Nigel Worthless 0 Posted October 24, 2009 After reading Paul Lamberts comments regarding a lack of transfer funds I can''t help feeling that we are destined for another Martin O''Neil scenario. Lets pray that the board can find some kind of investment to keep what is looking to be a very good manager in Paul Lambert!Stumping up the peanuts for Seabourne would surely help appease Lambert..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Chops 7 Posted October 24, 2009 "We can''t afford them," he said. "I am notgoing to sit here and say it''s great, but it''s happened, and it''ssomething I am not going to go on about because the current group oflads are giving me everything they''ve got, they''ve been brilliant. Butthe money is not there at the minute." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy Larkin 15 Posted October 24, 2009 It does somewhat appear to be the case… I''m hoping it is a bit of mind games, like Worthy did back in the day.Who knows? I think we get it in the ar*e more than any other set of fans these days… forget Man City being long suffering and The Toon being controlled by a knob… we are miles ahead. But I bet you won''t hear us described as "the long-suffering Norwich fans".Bunch of ar*e! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Chops 7 Posted October 24, 2009 Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted October 24, 2009 Unfortunatly, we don''t know what was said to PL when he signed for us, O''Neil claimed he was promised certain things, so we can only guess at the former.I just hope its not history repeating itself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Fish Seller 0 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="First Wizard"]Unfortunatly, we don''t know what was said to PL when he signed for us, O''Neil claimed he was promised certain things, so we can only guess at the former.I just hope its not history repeating itself.[/quote]With hindsight we all know Doomcaster was ''joking'' when he publicly promised Roeder money, thing is through one of those wholly unmentionable sources that actually do exist on this board, I heard that Roeder shall we say ''didn''t get the joke'' and the relationship between him and the club started deteriorating from that point on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BroadstairsR 0 Posted October 24, 2009 What a bargain Dean Windass would have been.You cannot blame O''Neill for not liking having to miss out on him.Are any of the players Lambert is unable to buy the same league? Is he missing out on any such bargains?I get the impression that he is fairly realistic about a player''s worth and the appropriate asking price. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yorkshire Canary 118 Posted October 24, 2009 Most people including Lambert will have known from the outset that there was little or no cash. What little there had been they let Gunn spend and in large part waste. Having said that if we are there or there abouts in January i would be surprised if there were not a couple of additions Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mello Yello 2,280 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Most people including Lambert will have known from the outset that there was little or no cash. What little there had been they let Gunn spend and in large part waste. Having said that if we are there or there abouts in January i would be surprised if there were not a couple of additions[/quote]And yet the 3 individuals responsible for Gunn''s appointment as fulltime manager - are still influential within club policy and finance..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wizard 0 Posted October 24, 2009 And two of them are majority shareholders Mello.................now thats scary.[:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CambridgeCanary 0 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Most people including Lambert will have known from the outset that there was little or no cash. What little there had been they let Gunn spend and in large part waste. Having said that if we are there or there abouts in January i would be surprised if there were not a couple of additions[/quote]Absolutely!!! Holt, MacDonald, Askou, Nelson all huge waste of money as their performansces demonstrate. And we know so much about Gill, Tudur Jones, Wiggins and even Maric to write them off as wastes of money too. Arguably Theoklitos and Whaley were mistakes.Yeah, large part waste of money by Gunn.What rubbish. Gunn couldn''t manage but he rebuilt the squad with some good acquisitions given a very limited budget Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canary_on_the Trent 0 Posted October 24, 2009 Surely we all knew this would be the case, we''ve just been relegated to League 1 with a wage bill that was high at Championship level, Gunn brought in 11 players over the summer and only really offloaded 3 of the high earners. It''s simple Maths! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Wazzock 902 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="First Wizard"]Unfortunatly, we don''t know what was said to PL when he signed for us, O''Neil claimed he was promised certain things, so we can only guess at the former.I just hope its not history repeating itself.[/quote]Perhaps he was told Foulger will NOT let the club and fans down! by some fantasist. [:|] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hairy Canary 668 Posted October 24, 2009 I know where you''re coming from but there are some big differences.O''neil was promissed money by chase and then discovered he was told porkies. As far as I know Lambert would have had a good idea of our cash situation before he signed.O''Neil was an up and coming manager and was wanted by any number of clubs. Lambert might end up being as good but he''s not on the radar of Premiership club at the mo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Mister Chops"]Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario.[/quote]I thought there was a letter in the local media quoting £400,000 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Chops 7 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Mister Chops"]Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario.[/quote]I thought there was a letter in the local media quoting £400,000 [/quote]I heard different, though the local media are obviously always right... However, and whatever the actual figures, O''Neill definitely went over Chase''s head, agreed a fee, then couldn''t get the board to sign it off. Hence he walked. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Mister Chops"]Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario.[/quote]I thought there was a letter in the local media quoting £400,000 [/quote]I heard different, though the local media are obviously always right... However, and whatever the actual figures, O''Neill definitely went over Chase''s head, agreed a fee, then couldn''t get the board to sign it off. Hence he walked. [/quote]Funny how the letter was adressed to Mr. Chase! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Chops 7 Posted October 24, 2009 [quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"][quote user="Mister Chops"]Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario.[/quote]I thought there was a letter in the local media quoting £400,000 [/quote]I heard different, though the local media are obviously always right... However, and whatever the actual figures, O''Neill definitely went over Chase''s head, agreed a fee, then couldn''t get the board to sign it off. Hence he walked. [/quote]Funny how the letter was adressed to Mr. Chase![/quote]Funnier still if it was signed "Martin O''Neill." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr.Carrow 376 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="Hairy Canary"]I know where you''re coming from but there are some big differences. O''neil was promissed money by chase and then discovered he was told porkies. As far as I know Lambert would have had a good idea of our cash situation before he signed. O''Neil was an up and coming manager and was wanted by any number of clubs. Lambert might end up being as good but he''s not on the radar of Premiership club at the mo.[/quote]Why then, is Lambert even bothering to go to the press saying "We`ve got no money" if he knew it anyway? Why is he bothering to identify players he wants to sign? Sorry, i think it`s come as a bit of a shock to him and it`s a tad worrying.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mook 0 Posted October 25, 2009 To assure his current squad of a secure future?To give other managers in the division the impression that we''re not worth bothering with as we won''t last the course?To give him a bargaining point come January?They''re just guesses, but you asked for reasons... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="Mister Chops"] Martin O''Neill resigned over the signing of Dean Windass because he wanted to pay £1,000,000 for a player and Chase baulked at the asking price, particularly because O''Neill had told Chase he was going to pay £750k. O''Neill agreed the £1m figure with Windass''s club and then presented it to Chase as a fait accompli.So in summary, Martin O''Neill was a bit naughty, Chase was a bit tight, and O''Neill walked.So really this is nothing like the Martin O''Neill scenario.[/quote]Martin O''Neill is well known for being careful with his transfer budget (some would say too careful) so a figure of £1m seems wholly unlikely. But there was a "million pounds" scenario with Chase over the signing of Jon Newsome, before O''Neill arrived. Chase said very publicly that he''d "never pay £1m for a footballer" - it later turned out he''d paid £999,999 for Newsome or not far short. Maybe you''re conflating the two events.I think it quite likely that O''Neill did take the initiative after Chase had been stalling over the transfer for three or four months, and made an offer based on what Chase had led him to believe was in his budget. As we now know, the money was never there and we were not far short of bankruptcy, hence the fire sale of Newsome and Ashley Ward a couple of months after O''Neill left. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="Hairy Canary"]I know where you''re coming from but there are some big differences. O''neil was promissed money by chase and then discovered he was told porkies. As far as I know Lambert would have had a good idea of our cash situation before he signed. O''Neil was an up and coming manager and was wanted by any number of clubs. Lambert might end up being as good but he''s not on the radar of Premiership club at the mo.[/quote]Why then, is Lambert even bothering to go to the press saying "We`ve got no money" if he knew it anyway? Why is he bothering to identify players he wants to sign? Sorry, i think it`s come as a bit of a shock to him and it`s a tad worrying....