Reflect on the Chase Era

Yorkshire Canary · December 13, 2009

He was dragged down like some East European Dictator in the wake of the Martin O Neil departure, but has history been fat too harsh on the Robert Chase era? That season we got relegated he clearly miscalculated in not strengthening the side and he could have done to keep O Neil and we would have reaped the benefits. We forget though that he successfully whelled and dealed to keep us in the top flight for many years when the crowds were more like 15 000! He was by and large a shrewd businessman who knew when to sell a player and more often than not when to buy one. We were reasonably profitable and since with odd blips we have suffered over a decade of financial and footballing mismanagement which culminated in last seasons relegation. I think with hindsight that history will show that we were very harsh on the guy just as we were on Worthy when he was hounded out the be replaced in qick succession be a series of incompetent managers

Crafty Canary · December 13, 2009

Spot on, YC. Our most successful period as a football club was under Mr Chase. Thanks to his foresight, the Stowmarket 2 had land to sell that kept the club afloat. Further more he didn''t saddle the club with a loan requiring interest payments to buy it. He actually received rent from the land to make it pay its way. As you say he was a businessman and not a celebrity. His big (and really stupid) mistake was to short term finance everything so that relegation would bring us to the brink. I can only imagine he thought that we''d stay in the top flight and the loans would be repaid leaving the club essentially debt free in the short term. Thank goodness for Geoff Watling saving the club even though the cook always sems to be given the credit.

missing in action? · December 13, 2009

to be fair, i thought he would of been a great chief executive, but as a chairman he had too much power and not enough brains in the end.

Lord Flashheart · December 13, 2009

My thoughts on Chase were summed up wonderfully by Kevin Baldwin in his book The Second Coming:He was condemned by his own criteria for success. His famous three-stage plan was as follows: 1) to secure the financial position of the club; 2) to complete a new ground with fine facilities; 3) to win something. The third part of this was later revised, when Chase said that success for Norwich would simply be to remain in the top division, but perhaps that is beside the point. After all, we could even manage to do that - and in any case, he left the club somewhere between stages 0 and 1.In fact, we are worryingly close to zero. When the club accounts were published in March, they tore away the last tattered shreds of his credibility and left him utterly exposed. He wasn''t a the shrewd, careful businessman that he pretended to be; the club is now millions of pounds in debt.Not only has all the money received for player like Sutton, Fox, Ekoku and Robins disappeared, along with that from the Premiership and European campaign, but millions on top of that have been spent. But what has it been spent on? It hasn''t gone on expensive replacements on the pitch. Not has it gone on inflated wages; after all, there have been precious few win bonuses paid out in the last two seasons. Some money has been spent on the ground, but insurance money and a large grant from the Football Trust mean that we cannot attribute our present plight to this alone.Far too much money has been spent on unnecessary things, such as Radio Canary, new gates to the car park, and the flour mill next to the ground - the latter bought after a promise by Chase that capital expenditure would be ''put on the back burner''.A fortune was spent on the new training ground at Colney, and very impressive it is too - but even here, a vital point was missed. Instead of appreciating what was being achieved on the pitch in the Premiership and in Europe, and putting resources into continuing the success, Chase cast an envious eye at other clubs'' facilities. He argued that a plush training centre would attract good youth players - but surely the best way to do this is to have a successful first team. It was as if Chase distrusted players. Spending money on them was an unacceptable risk.On top of all this, Chase cannot claim much credit for the team’s performances during his reign. It is now clear that success was achieved in spit of his policies, not because of them. We cannot even applaud his judgement in appointing Mike Walker and Martin O’Neill to manage the team, for it now appears that he wanted to appoint others (Phil Neal and Gary Megson) before the rest of the board objected. And when faced with a strong, successful manager, he effectively nudged him out of the door by failing to give him the backing he wanted. He was extraordinarily lucky for a long time. However, if you keep pushing Lady Luck, she will eventually respond with a most unladylike knee in the balls.--So, too harsh on Chase? Ask me another one. [:S]

