Official Badger Statement

[Badger 0]

[quote user="thebigfeller"]

Many a time, Badger, I''ve been tremendously proud of what a family, community oriented club Norwich City is. It''s what attracted me to the club in the first place way back in 1989, when I was a ten year old growing up in Middlesex. I don''t doubt there were many others like me: people not local to Norfolk who became fans of a club which, at a time of hooliganism and the long ball, did things so refreshingly differently.

But there''s a simple rule in life. Most things are fine in moderation, but become a problem when taken to excess - and lately, I have started to conclude that it''s possible for a football club to be too community and family oriented. Long before Fulham, I''ve stood at many away games and wondered what on earth fans around me were doing applauding the players off after a dreadful performance: I vividly remember one such occasion after an awful 2-1 defeat at Watford in January 2003. Fans of other clubs simply don''t do this: they demand better. Think about it for a moment: what''s the sense in applauding people for just doing their jobs, and badly at that?

[/quote]

I think that you are conflating too separate points here. One point is about the club being community orientated and the other about the nature of the fans support.I don''t think it is possible for a club to be too community orientated and would like to see it even more so. The football club is inextricably linked to my connection to the area and my heritage. I would argue that it needs to be more community orientated not less.Re fans support - eg Fulham. I understand what you are saying but I think we do it out of a sense of loyalty to our City. It''s a bit like when someone insults a member of your family - you might realise that they have a point but you stick up for the family member anyway! Support such as we saw at Fulham was not really an appreciation of the player''s efforts that day (although we were unlucky to in behind at half-time imho) but a reaffirmation of our pride and belief in the City and the area. (Yes I know that this sounds like sociological mumbo jumbo!)

[quote user="thebigfeller"]

I''m convinced it''s symptomatic of a deeper problem. Whether it''s chicken and egg, I don''t know - but the behaviour of some of the fans justifies the board in being so limp wristed, reactive rather than proactive and unambitious all the time. This will only change if the fans pressure those in charge to do so. I don''t hate any fan of Norwich City: it''s a fantastic club and fantastic city, and that Norwich itself remains so unspoilt and unique is one of its greatest secrets. But I do sometimes despair of how passive the fans can be - because ultimately, we are the custodians and guardians of the club, and it''s up to us to protect it. No matter how much they might protest to the contrary, players, managers and even directors are only ever just passing through.

[/quote]I don''t agree that the fan''s behaviour causes or justifies the boards "lack of ambition." I think it is simply that it does not have enough money. The economics of football has changed so much due to television revenues. The alternative revenue sources through an enlarged infrastructure was a sensible strategy 10 years ago and may in the long term still be the most feasible long-term, sustainable policy.However, TV revenues have increased so much in recent years that the revenues from these sources have been dwarfed by Sky etc. In doing so it has created wage and transfer fee inflation that leaves clubs without the TV revenue unable to compete effectively. This has rendered a sensible policy ineffective.It could be argued that the board should have adjusted its strategy to adapt to these changed circumstances but without alternative sources of finance this would be a significant gamble. I am still not sure whether TV revenues will be a medium term "bubble" - fashions change in the entertainment industry. But yes in retrospect, we were a central defender and a central striker light in our Premier Campaign and we all know the story from then on.Ultimately, I suppose your intellectual response to calls for protests depend upon whether or not you believe that "things can only get better." I am not convinced that there are any genuine rich investors that the board is fighting off. But I don''t claim to know one way or the other - I am highly suspicious of some of those that they do.

[Desert Fox 0]

Badger,

I will let you have the last word which you are obviously so keen to achieve.

Those of us that dare to question the Board are obviously nothing but ungrateful bullying Norfolk hating agitators with an axe to grind. The club is well run and all our problems are to do with on the pitch performances and we are fully confident that our Board will sort out the mess that it has been left to deal with.

Are you happy now - can we close this thread?

 

 

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Desert Fox"]

Those of us that dare to question the Board are obviously nothing but ungrateful bullying Norfolk hating agitators with an axe to grind.

