Worst Manager of the Decade:

[The Saturday Boy 0]

before i get pulled up for it by some clever dick i apologise for the typing errors. I am neither a secretary or an internet nerd!

[Row D Seat 7 0]

Gunn - just can''t get passed his disastrous reign.

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="The Saturday Boy"]I''m no fan of roeder but remember he did pull us out of the relegation mess that Grant had left us in. I still believe that, although he was a rubbish appointment that should have never been made, had roeder stayed in charge, we would have stayed up last season. ( I also tink that had we actually appointed a manager rather than Gunny we would have atayed up).

I''m not going to bre drawn into the slaging off of Gunny - a decent man who cleary cares about the club - shuld never have been manager but I can''t blame him for wanting the job - I blame those who appointed him just as I praised those who aapointed worthy and now Lambert.

and for the record it''s got to br Grant... yokk over a team who had a very, very decent chance of a play-off spot and left us adrift at the bottomof div1 / the championship[/quote]Yep, spot on.  People forget Roeder was sacked when we were outside the relegation places, and Gunn took us down.  But Roeder had to fix Grant''s mess, and keeping us up when we were virtually down by November shows he cannot be classed as the worst manager of the decade.  People need to remember being popular is not in a manager''s job description.  Roeder did something Grant and Gunn never did, i.e. he got it right for one season.  Now that''s not much, but it''s more than the other two clowns achieved.

[Simon Lappin, King Of Spain 0]

[quote user="Longy"]Grant for me from a football point of view, we went from a club that really should have been yo-yoing between the top 2 divisions to a shambles and fighting off relegation to league 1. Though i kind of respect him that at the end he admitted he wasn''t up to the job.

Hamilton is the one I truly despise, he was working for radio5 on the Ipswich game last year and he was so biased towards them, that is embarrasing to think such scum could be allowed to manage our club.


[/quote]

I remember listening to that game, the man is an absolute disgrace to football, some of the tripe he was coming out with was truly astounding, I have never heard a more biased commentator in my life. Even radio norfolk who obviously have a vested interest are more objective that that piece of excrement who was commentating for a national broadcaster, I hope he never works in the UK again (or if he does it''s managing the filth down the road), useless scummer prick!!!!

[Binky 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="The Saturday Boy"]I''m no fan of roeder but remember he did pull us out of the relegation mess that Grant had left us in. I still believe that, although he was a rubbish appointment that should have never been made, had roeder stayed in charge, we would have stayed up last season. [/quote]Yep, spot on.  People forget Roeder was sacked when we were outside the relegation places, and Gunn took us down.  But Roeder had to fix Grant''s mess, and keeping us up when we were virtually down by November shows he cannot be classed as the worst manager of the decade.  People need to remember being popular is not in a manager''s job description.  Roeder did something Grant and Gunn never did, i.e. he got it right for one season.  Now that''s not much, but it''s more than the other two clowns achieved.[/quote]Did Roeder save us Mr Chops - or was it Ched Evans? Was it an astute loan signing - or did he just get lucky? After all, he also signed some howlers too. Peter Grant was out of his depth and did us no good but at least he realised it.  Roeder believed he was infallible and that his loan policy was the only viable option - eg no Grant Holts for him. Arguably Ched Evans saved us in spite of Roeder''s best efforts to do otherwise. Roeder''s treatment of Hucks and Lappin is well trodden ground but let''s not forget either his dreadful managerial decisions to play decent players like Russell, Bell and Hoolahan out of position - and his masterstroke of making that legend and master footballer Mark Fotheringham, Captain of Norwich City!I do not share your view of Gunn as a "clown" (but will concede that you are entitled to it!) - but if Gunn had had some of his eventual signings on the books for those last 7 games - or if Hoolahan had not been injured - your view of Gunn may not be quite so harsh now.What is undoubted is that both Grant and Gunn could learn a few lessons of "how to do it" from Lambert - but not from Roeder. Roeder could also learn from Lambert.... but somehow I don''t think he ever would.

[Walphy 0]

Wemember that othe Scotchman Jimmy Duffy

Fwee out of fwee.

Hard man to beat.

 

[Arthur Whittle 0]

Is this the weal walph wight...walphy poos???