[/quote]When I read the article, this is what jumped out at me:"Lambert says he is paying the price for last year''s heavy reliance on the loan system and the bill City were left with". Has he only just become aware of the size of that bill? The club''s accounts are due to be published very soon, so maybe he''s had a preview that puts a different perspective on what he was told when he arrived? I wonder if even McNally knew enough at that stage about what went on last season to be able to put Lambert fully in the picture? Which begs the question: what was McNally told when he arrived? If they''re shocked, I think we might be too . . . [+o(] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="canary cherub "][quote user="Mr.Carrow"] [quote user="Hairy Canary"]I know where you''re coming from but there are some big differences. O''neil was promissed money by chase and then discovered he was told porkies. As far as I know Lambert would have had a good idea of our cash situation before he signed. O''Neil was an up and coming manager and was wanted by any number of clubs. Lambert might end up being as good but he''s not on the radar of Premiership club at the mo.[/quote]Why then, is Lambert even bothering to go to the press saying "We`ve got no money" if he knew it anyway? Why is he bothering to identify players he wants to sign? Sorry, i think it`s come as a bit of a shock to him and it`s a tad worrying....[/quote]When I read the article, this is what jumped out at me:"Lambert says he is paying the price for last year''s heavy reliance on the loan system and the bill City were left with". Has he only just become aware of the size of that bill? The club''s accounts are due to be published very soon, so maybe he''s had a preview that puts a different perspective on what he was told when he arrived? I wonder if even McNally knew enough at that stage about what went on last season to be able to put Lambert fully in the picture? Which begs the question: what was McNally told when he arrived? If they''re shocked, I think we might be too . . . [+o(][/quote]PS. I''m not trying to suggest that McNally was deliberately misled, maybe D&M weren''t fully in the picture either. Probably the only person who really knew where all the bodies were buried was about to put 500 miles between himself and Carrow Road. [:@] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoots 0 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="CambridgeCanary"][quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Most people including Lambert will have known from the outset that there was little or no cash. What little there had been they let Gunn spend and in large part waste. Having said that if we are there or there abouts in January i would be surprised if there were not a couple of additions[/quote]Absolutely!!! Holt, MacDonald, Askou, Nelson all huge waste of money as their performansces demonstrate. And we know so much about Gill, Tudur Jones, Wiggins and even Maric to write them off as wastes of money too.  Arguably Theoklitos and Whaley were mistakes.Yeah, large part waste of money by Gunn.What rubbish. Gunn couldn''t manage but he rebuilt the squad with some good acquisitions given a very limited budget[/quote]Agree with first pasrt of your post Cambridge but not the second.,The fact is that Gunn could not reverse the decline of Roeder''s rotten tenure as Norwich manager and sadly for him becamse associated with relegation. Boothroyd, who is now doing so well with Lambert''s Colchester squad, had the sense to turn down the opportunity to join Norwich when Roeder went so Gunn stepped up to the plate. Gunn takes credit for Holt - Roeder abysmally failed to bring in the much needed "big" frontman and Gunn remedied this at the first opportunity, other excellent signings such as Hughes, re-habbing Lappin, giving Korey Smith, Adeyemi and the other Academy players their chances and showed his managment potential in hte fine pre-season that we had and the bounce-back from the calamity one-off that was Colchester, re-grouped and won at Yeovil 4 goals to none conceded. Truth is we will never know whether Gunn woudl have been a good manager for us (I think he had all the makings of an exfellent long term manager) but one thing is absolutely for sure : no one can say that Gunn couldn''t manager because we just don''t know. What we do know is what I have already said which created a Gunn legacy for Lambert to inherit compared to the rotten, poisonous one inherited by Gunn from Roeder. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="canary cherub "][quote user="canary cherub "][quote user="Mr.Carrow"] [quote user="Hairy Canary"]I know where you''re coming from but there are some big differences. O''neil was promissed money by chase and then discovered he was told porkies. As far as I know Lambert would have had a good idea of our cash situation before he signed. O''Neil was an up and coming manager and was wanted by any number of clubs. Lambert might end up being as good but he''s not on the radar of Premiership club at the mo.[/quote]Why then, is Lambert even bothering to go to the press saying "We`ve got no money" if he knew it anyway? Why is he bothering to identify players he wants to sign? Sorry, i think it`s come as a bit of a shock to him and it`s a tad worrying....[/quote]When I read the article, this is what jumped out at me:"Lambert says he is paying the price for last year''s heavy reliance on the loan system and the bill City were left with". Has he only just become aware of the size of that bill? The club''s accounts are due to be published very soon, so maybe he''s had a preview that puts a different perspective on what he was told when he arrived? I wonder if even McNally knew enough at that stage about what went on last season to be able to put Lambert fully in the picture? Which begs the question: what was McNally told when he arrived? If they''re shocked, I think we might be too . . . [+o(][/quote]PS. I''m not trying to suggest that McNally was deliberately misled, maybe D&M weren''t fully in the picture either. Probably the only person who really knew where all the bodies were buried was about to put 500 miles between himself and Carrow Road. [:@][/quote]PPS. Does anyone know who took over as Finance Director after Shaun O''Hara left (in summer 2008 I