook ups....and bale the buggers out? I''d offer what I perceive as the going rate in the current climate, nothing more, nothing less - and unsympathetically save them a bit of credibility and face - then shove them on the back row of the Director''s box (and make ''em pay for their season tickets and snacks and drinks etc, as there''s no such thing as a free lunch). I recently lost money in shares....boo hoo! My bad, tuff titties - that''s the way the cookie crumbles.

I believe that the Major Shareholding duo and the board, are being unrealistic in their price for the club......and the club is suffering because of their being obstinate and unwilling to put the club and fans first. I also think that those currently at the helm wish to continue and cling on, and to have a large say and major input into the running of the club.....Well I fuggin don''t! Because they''re fuggin hopeless and haven''t got a bloody clue......But, it''s only a personal opinion....

 

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

I think the link below should be of interest.We are not alone....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/dec/03/championship-credit-crunch-recession

[/quote]good spot beau - its clear that many champs clubs have been pursuing speculative investment models to ''fund'' a route to the prem, and as i''ve suggested before, with club''s income under pressure from the recession (just look at the slump in champs attendances) then simply many clubs will find they either cut playing budgets/other costs or be prepared to fund significant losses...and that the clubs most at risk of the downturn, are those traditional clubs like ourselves...imo - the benefactor owned clubs will be better prepared to ride the storm out, but even then, this may be an unwelcome test for many of them - who may have entered into the romance of owning a footy club, only to find their obligations to the clubs they own become troublesome - especially if the team performs poorly on the pitch and that they attract the fans ire...double whammy or what???  not so glamourous then...reading fans criticism in one hand and the clubs bank statement in the other,,,ouch!!!its clear, many clubs will struggle - and that there will be a downward pressure on players wages,,,but as always, there will be clubs with wealthy owners prepared to pay more - its just that in bad economic times, the age old struggle between survival of the fittest in terms of the rich and poor becomes even more polarised...interesting the derby chairman has suggested this, given they have the advantage of parachute payments...will start a new thread on this subject...

[Desert Fox 0]

Mello Yello,

Good post.

I suspect that there is  a lot more going on behind the scenes regarding the exit valaustion for Delia than is being communicted for public consumption - unless of course she is not smart enough to have worked out that having control over the timing of her exit is a commodity that has a rapidly diminishing shelf life.

[Desert Fox 0]

Lucky Green Trainers,

Another good post.

You share my views about the polarising effect that the recession will have upon non-Prem teams. The big question is which side of the divide we will fall into - the side that uses the weakness of other clubs to reposition itself or the side that becomes one of the weaker clubs having to sell whatever players we can at firesale prices as we have run out of Ashtons and Earnshaws to sell.

At current prices the squad is probably worth no more than £2M and that is being generous, so we would have to shift a hell of a lot of players if the club is going to continue to use player trading as the principal source of covering their disastrous dabbbling in the property development market. Of course, this would ultimately just make the underlying problem worse.

Put simply, we are going to need someting like a £5M equity injection in the summer if we are not going to get sucked into the kind of downward spiral I have described above.

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

Lucky Green Trainers,

Another good post.

You share my views about the polarising effect that the recession will have upon non-Prem teams. The big question is which side of the divide we will fall into - the side that uses the weakness of other clubs to reposition itself or the side that becomes one of the weaker clubs having to sell whatever players we can at firesale prices as we have run out of Ashtons and Earnshaws to sell.

At current prices the squad is probably worth no more than £2M and that is being generous, so we would have to shift a hell of a lot of players if the club is going to continue to use player trading as the principal source of covering their disastrous dabbbling in the property development market. Of course, this would ultimately just make the underlying problem worse.

Put simply, we are going to need someting like a £5M equity injection in the summer if we are not going to get sucked into the kind of downward spiral I have described above.

[/quote]

I think you`ve nailed it in a very succinct post DF.  One thing for sure is that there couldn`t be a better time for a fresh injection of cash whereby we become one of the clubs picking up the pieces of other clubs problems.

And we have persistant overtures from the county`s wealthiest man......Surely some sort of deal has to be done?  Wouldn`t it be wonderful to be proactive and ahead of the game for once?  But then that doesn`t happen at little `ol norwich......

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]What are you going to do about it then? [/quote]

Live with it, because I accept that it''s their toy until someone else gives them enough sweeties for them to give it away.  It''s my opinion that it''s a shame you can''t, but it''s only my opinion.  You do seem to enjoy having a good moan.