[Rock the Boat 0]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

He may have brought us promotion but the the colossal mistakes he made not only lead to our immediate relegation but sparked off the downward spiral that lead into Division III for the first time in fifty years.

What did he do wrong? First big mistake was to rip the soul out of the team after we won promotion. Malka Mckay went on, first with West Ham, then again  with Watford to bring promotion to three clubs in successive seasons, he then put in a decent enough shift during Watford''s premiership year. Had Worthington not made his mistake Mckay would have been with us two years younger in the Premiership. He may not have lasted the course but he would have provided a transitional period to bed down a new heart in our team. Something we sorely missed. Malkay also would have popped up at set pices and scored half a dozen goals for us. Enough to win a couple of games.

We never recovered from the loss of Malky.

The second big mistake that Worthington made was to sign up Huckerby when he should have gone for Peter Crouch. Yes, Hucks is a God, and a brilliant player - at second division level. In the Premiership opposition teams stuck two defenders onto Huckerby and nullified any threat he may have caused. With Hucks running into blind alleys the rest of our game was neutered. Had Worthington sugned Crouch instead of Hucks, then with his height it wouldn''t have mattered if six defenders were marking him, he still would have towered over everyone at corners and free kicks. Imagine how deadly we would have been at set pieces with both Malkay Mackay and Pter Crouch to aim for. Likewise our defending would have been so much better at set pieces with those two coming back to defend. As it was we were amateurish in the Premiership dealing with high balls into our penalty area.

Crouch went on to play for Liverpool and England, so Worthington got it wrong big time when he chose the wrong forward to take us into the Premiership. Even more of a mistake when you realise that Huckerby had already failed to cut it in the top division.

So before you all bash me over Hucks, yes he was the best player we had during his stay at Carrow Road, but Worthington let an even better player slip though our fingers.

If Worthington had kept Mackay and signed Crouch the Ashton question would not have arisen. We would not have been relegated after one season. His long drawn out dismisal poisonned the club and left the fans split into opposing camps that still is in evidence today, although it has evolved into something different. Without those huge mistakes of Worthington there never would have been the whole sorry mess of Grant, Roeder, Gunn, et al.

It was those two mistakes of Worthington that are at the core of our demise over the past five years added to the fact that there was no one on the board with the footballing expertise to question what was the logic behind those decisions. So for me, Worthington''s mistakes undid all the good things he did, and that makes him the worst manager of the decade.

 

[Mr.Carrow 380]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

 

[/quote]

Delia and MWJ wanted Gunn to continue- who gave him a contract after he got us relegated?  I think if he`d stayed and we were now in the bottom three instead of the top, your posts would be exactly the same.....

[/quote]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

 

[/quote]

D and M only needed one more vote to pass whatever they liked at board level, and handily they had a yes-man they paid £180k a year to rely on.

McNally is made of different stuff and will vote against his employers if he feels it is for the good of the club.  To their credit D and M have accepted it so far, but how comfortable they are with this situation is open to considerable conjecture.....

[Binky 0]

[quote user="Rock the Boat"]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

The second big mistake that Worthington made was to sign up Huckerby when he should have gone for Peter Crouch. 

Crouch went on to play for Liverpool and England, so Worthington got it wrong big time when he chose the wrong forward to take us into the Premiership. Even more of a mistake when you realise that Huckerby had already failed to cut it in the top division.

So before you all bash me over Hucks, yes he was the best player we had during his stay at Carrow Road, but Worthington let an even better player slip though our fingers....

So for me, Worthington''s mistakes undid all the good things he did, and that makes him the worst manager of the decade.

 [/quote]

You are more than just a little way off beam my friend. Fact 1: Worthington & most at Carrow Rd would have loved to have signed Crouch. Fact 2. We couldn''t afford him or his wages - we only got Hucks by some kind benefactor stepping in (and Mrs Hucks deciding Norfolk was a decent place to live). Fact 3 There was no way he would have come to us permanently - as you say, he knew he was good enough to play at the top level and went on to do so. That we got him on loan at all was our good fortune, and due toWorthington''s opportunistic and clever double/triple swoop and to the management at Aston Villa treating him badly and stupidly - rather like Motherwell getting Lappin on loan from us.

