Oh er.........here comes trouble! Col Utd report Norwich

[Puzzy magnet 0]

Little Colchester be warned, we have ruined your place before, we might do it again if you don''t just accept we are your masters.

http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/article_13861.shtml

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="Jimhechip"]He wants a player compensation? why not give him Theo that would end it :P[/quote]

As much as I despise ColU now I couldn''t wish him on them...........oh hang on, yes I bloody could lmfao

[Inch High aka Inchy.. 405]

I see Delia was wining and dining the chairman of the football league last week, so that''s this little problem sorted then.[;)]

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Mike Grant"]

[quote user="Mr_Chimp"]Gowling has been running his mouth off again...
http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/sport/headlines/4754214.Cowling_urges_authorities_to_make_an_example_of_Norwich/
Found this bit interesting:
“We felt it could be settled. “I wanted to go to Paul Lambert with the idea of a money plus players agreement. “I don’t want to elaborate any more than that but we were declined the chance to do that by Norwich City and we were not allowed to speak to him.” Cheeky sod! No wonder we told him where to go.
[/quote]

What a pathetic little idiot this clown is..... just right for Col Utd in fact. Can you imagine any other chairman ringing up an ex-manager to agree which player he wants. I suggest he goes back to the Sunday league he obviously is more use to.

LOL!

[/quote]

Well they could have had Barndoor! Lol!

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]What should Colchester United get as way of compensation? Vote on the homepage now...[/quote]

IF we are guilty they can have either Barndoor or Kojack (Theo).

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"][quote user="Camuldonum"]

The simple fact is that if Norwich have done nothing wrong in this matter they have nothing to fear from a Disciplinary Commission.

As others have previously said leave it to the blazers to sort it out.  That''s what each club pays the Football League an annual membership fee towards - the resolution of disputes between clubs.

[/quote]

Hey Cam,

 

Can you elaborate on Cowling''s quote that he wanted to agree "a money plus players agreement"? The obvious player would be Jamie C...

Wiz would have been [U]

[:D]

[/quote]

My reading of this is completely different.  The story partially quoted earlier in this thread (the whole thing is here for anyone interested http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/sport/4754214.Cowling_urges_authorities_to_make_an_example_of_Norwich/) does not specify what he means but I believe he wants an agreement that PL will not approach any of our current players for the rest of the season. 

We got such an agreement from Hull City when we took them to the High Court over the departure of Parkinson (before Cowling''s time) and Rob Cowling is on public record many weeks ago as saying he wants such an agreement and would do his best to block any move for a Colchester player pending the satisfactory resolution of this dispute.  So that is my reading of it.  I cannot imagine why we would want Jamie: I honestly cannot even see him getting in our squad at all as things stand.  I do not know if he is injured but he doesn''t seem to have made your latest squad either but more importantly Boothroyd favours big physical strikers and whatever Jamie''s qualities of the past that ain''t one of them.  All the donkey work in his time in the Golden Boot season was done by big physical Chris Iwelumo, arguably one of the finest wingers Colchester have ever seen and I go back a few years.

I believe we have done our best this end to resolve the matter by negotiation.  I am assured we have written countless letters concerning the issue but there has been only one face to face meeting on the matter (between both CEO''s) which ended with the two clubs "six figures apart" on how much should be paid.  All other requests for a subsequent meeting to try and find a middle ground have been declined by Norwich City or so say Colchester. 

 

 

 

 

[Mike 2]

Probably because the figure Col Utd want is plainly daft.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="Mike Grant"]Probably because the figure Col Utd want is plainly daft.[/quote]

Agreed. So the blazers sort it out.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="Camuldonum"][quote user="Dion Dublin Legend"][quote user="Camuldonum"]

The simple fact is that if Norwich have done nothing wrong in this matter they have nothing to fear from a Disciplinary Commission.

As others have previously said leave it to the blazers to sort it out.  That''s what each club pays the Football League an annual membership fee towards - the resolution of disputes between clubs.

[/quote]

Hey Cam,

 

Can you elaborate on Cowling''s quote that he wanted to agree "a money plus players agreement"? The obvious player would be Jamie C...

Wiz would have been [U]

[:D]

[/quote]

My reading of this is completely different.  The story partially quoted earlier in this thread (the whole thing is here for anyone interested http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/sport/4754214.Cowling_urges_authorities_to_make_an_example_of_Norwich/) does not specify what he means but I believe he wants an agreement that PL will not approach any of our current players for the rest of the season. 

We got such an agreement from Hull City when we took them to the High Court over the departure of Parkinson (before Cowling''s time) and Rob Cowling is on public record many weeks ago as saying he wants such an agreement and would do his best to block any move for a Colchester player pending the satisfactory resolution of this dispute.  So that is my reading of it.  I cannot imagine why we would want Jamie: I honestly cannot even see him getting in our squad at all as things stand.  I do not know if he is injured but he doesn''t seem to have made your latest squad either but more importantly Boothroyd favours big physical strikers and whatever Jamie''s qualities of the past that ain''t one of them.  All the donkey work in his time in the Golden Boot season was done by big physical Chris Iwelumo, arguably one of the finest wingers Colchester have ever seen and I go back a few years.

I believe we have done our best this end to resolve the matter by negotiation.  I am assured we have written countless letters concerning the issue but there has been only one face to face meeting on the matter (between both CEO''s) which ended with the two clubs "six figures apart" on how much should be paid.  All other requests for a subsequent meeting to try and find a middle ground have been declined by Norwich City or so say Colchester. 

[/quote]

Bet you wish you were dealing with Neil Doncaster instead.

[:''(]

OTBC

 

[singing canary 0]

sorry folks im going to say this as it is really bothering me . football is a game and always has been of a fast turnover of players and managers alike. players are being sold on to other clubs every day, managers leave to better themselves or are sacked at the drop of a hat . after the colchester game norwich approached colchester to ask if the could talk to lambert . colchester agreed but quite clearly were not happy. but lambert decided to join us. if we went to lambert without asking colchester first i would see why they thought they were hard done by . to wish for us to have points deducted is nothing but dirty tactics as far as i can see to give them an advantage in a push for promotion . if the leauge decided to deduct points for this i can not see the justice . southampton had 10 points deducted for going in to fianancial meltdown . hardly the same is it colchester .? lets hope the people who make the final decision see the canaries actions are hardly under-handed . he wanted to come here and colchester gave us permission to talk to him . thats football it happens all the time get over it colchester.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

Brinkmanship to get more cash i think he is after cash plus Cureton

[Duncan Edwards 0]

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]Brinkmanship to get more cash i think he is after cash plus Cureton[/quote]

I''ll give em everything in my wallet, admittedly not a great deal, if they take Cureton

[singing canary 0]

why are they acting like spoilt brats..? sorry folks this is bothering me .football players and managers move clubs ,sacked bought ,released every day ...it is part of the game . norwich approached colchester to ask if they talk to lambert .colchester agreed but clearly were not happy about it .how on earth do they think that deducting points from us is fair..? get over it colchester its part of the game . the only reason they want points deducted is to gain an advantage over us in the hunt for promotion.

colchester let me say this... clubs get hit by a points deduction for going into administration .we asked to speak to your manager you said yes hardly the same is it..? now whos the cheats hey..!!!

[singing canary 0]

sorry wrote the first one and thought my computer had a fit ...!!

[ca 1]

http://www.pinkun.com/cs_pinkun/cs/forums/1905517/ShowPost.aspx

[Attleborough_Canary 65]

[quote user="Attleborough_Canary"][quote user="Camuldonum"]

The simple fact is that if Norwich have done nothing wrong in this matter they have nothing to fear from a Disciplinary Commission.

As others have previously said leave it to the blazers to sort it out.  That''s what each club pays the Football League an annual membership fee towards - the resolution of disputes between clubs.

[/quote]

It doesn''t stop us NORWICH fans discussing the subject on a NORWICH forum though does it??? Maybe we should start discussing the similarities between players on the pitch waving the imaginary yellow card gesturing to the referee to book a player and the Col who chairman constantly pushing to the media that he thinks we should be docked points!!! Where one of the above is commonly frowned upon by all supporters of football, maybe so should the other?? As a fan of the other club is it not embarrassing that your chairman is behaving in such a petulant manner?

I find it a bit desperate and fairly disgraceful tbh.

[/quote]

Come on Cam, you haven''t given your views (minus the hack hat), not on the compensation situation but how you feel about the way in which your chairman seems so desperate?

[Destort 0]

I''m starting to see the real reason why this pathetic excuse for a football club play at Cuckoo Farm. They are on a different planet. Funny thing is that this must be disrupting Boothroyd.

[norfolkchance1 0]

Colchester should be careful it doesn''t distract them from what they are trying to achieve on pitch.

[Yobocop 1,099]

Norwich are doing the right thing in keeping quiet.

How many more news reports are we going to keep seeing from this Cowling bloke?

What frustrates me is he wants it all his own way. He says about Lambert, Culvo and Karsa doing the dirty on the club, but then he says Joe Dunne and Aidy Boothroyd have both done a good job, so what is the problem then?

He says The Football league should make an example of Norwich City, yes he''s right they should, an example of the best way to appoint a club manager within the rules. Colchester on the other hand an example of how not to keep running to the press and spouting off! That''s going to be their potential downfall as I think he''s said too much to warrant a real case now.

[Old Shuck 183]

He''s not doing himself any favours mouthing off to all and sundry about it, and am sure the League will have noted that.

I am hoping our relative silence on matters is an indication, as others have already said, that we are not only convinced that we have done nothing wrong, but that it is a clear cut case and there is nothing to answer.

If we are deemed to have done wrong and get even a fine-that we can''t afford to pay-then the people responsible at the club for the hiring of Lambert and "to hell with the consequences, its only Colchester" attitude needs to take a very long, hard look at themselves and question their own use to the club if that is what it has cost us.

As for a points deduction, I would not hope, I would expect, those responsible to fall on their swords and resign.

[First Wizard 0]

Even a points reduction would be well worth it the long run as we at last have a real manager.

And they have HOOFROYD.

We win whatever the outcome.

[Beauseant 0]

From my own experience of dealing with the "blazers" and their self importance the one thing that is absolutely guaranteed to produce an undesirable response is telling them what they should do. I believe that City are playing this absolutely correctly by keeping quiet while the idiot Cowling continues to sabotage his own club''s chances.

[Yellow Hotrod 0]

Colchester are being very tiresome.Players and managers need to be able to move around in football, but at a fair price. Fine. No problem. Safe as.I''m more than happy for the U''s to be given reasonable compensation for Lambert but the U''s Chairman is spouting on and on and, from what it seems, he''s after a lot more than what would be considered a fair price. This is not only very tedious (the tribunal is not expected until end of Jan!) but if he get what he wants then its possible he risks damaging the ability of players and managers to move around for an agreed fee. The only issue here is over agreeing fee. Colchester have no divine right to keep hold of any member of their club so can we just settle a fee and move on? Please, Mr Cowling?

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

Even a points reduction would be well worth it the long run as we at last have a real manager.

And they have HOOFROYD.

We win whatever the outcome.

[/quote]Hurrah! I agree with Wiz!Because this is the odd thing. If a points deduction meant missing promotion, would this mean a reduction in support??Never!It would beWW2 all over again, with Cowling as Hitler; the massed ranks of Norwich supporters would draw together, the Dunkirk spirit would be invoked & Lambo would start to bear an uncanny resemblance to a Scottish Churchill .........    Plus Delia wouldn''t have to fork out for expensive new players. Whoops, perhaps shouldn''t have said that.Nothing like a common enemy to bring people together. I''m rather looking forward to it.

[NottsCanary 0]

I think that they need to look at what they are demanding, money and players in the compo?? really?? NO! We have done the right thing, if we get punished for what we have done, lets hope offences such as waving the imaginary card at the ref, and diving, and handballs in the box of world cup quals are equally punished!

[chicken 0]

Now I don''t want to presume anything here but I am going to suggest a couple of what ifs.Colchester are basically trying to claim that the situation is clear cut when it is anything but. Permission was given to Lambert to talk and he talked - the can''t really be claims of tapping up because at the end of the day it his choice to break his contract or not after having already held talks with Norwich.The only thing Norwich can be considered guilty of is employing him knowing that he had broken his contract with Colchester when perhaps they should have sought permission from the league to start with and dealt with it that way.However the point I want to get onto is the compensation. What is interesting here is that Norwich have offered compensation but it is obviously not to the amount that Colchester would have liked.Neither club is stupid and I suspect that both have consulted legal teams etc. Now, what if the league decide that the offer Norwich gave was enough? Colchester look more than a bit silly. I would even go as far as saying that for not publicly trying to influence the league through the press and trying to conduct an unfair campaign by doing so that they should recieve punishment.Its a strange, strange scenario which may actually back-fire on Colchester. It may even be a call your bluff gone wrong.However there are several clear factors to me - the approach to Colchester to enter negotiations with Lambert was all good and propper thus indicating that Colchester were happy to let him go. As part of usual talks of this type - player, manager or otherwise - contracts are discussed. After the talks Lambert broke his contract and joined Norwich. What I find strange is how Norwich could be accused of inducing him to do so when part of the talks are based around contracts which in themselves are enough to encourage someone to quit their job.Only if there is direct evidence to suggest that a member of the club told Lambert to quit his job have we directly told him to do so.Another thing I hope they consider is that should he not have left his post but indicated that he wanted to leave - where would they be? If they could not agree a compensation fee then they would have to put him on gardening leave in most probability, which would cost them his wages plus whoever they got in to cover him. So for example they may have got Boothy anyway but had to pay two managers wages.But to go to the press effectively begging the league to make an example of Norwich is the lowest of the low. I hope the pie ends up in their face as it sounds and smells like a lot of BS to me.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

I thought they denied us permission to speak to him so we just let it be known that the job was his if he wanted it.

[B-ru 0]

I think that this whole scenario has been turned into a grey area. There have been claims made by Col U and NCFC kept quiet. This could be the acid test for Mr McNally. If we get through this with reputation in tact, he will be the knight in shining armour we needed. If it goes buttock over breast, all teh blame will be firmly dumped at his feet.

[Joanna Grey 0]

Could this have not gone into the existing thread?

[Syteanric 1]

Cowlings going to talk the panel into a decision in our favour.. the more guff he spoutws the more chance he has of putting his foot in his mouth and looking stupid by saying the wrong thing....