[/quote]

No. Many of the board’s most passionate opponents are intelligent and well intentioned. It is quite possible to have a sensible and informative exchange of views with them and I for one have learnt a lot of interesting things from them. You could try reading the discussions but I should post a long word warning!However, some are ill informed, intellectually challenged, narrow minded and bigoted to the extent that anyone that thinks differently to them is perceived as a threat. Hence their dislike and castigation of the majority of City fans that do not join protests or fit into their narrow perspective of what a city fan should look like. This group, of which you are a good example, is small but very vocal on this site. Unable to express their ideas properly or comprehend anything other than simple black or white, they employ the only tactics of which they are capable - cheap abuse and deliberately ignoring, misquoting or simply lying about what has been posted.It is not a pleasant spectacle but it is a survival mechanism of sorts for those that cannot manage in any other way.

[Desert Fox 0]

Badger,

I promise you this is my last post to you.

I beleieve that you have no interest in debate of any kind - you are simply trying to smother any dissent. You should try holding a mirror up to yourself because most of your post above describes exactly how I feel about you.

On the basis that we cant both be write and this thread has effectively died, can you let matters rest?

[thebigfeller 200]

[quote user="Badger"]

I think that you are conflating too separate points here. One point is about the club being community orientated and the other about the nature of the fans support.

I don''t think it is possible for a club to be too community orientated and would like to see it even more so. The football club is inextricably linked to my connection to the area and my heritage. I would argue that it needs to be more community orientated not less.

Re fans support - eg Fulham. I understand what you are saying but I think we do it out of a sense of loyalty to our City. It''s a bit like when someone insults a member of your family - you might realise that they have a point but you stick up for the family member anyway!

Support such as we saw at Fulham was not really an appreciation of the player''s efforts that day (although we were unlucky to in behind at half-time imho) but a reaffirmation of our pride and belief in the City and the area. (Yes I know that this sounds like sociological mumbo jumbo!)

I don''t agree that the fan''s behaviour causes or justifies the boards "lack of ambition." I think it is simply that it does not have enough money. The economics of football has changed so much due to television revenues. The alternative revenue sources through an enlarged infrastructure was a sensible strategy 10 years ago and may in the long term still be the most feasible long-term, sustainable policy.

However, TV revenues have increased so much in recent years that the revenues from these sources have been dwarfed by Sky etc. In doing so it has created wage and transfer fee inflation that leaves clubs without the TV revenue unable to compete effectively. This has rendered a sensible policy ineffective.

It could be argued that the board should have adjusted its strategy to adapt to these changed circumstances but without alternative sources of finance this would be a significant gamble. I am still not sure whether TV revenues will be a medium term "bubble" - fashions change in the entertainment industry. But yes in retrospect, we were a central defender and a central striker light in our Premier Campaign and we all know the story from then on.

Ultimately, I suppose your intellectual response to calls for protests depend upon whether or not you believe that "things can only get better." I am not convinced that there are any genuine rich investors that the board is fighting off. But I don''t claim to know one way or the other - I am highly suspicious of some of those that they do.

[/quote]

But on the contrary: the more community or family oriented a club is, the more likely it is to capture support not just from football diehards, but women (some women are football diehards, of course - but not all), children (ditto), and people just happy to be "at an event". That in turn means that to a section - but only a section - of our support, losing simply doesn''t hurt as much as it does other fans or fans of other clubs. As well as supporting Norwich, I also follow Hearts north of the border, and venture on to a number of other clubs'' messageboards from time to time. I''m always struck by how furious so many of their fans are when their team loses. It''s very over the top at times: but also reflects a sense that they deserve better.

In our case, if the fans just keep parroting the same excuses as the board, there''ll be no pressure on them to change at all. I think the goodwill Delia and Michael still enjoy is astounding given the club''s decline over the past four years - and while I too recoil at the personal abuse chucked at them from a few on here who should know better (not least because it muddies the waters), am extremely relieved real questions are finally beginning to be asked, by moderates as well as extremists. Because Badger, it''s not lack of money which got us relegated from the Championship: it''s lack of footballing expertise, lack of vision, expenditure and over-borrowing on completely the wrong things, absurd managerial choices and above all, simple lack of leadership from those we''re supposed to trust.

