The Most Unpopular Post of the Year - My View

[tom cavendish 0]

[quote] "I really would stop digging if i were you tom.  I notice you don`t comment on Apathy fc`s figure for greater Norwich above....a tad inconvenient perhaps? " [/quote]

If you read back then you will see that I have already covered what Apathy said, read my post with "Regarding population, if you want to add areas further afield to Norwich then you must also do the same with other clubs to make a fair comparison".

[quote]"You are correct about Bristol having a population of over 1 million to draw from, but they also have two well-supported football clubs and a very obvious liking for the oval ball in those parts."[/quote]

But that isn''t true - and I have checked the facts.

Norwich get average crowds higher than Bristol City + Bristol Rovers added together. Even Bristol rugby club only get an average of 5,005. Yet Bristol is many times bigger than Norwich so it has a far greater potential than Norwich.

So can people now realise that things could be a lot lot worse and not destroy what good we do have unless we have better waiting to take its place. 

[kdncfc 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]

[quote] "I really would stop digging if i were you tom.  I notice you don`t comment on Apathy fc`s figure for greater Norwich above....a tad inconvenient perhaps? " [/quote]

If you read back then you will see that I have already covered what Apathy said, read my post with "Regarding population, if you want to add areas further afield to Norwich then you must also do the same with other clubs to make a fair comparison".

[quote]"You are correct about Bristol having a population of over 1 million to draw from, but they also have two well-supported football clubs and a very obvious liking for the oval ball in those parts."[/quote]

But that isn''t true - and I have checked the facts.

Norwich get average crowds higher than Bristol City + Bristol Rovers added together. Even Bristol rugby club only get an average of 5,005. Yet Bristol is many times bigger than Norwich so it has a far greater potential than Norwich.

So can people now realise that things could be a lot lot worse and not destroy what good we do have unless we have better waiting to take its place. 

[/quote]

You don''t have to go further afield, the suburbs of Norwich are all part of Norwich but because they come under different councils they aren''t declared as part of the population whereas the population of Bristol includes the suburbs. Bristol is under twice the size of Norwich but they have 2 footy teams which evens it out.

 

[The Fish Seller 0]

But Norwich City has a far greater population than the City of London (pop circa 7,800)  and look at Chelsea, Arsenal Tottenham etc.Where are we going wrong then? These London Clubs get far bigger crowds than Norwich do.

[tom cavendish 0]

[quote user="kdncfc"][quote user="tom cavendish"]

[quote] "I really would stop digging if i were you tom.  I notice you don`t comment on Apathy fc`s figure for greater Norwich above....a tad inconvenient perhaps? " [/quote]

If you read back then you will see that I have already covered what Apathy said, read my post with "Regarding population, if you want to add areas further afield to Norwich then you must also do the same with other clubs to make a fair comparison".

[quote]"You are correct about Bristol having a population of over 1 million to draw from, but they also have two well-supported football clubs and a very obvious liking for the oval ball in those parts."[/quote]

But that isn''t true - and I have checked the facts.

Norwich get average crowds higher than Bristol City + Bristol Rovers added together. Even Bristol rugby club only get an average of 5,005. Yet Bristol is many times bigger than Norwich so it has a far greater potential than Norwich.

So can people now realise that things could be a lot lot worse and not destroy what good we do have unless we have better waiting to take its place. 

[/quote]

You don''t have to go further afield, the suburbs of Norwich are all part of Norwich but because they come under different councils they aren''t declared as part of the population whereas the population of Bristol includes the suburbs. Bristol is under twice the size of Norwich but they have 2 footy teams which evens it out.

 

[/quote]

 

Wrong! The population quoted from Bristol does not include the suburbs as they are under South Glos and Somerset councils. So if you want to make a comparison then do a like for like as I did.

 

 

[tom cavendish 0]

Arsenal and Spurs don''t play in the central City of London area, they play in North London that has a population of about 1million and in a densely populated area.

[TheFineCity 0]

I agree with Mr Carrow Tom, stop digging. Your population argument is completely laughable.

[Barclay_Boy 0]

poor old Tom. Now we know that the Board read these message boards an it has been long suspected that they "plant" the occasional poster on here, to try to address the balance, and convince some of the more gullible fans with their spin.

I have to say you are the most obvious "plant" I have come across in two years of viewing.

 

[The Fish Seller 0]

I rue the day they let the City wall fall into disrepair, at least you knew where you were with the outsiders when the wall was up.

[tom cavendish 0]

[quote user="Barclay_Boy"]

poor old Tom. Now we know that the Board read these message boards an it has been long suspected that they "plant" the occasional poster on here, to try to address the balance, and convince some of the more gullible fans with their spin.

I have to say you are the most obvious "plant" I have come across in two years of viewing.

[/quote]

I''m no plant - I have never even met anyone from the club. But I do have friends who support other clubs so know about the problems they face. Norwich fans should think themselves very fortunate becuase they still have a very good club. Don''t turn it into the next Notts County, Oxford Utd, or Luton Town by destroying the good things that we do have.

[Desert Fox 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]

Arsenal and Spurs don''t play in the central City of London area, they play in North London that has a population of about 1million and in a densely populated area.

[/quote]

Tom,

Do you know the meaning of the word ''irony''. Clearly not!

[Desert Fox 0]

Tom,

No doubt you believe that our Board are one of the ''good things we have''. I would hate to think where we would be if we had a bad Board. For the avoidance of doubt I am being sarcastic.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]

I''m no plant - I have never even met anyone from the club. But I do have friends who support other clubs so know about the problems they face. Norwich fans should think themselves very fortunate becuase they still have a very good club. Don''t turn it into the next Notts County, Oxford Utd, or Luton Town by destroying the good things that we do have.

[/quote]Okay Tom an easy one for you.In your own words:''Norwich fans should think themselves very fortunate becuase they still have a very good club''.Now take away the fans and tell us all what''s ''very good'' about our club at the moment because if I''m being honest we appear to be in the worst all round condition I can remember in 40 years.

[Barclay_Boy 0]

[quote user="tom cavendish"][quote user="Barclay_Boy"]

poor old Tom. Now we know that the Board read these message boards an it has been long suspected that they "plant" the occasional poster on here, to try to address the balance, and convince some of the more gullible fans with their spin.

I have to say you are the most obvious "plant" I have come across in two years of viewing.

[/quote]

I''m no plant - I have never even met anyone from the club. But I do have friends who support other clubs so know about the problems they face. Norwich fans should think themselves very fortunate becuase they still have a very good club. Don''t turn it into the next Notts County, Oxford Utd, or Luton Town by destroying the good things that we do have.

[/quote]

sorry - you have been sussed, either you''re a plant or your stupid puerile views make you a vegetable - you choose

[Ultramagnetic 0]

I don''t know about comparing us to Notts County, Luton or Oxford (apart from the latter clubs Milk Cup victories).  Over the past fifty years, Norwich is historically a bigger club than those three, fair enough Notts County got decent gates in the 40''s and 50''s, but what have they done since then (apart from three seasons in the top flight in the 80''s and a season in 90/91)?Surely Luton''s demise is stark lesson in incompetent management of a football club at board level.  Sadly though, I can see the same thing happening to Norwich under this current regime....

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="tom cavendish"]

[quote] "I really would stop digging if i were you tom.  I notice you don`t comment on Apathy fc`s figure for greater Norwich above....a tad inconvenient perhaps? " [/quote]

If you read back then you will see that I have already covered what Apathy said, read my post with "Regarding population, if you want to add areas further afield to Norwich then you must also do the same with other clubs to make a fair comparison".

[quote]"You are correct about Bristol having a population of over 1 million to draw from, but they also have two well-supported football clubs and a very obvious liking for the oval ball in those parts."[/quote]

But that isn''t true - and I have checked the facts.

Norwich get average crowds higher than Bristol City + Bristol Rovers added together. Even Bristol rugby club only get an average of 5,005. Yet Bristol is many times bigger than Norwich so it has a far greater potential than Norwich.

So can people now realise that things could be a lot lot worse and not destroy what good we do have unless we have better waiting to take its place. 

[/quote]

Tom, are you seriously arguing that City`s catchment area is the tiny part of inner Norwich which falls under the jurisdiction of Norwich City council?  The club themselves have stated in the past that over 50% of its supporters come from outside Norwich- so my figure of a catchment area of over a million is accurate is it not?  So i agree that Bristol have a catchment area of a million, but so do we and we don`t have two clubs or competition from other major sports; ergo our catchment area is bigger/better than theirs.  I would suggest you look at the facts before forming opinions based on inaccurate myths.

[Badger 0]

Don''t worry Tom. Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid!

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Badger"]Don''t worry Tom. Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid![/quote]Asinine even by your standards Neil.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]Don''t worry Tom. Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid![/quote]Asinine even by your standards Neil.[/quote]Care to elucidate or would you like to keep it at nice simple abuse - I wouldn''t want to tax you with requiring reason!

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="Badger"]
Don''t worry Tom.

Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid!
[/quote]

Speaking personally Badger, i`ve accepted tom`s estimate of the total catchment area Bristol has.  Have a look at the official figure tom posted for Bristol- it`s a good deal less than 1 million isn`t it?  So what this means is that i`m accepting the fact that other towns and Cities have suburbs and outlying towns and factoring that in doesn`t it?

Now i`ve stated that both Bristol and Norwich have a catchment area of about a million people, but that Bristol has two football clubs and top-class rugby.  Do you have a problem with that statement?

[corbs 0]

The top Clubs all come from the same 4 Cities, Conurbations, and are going to continue to do so under this system : London, Manchester, Liverpool, and of course Birmingham (the perennial under achievers). That is why Cough was unique, because he won Titles with TWO provincial Clubs, Nottingham F and Derby. Norwich is a medium sized provincial Club, well out of the heartland of football, but able to sustain a solid fan base due to being a family friendly Club, thanks in part to this Board. 

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="Badger"]Don''t worry Tom. Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid![/quote]

Speaking personally Badger, i`ve accepted tom`s estimate of the total catchment area Bristol has.  Have a look at the official figure tom posted for Bristol- it`s a good deal less than 1 million isn`t it?  So what this means is that i`m accepting the fact that other towns and Cities have suburbs and outlying towns and factoring that in doesn`t it?

Now i`ve stated that both Bristol and Norwich have a catchment area of about a million people, but that Bristol has two football clubs and top-class rugby.  Do you have a problem with that statement?

[/quote]You cite Apathy FC [quote user="Apathy FC"]"368,000 people live in Greater Norwich...[url]http://www.eastofengland.uk.com/res/265.asp[/url][/quote]What is the population of "greater" Bristol? I imagine that you are pretty aware that you are not comparing like with like. If you really think Norwich/ Norfolk is bigger/ more populous than Bristol and equivalent environs, I suggest you haven''t been there. My guess is that you don''t really believe it though do you?

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]Don''t worry Tom. Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid![/quote]Asinine even by your standards Neil.[/quote]Care to elucidate or would you like to keep it at nice simple abuse - I wouldn''t want to tax you with requiring reason![/quote]Don''t worry Badger it''s not taxing when you''re used to using it. ''Asinine'' is an adjective derived from the latin ''asininus'' which means of or relating to an ass or in more modern usage ''extremely or utterly foolish''.As in:  ''It is asinine to imply that all the posters on this thread who do not agree with the points raised by one particular poster are ignorant to the point that they do not know other cities have suburbs or outlying towns too''.''It is also asinine to imply that all other posters on the message board are stupid''.In using the phrase ''even by your standards'' I draw attention to the fact that this is not the first time you have made derogatory comments on such a sweeping basis as this latest snipe and further highlight that a one liner in which you in two separate sentences call us thick is a more concentrated attempt at abuse than you normally make.The ''Neil'' is to do with the name Badger. I know of a ''Neil'' who reminds me of a Badger, let''s call it a nickname shall we.So in summary ''Asinine even by your standards Neil''.Means your post is extraordinarily stupid and insulting even from one who isn''t averse to popping in the odd insult on here when they have nothing more intelligent or constructive to say on the topic.Next lesson is ''Agent Provocateur'' don''t forget to do your research.

(Neil).

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="corbs"]The top Clubs all come from the same 4 Cities, Conurbations, and are going to continue to do so under this system : London, Manchester, Liverpool, and of course Birmingham (the perennial under achievers). That is why Cough was unique, because he won Titles with TWO provincial Clubs, Nottingham F and Derby. Norwich is a medium sized provincial Club, well out of the heartland of football, but able to sustain a solid fan base due to being a family friendly Club, thanks in part to this Board. [/quote]

Corbs, don`t faint but i actually agree with all of that.  The thing is i`ve never read a post on here which suggests we should be a top 4 club.  Or a top 10 club.  Top 30?  Absolutely.

The one outright undeniable success the board has had is in the marketing/ticketing policy, but the point is we had the potential fanbase there to utilise.  Even Doncaster said that demand for tickets far outstripped supply in the promotion/Prem seasons, therefore is it reasonable of me to state that a "medium sized provincial club" who have a catchment area of 1 million with no competition and who can pull in 25,000 at the bottom of the Champs, might be able to add say 10,000 to that figure if established in the Prem, making it one of the best supported clubs in the country?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

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

[quote user="Badger"]
Don''t worry Tom.

Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid!
[/quote]

Speaking personally Badger, i`ve accepted tom`s estimate of the total catchment area Bristol has.  Have a look at the official figure tom posted for Bristol- it`s a good deal less than 1 million isn`t it?  So what this means is that i`m accepting the fact that other towns and Cities have suburbs and outlying towns and factoring that in doesn`t it?

Now i`ve stated that both Bristol and Norwich have a catchment area of about a million people, but that Bristol has two football clubs and top-class rugby.  Do you have a problem with that statement?

[/quote]

You cite Apathy FC

[quote user="Apathy FC"]

"368,000 people live in Greater Norwich...

[url]http://www.eastofengland.uk.com/res/265.asp[/url]
[/quote]

What is the population of "greater" Bristol? I imagine that you are pretty aware that you are not comparing like with like. If you really think Norwich/ Norfolk is bigger/ more populous than Bristol and equivalent environs, I suggest you haven''t been there.

My guess is that you don''t really believe it though do you?
[/quote]

Badger, where am i saying that Norwich/Norfolk is more populous than Bristol?  Tom stated that the Bristol area has a population of about 1 million (against an "official" population of c.300k) and i pointed out that the area City draws it`s support from is about the same.  But that we don`t have two clubs or other major sports.  What is your counter argument?

Something else to consider:  the population of Greater Birmingham is 3.07 million.  It has 6 professional clubs (it includes Coventry).  So which is better 3.07 million between 6 clubs, or 1 million for just 1?  Kind of casts a different light on the "little old Norwich" myth doesn`t it?

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="corbs"]The top Clubs all come from the same 4 Cities, Conurbations, and are going to continue to do so under this system : London, Manchester, Liverpool, and of course Birmingham (the perennial under achievers). That is why Cough was unique, because he won Titles with TWO provincial Clubs, Nottingham F and Derby. Norwich is a medium sized provincial Club, well out of the heartland of football, but able to sustain a solid fan base due to being a family friendly Club, thanks in part to this Board. [/quote]

Corbs, don`t faint but i actually agree with all of that.  The thing is i`ve never read a post on here which suggests we should be a top 4 club.  Or a top 10 club.  Top 30?  Absolutely.

The one outright undeniable success the board has had is in the marketing/ticketing policy, but the point is we had the potential fanbase there to utilise.  Even Doncaster said that demand for tickets far outstripped supply in the promotion/Prem seasons, therefore is it reasonable of me to state that a "medium sized provincial club" who have a catchment area of 1 million with no competition and who can pull in 25,000 at the bottom of the Champs, might be able to add say 10,000 to that figure if established in the Prem, making it one of the best supported clubs in the country?

[/quote]Don''t forget the fifth conurbation the North East, Newcastle, Sunderland, and more recently Middlesborough.Plot out the premiership teams on a map of Britain and you''ll start to wonder why it''s such a big thing to so many people.

[tom cavendish 0]

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

[quote user="Badger"]
Don''t worry Tom.

Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid!
[/quote]

Speaking personally Badger, i`ve accepted tom`s estimate of the total catchment area Bristol has.  Have a look at the official figure tom posted for Bristol- it`s a good deal less than 1 million isn`t it?  So what this means is that i`m accepting the fact that other towns and Cities have suburbs and outlying towns and factoring that in doesn`t it?

Now i`ve stated that both Bristol and Norwich have a catchment area of about a million people, but that Bristol has two football clubs and top-class rugby.  Do you have a problem with that statement?

[/quote]

You cite Apathy FC

[quote user="Apathy FC"]

"368,000 people live in Greater Norwich...

[url]http://www.eastofengland.uk.com/res/265.asp[/url]
[/quote]

What is the population of "greater" Bristol? I imagine that you are pretty aware that you are not comparing like with like. If you really think Norwich/ Norfolk is bigger/ more populous than Bristol and equivalent environs, I suggest you haven''t been there.

My guess is that you don''t really believe it though do you?
[/quote]

Badger, where am i saying that Norwich/Norfolk is more populous than Bristol?  Tom stated that the Bristol area has a population of about 1 million (against an "official" population of c.300k) and i pointed out that the area City draws it`s support from is about the same.  But that we don`t have two clubs or other major sports.  What is your counter argument?

[/quote]

You are not comparing like for like. If you want to include places such as Kings Lynn in the Norwich catchment area, then you should add an Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Bath etc. in the Bristol catchement area which still makes the population of the Bristol catchment area many, many times that of Norfolk - which ever way you want to look at it.

And I repeate, Bristol Rugby club only get an average of 5,005 - and many of those also go to football games - so Norwich get more fans than the Bristol Rugby club, Bristol City, and Bristol Rovers added together- and Norwich has a much lower number of people within its catchment area than Bristol. Bristol is the 6th biggest city in England.

[tom cavendish 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="corbs"]The top Clubs all come from the same 4 Cities, Conurbations, and are going to continue to do so under this system : London, Manchester, Liverpool, and of course Birmingham (the perennial under achievers). That is why Cough was unique, because he won Titles with TWO provincial Clubs, Nottingham F and Derby. Norwich is a medium sized provincial Club, well out of the heartland of football, but able to sustain a solid fan base due to being a family friendly Club, thanks in part to this Board. [/quote]

Corbs, don`t faint but i actually agree with all of that.  The thing is i`ve never read a post on here which suggests we should be a top 4 club.  Or a top 10 club.  Top 30?  Absolutely.

The one outright undeniable success the board has had is in the marketing/ticketing policy, but the point is we had the potential fanbase there to utilise.  Even Doncaster said that demand for tickets far outstripped supply in the promotion/Prem seasons, therefore is it reasonable of me to state that a "medium sized provincial club" who have a catchment area of 1 million with no competition and who can pull in 25,000 at the bottom of the Champs, might be able to add say 10,000 to that figure if established in the Prem, making it one of the best supported clubs in the country?

[/quote]

The points I''ve put in bold are the main points I was making so we do agree to an extent.

[Ultramagnetic 0]

I never disagreed with your statements about Bristol being considerably bigger than Norwich, that is common knowledge.  It was the comparison with the likes of Luton and Oxford that I had issues with...

 

Historically west country clubs have always been underachievers, both in terms of results on the pitch and attendances achieved.  Yes, the area has great potential, but for some reason this has never been realised.  Surely the continued ''failure'' of clubs like Bristol City, Bristol Rovers, Swindon, Bournemouth, Exeter, Torquay, Plymouth and Cheltenham cannot be attributed to their respectives boards?

[Mr.Carrow 376]

[quote user="tom cavendish"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Badger"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="Badger"]
Don''t worry Tom.

Most of them don''t know that other cities have suburbs and outlying towns too. The irony is that they think everybody else is stupid!
[/quote]

Speaking personally Badger, i`ve accepted tom`s estimate of the total catchment area Bristol has.  Have a look at the official figure tom posted for Bristol- it`s a good deal less than 1 million isn`t it?  So what this means is that i`m accepting the fact that other towns and Cities have suburbs and outlying towns and factoring that in doesn`t it?

Now i`ve stated that both Bristol and Norwich have a catchment area of about a million people, but that Bristol has two football clubs and top-class rugby.  Do you have a problem with that statement?

[/quote]

You cite Apathy FC

[quote user="Apathy FC"]

"368,000 people live in Greater Norwich...

[url]http://www.eastofengland.uk.com/res/265.asp[/url]
[/quote]

What is the population of "greater" Bristol? I imagine that you are pretty aware that you are not comparing like with like. If you really think Norwich/ Norfolk is bigger/ more populous than Bristol and equivalent environs, I suggest you haven''t been there.

My guess is that you don''t really believe it though do you?
[/quote]

Badger, where am i saying that Norwich/Norfolk is more populous than Bristol?  Tom stated that the Bristol area has a population of about 1 million (against an "official" population of c.300k) and i pointed out that the area City draws it`s support from is about the same.  But that we don`t have two clubs or other major sports.  What is your counter argument?

[/quote]

You are not comparing like for like. If you want to include places such as Kings Lynn in the Norwich catchment area, then you should add an Gloucester, Worcester, Hereford, Bath etc. in the Bristol catchement area which still makes the population of the Bristol catchment area many, many times that of Norfolk - which ever way you want to look at it.

And I repeate, Bristol Rugby club only get an average of 5,005 - and many of those also go to football games - so Norwich get more fans than the Bristol Rugby club, Bristol City, and Bristol Rovers added together- and Norwich has a much lower number of people within its catchment area than Bristol. Bristol is the 6th biggest city in England.

[/quote]

Tom, most of the places you mention there have their own club or rugby team.  Rugby has a huge influence in the West of the country and the two sports do not generally mix well.  Anecdotally, plenty of people i`ve met from the West say that "people prefer rugby to football".  Swindon isn`t too far up the road.

My point is that every area with a larger population has a corresponding larger number of football clubs and major sports.  Another example:  South Yorkshire has a population of 1.26m people.  It has FIVE professional football clubs and big rugby clubs plus ice hockey/speedway etc.  Makes our catchment area of 1 million in Norfolk and N.Suffolk for one team with no other major sports not half bad doesn`t it?

 

[BigFish 1,987]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]

[quote user="corbs"]The top Clubs all come from the same 4 Cities, Conurbations, and are going to continue to do so under this system : London, Manchester, Liverpool, and of course Birmingham (the perennial under achievers). That is why Cough was unique, because he won Titles with TWO provincial Clubs, Nottingham F and Derby. Norwich is a medium sized provincial Club, well out of the heartland of football, but able to sustain a solid fan base due to being a family friendly Club, thanks in part to this Board. [/quote]

Corbs, don`t faint but i actually agree with all of that.  The thing is i`ve never read a post on here which suggests we should be a top 4 club.  Or a top 10 club.  Top 30?  Absolutely.

The one outright undeniable success the board has had is in the marketing/ticketing policy, but the point is we had the potential fanbase there to utilise.  Even Doncaster said that demand for tickets far outstripped supply in the promotion/Prem seasons, therefore is it reasonable of me to state that a "medium sized provincial club" who have a catchment area of 1 million with no competition and who can pull in 25,000 at the bottom of the Champs, might be able to add say 10,000 to that figure if established in the Prem, making it one of the best supported clubs in the country?

[/quote]Now Mr C, I can''t let you get away with that. Not withstanding that the increase that you talk about would require significant additional investment & borrowing that you have consistently railed against (perhaps even a new ground) there is the fact that the support City get from the catchment area you talk about has been traditionally lukewarm.Looking back at the days before seating constrained the raw numbers that support rarely troubled Carrow Road''s capacity and would give a much lower figure than the 35k average that you suggest is achievable. In the 70s John Bond regularly moaned that though he thought of Norwich as a "football" city the gates never supported that.Indeed the case may be made that fewer individual people go to matches now the average attendance is c24/25k than when it was lower. Back in the days when you could pay on the gate it was quite common for non regulars to turn for the odd game when they fancied it, particularly those who worked Saturdays. Now is suspect many more go every week while the number attending less than half is negligible.You admit and I agree that the boards one success has been at marketing the gates up. This has been achieved by giving tickets away free, discounted & comparatively cheap. All very laudable but support that would melt away if charged at full price.