Worthy the worst of the decade? Have you been asleep these past few years?

[nutty nigel 7,669]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

 

[/quote]

Delia and MWJ wanted Gunn to continue- who gave him a contract after he got us relegated?  I think if he`d stayed and we were now in the bottom three instead of the top, your posts would be exactly the same.....

[/quote]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

 

[/quote]

D and M only needed one more vote to pass whatever they liked at board level, and handily they had a yes-man they paid £180k a year to rely on.

McNally is made of different stuff and will vote against his employers if he feels it is for the good of the club.  To their credit D and M have accepted it so far, but how comfortable they are with this situation is open to considerable conjecture.....

[/quote]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

 

[nutty nigel 7,669]

Well respect to you "Rock The Boat". I agree that Worthy should win this coveted award. Now, I don''t think he was the worst manager of the decade, I believe he was the best. But on the fans vote he whould be the worst. After all he was bad enough to move the fans to protest in huge numbers. A Public Meeting at St Andrews Hall, petitions  and marches. Yes he was despised more than any manager before or since. So as I say, respect to you for sticking to your guns and not being two-faced by voting for Hamilton, Grant and Roeder.

But as usual these attacks on Worthy are not based on what actually happened. For instance Peter Crouch eventually moved on to Liverpool. He first went to Southampton who finished below us in that premiership season. They finished bottom. Just like Watford did when they played Mackay.

 

 

[norfolkchance1 0]

It depends on what criteria you are calling the worst manager of the decade on. I agree Peter Grant made some signings that didn''t work out ( I would hesitate to calling them all poor buys though)- Simon Lappin has proved to be a decent player once given a run in the side albeit at a lower level. But to Grants credit he walked away when he realised he wasn''t up to it.

Roeder did well in keeping us up but the loan policy the season after was never going to work for team morale with players coming and going all the time. The AGM incident leaves a sour taste as well.

I believe Roeders rot was quite well set in apart from Gunns first game, but even so a better motivator would have dug us out with the players we had. The decision to appoint a novice at such a crucial time was done with views through tremendously romantic spectacles.

For me though it is Roeder who wins the vote, I used to go to games and have to work out who the latest new loan signing was that was way out of his depth, due to the fact that I''d never heard or seen the player before.

Added to that the way Huckerby was released without the send off he deserved will always rankle when it could have so easily coincided with Dions finale.

One final reason, the banishment of Lappin after a game in which several players played poorly was a disgrace. Although a division lower he is close to (or at the top) of the assists table now. Last season we couldn''t hardly score enough goals to stay up - and you can''t score goals if there is no supply line.

[BlyBlyBabes 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Mr.Carrow"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

[/quote]

Delia and MWJ wanted Gunn to continue- who gave him a contract after he got us relegated?  I think if he`d stayed and we were now in the bottom three instead of the top, your posts would be exactly the same.....

[/quote]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

[/quote]

D and M only needed one more vote to pass whatever they liked at board level, and handily they had a yes-man they paid £180k a year to rely on.

McNally is made of different stuff and will vote against his employers if he feels it is for the good of the club.  To their credit D and M have accepted it so far, but how comfortable they are with this situation is open to considerable conjecture.....

[/quote]

Just as a matter of interest Mr Carrow - at what point do we decide whether Delia appointed the manager or not? She obviously didn''t appoint Lambert now but how many games would we have to lose before he became "one of hers"? Did she appoint Worthy?

[/quote]

As I recall it Worthy virtually appointed himself.

''Give me the job or I''m off'' is a fair precis I think.

One thing about Worthy, he usually had the balls to go to the board and make his demands - and curiously we mostly knew when he did. Maybe that''s what you and Delia fell in love with?

OTBC

 

OTBC

 

[nutty nigel 7,669]

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

As I recall it Worthy virtually appointed himself.

''Give me the job or I''m off'' is a fair precis I think.

One thing about Worthy, he usually had the balls to go to the board and make his demands - and curiously we mostly knew when he did. Maybe that''s what you and Delia fell in love with?

OTBC

 

OTBC

 

[/quote]

Now do you think this is a quality that would be in his favour for the "worst" or "best" category?

It seems to be a quality Lambert has too. So your answer could be a pointer to what the future holds..

 

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Glen Roeder!

Not a manager in my opinion!

Too old when he came to Norwich so was not hungry and was prepared to do whatever the board told him to do which in his instance was the ridiculous loan policy!

Why did he change a winning team that was unbeaten after 13 games!

Abysmyl treatment of Lappin, who as we all know is no worldbeater but was better than Roeder treated him!

Releasing Huckerby when he was still our best attacking option, not because of money or he was past it, just cause Roeder didn''t like him. I''m still convinced that no mark left sided player Eagle was signed just to rub it into to Hucks. Roeder could never give a proper reason why he released a player who he even prefered to Croft on the right!

Too many of the loans were just blind stabs in the ground, not up to it, just going on the word of some contact he knew. Messrs Koroma (remember him?), Gibbs, Henry, Archibald Henville spring to mind. The sight of Roeder trying to tell Henry what to do at half time of the thrashing at Leicester was painful. John Kennedy was another player who should never of signed for Norwich!

Terrible man management/motivational skills which only created a negative atmosphere amongst the board, players and fans!

An arrogance that had the same negative effect. Proclaimed himself as a total football expert, who would not listen to anyone and would never admit he was wrong!

Grant was another mistake but at least he admitted he was not up to it - I suspect Roeder wouldn''t admit that even now!

Yes we were not in the bottom 3 when he was rightfully sacked but the it would of happened as well as virtual civil war if he had stayed!

Gunny was a club legend who was put in an impossible, poisoned chalice position that established managers like Worthington and Boothroyd sensibly turned down!

Finally, its a pleasure to have a proper manger for the 1st time since Worthington in his prime!

[Guest]

[quote user="Rock the Boat"]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

[/quote][:D] It''s not quite April yet is it?!

[Arthur Whittle 0]

Koroma and Henville Jesus!!! Wheres Oj now? Henville got sent off for Exeter the other day.

[Rock the Boat 0]

[quote user="Binky"][quote user="Rock the Boat"]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

The second big mistake that Worthington made was to sign up Huckerby when he should have gone for Peter Crouch. 

Crouch went on to play for Liverpool and England, so Worthington got it wrong big time when he chose the wrong forward to take us into the Premiership. Even more of a mistake when you realise that Huckerby had already failed to cut it in the top division.

So before you all bash me over Hucks, yes he was the best player we had during his stay at Carrow Road, but Worthington let an even better player slip though our fingers....

So for me, Worthington''s mistakes undid all the good things he did, and that makes him the worst manager of the decade.

 [/quote]

You are more than just a little way off beam my friend. Fact 1: Worthington & most at Carrow Rd would have loved to have signed Crouch. Fact 2. We couldn''t afford him or his wages - we only got Hucks by some kind benefactor stepping in (and Mrs Hucks deciding Norfolk was a decent place to live). Fact 3 There was no way he would have come to us permanently - as you say, he knew he was good enough to play at the top level and went on to do so. That we got him on loan at all was our good fortune, and due toWorthington''s opportunistic and clever double/triple swoop and to the management at Aston Villa treating him badly and stupidly - rather like Motherwell getting Lappin on loan from us.

[/quote]

Well Binky, I say this:

Fact 1: Agreed

Fact 2: Agreed, though I said it was a choice between Crouch and Huckerby. As Nutty says elsewhere, I don''t think we had the money to buy both players, so Worthy had to make a choice which one to go for. He went for Hucks and signed up the most brilliant player we''ve had in the decade, a total gentleman and a great entertainer. Unfortunately, I think Crouch would have been the better choice. His goals from set pieces and assists would have given us more results. But if any one says we would have been a more boring side to watch, I can''t disagree with that either.

Fact 3: After us he went to Southampton, a team level with us at the time. Nutty says he failed at Southampton. I think that is because the Saint''s management didn''t know how to play him best. The fact that he went on to Liverpool and England is proof that he could, and maybe still can, do a job at the highest level. Worthington''s mistake was to go for a player who, I''m sorry to say, had already proven he couldn''t operate at the same level (defenders knew how to play him)

Nutty,

Eventually Malkay did finish bottom of the Premier with Watford, but that was three years after he left us. He played in two promotion-winning sides plus a Premiership campaign. Proof, I think, that he was let go by the manager too early.