chicken · December 13, 2009

[quote user="Lord Flashheart"]My thoughts on Chase were summed up wonderfully by Kevin Baldwin in his book The Second Coming:He was condemned by his own criteria for success. His famous three-stage plan was as follows: 1) to secure the financial position of the club; 2) to complete a new ground with fine facilities; 3) to win something. The third part of this was later revised, when Chase said that success for Norwich would simply be to remain in the top division, but perhaps that is beside the point. After all, we could even manage to do that - and in any case, he left the club somewhere between stages 0 and 1.In fact, we are worryingly close to zero. When the club accounts were published in March, they tore away the last tattered shreds of his credibility and left him utterly exposed. He wasn''t a the shrewd, careful businessman that he pretended to be; the club is now millions of pounds in debt.Not only has all the money received for player like Sutton, Fox, Ekoku and Robins disappeared, along with that from the Premiership and European campaign, but millions on top of that have been spent. But what has it been spent on? It hasn''t gone on expensive replacements on the pitch. Not has it gone on inflated wages; after all, there have been precious few win bonuses paid out in the last two seasons. Some money has been spent on the ground, but insurance money and a large grant from the Football Trust mean that we cannot attribute our present plight to this alone.Far too much money has been spent on unnecessary things, such as Radio Canary, new gates to the car park, and the flour mill next to the ground - the latter bought after a promise by Chase that capital expenditure would be ''put on the back burner''.A fortune was spent on the new training ground at Colney, and very impressive it is too - but even here, a vital point was missed. Instead of appreciating what was being achieved on the pitch in the Premiership and in Europe, and putting resources into continuing the success, Chase cast an envious eye at other clubs'' facilities. He argued that a plush training centre would attract good youth players - but surely the best way to do this is to have a successful first team. It was as if Chase distrusted players. Spending money on them was an unacceptable risk.On top of all this, Chase cannot claim much credit for the team’s performances during his reign. It is now clear that success was achieved in spit of his policies, not because of them. We cannot even applaud his judgement in appointing Mike Walker and Martin O’Neill to manage the team, for it now appears that he wanted to appoint others (Phil Neal and Gary Megson) before the rest of the board objected. And when faced with a strong, successful manager, he effectively nudged him out of the door by failing to give him the backing he wanted. He was extraordinarily lucky for a long time. However, if you keep pushing Lady Luck, she will eventually respond with a most unladylike knee in the balls.--So, too harsh on Chase? Ask me another one. [:S][/quote]I totally agree with this. I would also add that he has no regrets about those days either and seems to think that he did the best he could and appears unwilling to accept much if any responsibility for what happened to the club.The other thing people forget is that he was getting money from the club through his building firm. And that whilst Norwich struggled financially he spent sums of money which was large in those days, on personal projects such as the £200k reportedly spent on his villa in Spain - not buying it, but on things like security, etc.

December 13, 2009

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]He was dragged down like some East European Dictator in the wake of the Martin O Neil departure, but has history been fat too harsh on the Robert Chase era? That season we got relegated he clearly miscalculated in not strengthening the side and he could have done to keep O Neil and we would have reaped the benefits. We forget though that he successfully whelled and dealed to keep us in the top flight for many years when the crowds were more like 15 000! He was by and large a shrewd businessman who knew when to sell a player and more often than not when to buy one. We were reasonably profitable and since with odd blips we have suffered over a decade of financial and footballing mismanagement which culminated in last seasons relegation. I think with hindsight that history will show that we were very harsh on the guy just as we were on Worthy when he was hounded out the be replaced in qick succession be a series of incompetent managers[/quote]

Yes.... and built upon by the cook''s cynical PR team who have created a Saint as well as a Devil....

Robert Chase had his faults like the rest of us.... but did he take us down to Division 3 before getting ousted?Seems to me Smith has singularly destroyed all that those before her built....... yet remains on her throne gloating.

I''ve never stopped thanking him for so many great years anyway.......

Lord Flashheart · December 13, 2009

[quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]He was dragged down like some East European Dictator in the wake of the Martin O Neil departure, but has history been fat too harsh on the Robert Chase era? That season we got relegated he clearly miscalculated in not strengthening the side and he could have done to keep O Neil and we would have reaped the benefits. We forget though that he successfully whelled and dealed to keep us in the top flight for many years when the crowds were more like 15 000! He was by and large a shrewd businessman who knew when to sell a player and more often than not when to buy one. We were reasonably profitable and since with odd blips we have suffered over a decade of financial and footballing mismanagement which culminated in last seasons relegation. I think with hindsight that history will show that we were very harsh on the guy just as we were on Worthy when he was hounded out the be replaced in qick succession be a series of incompetent managers[/quote]

Yes.... and built upon by the cook''s cynical PR team who have created a Saint as well as a Devil....

Robert Chase had his faults like the rest of us.... but did he take us down to Division 3 before getting ousted?Seems to me Smith has singularly destroyed all that those before her built....... yet remains on her throne gloating.

I''ve never stopped thanking him for so many great years anyway.......

[/quote]So he was branded a devil by Delia''s PR team, not because of anything he did? If memory serves me right his head was already being called for before Delia was even on the scene. Not sure she can be blamed for the fans having already made up their minds about the bloke. [8-)]He didn''t take us down to Division Three, but he did take us from being a club challenging for the Premiership title and a consistent place in Europe to a bankrupt club towards the bottom of the old First Division. Hardly something to thank him for. [:S]It seems to me that both Chase and Delia got a lot wrong. I don''t see why one has to deify one and loathe the other. [Y]

lappinitup · December 13, 2009

[quote user="crafty canary"]Thank goodness for Geoff Watling saving the club even though the cook always sems to be given the credit.[/quote]So, apart from buying Chase''s shares and then selling them on to D&M who then loaned the club £1m, what exactly did Geoffrey Watling do to "save the club"?

nutty nigel · December 13, 2009

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="crafty canary"]Thank goodness for Geoff Watling saving the club even though the cook always sems to be given the credit.[/quote]So, apart from buying Chase''s shares and then selling them on to D&M who then loaned the club £1m, what exactly did Geoffrey Watling do to "save the club"?[/quote]

I have asked this question many times. I remember folk delving into the past and cherrypicking "facts" to make Chase a villain and Delia a hero. Now they delve into the past and pull out facts to make "Delia" a villain and Watling a hero. It''s because of the need for a scapegoat, nothing more and nothing less. Our great clubs history is what it is. All the people that some try so hard to discredit did more good than bad. Why does football make it so important for people to find someone to hate?

December 13, 2009

[quote user="Lord Flashheart"][quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]He was dragged down like some East European Dictator in the wake of the Martin O Neil departure, but has history been fat too harsh on the Robert Chase era? That season we got relegated he clearly miscalculated in not strengthening the side and he could have done to keep O Neil and we would have reaped the benefits. We forget though that he successfully whelled and dealed to keep us in the top flight for many years when the crowds were more like 15 000! He was by and large a shrewd businessman who knew when to sell a player and more often than not when to buy one. We were reasonably profitable and since with odd blips we have suffered over a decade of financial and footballing mismanagement which culminated in last seasons relegation. I think with hindsight that history will show that we were very harsh on the guy just as we were on Worthy when he was hounded out the be replaced in qick succession be a series of incompetent managers[/quote]

Yes.... and built upon by the cook''s cynical PR team who have created a Saint as well as a Devil....

Robert Chase had his faults like the rest of us.... but did he take us down to Division 3 before getting ousted?Seems to me Smith has singularly destroyed all that those before her built....... yet remains on her throne gloating.

I''ve never stopped thanking him for so many great years anyway.......

[/quote]

So he was branded a devil by Delia''s PR team, not because of anything he did? If memory serves me right his head was already being called for before Delia was even on the scene. Not sure she can be blamed for the fans having already made up their minds about the bloke. [8-)]

He didn''t take us down to Division Three, but he did take us from being a club challenging for the Premiership title and a consistent place in Europe to a bankrupt club towards the bottom of the old First Division. Hardly something to thank him for. [:S]

It seems to me that both Chase and Delia got a lot wrong. I don''t see why one has to deify one and loathe the other. [Y]
[/quote]

How quickly the success he brought us was forgotten though. Nobody is perfect but it was an ungrateful lynching by any other name and when that was allowed to happen the whole ethos of the club changed.

Personally I feel the club has never recovered from what happened to Robert Chase and it''s mentality has slipped into over expectance and ideas way above it''s station.

Robert Chase made NCFC into something it never was..... and never will be again without another man like him.

Lord Flashheart · December 13, 2009

I don''t think it''s fair to say that they were "forgotten". What City fan can''t remember that glorious night in Munich or the sound thumping that was dealt to Leeds? Nobody will forget the good times the club experienced under Chase (just like nobody will forget the good times the club has been through under Delia), but that doesn''t detract from the fact that he left the club on its knees through his own stupid mistakes. Nobody''s perfect sure, but that doesn''t mean he shouldn''t be held accountable. So, for what it''s worth, thanks for the good times Mr Chase but also curse you for the worst. [Y]

lappinitup · December 13, 2009

[quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]it was an ungrateful lynching by any other name

Personally I feel the club has never recovered from what happened to Robert Chase

Robert Chase made NCFC into something it never was..... and never will be again without another man like him.

[/quote]So let''s get this right Cluck, you''re blaming the fans at the time for the clubs demise, the very same fans you applaud so often on here as preferable to todays fans. In other words, it''s always been the fans fault. Yeah, right!

Crafty Canary · December 13, 2009

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="crafty canary"]Thank goodness for Geoff Watling saving the club even though the cook always sems to be given the credit.[/quote]So, apart from buying Chase''s shares and then selling them on to D&M who then loaned the club £1m, what exactly did Geoffrey Watling do to "save the club"?[/quote]

Other than keeping the club going, not much!.

December 14, 2009

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]it was an ungrateful lynching by any other name

Personally I feel the club has never recovered from what happened to Robert Chase

Robert Chase made NCFC into something it never was..... and never will be again without another man like him.

[/quote]So let''s get this right Cluck, you''re blaming the fans at the time for the clubs demise, the very same fans you applaud so often on here as preferable to todays fans. In other words, it''s always been the fans fault. Yeah, right![/quote]

Go snuggle up to Nutless Slappy....

You''re safe there......

December 14, 2009

[quote user="Lord Flashheart"]I don''t think it''s fair to say that they were "forgotten". What City fan can''t remember that glorious night in Munich or the sound thumping that was dealt to Leeds? Nobody will forget the good times the club experienced under Chase (just like nobody will forget the good times the club has been through under Delia), but that doesn''t detract from the fact that he left the club on its knees through his own stupid mistakes. Nobody''s perfect sure, but that doesn''t mean he shouldn''t be held accountable. So, for what it''s worth, thanks for the good times Mr Chase but also curse you for the worst. [Y]
[/quote]

What good times under Delia Smith?.....

One promotion from Division Two (Chase had a collection of them) followed by a disastrous humiliation in the Premier League and freefall ever since.....

I can''t see any comparison between a man who brought us unbelievable joy and a woman who has taken us south and piled up the debt in doing so.......

PurpleCanary · December 14, 2009

[quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]

What good times under Delia Smith?.....

One promotion from Division Two (Chase had a collection of them)

[/quote]No. Simply not true. Ignorance or a lie. I don''t care which. I doubt anyone does. Chase did not have a collection of promotions from the second tier. He had - at best - one. The same number as Smith and Jones.That was the 1985/86 season. And since he only became chairman during that season he can hardly be given total credit.Tedious stuff, this factual accuracy thing.

nutty nigel · December 14, 2009

[quote user="crafty canary"]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="crafty canary"]Thank goodness for Geoff Watling saving the club even though the cook always sems to be given the credit.[/quote]So, apart from buying Chase''s shares and then selling them on to D&M who then loaned the club £1m, what exactly did Geoffrey Watling do to "save the club"?[/quote]

Other than keeping the club going, not much!.

[/quote]

It just doesn''t add up to me Crafty.

Big Bob obviously had had enough and who could blame him. Those purists of the day protested in the ground, outside the ground and even at his home. It''s not that they''d forgotten had they? I mean those glorious days at the top of the Premier League and in Europe just a couple of years before must have been so fresh in their minds. But they wanted Chase out. Many of them openly hated him. So, in Geoffrey Watling, Big Bob finally found the right man with the right offer for his shares and walked away. Now Crafty, I don''t see a saviour there, do you? Unless Big Bob saved the club from himself.

A lot of people then worked together to get our club back on an even keel. Including some of Chases own men who stayed on. Geoffrey Watling, Barry Lockwood, Martin Armstrong and Gordon Bennett were big players in this. later Smith&Jones, Foulger and Skipper joined the board in return for investment.

Eventually Geoffrey Watling sold the shares he bought from Chase and his original shareholding to Smith&Jones.

Now I reckon that''s a lot of people been involved in "saving the club" and "keeping it going". Even Chase himself must be partly a "Saviour" for seeking out a buyer in the first place. Over the years fans have gone back in time and cherrypicked someone to be crowned as "Saviour"! That was my whole reason for bringing back the "Time to kiss and make up with Robert Chase" thread. http://www.pinkun.com/cs_pinkun/cs/forums/345378/ShowPost.aspx

As I said earlier, our great clubs history is what it is. Robert Chases achievements are no greater or less than they were when that thread was first posted in 2004. It was then after all 8 years after he had walked away. Those achievements are also no greater or less today. So what has changed? All I can see is the cherrypicking from our history to suit the current scapegoating.

BlyBlyBabes · December 14, 2009

The facts speak for themselves - and always will no matter how much some would seek to re-write history.

It speaks volumes for the deep rot at the heart of our club that Smith & Jones are not big enough to sort out a rapprochement with Robert Chase and bring him back into the fold.

Big people make things happen whereas little people let things happen.

OTBC

nutty nigel · December 14, 2009

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

The facts speak for themselves - and always will no matter how much some would seek to re-write history.

It speaks volumes for the deep rot at the heart of our club that Smith & Jones are not big enough to sort out a rapprochement with Robert Chase and bring him back into the fold.

Big people make things happen whereas little people let things happen.

OTBC

[/quote]

I have never agreed with anything I have seen from you more than that statement Babes[Y]

So why do you seek to do it[:^)]

I believe Big Bob states the only thing he would have done differently would have been to have gone six months earlier. Would he ever come back? And would it work if he did? We have to move on but the biggest problem we have had is that the game has moved quicker than our club. Whether that be at the end of Chases time or later.

BlyBlyBabes · December 14, 2009

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

The facts speak for themselves - and always will no matter how much some would seek to re-write history.

It speaks volumes for the deep rot at the heart of our club that Smith & Jones are not big enough to sort out a rapprochement with Robert Chase and bring him back into the fold.

Big people make things happen whereas little people let things happen.

OTBC

[/quote]

I have never agreed with anything I have seen from you more than that statement Babes[Y]

So why do you seek to do it[:^)]

I believe Big Bob states the only thing he would have done differently would have been to have gone six months earlier. Would he ever come back? And would it work if he did? We have to move on but the biggest problem we have had is that the game has moved quicker than our club. Whether that be at the end of Chases time or later.

[/quote]

I''ll ignore your characteristic 2nd sentence for now.

Tell me though, do you think that Chase and McNally would get on together?

OTBC

mozzer · December 14, 2009

Players being driven away from Colney to be sold under the managers nose, the farce of the Windass transfer talks, "If Sutton goes, I go", loud speakers aimed at the Barclay to drown out any chants agaisnt Chase, police horses charging through Norwich supporters.................oh, happy days

chicken · December 14, 2009

[quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]

[quote user="Lord Flashheart"]I don''t think it''s fair to say that they were "forgotten". What City fan can''t remember that glorious night in Munich or the sound thumping that was dealt to Leeds? Nobody will forget the good times the club experienced under Chase (just like nobody will forget the good times the club has been through under Delia), but that doesn''t detract from the fact that he left the club on its knees through his own stupid mistakes. Nobody''s perfect sure, but that doesn''t mean he shouldn''t be held accountable. So, for what it''s worth, thanks for the good times Mr Chase but also curse you for the worst. [Y][/quote]

What good times under Delia Smith?.....

One promotion from Division Two (Chase had a collection of them) followed by a disastrous humiliation in the Premier League and freefall ever since.....

I can''t see any comparison between a man who brought us unbelievable joy and a woman who has taken us south and piled up the debt in doing so.......

[/quote]Hmmm.I would say that the play off final season was ''good'' as was the promotion season and indeed the premiership season up until Fulham - that is only a matter of opinion ofcourse but if our team had actually turned up that day and half of them not already playing for another team we would have remained in the premiership and your opinion of it would be vastly different.But it would be harsh to blame anything other than not getting Ashton in the summer on the majority shareholders. One goal in one of those draws would have seen us stay up - not sure how much of that you can blame on any director! To add to that the most humiliating thing that season was ''Delia gate'' ''where are you'' etc.It wasn''t as humiliating as having a top three premiership teams old out from underneath the manager and none of it re-invested in anything worth while.Before you harp on about land that has since been sold for a proffit - do consider the SINCE. In the long run it may well have been a money spinner but it hasn''t helped us has it? Because by the time it was worth the money to sell / develop etc it was too late to help.The relegation under Chase cost us a lot more than the one under Delia. Why you ask? Because money was just returning to football in a big way and because of the way we were sold piece by piece and still ended up with debts meant that we couldn''t even compete to get back into the big time, and all the while the money in the prem grew and grew and grew. If we had been in the top three still who knows how much history we would be celebrating now. We missed the ride, we missed the fun and we missed the money.For me Chase is often held up as having been a scapegoat but quite frankly it can only be done by people who refuse to see the facts. People have criticised the board for not making clear what has happened to the money from the sales of players like Ashton, Earnshaw etc but we know there are debts to be serviced, when Chase sold our players - we were in the dark. And at £5million Sutton was a transfer record - yet we still saw none of it.