Football has changed considerably over the past fifteen years, and will continue to do so. Like you, I used to wonder whether the TV bubble would burst; but now, I can see that the internet and telecommunications revolution will ensure the rich will keep on getting richer. At some stage, either Rangers and Celtic will move south, or the biggest clubs in England and Scotland will join a several-tiered European Super League. A Premier League 2 seems to be in the offing as well; and just as Norwich got relegated at precisely the wrong time just as money was flooding into the game in the mid-90s, so we might well have done so again this year. If we''re not careful, we could find ourselves locked out of a new, two-division structure as well - a thought to awful to contemplate.

A lot of what''s happened to the game hasn''t been particularly edifying. But happened it has, and the runaway train shows no sign of slowing down. Meanwhile, instead of thinking of ways to compete in this new reality, those purportedly in charge fail to throw the kitchen sink at courting new investment (not even when we were promoted, which was surely a better time than any), set conditions which are simply too difficult to meet, and cry "stop the world! We want to get off!" Sorry, but that just doesn''t cut it. If we have to sell to a non-Norwich fan or overseas benefactor, sell we must. Sheffield Wednesday''s Chairman was in the US talking with potential investors the other day; would our directors even dream of doing likewise? Yet it won''t stop Wednesday being a community club; nor has Marcus Evans'' ownership done so in Ipswich''s case. Football clubs are about history, tradition and are passed from one generation to the next, always maintaining certain characteristics along the way: it was true in our case under Robert Chase, and will remain so in the future no matter who might own us.

The board admitted at the AGM last year that it had run out of ideas. We need modern people and a completely different way of thinking about who we are and what we can achieve. Simply taking pride in values we''ve always had while the club drifts ever lower is simply not an option; and if the board can''t see this, it''s up to the fans to let them know it in no uncertain terms.

[gazzathegreat 0]

Desert Fox, you win this week''s post of the week award. Well done.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Badger"]However, some are ill informed, intellectually challenged, narrow minded and bigoted to the extent that anyone that thinks differently to them is perceived as a threat. Hence their dislike and castigation of the majority of City fans that do not join protests or fit into their narrow perspective of what a city fan should look like. This group, of which you are a good example, is small but very vocal on this site. Unable to express their ideas properly or comprehend anything other than simple black or white, they employ the only tactics of which they are capable - cheap abuse and deliberately ignoring, misquoting or simply lying about what has been posted.It is not a pleasant spectacle but it is a survival mechanism of sorts for those that cannot manage in any other way.[/quote]Same abuse different target.Classy.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]However, some are ill informed, intellectually challenged, narrow minded and bigoted to the extent that anyone that thinks differently to them is perceived as a threat. Hence their dislike and castigation of the majority of City fans that do not join protests or fit into their narrow perspective of what a city fan should look like. This group, of which you are a good example, is small but very vocal on this site. Unable to express their ideas properly or comprehend anything other than simple black or white, they employ the only tactics of which they are capable - cheap abuse and deliberately ignoring, misquoting or simply lying about what has been posted.It is not a pleasant spectacle but it is a survival mechanism of sorts for those that cannot manage in any other way.[/quote]Same abuse different target.Classy.[/quote]Not abuse but a accurate description targeted not at an individual but a group. You would only take offence if you felt that you were part of said group.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]However, some are ill informed, intellectually challenged, narrow minded and bigoted to the extent that anyone that thinks differently to them is perceived as a threat. Hence their dislike and castigation of the majority of City fans that do not join protests or fit into their narrow perspective of what a city fan should look like. This group, of which you are a good example, is small but very vocal on this site. Unable to express their ideas properly or comprehend anything other than simple black or white, they employ the only tactics of which they are capable - cheap abuse and deliberately ignoring, misquoting or simply lying about what has been posted.It is not a pleasant spectacle but it is a survival mechanism of sorts for those that cannot manage in any other way.[/quote]Same abuse different target.Classy.[/quote]Not abuse but a accurate description targeted not at an individual but a group. You would only take offence if you felt that you were part of said group. [/quote]No Badger you''re not clever. It''s quite clearly abuse and personal insult directed at Desert Fox.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]No Badger you''re not clever. It''s quite clearly abuse and personal insult directed at Desert Fox.[/quote]I don''t claim to be clever.Not a personal insult at desert - he can disassociate himself from the group. I could be wrong, maybe he is not an example of it, it seems to me on the balance of evidence that I have that he is but it is not something that I have researched deeply. The grouping clearly exists - informal entity without paid up membership before you grab that straw. His choice to disassociate himself if he wishes.Do you consider yourself a member or would you like to disassociate yourself as well? You have proved to be remarkably reticent in the past - you wouldn’t disassociate yourself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called "idiots."Worried about "false dichotomy" as I remember it - curious priority - City fans called "idiots" but you couldn''t deny this because you were worried about linguistic niceties.

[The Fish Seller 0]

Could you show me where I ''wouldn’t disassociate myself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called idiots'' please?I find this accusation strange and unpalatable after all I am often not slow to raise issue when people like Neil Doncaster try to take us for idiots.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]Could you show me where I ''wouldn’t disassociate myself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called idiots'' please?I find this accusation strange and unpalatable after all I am often not slow to raise issue when people like Neil Doncaster try to take us for idiots.[/quote]Well how about the following? . There were many other occasions.[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]PS – you never did try to disassociate yourself from comments that "City fans are idiots did you?" I can only assume that you agree with the statement,[/quote]Dont hold your breath waiting for a reply Badger as I suspect it''s not just me who will not stoop to answer your false dichotomy.[/quote]Ok Buckethead, I will make it easier for you, you don''t have to discuss what you term a "false" dichotomy. (I think you need to look that one up again btw!)The original statement made by one of you fellow travellers was "Norwich City - a club run by idiots for idiots."If for the sake of argument, I say that we focus on just the second part of your mate''s allegation - i.e. that it is a club run "for idiots" - would you be happy to disassociate yourself from that? It is the seventh time - I have made it easy for you - go on you can do it!Or are you worried about alienating extremist opinion?[/quote]Even then you wouldn’t do it? Will you disassociate yourself from this now?

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]

However, some are ill informed, intellectually challenged, narrow minded and bigoted to the extent that anyone that thinks differently to them is perceived as a threat. Hence their dislike and castigation of the majority of City fans that do not join protests or fit into their narrow perspective of what a city fan should look like.

This group, of which you are a good example, is small but very vocal on this site. Unable to express their ideas properly or comprehend anything other than simple black or white, they employ the only tactics of which they are capable - cheap abuse and deliberately ignoring, misquoting or simply lying about what has been posted.

It is not a pleasant spectacle but it is a survival mechanism of sorts for those that cannot manage in any other way.


[/quote]

Same abuse different target.

Classy.
[/quote]

Not abuse but a accurate description targeted not at an individual but a group. You would only take offence if you felt that you were part of said group.
[/quote]

I''m an idiot.....but, I don''t like being run by idiots.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"]

No Badger you''re not clever.
 It''s quite clearly abuse and personal insult directed at Desert Fox.

[/quote]

I don''t claim to be clever.

Not a personal insult at desert - he can disassociate himself from the group. I could be wrong, maybe he is not an example of it, it seems to me on the balance of evidence that I have that he is but it is not something that I have researched deeply. The grouping clearly exists - informal entity without paid up membership before you grab that straw. His choice to disassociate himself if he wishes.

Do you consider yourself a member or would you like to disassociate yourself as well? You have proved to be remarkably reticent in the past - you wouldn’t disassociate yourself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called "idiots."

Worried about "false dichotomy" as I remember it - curious priority - City fans called "idiots" but you couldn''t deny this because you were worried about linguistic niceties.


[/quote]

Did the teach you all this on your MBA course?

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

I''m an idiot.....but, I don''t like being run by idiots.

[/quote]Fortunately, they never accused you of that becuase you are anti-board. It is the non protesters that attract this soubriquet.