[quote] Worthy the worst of the decade? Have you been asleep these past few years? [/quote]

Yes he was. Worthington had all the Premiership budget, he had two parachut payments. He had the most funds to buy players out of all managers, and as Nutty says - it''s all about not throwing huge budgets at poor managers. They will only waste it. Just what Worthington did.

Final point: Out of all the managers we''ve had, who was the only one to face a St. Andrews vote of no-confidence from the fans?

 

[Smudger 0]

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

No votes for Worthy[:^)]

 

[/quote]

haha how did we ever guess that you would of posted that Nutty??? [:|]

[/quote]

Well I think he''s gotta be in with a shout to be fair Smudge. I wouldn''t vote for him because I think he''s the clear winner of best manager of the decade. Although, apparently, a few wins in division three have secured that for Lambo[;)]

Who''s your best and worst of the decade?

I''d go for Worthy best with Hamilton, Grant, Roeder and Gunn sharing worst for various reasons.

We''re in a new decade now so let''s see how Lambo goes. If he can get us to the Premiership with the Delia and Michael still at the helm then he can battle it out with Worthy for manager of the century!! But of course Worthy did it with the useless Doomcaster, Skipper and Munby while Lambo has the backing of new fans darlings Bowkett and McNally so if he manages it will it ever match what Worthy did[:^)]

[;)]

Happy New Year Smudger[<:o)]

 

[/quote]

Hi Nutty,

My best manager of the decade would also be Worthy but that is not to say that I think that he had run out of ideas of how to take the team forwards working under employers who much preferred to invest money in non tangible fixed assets.

As for worst manager I would say it has to be a score draw between Grant and Gunn.  Grant was responsible for the rot really setting in, but at least he was man enough to admit that he was not up to the job and walk away.  Roeder then saved us from the mess that Grant had created and never took NCFC in to the bottom 3 again... I think that two many deluded fans who wish to divert blame for what went wrong at the club elsewhere still blame Roeder due to his arrogance and the comments he made at the AGM.  The facts quite clearly prove that Roeder was far from the worst NCFC manager of the decade however and in my opinion his name should not even be on the list.

Gunn''s record also speaks for itself... he picked up where Grant left off and led us to relegation before the club legend not realising that he had gotten too big for his boots and putting his own interests before those of NCFC.  He should of left with his dignity in tact and resigned after relegating us.

The 3rd manager who deserves a mention is Hamilton for sending me to sleep at a football match on more occasions than any other manager in our history.

Jim Duffy''s 3 games as caretaker manager should not be mentioned, as that is all that he was... a caretaker manager.

So all in all I agree with you, apart from the continual scapegoating of Roeder.  Look at the stats and some of the football played under him and I am sure that you will have to agree?! [;)] 

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Arthur Whittle"]Andy Hughes had left the club by the time Gunn was in charge hadnt he?[/quote]

He certainly had Arthur...[;)]

Typical bull from those who still like to try and pin the blame for our relegation on Roeder despite all the evidence saying that once he had us out of the bottom 3 after the mess that Grant had created we never once went back there until CLUB LEGEND Mr Gunn had been in charge for a few weeks of course!

[Binky 0]

[quote user="Rock the Boat"][quote user="Binky"][quote user="Rock the Boat"]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

The second big mistake that Worthington made was to sign up Huckerby when he should have gone for Peter Crouch. 

Crouch went on to play for Liverpool and England, so Worthington got it wrong big time when he chose the wrong forward to take us into the Premiership. Even more of a mistake when you realise that Huckerby had already failed to cut it in the top division.

[/quote]

You are more than just a little way off beam my friend. Fact 1: Worthington & most at Carrow Rd would have loved to have signed Crouch. Fact 2. We couldn''t afford him or his wages - we only got Hucks by some kind benefactor stepping in (and Mrs Hucks deciding Norfolk was a decent place to live). Fact 3 There was no way he would have come to us permanently - as you say, he knew he was good enough to play at the top level and went on to do so. That we got him on loan at all was our good fortune, and due toWorthington''s opportunistic and clever double/triple swoop and to the management at Aston Villa treating him badly and stupidly - rather like Motherwell getting Lappin on loan from us.

