Web Team - Vince 0 Posted August 17, 2009 http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/sport/football/columns/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=FansEyeView&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=xDefault&itemid=NOED16%20Aug%202009%2011%3A58%3A18%3A817 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WeAreYellows49 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Wow great article [Y] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pete_norw 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="WeAreYellows49"]Wow great article [Y][/quote]you can almost hear the thunder storms brewing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andy cousins 9 Posted August 17, 2009 what a good article and how true Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WeAreYellows49 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="pete_norw"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"]Wow great article [Y][/quote]you can almost hear the thunder storms brewing [/quote]lol yes you can can''t you. Like a firework just waiting to be lit and go whoooooooooooooosh[:)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Her days are at last counted in months, her bell is being tolled. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barry Brockes 145 Posted August 17, 2009 Rather blows out of the water the theory that the new Archant man on the Board was put there to act as a censor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
city-till-i-die 7 Posted August 17, 2009 BANG, NAIL, HEAD.....spot on in every word[Y] at last some honest journolism and not the usuall kiss a$$ stuff Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dion Dublin=Legend 0 Posted August 17, 2009 I know this won''t be well received by some of the more abnormal posters on here (that''ll be most of you, then!) but a thumbs up to Archant and Stephan Phillips for allowing such a piece to be published. If Phillips was interefering with journalistic content there''s no way that this would have been published. Thumbs up to the author as well; the point he makes that investment and passion does not qualify you to run a football club competently is the crux of what''s wrong with DS and MWJ''s involvement in the club. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blahblahblah 2 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote]I know this won''t be well received by some of the more abnormal posters on here (that''ll be most of you, then!) but a thumbs up to Archant and Stephan Phillips for allowing such a piece to be published. If Phillips was interefering with journalistic content there''s no way that this would have been published. Thumbs up to the author as well; the point he makes that investment and passion does not qualify you to run a football club competently is the crux of what''s wrong with DS and MWJ''s involvement in the club.[/quote]Of course, if Mr Phillips wanted to get Delia and Michael to step down and become silent partners (and to be fair, who could blame him), there would be no easier way of doing so than getting one of his employees to write this article - to be fair though, I don''t think people need much prompting at the moment... It looks like D & M are on their way to becoming silent anyway given the reversal from their position on Gunn at the Capital Canaries Q & A - how often will they be out-voted from now on ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yelverton Yella 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Excellent article expressing exactly my views. I only hope the stupid timing and inhuman and inept way the Gunn sacking was handled was a ''blip'' and not a sign of lasting incompetence from McNally. The identity of the new Manager will give us a clue about this!I hope some of the more hot-headed posters read the article and realise that the ''Aiken way'' - DS and MWJ becoming ''silent owners'' and ceding power to the professional Board members (if they haven''t already!)- is the only realistic way to progress in the absence of a ''sugar daddy'' ready to pour millions into the club because s/he loves football!Marching down Rouen road baying for blood will just attract more unwelcome headlines and patronising comments about Norfolk people and, quite probably, scare off anybody who had half a mind to invest in the club in case they become the next target of the hate-filled boo boys.OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
london Canary 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Excellant article!....for too long now we have been an absolute laughing stock, the whole footballing world can see it! This article should be the view of every supporter of our club and anybody who thinks different is as bad as them.....delia, mwj should NEVER had a say in the appointment of gunn. Wrong decision after wrong decision...please mr mcnally get this appointment right!!! Ive not always agreed with your veiws mr aiken but i''m 100% with you on this one... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,554 Posted August 17, 2009 Aiken seems not to understand the crucial point which has been made in the "Another view from afar" thread, that Smith and Jones have effectively given up power and influence by appointing three new directors capable and (apparently) already willing to vote against them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jelltex 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Just about sums my views up perfectly. Surprised it was allowed to be published, but glad that it was and for the independence of the Pink ''Un.The identity of the new manager will be telling, and I think that any demonstrations should be on hold until we know who that it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaun Tilly Lace 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Spot on. I couldn''t agree more with the words of this topic title. Their decision-making has been quite simply appalling from the point that they didn''t stump up the money for Crouch or Ashton at the start of the Premiership campaign, to the latest nonsense of the appointment and then knee-jerk sacking of Gunny, without having a replacement lined up. Ludicrous - you couldn''t make it up!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smudger 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="PurpleCanary"]Aiken seems not to understand the crucial point which has been made in the "Another view from afar" thread, that Smith and Jones have effectively given up power and influence by appointing three new directors capable and (apparently) already willing to vote against them.[/quote]For oncre I agree with you Purple. It is an awful article, where Adam Aiken has fallen in to that trap that those with a bit of foresight could see a mile off.He doesn''t only spot the fact that if Smith & Jones did not want this decision to go through then they would of ousted McNally & Co, but they have also now put McNally and the other two new gibbons they purchased in the boardroom during the summer right in the firing line.I can''t believe that I am only one of a few people that can see that Smith & Jones are purposefully taking a backseat for when the blame game begins. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ca 1 Posted August 17, 2009 Spot on Adam once again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smudger 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="Smudger"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]Aiken seems not to understand the crucial point which has been made in the "Another view from afar" thread, that Smith and Jones have effectively given up power and influence by appointing three new directors capable and (apparently) already willing to vote against them.[/quote]For once I agree with you Purple. It is an awful article, where Adam Aiken has fallen in to that trap that those with a bit of foresight could see a mile off.He doesn''t spot the fact that if Smith & Jones did not want this decision to go through then they would of ousted McNally & Co. Despite the noises that McNally and the other board members are now making, the majority of the fans of have put two and two together and made 5.I can''t believe that I am only one of a few people that can see Smith & Jones have already purposefully taken a backseat for when the blame games begin.[/quote]Not as awful, as my first post above though (corrections made)... [:$]Ahh makes a bit more sense to me now anyway (even if it doesn''t the rest of you). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Smudger"] [quote user="PurpleCanary"]Aiken seems not to understand the crucial point which has been made in the "Another view from afar" thread, that Smith and Jones have effectively given up power and influence by appointing three new directors capable and (apparently) already willing to vote against them.[/quote]For once I agree with you Purple. It is an awful article, where Adam Aiken has fallen in to that trap that those with a bit of foresight could see a mile off.He doesn''t spot the fact that if Smith & Jones did not want this decision to go through then they would of ousted McNally & Co. Despite the noises that McNally and the other board members are now making, the majority of the fans of have put two and two together and made 5.I can''t believe that I am only one of a few people that can see Smith & Jones have already purposefully taken a backseat for when the blame games begin.[/quote]Not as awful, as my first post above though (corrections made)... [:$]Ahh makes a bit more sense to me now anyway (even if it doesn''t the rest of you).[/quote]You are unbelievable Smudger! What''s up? Are you so p****d off that someone else got in there with a better constructed arguement than you could manage, that you decide to slag him off for saying what you''ve been, very poorly, trying to say? And then, you pretend that there is some other hidden agenda that no one else could possibly think off, apart from your incredibly egotistical self of course, and you can''t tell anyone because it''s so devious and we are all soooo stupid we''d never understand.Priceless! If your ego wasn''t so transparent to all and sundry it would be laughable. Oh no, wait a minute........... it is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grantroederdisaster 0 Posted August 17, 2009 I haven''t agreed with all of his articles but on this occasion hes spot on!Thanks for investing your time, money and enthusiasm into the club but now your just making us a laughing stock! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USAcanary 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="Barry Brockes"]Rather blows out of the water the theory that the new Archant man on the Board was put there to act as a censor.[/quote]Really.........we still dont know why the players were censored by the board on Saturday........... was Phillips part of that decision?http://www.pinkun.com/cs_pinkun/cs/forums/1805782/ShowPost.aspx Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USAcanary 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="blahblahblah"][quote]I know this won''t be well received by some of the more abnormal posters on here (that''ll be most of you, then!) but a thumbs up to Archant and Stephan Phillips for allowing such a piece to be published. If Phillips was interefering with journalistic content there''s no way that this would have been published. Thumbs up to the author as well; the point he makes that investment and passion does not qualify you to run a football club competently is the crux of what''s wrong with DS and MWJ''s involvement in the club.[/quote]Of course, if Mr Phillips wanted to get Delia and Michael to step down and become silent partners (and to be fair, who could blame him), there would be no easier way of doing so than getting one of his employees to write this article - to be fair though, I don''t think people need much prompting at the moment... It looks like D & M are on their way to becoming silent anyway given the reversal from their position on Gunn at the Capital Canaries Q & A - how often will they be out-voted from now on ?[/quote]Bingo! 100% spot on IMHO................there has been talk/rumor that the "unanimous" vote to oust Gunn wasn''t exactly unanimous!Its obvious that the timing of the sacking was very strange so late on Friday which suggests more going on behind closed doors than we are being told about. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pyro Pete 1,889 Posted August 17, 2009 About time someone pointed out the elephant in the room. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mello Yello 2,278 Posted August 17, 2009 Good piece by Mr Aiken.....[Y] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Camuldonum 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="USAcanary"][quote user="Barry Brockes"]Rather blows out of the water the theory that the new Archant man on the Board was put there to act as a censor.[/quote]Really.........we still dont know why the players were censored by the board on Saturday........... was Phillips part of that decision?http://www.pinkun.com/cs_pinkun/cs/forums/1805782/ShowPost.aspx[/quote] I think that is pretty obvious. The way some of them were feeling on Friday afternoon and evening might have produced a statement which would have made Huckerby''s "worst team I have played in" interview look like a report of the Wymondham WI annual meeting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Divs crew! 0 Posted August 17, 2009 I could not have worded it better myself,well done my exact thoughts ..............it needed saying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USAcanary 0 Posted August 17, 2009 [quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="USAcanary"] [quote user="Barry Brockes"]Rather blows out of the water the theory that the new Archant man on the Board was put there to act as a censor.[/quote]Really.........we still dont know why the players were censored by the board on Saturday........... was Phillips part of that decision?http://www.pinkun.com/cs_pinkun/cs/forums/1805782/ShowPost.aspx[/quote] I think that is pretty obvious. The way some of them were feeling on Friday afternoon and evening might have produced a statement which would have made Huckerby''s "worst team I have played in" interview look like a report of the Wymondham WI annual meeting.[/quote]Cause and effect................ why was the sacking so late on Friday when the "unanimous" decision was taken at the board meeting earlier in the week?................. more reasonable questions not being asked by the local media.In effect you are saying the board was trying to hide the shambles that had been going on behind the scenes................The board "unanimously" thought Gunn was NOT the right man yet let him buy 12 players and sign many others. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites