This is an ex-Canary. It has ceased to be.

[thebigfeller 200]

Or at least, that''s how it feels right now. I''ve been a Norwich City fan for 20 years now, and have never felt bleaker about where the club was heading. We''re down, folks - there''s no way we''re getting out of this. Whereupon administration could conceivably follow, the few decent players we have will be sold, and a rudderless club will hope to climb back out of the third tier, but with desperately little in the way of vision, direction or money to aid it.Do I blame the board? Sure - they''ve made all manner of terrible decisions over the past four or five years. We all know what they were: there''s no need to rehearse them yet again. I stop short at personally abusing them though, and find the behaviour of certain posters in that regard cringeworthy and incredibly naive. "Delia Out"? Fine - we obviously need a new broom and new ideas at the helm. Except no-one''s out there, and this thing you might have heard of called the credit crunch ensures that many other clubs at this and higher levels have little prospect of being sold in the foreseeable future.Which renders those who pride themselves on such empty gestures - not to mention attacking those who simply point out the reality - entirely pointless. When we protested against Chase, it was because a) we didn''t believe he had the club''s best interests at heart; and b) there was an alternative prepared to buy his shares we could coalesce around: namely, Geoffrey Watling. The present board are well meaning amateurs, but they''ll be as devastated by what''s happening as we all are; and we have no Watling figure this time. The one alternative we did seem to have has gone completely quiet, and may well be facing business problems of his own. It hasn''t stop people demanding Delia''s head in the hope he''ll miraculously ride to our rescue, but again, that''s just as empty and pointless given present economic circumstances. Football isn''t some computer game whereby those who shout loudest just magically get what they want. Should we have appointed Gunn? Depends on whether we could''ve afforded anyone better. Charlton, Southampton and Watford took cheap options too: it''s what happens to clubs who fall out of the Premier League and don''t get back. And yes, of course relegation will be a financial calamity - but where were the board supposed to magic the money up from - not just for a better-paid and better-qualified manager, but for a higher short and medium term budget with which to convince him to take the job? Thin air? Those smaller clubs performing much better than us at present are doing so mostly because their boards have access to considerably more money: all we can do is make do with what we have.It''s a depressing, demoralising, gut-wrenching situation. As soon as the board admitted they had no further ideas on where funding could come from, the game was effectively up: rudderless clubs drop to the bottom of the league and don''t stay up. Barring a new buyer appearing on the scene, the same problems will no doubt apply in League One too. Leicester have Mandaric''s money; MK Dons have funds they can access as well. There''s little prospect of us defying all logic and charging straight back up - and while I certainly don''t subscribe to the "new Bradford/Luton" prophecising on here, my best guess is we''ll end up following Sheffield Wednesday''s path. A horribly difficult first season down there, a huge reorganisation of the club, before we slowly, painfully find our way back.Until very recently, Wednesday had been ruined by off-field problems for many years. There was a smell of death about that club, just as there''s been about Norwich since May 2005 - but this never stopped their incredible fans getting on with it and adjusting to a new reality. Now, at last, things are starting to come good there, as they ultimately will at this club too. We''re too big and too special a club to stay down there forever: there is a tremendous amount of goodwill felt towards Norwich City from many other fans and clubs alike. There''s always hope, folks; it''s just that where we are at present hurts like hell and would have been unthinkable until pretty recently.One last thing. Before anyone dares accuse me of being a boardroom apologist, let me assure you that I''ve been massively critical of this board for many years: ever since October 2005, indeed. I''ve scarcely been able to believe their incompetence on occasion, and would have jumped at the chance of someone new buying the club. But at present, it''s simply not an option - and I''ll be damned if our joint majority shareholder is actually going to be attacked for loving the club so much that she''s gone back to work to find more funds with which to help keep us afloat. The epitaph of the Smith and Jones time at the club is simple: mere love of the club just isn''t enough; nor is access to moderate levels of cash. Competence, ruthlessness, real footballing expertise, a lot more money and above all, the right decisions are all far more important - and on that, the board have been found sadly wanting. Leaving us are where we are this bleak Sunday morning: fans apathetic and resigned to our fate; board without the foggiest idea how to prevent it.

[|BA 0]

Cheerio

[......and Smith must score. 1,360]

Excellent post thebigfeller.

You''ve summed up the present mood of despair perfectly. If we didn''t know it already I think after yesterday we all know the games up. It may indeed be a long time before we return to this League ( I''m knowingly writing this not as fact but in the hope that it will be thrown back in my face should we achieve the unlikely and manage to avoid relegation )

I would however take issue with you on one point. Delia Smith.

I may be wrong but I get the impression that she has been the stumbling block in any attempt to take over the Club. We don''t know - and may indeed never know -  the reason why the Cullum interest came to nothing. That interest may well be resurrected in the near future but I suspect that had most of the other Board members, the long suffering MJW especially, would have been more than happy to have abandoned ship some time ago had Delia not been so keen to keep hold of her '' baby ''.

Sadly it looks as though that obstinacy will be hers and the Clubs undoing....

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Do you think that Smith loves the club, or that Smith loves being majority shareholder of the club?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

A bleak,but very perceptive and accurate appraisal of the current situation,Big Feller.

Like you,I see no easy way out of this. I''ve already resigned myself to relegation,and ,like you without big injections of cash,League One aint going to be a breeze either. I certainly can''t see us "doing a Leicester". Perhaps understandably Doomcaster/The Board are staying tight lipped about administration,but I,firmly believe it''ll happen ,and sooner than most folk believe.

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."]

I would however take issue with you on one point. Delia Smith.

I may be wrong but I get the impression that she has been the stumbling block in any attempt to take over the Club. We don''t know - and may indeed never know -  the reason why the Cullum interest came to nothing. That interest may well be resurrected in the near future but I suspect that had most of the other Board members, the long suffering MJW especially, would have been more than happy to have abandoned ship some time ago had Delia not been so keen to keep hold of her '' baby ''.

Sadly it looks as though that obstinacy will be hers and the Clubs undoing....

[/quote]I wondered about that at the time - but certainly don''t subscribe to such a view now. You think having to find millions more in loans is fun, especially at her age? I always questioned how hard the board were actually trying to find new investment - but with regard to foreign ownership, the credit crunch has largely vindicated their stance.If we were ever made a proper offer by a fit and proper person (Cullum was a fit and proper person, but made no proper offer), I''ve no doubt at all Delia would just retire into the background. She''s had her time - and the board have run out of ideas. So they went to Keith Harris - yet nothing has materialised. Which should tell you all you need to know.

[Mr Brownstone 0]

It tells you that no one wants to ''invest'' under Smith''s terms. At no point have they ever said they are looking for a new owner, just new investment.

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]It tells you that no one wants to ''invest'' under Smith''s terms. At no point have they ever said they are looking for a new owner, just new investment.[/quote]You don''t go to Keith Harris unless you''re looking for a new owner. Various other much bigger clubs have gone to him too - yet nothing has happened. Is that because of their "terms" as well?

[Mr Brownstone 0]

Then why continually use the term ''investment''? Why not just come out and say the club is for sale? I''m not suggesting this would make any difference to investment coming in, but it would clarify Smith''s position. Does she want to keep her toy or does she just want someone else to pay for it?

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]Then why continually use the term ''investment''? Why not just come out and say the club is for sale? I''m not suggesting this would make any difference to investment coming in, but it would clarify Smith''s position. Does she want to keep her toy or does she just want someone else to pay for it?[/quote]Openly stating the club is up for sale invariably creates panic, and drives offers down (not just for her shares, but what is intended to be put into the club too). Incredibly few clubs who''ve approached Harris have made such a declaration: it''s just not how it works. I certainly think she deserves to get her money back, by the way: but her overriding concern has always been whether any new buyer was another Giovanni di Stefano, or someone who could be trusted. I don''t think she''s wrong in that regard.

[Clever Farke 65]

There was also the small matter of the Turners leaving the board in the lurch with the 2 million pound shortfall to make up- money that was set aside for the transfer budget, a decent striker maybe. Might have something to do with our present plight? They seemed to have ridden away into to sunset without without so much as a bad word said about them.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

[quote user="thebigfeller"][Openly stating the club is up for sale invariably creates panic, and drives offers down (not just for her shares, but what is intended to be put into the club too). Incredibly few clubs who''ve approached Harris have made such a declaration: it''s just not how it works. .
[/quote]

 

But letting the club slide into the lower reaches of the league doesn''t "create panic" or "drive offers doen" then?

 

What nonsense.If you were looking for a textbook on how NOT to run a football club''s finances you could do a lot worse than follow  MWJ/DS and all the rest of the board''s actions over the last 5 years.

 

In any case I do wish that people would stop harping on about Cullum/Harris. there is no evidence that anty such deal was ever on the table.

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="canari francais"]

But letting the club slide into the lower reaches of the league doesn''t "create panic" or "drive offers doen" then?