Jack Flash · December 14, 2009

Re - "Players being driven away from Colney to be sold under the managers nose, the farce of the Windass transfer talks, "If Sutton goes, I go", loud speakers aimed at the Barclay to drown out any chants agaisnt Chase, police horses charging through Norwich supporters.................oh, happy days".... Wasn''t the quote more like - ''Sutton will only be sold over my dead body!'' A few weeks later, the decision was made to sell Sutton, but not by Chase, I suspect, more likely the Bank. That''s the mess he had created.

pete_norw · December 14, 2009

[quote user="Yorkshire Canary"]He was dragged down like some East European Dictator in the wake of the Martin O Neil departure, but has history been fat too harsh on the Robert Chase era? That season we got relegated he clearly miscalculated in not strengthening the side and he could have done to keep O Neil and we would have reaped the benefits. We forget though that he successfully whelled and dealed to keep us in the top flight for many years when the crowds were more like 15 000! He was by and large a shrewd businessman who knew when to sell a player and more often than not when to buy one. We were reasonably profitable and since with odd blips we have suffered over a decade of financial and footballing mismanagement which culminated in last seasons relegation. I think with hindsight that history will show that we were very harsh on the guy just as we were on Worthy when he was hounded out the be replaced in qick succession be a series of incompetent managers[/quote]

Given the choice I''d rather not, if you don''t mind

Old Shuck · December 14, 2009

Of course, the "good times" we had under Chase (don''t forget, we also had them, big time, under John Bond and Ken Brown) might also have something to do with the fact that we had a bloody good Manager, and a fantastic squad of players.

As well as the third in the Prem, we had a 4th place and a 5th place finish in the old First Division before the Chase/Walker era, look at Dave Stringers side and what he built, Walker did a good job, but Stringer had laid the foundations.

In that 88/89 season, we were being tipped to do the double at one point!

Football was different then though. We had our moments, and, more than most. As did QPR, Wimbledon, Villa-they were 2nd when we finished 3rd-Oxford United and Luton won league cups, Forest two European Cups, Wimbledon an FA Cup...

...football is now for the super rich and those that aren''t, and their clubs, have fallen away and we''ll never see that variety, or examples of other clubs coming to the fore and having good seasons as we and those others did. Chase was at the helm when it was still possible to rattle the cages of the big clubs and be noticed, football outgrew him and his regime, just as it did, later, with Risdale at Leeds. The trick is not knowing when to get out, it was get out if you could, and, if you can''t...well, Chase couldn''t, didn''t, and suffered. Before it all started to go wrong for him, he was popular. no question, if not adored.

Football clubs were owned by scrap metal merchants, bog roll company owners (Frannie Lee) and car salesmen. They could cope, clubs could prosper. Not any more. I remember the end of the Chase years, it wasn''t nice, it was bloody ugly. But, in hindsight, did he swiftly and irrecovably get out of his depth? I think he did, just as Delia and Michael maybe now. Their faults or not? Bad management? Bad advice? Poor policy? Its 101 things and more-and easy to turn on the one person, but never that simple.

nutty nigel · December 14, 2009

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Tell me though, do you think that Chase and McNally would get on together?

OTBC

[/quote]

No I don''t think they would. And the reason I think that is because Big Bob ran the club and, although had advisors, wouldn''t have had a CE make decisions for him. Robert Chase was not at all the monster he was painted. He lived for Norwich City for those ten years. He had a hand and an interest in every aspect of the club. I know on good authority that he was always there. He''d be near enough the first to arrive in the morning and last to leave at night. Anyone who turned up to work at the ground would probably run into Chase. If you were there to lay a carpet or build a wall Big Bob would know about it and you''d meet him. He never really delegated, made virtually all the decisions across the board, and even though he didn''t actually have a majority shareholding nobody out voted him. Despite everything that''s been said since I believe he was a strong and honest leader of men.

Barry Lockwood remained Chairman after Chase sold his shares. Martin Armstrong was Watling''s first choice but Norwich & Peterborough wouldn''t allow it so Lockwood remained. And this is part of an interview with the local press : -

Barry Lockwood''s assertion is somehow both disarming and startling in its candour. "All directors and the vice-chairman received monthly management accounts including the bank position and the cash book position. So we were all aware what the position was." Pause as bamboozled interviewer scratches head. For a man purportedly under fire, the 58-year-old King''s Lynn-based businessman appears curiously disinclined to bolt for the one, perilous escape hatch still just about ajar to anyone associated with the remarkable deterioration in Norwich City''s financial fortunes.
"Blame Robert Chase?" Lockwood pauses briefly, with eyebrow half-raised and the faintest trace of a sardonic smile. "That''s the easy answer," he continues. "I''d be failing in my responsibility if I said that."

Anyway, for what it''s worth I reckon it''s against this background that the new board moved forward without strong leadership and with a team in place to run the club. The comments attributed to various people, especially Geoffrey Watling and Delia Smith, about "no one person holding the majority shares in the football club" I have never seen anywhere. I believe they are confused with comments about "no one person should make all the decisions again". That also makes more sense because Robert Chase never was majority shareholder. He just got his own way.

For my money Chase never deserved to be treated the way he was. The expenditure was far too great when he finally left but I believe a lot of that was because we had fallen from the top of the Premier League and playing in Europe to the bottom of Division Two in such a short time. That drop was massive! IMO it was far bigger than the one we have just experienced. But the result is the same. We had to regroup, restructure and build again just as we are this season.

But this time we fell with a team in charge where as last time one man was making all the decisions. I see it a bit like governments and the floating voters. We get fed up with one way so we go with another way and then have a few years of central politics which is neither one or the other. But the result is usually much the same whoever is in charge. And that''s because the problems are the same and there''s only so many ways the resources can be found to deal with them.

So now we are sort of half and half. A middle way if you like. We have a team and it appears strong leadership from both the Chairman and CE. It will work if they appoint the right football manager and the football budget isn''t wasted.

But continually cherrypicking things from our history to discredit Chase, Watling or Smith&Jones may ultimately make those with need of a scapegoat and a pound of flesh feel better. But will make no difference to the football we go to see.

BlyBlyBabes · December 14, 2009

[quote user="Old Shuck"]Of course, the "good times" we had under Chase (don''t forget, we also had them, big time, under John Bond and Ken Brown) might also have something to do with the fact that we had a bloody good Manager, and a fantastic squad of players. As well as the third in the Prem, we had a 4th place and a 5th place finish in the old First Division before the Chase/Walker era, look at Dave Stringers side and what he built, Walker did a good job, but Stringer had laid the foundations. In that 88/89 season, we were being tipped to do the double at one point! Football was different then though. We had our moments, and, more than most. As did QPR, Wimbledon, Villa-they were 2nd when we finished 3rd-Oxford United and Luton won league cups, Forest two European Cups, Wimbledon an FA Cup... ...football is now for the super rich and those that aren''t, and their clubs, have fallen away and we''ll never see that variety, or examples of other clubs coming to the fore and having good seasons as we and those others did. Chase was at the helm when it was still possible to rattle the cages of the big clubs and be noticed, football outgrew him and his regime, just as it did, later, with Risdale at Leeds. The trick is not knowing when to get out, it was get out if you could, and, if you can''t...well, Chase couldn''t, didn''t, and suffered. Before it all started to go wrong for him, he was popular. no question, if not adored. Football clubs were owned by scrap metal merchants, bog roll company owners (Frannie Lee) and car salesmen. They could cope, clubs could prosper. Not any more. I remember the end of the Chase years, it wasn''t nice, it was bloody ugly. But, in hindsight, did he swiftly and irrecovably get out of his depth? I think he did, just as Delia and Michael maybe now. Their faults or not? Bad management? Bad advice? Poor policy? Its 101 things and more-and easy to turn on the one person, but never that simple.[/quote]

I think that''s a jolly good post Shuck. Very fair and insightfull.

However, it''s a great pity that too many will continue spitting bile rather than digesting the many truths in a post such as this.

OTBC

BlyBlyBabes · December 14, 2009