[Mello Yello 2,289]

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

I''m an idiot.....but, I don''t like being run by idiots.

[/quote]

Fortunately, they never accused you of that becuase you are anti-board. It is the non protesters that attract this soubriquet.
[/quote]

Yes, I''m anti-board....but unfortunately - I am a football fan.

Let''s see what occurs when events unfold...It''s all going to get really interesting, and I do think that you and ''Tom, Tom, up the Badger''s Bum'' are aware of that, and that''s why you''re pulling out all the stops in a futile attempt to discredit those who want change. Good Hunting!

PS, it''s sobriquet....I''ll give you soubriquet''s if you meant the plural. (though it''s a shoddy spellun of becuase).

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"]Could you show me where I ''wouldn’t disassociate myself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called idiots'' please?I find this accusation strange and unpalatable after all I am often not slow to raise issue when people like Neil Doncaster try to take us for idiots.[/quote]Well how about the following? . There were many other occasions.[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Badger"]PS – you never did try to disassociate yourself from comments that "City fans are idiots did you?" I can only assume that you agree with the statement,[/quote]Dont hold your breath waiting for a reply Badger as I suspect it''s not just me who will not stoop to answer your false dichotomy.[/quote]Ok Buckethead, I will make it easier for you, you don''t have to discuss what you term a "false" dichotomy. (I think you need to look that one up again btw!)The original statement made by one of you fellow travellers was "Norwich City - a club run by idiots for idiots."If for the sake of argument, I say that we focus on just the second part of your mate''s allegation - i.e. that it is a club run "for idiots" - would you be happy to disassociate yourself from that? It is the seventh time - I have made it easy for you - go on you can do it!Or are you worried about alienating extremist opinion?[/quote]Even then you wouldn’t do it? Will you disassociate yourself from this now?[/quote]You needed to read and understand the question before replying. Badger or Mole one things for sure you''re certainly a boar.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]You needed to read and understand the question before replying. Badger or Mole one things for sure you''re certainly a boar.[/quote]You ask for the evidence and I provide it above. You completely ignore said evidence and reply with an insult. Time and time again you have failed to disassociate yourself from abuse of the majority of City fans as a group.When challenged on this you ask for the evidence - when this is provided, you ignore it. This follows a similar pattern on other threads too. It causes me to wonder why you go to City matches at all as you clearly have disdain for the majority of fans.If you follow the predictable pattern of your previous behaviour, I can anticipate a number of responses:1. Ignore it, you are cornered. You might however, allow one of your fellow travellers to respond on your behalf.2. State that your disdain is not for City fans (although you have never gone this far before and it would be progress) - merely me. In which case why the reluctance to state this before - especially when the false dichotomy shield was withdrawn.3. Accuse me of being a board apologist (or indeed member). If so, please don’t pretend that you have not read the critical comments that I have made about them and the deplorable situation that we find ourselves in. My guess is number one – with perhaps a comment from, say, Desert Fox?

[Mello Yello 2,289]

[quote user="Badger"][quote user="Buckethead"]

You needed to read and understand the question before replying. Badger or Mole one things for sure you''re certainly a boar.

[/quote]

You ask for the evidence and I provide it above. You completely ignore said evidence and reply with an insult. Time and time again you have failed to disassociate yourself from abuse of the majority of City fans as a group.

When challenged on this you ask for the evidence - when this is provided, you ignore it. This follows a similar pattern on other threads too. It causes me to wonder why you go to City matches at all as you clearly have disdain for the majority of fans.

If you follow the predictable pattern of your previous behaviour, I can anticipate a number of responses:

1. Ignore it, you are cornered. You might however, allow one of your fellow travellers to respond on your behalf.

2. State that your disdain is not for City fans (although you have never gone this far before and it would be progress) - merely me. In which case why the reluctance to state this before - especially when the false dichotomy shield was withdrawn.

3. Accuse me of being a board apologist (or indeed member). If so, please don’t pretend that you have not read the critical comments that I have made about them and the deplorable situation that we find ourselves in.

My guess is number one – with perhaps a comment from, say, Desert Fox?