[nutty nigel 7,526]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

 

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

Nutty, one of the reasons why i accuse you of lack of integrity is you are quite happy to twist other peoples arguments and present them as something totally different. You know i have never said "all off-pitch spend is bad" and have defended the Hotel and accepted that the Jarrold was necessary. Not everything Chase threw money at was bad but he definately put infrastructure before the team and i`ve heard plenty of whispers as to why. The current board did not do that until `02-`03 so fair enough, when i said "The current board continued the Chase`s policy`s" it was badly worded- after an encouraging hiatus they repeated his mistakes and even admitted to an "obsession". We finished our parachute payments with a squad which cost less than what we received for selling just one player and were frequently regaled with "All money received for transfers is available to be re-invested in the squad".......

"The real problem is that the club is asset-rich but cash-poor", a quote by the real saviour of the club which should haunt those who failed to learn the lessons of our recent past and those who tried to shout down those who saw the problems coming. I believe G.Bennett described the club as "All fur coat but no knickers"- another quote which still applies- but it might be my memory playing up.

Yes, in the real world the projects got built and we recently had Munby telling us their policy`s have been "So successful for the last 12 years". No sign of any recognition that they`ve had the club on the wrong path in the last four years, so i assume no change in approach. You obviously don`t think fan pressure has any effect (despite evidence to the contrary with Chase), but don`t you think we have a duty to at least TRY to get out of this downward spiral by putting pressure on the policies (and personel) at the top? If not, more of the same IMO. Enjoy.....

[/quote]

And like you don’t twist things Mr Carrow. You are the master of it. I know I’m going to regret getting bogged down in this debate with you, but I’ll give it one more go. (I wish we could talk about football sometimes). You are reactive to the now. You probably didn’t protest against Chase during those heady days of the early 90’s (but if you did I’m sorry for the assumption). Most people protested when it all fell apart. It was the fans disappointment of our fall from the top of the Premiership and Europe through relegation and finally being near the bottom of the Championship that really caused the protests against Chase, not the mistakes he made. The seeds for the disaster were sown in the late 80’s. Players were sold and replaced by substandard ones. Fans were upset but we had a clutch of great players come through the youth team and we could rely on them. When Ken Brown was sacked the two Daves (Williams & Stringer) took our football to a level that I never saw before or since so naturally fans were happy and didn’t question too much what was going on behind the scenes. By the time fans did question the policies, like now, it was too late. The decisions had already been made. They can’t be changed because the money is committed and the work is in progress. Chase didn’t have the luxury of being able to flip-flop his policy because of disappointment like the fans did. He’d already committed the money off the field but the biggest mistake he made for me was allowing Williams to walk away when Stringer resigned. He was obviously clueless where to go next. He should have moved heaven and earth to keep Dave Williams at the club but he let him go and so nearly appointed Phil Neal before handing the job to Mike Walker. Walker was manager for just 18 months and he managed to motivate the players he inherited, and had been coached so well by Williams, to play to the best of their abilities and we had an unbelievable 18 months. When Walker went and it all fell apart it was through the policies taken on and mistakes made in the late 80’s early 90’s. It was too late to change anything. But we still had good young players coming through the youth set up, and that had probably been Chase’s get out of jail card ever since 1985. But Chases legacy wasn’t all bad you know. Fans concentrate on his mistakes but his commitment to a production line of youth talent was his equivalent of this boards commitment to off the pitch revenue streams. A lot of what he set up has been dismantled, early on because he left the club in such a state that all available money had to be channelled into the here and now. But then later the FA’s new laws on travelling time for youngsters put paid to ever replacing some of the networks he set up.

I reckon the new south stand, hotel and associated infrastructure expenditure decision was made way back when you were happy with the boards performance or at least essentially neutral. Much of that expenditure was forced upon them. Remember the old south stand and surrounding areas? As someone who knows little about these things it seems to me that they have looked to maximise any revenue they can while bringing this area up to the standard it is now. But is it finished now? Is there more of this expenditure going on? And is it now bringing in revenue? And where would we be now if it hadn’t happened?

Many changes were made at the club in the summer. Not least on the football side by Glen Roeder. If his changes, especially in the recruitment of young players, bear fruit then someone else will get the credit. That’s the nature of football I’m afraid. The short term decisions like buying a player or appointing a manager are there for all to see and scrutinise but the long term policies are not obvious at the time they are put into place.

The trouble with fan pressure is that it comes too late Mr Carrow. Fans are only motivated into action through disappointment of results and performance. Often the reason for this is through things that happened and decisions that were made years earlier. I guess if things turn really ugly and Smith&Jones suffer the personal abuse that Chase and Worthy had to contend with then they may walk. But then what will you ultimately have achieved?

But if that’s “your bag” then enjoy……….

[/quote]

So those who have been sternly critiquing the policies and actions of the Smith-led club for the past 3 years or more have, in fact, been correct in doing so - the rest piling in now are too late.

Stand up you usual suspects - and take your belated bow!

Logic does for all charlatans in the end.

Risum teneatis, amici?

One love.

OTBC

[/quote]

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

This policy has been going on since 1985. 23 years and no sign of an end to it. The only time in all the years I supported the club that the focus has been on the pitch was the 10 years of Sir Arthur South and even then we sold Kevin Reeves to build a stand. But we didn’t spend anything much else off the field. We put red and blue seats in the South Stand I assume because they were cheap and would leave more money to spend on players. The likes of Martin Peters, Ted MacDougall, Phil Boyer, Mel Machin, Jimmy Neighbour, Dave Jones, Martin O’Neill, Joe Royle, Chris Woods, John Deehan, Dave Watson, Chris Woods, Mick Channon, Steve Bruce, Kevin Drinkell, Mick Phelan, David Williams Ian Culverhouse, and so many more. We didn’t spend much on infrastructure then and we didn’t mind the poor facilities because Sir Arthur bought quality players into the club year in year out without really selling too many.

But as soon as we got relegated in 1985 and then made a poor start in the next season letters were flooding the newspapers complaining about the way Sir Arthur ran the club. It’s performance that fuels the protest but even the protest apologists seem to admit that if the protesters get the change they want ultimately nothing really changes.

So stand up and take a bow you protest apologists. Glory in getting Chase out and Smith in. Glory in getting Worthy out and Grant in. You didn’t do us a lot of good but you got your pound of flesh. Jolly well done old boys.

A charlatan is a swindler. Someone who seeks to gain an advantage via some form of pretence or deception. Sort of like quoting disinformation off Wikipedia to prove a point on here.

Vescere bracis meis

[/quote]

Wikipedia is indubitably far more reliable than your memory! Of that you can be sure.

A charlatan may also be defined as a person falsely claiming to have a special knowledge or skill - unless, of course, you think that The Concise Oxford Dictionary is also providing disinformation.

Now what would you say that skillfully editing out my cross-references from your post above when copying my post for your response amounts to? Twisting the argument ad usum maybe?

Now see if you can google a foreign phrase for use in your riposte![:S]

One love.

OTBC

P.S. Apparently nigel''s phrase vescere brasis meis in internet terms translates to ''eat my shorts''. Just to save y''all googling it and maybe getting disinformation![:)]

[/quote]

The reason I didn''t "quote" half the thread is because it clogs up the page like this! But here you are, here is today''s episode linked together in its entirety. And some pretty red bits instead of your exciting blue.

You didn''t answer about the Charlton game? Will you be with Smudger hopeing for a cup exit on the 50th anniversary of 1959? Don''t forget to quote the whole post now [:O]

[/quote]

Not at all nigel. Nothing I like more than a good rollicking cup run. Just another thing that''s sadly gone missing in the Smith years! Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!......Shhh11........Hush!

Here''s the deep pink that I know you really prefer. Oops  now, I''ve gone and let out your little secret.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Love the pink Babes.. it kind of looks right...suits your posting style.

Do you want to share some more memories?

Have you got any comments on the following that you chose to ignore?

The fact that it comes too late to change what’s happened in the past doesn’t make it right does it?

If fan pressure had not been applied to Chase would things have turned out differently?

Many of the protest apologists argue that this board just carried on where Chase left off. So if they’d never got rid of him we would have got back here under Chase anyway. Wouldn’t we?

 

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]

[quote]What are you going to do about it then? [/quote]

Live with it, because I accept that it''s their toy until someone else gives them enough sweeties for them to give it away.  It''s my opinion that it''s a shame you can''t, but it''s only my opinion.  You do seem to enjoy having a good moan.

[/quote]

You don''t actually put that many sweeties into NCFC, do you?

And you never moan......