[/quote]

Well Binky, I say this:

Fact 1: Agreed

Fact 2: Agreed, though I said it was a choice between Crouch and Huckerby. As Nutty says elsewhere, I don''t think we had the money to buy both players, so Worthy had to make a choice which one to go for. He went for Hucks and signed up the most brilliant player we''ve had in the decade, a total gentleman and a great entertainer. Unfortunately, I think Crouch would have been the better choice.

Fact 3: After us he went to Southampton, a team level with us at the time. Nutty says he failed at Southampton. I think that is because the Saint''s management didn''t know how to play him best. The fact that he went on to Liverpool and England is proof that he could, and maybe still can, do a job at the highest level. Worthington''s mistake was to go for a player who, I''m sorry to say, had already proven he couldn''t operate at the same level (defenders knew how to play him)

[/quote]Ah then we agree on quite a lot! And (unlike Nutty) I do follow and care about the careers of good players who have played for us. That Crouch was a better player than Hucks is easily arguable by what both actually achieved - quite a lot in both cases but Crouch has played some good games for England and I hope he continues to get the call. He has much more to offer than just height and a heading ability.But your argument is still unfair I think. Crouch said at the time (a bit like Lappin when he was at Motherwell) that he wanted to go back to Villa and force his way back into the team. Maybe as a single lad he didn''t fancy distant old Norwich? But I suspect his wages were even higher than Hucks'' - and whether Hucks realised it at the time, he was looking for somewhere to settle. Crouch''s loan spell with us helped rekindle his career - but I think he only ever saw it as a necessary stepping stone. Whilst I would like to think he would have encouraged any fringe Prem players at Liverpool say, to consider a loan spell with us if offered the chance, I saw no evidence of that or ever heard him praising Norwich as a club. A few years ago, during Peter Grant''s reign, I was talkng to Dave Stringer and we were discussing players of the past. I mentioned how much I liked watching Crouch play, and how much he enjoyed his game. Stringer just chuckled and said: "I would have signed him like a shot - different class. Was never going to happen though." Worthington recognised Crouch''s ability, that''s why he brought him in and that in itself was a clever deal. Don''t think it was up to Worthy to sign him permanently though. Even if the money had been there.

[Lurd 0]

Ridiculous to claim Saints’ management didn’t know what to do with Crouch when a) he scored 16 in 33 games and b) that management happened to be Harry Redknapp who had managed him previously and has since on to sign him two more times.

[Rock the Boat 0]

Well I''m glad we all agree that Peter Crouch is a fine player, which is what I said at the beginning.

To be honest, I don''t think Worthy is the worst manager of the decade, I was just rattling Nutty Nigel''s cage. Naughty me...

[Delia Out! 0]

Peter Grant or Bryan Gunn.

Although Gunn did bring in a few decent players over the summer, so it has to be Grant for me.

[Arthur Whittle 0]

Nutty Nigel, I cant find it but people ar claiming you said Crouch FAILED at Southampton...let me refresh your memory....

His form for the Southampton resulted in him receiving his first England call up. He scored 16 goals in 33 appearances during the 2004–05 season, Southampton were relegated from the Premiership so 16 goals in 33 games is pretty imprssive for a player in a relegation team. Southampton agreed to sell Crouch for £7 million to Liverpool, after relegation.

Now if he failed in that 1 solo season at Southmapton where he "only" managed 16 goals Nutty, why did Liverpool pay 7m for him? Are clubs in the habit of paying 7m for failures?

Please answer Nutty, Cludger, Nigel, Whoever and I apologise if you didnt really say this.

[Mello Yello 2,315]

Who decided that Hamilton, Peter Grant, Roeder and Gunn should be our manager? Two of the instigators are still at the club.....Albeit, they don''t have the ''punch'' that they so dearly enjoyed before appointing Mr Mac and the two others onto the board.

For those two remaining instigators (control-freaks) to continue, desperate measures had to be taken....Their hand was forced because they realised it was their ''last chance saloon'' as the club was spiralling into oblivion...I don''t accept all this ''well, they should be applauded for bringing in Mr Mac and the two others'' If we had stayed up by the skin of our teeth, the board would have remained unchanged......Since the departure of Doncaster (I think he was off anyway).....Look at the way the club has reinvigorated itself....

Mr Munby? Is he missed?

 

[Arthur Whittle 0]

Agree with you mello.

[Mr.Carrow 380]

[quote user="Binky"][quote user="Rock the Boat"][quote user="Binky"][quote user="Rock the Boat"]

Without a shadow of a doubt the worst manager of the past decade is Nigel Worthington.

The second big mistake that Worthington made was to sign up Huckerby when he should have gone for Peter Crouch. 

Crouch went on to play for Liverpool and England, so Worthington got it wrong big time when he chose the wrong forward to take us into the Premiership. Even more of a mistake when you realise that Huckerby had already failed to cut it in the top division.

[/quote]

You are more than just a little way off beam my friend. Fact 1: Worthington & most at Carrow Rd would have loved to have signed Crouch. Fact 2. We couldn''t afford him or his wages - we only got Hucks by some kind benefactor stepping in (and Mrs Hucks deciding Norfolk was a decent place to live). Fact 3 There was no way he would have come to us permanently - as you say, he knew he was good enough to play at the top level and went on to do so. That we got him on loan at all was our good fortune, and due toWorthington''s opportunistic and clever double/triple swoop and to the management at Aston Villa treating him badly and stupidly - rather like Motherwell getting Lappin on loan from us.

[/quote]

Well Binky, I say this:

Fact 1: Agreed

Fact 2: Agreed, though I said it was a choice between Crouch and Huckerby. As Nutty says elsewhere, I don''t think we had the money to buy both players, so Worthy had to make a choice which one to go for. He went for Hucks and signed up the most brilliant player we''ve had in the decade, a total gentleman and a great entertainer. Unfortunately, I think Crouch would have been the better choice.

Fact 3: After us he went to Southampton, a team level with us at the time. Nutty says he failed at Southampton. I think that is because the Saint''s management didn''t know how to play him best. The fact that he went on to Liverpool and England is proof that he could, and maybe still can, do a job at the highest level. Worthington''s mistake was to go for a player who, I''m sorry to say, had already proven he couldn''t operate at the same level (defenders knew how to play him)

[/quote]

Ah then we agree on quite a lot! And (unlike Nutty) I do follow and care about the careers of good players who have played for us. That Crouch was a better player than Hucks is easily arguable by what both actually achieved - quite a lot in both cases but Crouch has played some good games for England and I hope he continues to get the call. He has much more to offer than just height and a heading ability.

But your argument is still unfair I think. Crouch said at the time (a bit like Lappin when he was at Motherwell) that he wanted to go back to Villa and force his way back into the team. Maybe as a single lad he didn''t fancy distant old Norwich? But I suspect his wages were even higher than Hucks'' - and whether Hucks realised it at the time, he was looking for somewhere to settle. Crouch''s loan spell with us helped rekindle his career - but I think he only ever saw it as a necessary stepping stone. Whilst I would like to think he would have encouraged any fringe Prem players at Liverpool say, to consider a loan spell with us if offered the chance, I saw no evidence of that or ever heard him praising Norwich as a club. A few years ago, during Peter Grant''s reign, I was talkng to Dave Stringer and we were discussing players of the past. I mentioned how much I liked watching Crouch play, and how much he enjoyed his game. Stringer just chuckled and said: "I would have signed him like a shot - different class. Was never going to happen though." Worthington recognised Crouch''s ability, that''s why he brought him in and that in itself was a clever deal. Don''t think it was up to Worthy to sign him permanently though. Even if the money had been there.
[/quote]

Crouch publically stated "If i leave Villa, i want to go to Norwich" in the pre-season before our Prem campaign kicked off.  We commited to Huckerby (thanks to the share issue and C.Moore`s contribution) well before we achieved a promotion worth £34m over three seasons so the "Huckerby or Crouch" line is utter nonsense.  Unfortunately the club decided at that time to commit significant funds to the corner infill, new pitch/boiler room, press facilities etc.- just the usual wrong priorities.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,471]

I know I''m not in the gang chaps, but this is ridiculous. Under the thread "worst manager of the decade" you are all arguing about Nigel Worthington? Promotion-to-the-premiership gaining Nigel Worthington? Not Grant, nor Gunn or Blarney? Are you all bonkers?