 

What nonsense.If you were looking for a textbook on how NOT to run a football club''s finances you could do a lot worse than follow  MWJ/DS and all the rest of the board''s actions over the last 5 years.

 

In any case I do wish that people would stop harping on about Cullum/Harris. there is no evidence that anty such deal was ever on the table.

[/quote]Letting the club slide into the lower reaches of the league through your own incompetence is awful and depressing - but a world away from actually imperilling the club''s very existence. We''re not in that position; we''re run badly, but hardly malevolently. And if we weren''t interested in doing due diligence on any prospective buyer (not that there are any out there), or selling out to the highest bidder without a second thought, that''d mean we were no longer a football club; but in fact a whore.

[Canary Fan 0]

I''m in broad agreement with you but walking away from the ground yesterday and mulling over the "What if''s" I started to think that maybe the best thing to happen would be relegation. Wait - hear me out! If we stay up I can only see us being in a similar dog fight next season. What will change? Where will the money come from to buy in the players we need? If we go down, we will lose all the loan players - fine. We would lose good players like Croft, Hoolihan and Clingan and anyone else who considers themselves above playing in League 1. But, hopefully we would keep a few of the experienced players like Doc, Drury and Cureton and they would be needed to bring on our youth members who are showing great promise. We''ve also got some bright prospects in the wings like the young lad from Dartford who should do well on that level and we''ll get some loanees of our own back who are currently doing well for other clubs. OK - so we stay in the lower league for a season (or two or three) to really consolidate but when we come back up we will come up with a team that are Norwich through and through with players who are proud to wear the shirt.

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="Canary Fan"]I''m in broad agreement with you but walking away from the ground yesterday and mulling over the "What if''s" I started to think that maybe the best thing to happen would be relegation. Wait - hear me out! If we stay up I can only see us being in a similar dog fight next season. What will change? Where will the money come from to buy in the players we need? If we go down, we will lose all the loan players - fine. We would lose good players like Croft, Hoolihan and Clingan and anyone else who considers themselves above playing in League 1. But, hopefully we would keep a few of the experienced players like Doc, Drury and Cureton and they would be needed to bring on our youth members who are showing great promise. We''ve also got some bright prospects in the wings like the young lad from Dartford who should do well on that level and we''ll get some loanees of our own back who are currently doing well for other clubs. OK - so we stay in the lower league for a season (or two or three) to really consolidate but when we come back up we will come up with a team that are Norwich through and through with players who are proud to wear the shirt.[/quote]If by some minor miracle we stay up, I entirely agree: it will certainly be more of the same. The flaw in your argument, though, is while I think we would recover in time (hence the example of Sheff Wed), it''s hardly guaranteed - and we could easily end up marooned in the third flight for years.

[Theres only one Martin Peters! 0]

Broadly speaking I agree with your excellent post Big Feller, however I would debate a couple a points.

The appointment of Gunny was certainly romantic, but Watford, Soto & Charlton all appointed Managers who were either experienced at Managing Football League Clubs or Reserve Teams or who had direct involvement as Assistant Managers in running Teams. Regrettably , Gunny has none of the above, and I cannot think of one successful Manager we have had who did not have experience of Managing Teams when appointed.

The loan signings made (none of whom are starting) team selections and substitutions that hand the initiative to the opposition all point to a Manager out of his depth.

Reference the Cullum saga it is alleged that Delia never had a meeting with him to discuss his offer, if true this beggars belief as what could be lost by meeting to try & find some common ground, strike up a rapport or leave the door open for future talks. The Cullums of this world do not come along very often and to snub them is asking for trouble & boy have we got that in bucket loads. Delia acted like a frightened rabbit in the headlights and it appears nobody on the board challenged her robustly enough (or did the Turners?).

I agree that the Board cannot magic money from thin air, but I remain to be convinced that the club is being run in a commercially sound way. With gates of 24/25k and various commercial enterprises we should not be one of the sick men of the Championship. Lavishing money on agents is a clear indication of the mismanagement of scarce resources.

Where do we go from here? I would suggest the supporters as substantial shareholders/stakeholders in their own right should demand the appointment to the Board of a representative director with expertise in football finance to carry out a forensic analysis of club finances and identify any commercial operations that are not viable, some difficult decisions will inevitably have to be made. A businessplan will need to be put together that matches our divisional status and financial means, and paramount importance should be given to footballing matters and not sacrificing ambition for prudence.

[I am a Banana 0]

smith wants to mix the club up and then beet it!

[city-till-i-die 7]

[quote user="Mr Brownstone"]Do you think that Smith loves the club, or that Smith loves being majority shareholder of the club?[/quote]if she loved the club she would not be in charge now!!! she likes no LOVES the media limelight   simples

[AndyJR 0]

I''m not giving up on them until the maths says otherwise.OTBC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thebigfeller 200]

There''s only one Martin Peters: I can''t disagree with much of that, mate. Are you the Martin Peters who

posts on the Wrath, incidentally? He always talks sense, as you have

above. In terms of Gunny''s appointment differing from that of the other

clubs you''ve mentioned: well, sure. I was hardly happy about it myself.

But candidates with prior, credible experience weren''t really available

to us given our vastly reduced means: all would''ve been a gamble, and

it''d have been a struggle big time to appoint any of them on a

short-term contract and not commit ourselves to another huge pay-off

should it go wrong. On Cullum: I absolutely agree we should''ve at least

met with the man, and was furious when we didn''t - but his subsequent

behaviour hasn''t suggested any real commitment on his part at all.Overall though, I broadly agree - and your suggestion in the last paragraph is excellent. I very much hope it''s pursued.

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

[quote user="thebigfeller"] On Cullum: I absolutely agree we should''ve at least

met with the man, and was furious when we didn''t - but his subsequent

behaviour hasn''t suggested any real commitment on his part at all.[/quote]thebigfeller, this is one of those internet myths that keeps getting repeated no matter how many times the truth is pointed out. Directors of NCFC plc met Peter Cullum on at least two occasions (it may have been more) - in the autumn of 2007 and the summer of 2008.

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

Mr Brownstone wrote the following post at 01/03/2009 2:23 PM:

Do you think that Smith loves the club, or that Smith loves being majority shareholder of the club?

 

 

Smith loves Smith and the publicity it brings her, remember the Lets be aving you. Remember little ol Norwich when we were promoted to the Premiership where is she now. I thought for some time that she would be good for the club and the publicity that it brings us but since relegation from the Premiership I realised that it is about her and not the club.

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="Theres only one Martin Peters"]

Broadly speaking I agree with your excellent post Big Feller, however I would debate a couple a points.

The appointment of Gunny was certainly romantic, but Watford, Soto & Charlton all appointed Managers who were either experienced at Managing Football League Clubs or Reserve Teams or who had direct involvement as Assistant Managers in running Teams. Regrettably , Gunny has none of the above, and I cannot think of one successful Manager we have had who did not have experience of Managing Teams when appointed.

The loan signings made (none of whom are starting) team selections and substitutions that hand the initiative to the opposition all point to a Manager out of his depth.

Reference the Cullum saga it is alleged that Delia never had a meeting with him to discuss his offer, if true this beggars belief as what could be lost by meeting to try & find some common ground, strike up a rapport or leave the door open for future talks. The Cullums of this world do not come along very often and to snub them is asking for trouble & boy have we got that in bucket loads. Delia acted like a frightened rabbit in the headlights and it appears nobody on the board challenged her robustly enough (or did the Turners?).

I agree that the Board cannot magic money from thin air, but I remain to be convinced that the club is being run in a commercially sound way. With gates of 24/25k and various commercial enterprises we should not be one of the sick men of the Championship. Lavishing money on agents is a clear indication of the mismanagement of scarce resources.

Where do we go from here? I would suggest the supporters as substantial shareholders/stakeholders in their own right should demand the appointment to the Board of a representative director with expertise in football finance to carry out a forensic analysis of club finances and identify any commercial operations that are not viable, some difficult decisions will inevitably have to be made. A businessplan will need to be put together that matches our divisional status and financial means, and paramount importance should be given to footballing matters and not sacrificing ambition for prudence.

[/quote]i think this last statement is very sound - and given the supporters contributed to our most succesful season by subscribing to the share issue at that time - there''s a moral argument to it too...

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="lucky green trainers"][quote user="Theres only one Martin Peters"]

Broadly speaking I agree with your excellent post Big Feller, however I would debate a couple a points.

The appointment of Gunny was certainly romantic, but Watford, Soto & Charlton all appointed Managers who were either experienced at Managing Football League Clubs or Reserve Teams or who had direct involvement as Assistant Managers in running Teams. Regrettably , Gunny has none of the above, and I cannot think of one successful Manager we have had who did not have experience of Managing Teams when appointed.

The loan signings made (none of whom are starting) team selections and substitutions that hand the initiative to the opposition all point to a Manager out of his depth.

Reference the Cullum saga it is alleged that Delia never had a meeting with him to discuss his offer, if true this beggars belief as what could be lost by meeting to try & find some common ground, strike up a rapport or leave the door open for future talks. The Cullums of this world do not come along very often and to snub them is asking for trouble & boy have we got that in bucket loads. Delia acted like a frightened rabbit in the headlights and it appears nobody on the board challenged her robustly enough (or did the Turners?).

I agree that the Board cannot magic money from thin air, but I remain to be convinced that the club is being run in a commercially sound way. With gates of 24/25k and various commercial enterprises we should not be one of the sick men of the Championship. Lavishing money on agents is a clear indication of the mismanagement of scarce resources.

Where do we go from here? I would suggest the supporters as substantial shareholders/stakeholders in their own right should demand the appointment to the Board of a representative director with expertise in football finance to carry out a forensic analysis of club finances and identify any commercial operations that are not viable, some difficult decisions will inevitably have to be made. A businessplan will need to be put together that matches our divisional status and financial means, and paramount importance should be given to footballing matters and not sacrificing ambition for prudence.

[/quote]

i think this last statement is very sound - and given the supporters contributed to our most succesful season by subscribing to the share issue at that time - there''s a moral argument to it too...


[/quote]

But according to certain shareholders on here us mere supporters/season ticket holders have no rights, it''s only the shareholders that do.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

It is how they have handled the money that has angered me. Delia should be devestated because if you look at the neglect to the squad over the last three years you will see that they fully deserve relegation. I have no complaints with the fact we will be relegated. You get what you pay for in this game and we have paid for a League One squad. The boardroom should be absolutley distraught and plagued by guilt. The fans had warned them long ago that the club was on the slide yet more loanees arrived and inadequate money was spent on permanent signings. We sold Shackell and Bell for £1.5m. Even over the last three years we havent spent that on players. There is never any intention to reinvest. I would rather the club go into admistration than see the current boardroom remain.

[Freeza 0]

[quote user="thebigfeller"] let me assure you that I''ve been massively critical of this board for many years: ever since October 2005, indeed.

[/quote]

Very good post, you should write a blog mate, just out of interest what happened in October 2005?

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="Freeza"][quote user="thebigfeller"] let me assure you that I''ve been massively critical of this board for many years: ever since October 2005, indeed.

[/quote]

Very good post, you should write a blog mate, just out of interest what happened in October 2005?[/quote]I used to write a blog under my username: mainly during 06/7, but I lost interest in it eventually. What happened in Oct ''05? Luton and QPR away, and Sheffield Wednesday at home. We lost the lot, and I couldn''t believe it when we didn''t get rid of Worthington. 11 months of paralysis and fiddling while Rome burned followed.

[gazzathegreat 0]

There''s only one MP - with reference to your final paragraph, we were told that the Turners came on board precisely to do what you suggest here. Strange then that they left and nothing has been said concerning their exit. Am I the only one that thinks this issue needs clearing up with some kind of statement issued by the board and preferably the Turners as well.

The rest of your post is excellent though, can''t disagree with any of it.

[Mr.Carrow 378]

[quote user="gazzathegreat"]There''s only one MP - with reference to your final paragraph, we were told that the Turners came on board precisely to do what you suggest here. Strange then that they left and nothing has been said concerning their exit. Am I the only one that thinks this issue needs clearing up with some kind of statement issued by the board and preferably the Turners as well. The rest of your post is excellent though, can''t disagree with any of it.[/quote]

I was going to post just that gaz [Y].  It`s another handy assumption from the toe-the-liner`s that the Turners left purely because of the credit crunch, but why Munby`s "I have no idea why they are leaving" statement?  Why no statement of support from the Turners to nip the inevitable rumours of a fall-out in the bud?  You are one of several informed people who have stated that they left because they confronted the rest of the board with a few home-truths about their profligacy off the pitch and they couldn`t take it.

PurpleCanary, how is your assertion that D and M met with Cullum twice any less of a myth than the press reports at the time stating that they had not?

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

PurpleCanary, how is your assertion that D and M met with Cullum twice any less of a myth than the press reports at the time stating that they had not?

[/quote]Mr Carrow, you need to read what I wrote. I never said Delia and Michael met Cullum twice. I said it was a fact (and it is) that a Norwich City director or directors met Cullum on two occasions. Those occasions were the autumn of 2007 and the summer of 2008. There may have been other meetings.I have never said that Delia met Cullum, because I have no idea whether she has or not. As it happens, I suspect this myth about directors never meeting Cullum arose was when it was reported - quite possibly correctly - that Delia had never met Cullum, and people took that to mean no director had ever met Cullum.