[/quote]

Lawyer/Solicitor speak.

[The Fish Seller 0]

That wasn''t a real attack on city fans though was it, that was a hypothetical scenario contrived by yourself.Why do you revert to calling me a ''traveller'' by the way I have no gypsy blood?

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

Yes, I''m anti-board....but unfortunately - I am a football fan.

Let''s see what occurs when events unfold...It''s all going to get really interesting, and I do think that you and ''Tom, Tom, up the Badger''s Bum'' are aware of that, and that''s why you''re pulling out all the stops in a futile attempt to discredit those who want change. Good Hunting!

[/quote]I don''t want to discredit those that want change. I want change myself. I have never seen Norwich in the "third division" and the board is responsible for this. Changes have to happen. Now the season is over, I have no problem with protests either.What I have consistently objected to is the way that some anti-board individuals have rounded on other fans and called them stupid, backward, too middle class, old, female etc etc.It is possible to have a different view without being a "dupe," apologist" etc. Something that Buckethead won''t allow for. I have also made the point that tactics such as these are likely to alienate potential support from more moderate fans, so harm rather than help the cause of change. Anything which does not fit the very narrow world view of Buckethead, in particular attracts criticism as USA Canary, for example, has found on another thread.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Mello Yello"]

Lawyer/Solicitor speak.

[/quote]Correct Mello yet the speak of a solicitor who has never had to practice in the real world as any true practising solicitor would be aware that presenting a negative for the other party to disprove is unmeritorious as a representation and would lead to certain defeat if it weren''t thrown out under CPR 16 prior to hearing.This is why Badger is floundering here he is asking me to prove I have not done something I have not done yet legally the onus is on him to prove that I have done it, any failure to so prove is taken as proof of my innocence.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]That wasn''t a real attack on city fans though was it, that was a hypothetical scenario contrived by yourself.[/quote]Ok option 4 - continued denial of the facts that have been demonstrated. It is not hypothetical, as you are well aware. There have been lots of attacks on City fans - whole threads in fact.The "club run by idiots for idiots" was a direct quotation that I have been trying to get you disassociate yourself from for days. You haven''t (yet) but I am sure if cornered enough you will, although I expect with some attacking or disdainful caveat or, perhaps a claim that you were unaware such nasty things had been happening.

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]Why do you revert to calling me a ''traveller'' by the way I have no gypsy blood?[/quote]It''s "fellow

traveller." Look it up.

[The Fish Seller 0]

If it''s easier I''ll put it in a format you might understand better.

BetweenBadger - ClaimantandBuckethead - Defendant

Draft Order for Directions The defendant puts the claimant to strict proof that an association existed as alleged in the particulars of claim.The Claimant shall within 24 hours of service of this order file and serve the following:1) At least one example of the defendant associating himself with the claim that NCFC is a club run by idiots for idiots.2) At least one example of the defendant attacking a Norwich fan for no other reason than them being a Norwich fan.3) Any such example(s) of the defendant abusing a poster on the Pink ''Un without provocation or some other measure of justification.

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.The Defendant shall within 24 hours thereafter file and serve the following- An amended defence sufficiently particularised in response to the evidence supplied by the claimant

[Badger 0]

[quote user="thebigfeller"]

But on the contrary: the more community or family oriented a club is, the more likely it is to capture support not just from football diehards, but women (some women are football diehards, of course - but not all), children (ditto), and people just happy to be "at an event". That in turn means that to a section - but only a section - of our support, losing simply doesn''t hurt as much as it does other fans or fans of other clubs. As well as supporting Norwich, I also follow Hearts north of the border, and venture on to a number of other clubs'' messageboards from time to time. I''m always struck by how furious so many of their fans are when their team loses. It''s very over the top at times: but also reflects a sense that they deserve better.

In our case, if the fans just keep parroting the same excuses as the board, there''ll be no pressure on them to change at all. I think the goodwill Delia and Michael still enjoy is astounding given the club''s decline over the past four years - and while I too recoil at the personal abuse chucked at them from a few on here who should know better (not least because it muddies the waters), am extremely relieved real questions are finally beginning to be asked, by moderates as well as extremists. Because Badger, it''s not lack of money which got us relegated from the Championship: it''s lack of footballing expertise, lack of vision, expenditure and over-borrowing on completely the wrong things, absurd managerial choices and above all, simple lack of leadership from those we''re supposed to trust.

Football has changed considerably over the past fifteen years, and will continue to do so. Like you, I used to wonder whether the TV bubble would burst; but now, I can see that the internet and telecommunications revolution will ensure the rich will keep on getting richer. At some stage, either Rangers and Celtic will move south, or the biggest clubs in England and Scotland will join a several-tiered European Super League. A Premier League 2 seems to be in the offing as well; and just as Norwich got relegated at precisely the wrong time just as money was flooding into the game in the mid-90s, so we might well have done so again this year. If we''re not careful, we could find ourselves locked out of a new, two-division structure as well - a thought to awful to contemplate.

A lot of what''s happened to the game hasn''t been particularly edifying. But happened it has, and the runaway train shows no sign of slowing down. Meanwhile, instead of thinking of ways to compete in this new reality, those purportedly in charge fail to throw the kitchen sink at courting new investment (not even when we were promoted, which was surely a better time than any), set conditions which are simply too difficult to meet, and cry "stop the world! We want to get off!" Sorry, but that just doesn''t cut it. If we have to sell to a non-Norwich fan or overseas benefactor, sell we must. Sheffield Wednesday''s Chairman was in the US talking with potential investors the other day; would our directors even dream of doing likewise? Yet it won''t stop Wednesday being a community club; nor has Marcus Evans'' ownership done so in Ipswich''s case. Football clubs are about history, tradition and are passed from one generation to the next, always maintaining certain characteristics along the way: it was true in our case under Robert Chase, and will remain so in the future no matter who might own us.

The board admitted at the AGM last year that it had run out of ideas. We need modern people and a completely different way of thinking about who we are and what we can achieve. Simply taking pride in values we''ve always had while the club drifts ever lower is simply not an option; and if the board can''t see this, it''s up to the fans to let them know it in no uncertain terms.

[/quote]I agree with much of this, although I''m not sure that I do about the over-borrowing on the wrong things part. Sure, there were things that shouldn''t have been spent but any organisation does that tbh. It was part of the alternative sources of revenue issue that we have discussed and both agreed was rendered out-dated and ineffective by events.I''m not as convinced as you are that the bubble won''t burst but certainly we got relegated at precisely the wrong time. The two-division structure is the nightmare scenario that we have to contemplate, which is why we have to get back up this year. If I am wrong and the bubble doesn''t burst, we don''t want to find ourselves in the wrong division at the wrong time again!Yes we need new money and we need new ideas - as soon as possible please! My fear is that the former, in particular, might not be forthcoming quickly, whilst in the meantime the division around the club and its fans that is rife will continue to grow. This will leave us in an even worse position than we already are to meet the essential challenge of getting out of League One first time round. If we hadn''t been relegated 15 years ago, our recent history might have been infinitely better. Goodness knows what could happen to us if we just miss out again!

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"]Could you show me where I ''wouldn’t disassociate myself from attacks on the majority of City fans when they were called idiots'' please?[/quote](Yesterday, 11:32 PM)The evidence was presented - you ignored it. Now you are trying to use another method to avoid answering the question – I think we all know that guilty people try to hide behind lawyers. You are going to huge lengths to avoid having to disassociate yourself from the statement that Norwich City is a club “for idiots.”Why? Who are you worried about alienating?

[The Butler 0]

Badger must be a solicitor everything is in small print!!

Sorry to interject!

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="The Butler"]

Badger must be a solicitor everything is in small print!!

Sorry to interject!

[/quote]Have you had that problem with premature  interjectulation long Butts? [:^)]

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="The Butler"]

Badger must be a solicitor everything is in small print!!

Sorry to interject!

[/quote]Have you had that problem with premature  interjectulation long Butts? [:^)][/quote]

Only when dealing with to****s sorry solicitors.

Always makes me lose control.[;)]