think it was)? I hope to goodness the answer isn''t "nobody" [:''(] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanaryPurple 0 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="canary cherub "]PPS. Does anyone know who took over as Finance Director after Shaun O''Hara left (in summer 2008 I think it was)? I hope to goodness the answer isn''t "nobody" [:''(] [/quote]Sam Gordon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanaryPurple 0 Posted October 25, 2009 I think Bob Franklin has to be congratulatedfor getting a thread ostensibly on Martin O''Neill back on message!Given that, a simple, fact-based comparison:Championship football club A (in relegation zone) sacks manager. Badresults. Team confidence shot to hell. Poisonous inheritance. Etc etcetc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with team nowjust above relegation zone. Has 20 matches in which to ensure safety.Does a bit of transfer business. Brings in two hotshot strikers inMarch who play total of only 10 games between them. But mainly he workswith what he has inherited.Results:8 wins5 draws7 defeats29 points from 20 games. Average of 1.45 points per game. Team finishes safely in 19th place.Championship football club B (not inrelegationzone) sacks manager. Bad results. Team confidence shot to hell.Poisonous inheritance. Etc etcetc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with teamstill above relegation zone. Has 18 matches in which to ensure safety.Does lots of transfer business in late January and very early February. Brings in nine players (plus a tenthalready brought back). So a whole new outfield, including four hotshotstrikers.Results:4 wins5 draws9 defeats17 points from 18 games. Average of 0.9 points per game. Team gets relegated.Club A is Nottingham Forest, with Billy Davies. Club B isn''t. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Herman 9,713 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="CanaryPurple"]I think Bob Franklin has to be congratulated for getting a thread ostensibly on Martin O''Neill back on message! Given that, a simple, fact-based comparison:Championship football club A (in relegation zone) sacks manager. Bad results. Team confidence shot to hell. Poisonous inheritance. Etc etc etc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with team now just above relegation zone. Has 20 matches in which to ensure safety. Does a bit of transfer business. Brings in two hotshot strikers in March who play total of only 10 games between them. But mainly he works with what he has inherited.Results:8 wins5 draws7 defeats29 points from 20 games. Average of 1.45 points per game. Team finishes safely in 19th place.Championship football club B (not in relegation zone) sacks manager. Bad results. Team confidence shot to hell. Poisonous inheritance. Etc etc etc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with team still above relegation zone. Has 18 matches in which to ensure safety. Does lots of transfer business in late January and very early February. Brings in nine players (plus a tenth already brought back). So a whole new outfield, including four hotshot strikers.Results:4 wins5 draws9 defeats17 points from 18 games. Average of 0.9 points per game. Team gets relegated.Club A is Nottingham Forest, with Billy Davies. Club B isn''t. [/quote]A very good post Purple,but do you get the feeling it will fall on deaf ears???[Y] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sgncfc 1,221 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="CanaryPurple"]I think Bob Franklin has to be congratulated for getting a thread ostensibly on Martin O''Neill back on message! Given that, a simple, fact-based comparison:Championship football club A (in relegation zone) sacks manager. Bad results. Team confidence shot to hell. Poisonous inheritance. Etc etc etc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with team now just above relegation zone. Has 20 matches in which to ensure safety. Does a bit of transfer business. Brings in two hotshot strikers in March who play total of only 10 games between them. But mainly he works with what he has inherited.Results:8 wins5 draws7 defeats29 points from 20 games. Average of 1.45 points per game. Team finishes safely in 19th place.Championship football club B (not in relegation zone) sacks manager. Bad results. Team confidence shot to hell. Poisonous inheritance. Etc etc etc. The usual story. New manager takes over in January, with team still above relegation zone. Has 18 matches in which to ensure safety. Does lots of transfer business in late January and very early February. Brings in nine players (plus a tenth already brought back). So a whole new outfield, including four hotshot strikers.Results:4 wins5 draws9 defeats17 points from 18 games. Average of 0.9 points per game. Team gets relegated.Club A is Nottingham Forest, with Billy Davies. Club B isn''t. [/quote]Excellent post, and perhaps Bob Franklin will read it and stop going on about Gunn. Yes, he brought in some decent players BUT he got us relegated and clearly showed that he couldn''t manage them in the Colchester defeat. The right decison to sack him was made. Now for heaven''s sake, MOVE ON!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 25, 2009 [quote user="CanaryPurple"]I think Bob Franklin has to be congratulated for getting a thread ostensibly on Martin O''Neill back on message! Given that, a simple, fact-based comparison: [/quote]The OP on this thread is not about Martin O''Neill''s management skills. It compares and contrasts the financial situation that led him to walk with the financial situation we''re in now.If I didn''t know better Purple, I''d think you were a bit thick [;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites