Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
barclay seats 4849

Why is the Pink un claiming the "Vast majority " would like to see gunn stay !

Recommended Posts

I for one do not want Bryan Gunn to stay as manager, he was only supposed to be a temporary solution, and he has shown that he does not have what is needed to obtain even a modicum of success at this club. Nice bloke ...now get in a proper manager.................Mark Robbins ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the trouble when a club legend is put in charge of team affairs, we would have to be facing a disaster as big as relegation to the fourth division before fans would chant for his head. We just have to hope that if Gunn is still manager next season and things are going badly that he walks before he''s pushed (probably back to one of his previous roles within the club, the lucky so-and-so!), or the cook and her cronies take swift and decisive action for a pleasant change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you think he was appointed. The board knew that the fans would not turn on Gunn. He should be found a role at the club but should NOT be manager next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="crowey66"]I would put my money on butterworth[/quote]

 

Now that would be a disaster...the arrogant tw@t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I''m missing something then because assuming we''re reading the same article, this is the closest I could find...

"And with fellow City legends Ian Crook, Ian Butterworth and John Deehan in the wings, a vast majority of Norwich fans were willing to get behind his line-up."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="barclay seats 48 49 "]If you read the article it clearly says that the " vast Majority of fans " would be happy for him to remain as manager.[/quote]

And yet the PU poll today is:

Should Bryan Gunn be given the manager''s job full-time next season?

And yes, I voted NO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I felt Gunn was a willing "victim" out of allegience to Smith for keeping him on the payroll as official lounge lizard over the years. He has failed as expected.... but you can''t blame him for what has happened to the club.

Smith and the board knew there would be no "Gunn out" campaign from the fans if it all went tits up.... so he was the perfect shield to hide behind. Another cynical ploy by the club''s "damage limitation" department.... and it has worked for them to a large extent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evening News have several posts from here in the paper tonight of people who don''t want Gunn kept on including Kathy, Graham Humphrey, Lambo, Butler, R Lim, Thebigfeller, Duke of Norfolk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Pink Un are partly to blame aswell, their solidarity to NCFC shows that they have no backbone as a paper and are more worried of upsetting the club than reporting the truth of feelings of supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="First Wizard"]

[quote user="barclay seats 48 49 "]If you read the article it clearly says that the " vast Majority of fans " would be happy for him to remain as manager.[/quote]

And yet the PU poll today is:

Should Bryan Gunn be given the manager''s job full-time next season?
And yes, I voted NO![/quote]Good job the Pink ''un didn''t say the vast majority of fans want him to stay on then isn''t it?(And I would like whatever the 34.18% are taking. Must be good stuff...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bryan will be in charge of team affairs (under my personal guidance) for next season...and there ain''t nothin'' you gullible gonads can do squit about....HAR! HAR HAR!" ....."£180,000 sheets - for a job well done!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who we have as manager should not really be an issue worth discussing at the moment.

If they were still with us then you could roll the best aspects of Sir Alf Ramsey, Matt Busby, Bill Shankly, Brian Clough and Bob Paisley together, put them in one human being and it would still not be good enough to get results under Delia Smith and her directors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
exactly smudge............ this board have destroyed us!

[quote user="Smudger"]

Who we have as manager should not really be an issue worth discussing at the moment.

If they were still with us then you could roll the best aspects of Sir Alf Ramsey, Matt Busby, Bill Shankly, Brian Clough and Bob Paisley together, put them in one human being and it would still not be good enough to get results under Delia Smith and her directors.

[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This board has made some appointments of devastating horror and there is nothing us fans can do but abandon the club, i for one and thousands of others have Norwich City in their blood and not about to give it all away for the sake of a bunch of financially inept decision makers and egotistical morons. Bryan Gunn has done his best and no doubt sacrificed a lot personally but he is not up to it. I am going to make myself unpopular here but we should have kept with Roeder and sacked him whatever happened, cos i am convinced we would be safe now. Come on City dont break my heart anymore win on Sunday and see what unfolds elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Neil Cluckcaster"]

I felt Gunn was a willing "victim" out of allegience to Smith for keeping him on the payroll as official lounge lizard over the years. He has failed as expected.... but you can''t blame him for what has happened to the club.

Smith and the board knew there would be no "Gunn out" campaign from the fans if it all went tits up.... so he was the perfect shield to hide behind. Another cynical ploy by the club''s "damage limitation" department.... and it has worked for them to a large extent.

[/quote]

Agree with the first bit. Gunn is not to blame - the problem is much bigger, though I do feel that a proper manager would have given us a much better chance of avoiding the drop. Gunn inherited a much better sityouashun than Roeder did...

But the second paragraph is intellectually incoherent, Cluck. Surely if there will be no Gunn Out campaign, there is no shield. Grant''s incompetence was a shield for the board to hide behind. Roeder''s deep unpleasantness was a shiled for the board to hide behind. BUt if you don''t blame Gunn, as most don''t, who is to blame?

Certainly as someone who has given the board the benefit of the doubt for a long time, the appointment and failure of Gunn has been the thing that has convinced me that it is the board and not the latest hapless manager, who have to take responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...