i dont understand..

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

[quote user="singing canary"]why so many of you (and much as i respect your thoughts).. give gunny a hard time .

lets look at the facts .

gunn took over half way through last season with no player budget and was on a hidding to nothing .

he bought players in like askou , holt , keeped hold of hoolihan brought back martin . though season friendlies we did not lose a game infact we looked good . i must admit the colchester game shocked me , i thought theo was poor.

but then we went and won 4-0 away from home and gunn was sacked..!!

lambert has taken all the credit and gunn is a waste of space .

lambert is a far better than gunn i will admit , but what gets me is thew stick gunn still gets when through him and hid ideas we have got better players than we had through roeder.

he was a legend here and as much as you lot slate him as a manager he found something that city have lacked for ages since earnshaw left ... a proven striker .

roeder killed this club and gunn has taken the stick .

im my eyes he is still a canary legend and without his signings we may not be where we are today .

i know im about to get stick for this post but to be honest im not bothered.

why ... if it was not for gunn we would not have the players who got us here .

lambert is a great manager ,and im pleased he is here . but give gunny some credit as im fed up with hearing how crap he was . he had one bad result after he put the team together he wanted and it cost him and his career .

im ready for the abuse..!!![/quote]

Singing canary ...

He inherited a team which had been OUT of the relegation zone for over a year.

He had 17 games to stabilise the league position.

He brought in 9 of his own players in January.

He was tactically out of his depth as shown by his inability to tinker with things after opposing managers changed tactics during a game.

His teams played with no confidence and the worst thing of all ... no passion, belief or guts on that last day at the Valley.

Yes, bringing in Holt was a good move but buying the leading scorer in League 2 is hardly shewd.

However,

It''s not his fault. His love for NCFC meant that he couldn''t turn down the offer to do the job.

The fault lies with the Board who employed a man with NO managerial experience when the club needed it most.

For his playing days, charity work and love for the club he must always remain a Norwich City great ... but as a manager he was fatally out of his depth and should have been politely pushed away from the permanent job.

[Hairy Canary 668]

To answer your question - what you don''t understand is the difference between being a scout and a manager.

Ok Gunn brought in a few decent players, along with several useless ones. We could argue that point.

What you dont understand is that he just couldn''t manage. He played Hollahan wide, leaving Drury with no defensive cover. Cory Smith never got a game. We played with no holding midfield player for God sake. Nelson was preferred to Askou. Theoklitos was preferred to Rudd. Is it any wonder we got stuffed 1-7?

His first choice mid-field was Hollahan, Tudor-Jones, Gill and Whaley. Read that again and weap!

Sorry mate but he was a disaster!

[morty 0]

Whilst I agree with most of that Broadstairs Canary Gunn must have genuinely thought he was capable of doing the job, and has now realised he wasn''t / isn''t as he is working for a mobile phone company.No one forced him to take the job.If the club had offerred me the job I would have said "As much as I love Norwich city, they deserve someone who can do a better job than I would be able to do"

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Broadstairs Canary"]Singing canary ...

He inherited a team which had been OUT of the relegation zone for over a year.

He had 17 games to stabilise the league position.

He brought in 9 of his own players in January.

He was tactically out of his depth as shown by his inability to tinker with things after opposing managers changed tactics during a game.

His teams played with no confidence and the worst thing of all ... no passion, belief or guts on that last day at the Valley.

Yes, bringing in Holt was a good move but buying the leading scorer in League 2 is hardly shewd.

However,

It''s not his fault. His love for NCFC meant that he couldn''t turn down the offer to do the job.

The fault lies with the Board who employed a man with NO managerial experience when the club needed it most.

For his playing days, charity work and love for the club he must always remain a Norwich City great ... but as a manager he was fatally out of his depth and should have been politely pushed away from the permanent job.[/quote]Yes. The "poisoned chalice" argument is nonsense. Gunn had every chance to keep us up.There is a very simple comparison. Forest, in worse trouble than us,

below us in the table, appointed someone who knew what they were doing.

We appointed someone who didn''t know what they were doing. Forest

overtook us and stayed up. We went down.

One manager is still in football, in charge of the team he saved from relegation and which is now in an automatic

promotion place in the Championship. The other manager is now working for a

phone company.

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

[quote user="morty"]Whilst I agree with most of that Broadstairs Canary Gunn must have genuinely thought he was capable of doing the job, and has now realised he wasn''t / isn''t as he is working for a mobile phone company.No one forced him to take the job.If the club had offerred me the job I would have said "As much as I love Norwich city, they deserve someone who can do a better job than I would be able to do"[/quote]

I can see what you''re saying Morty but with all due respects unlike you Gunn was more than a fan.

At least he played the game at the highest level for a number of years. He sat in dressing rooms listening to successful managers and watching how they worked. He has seen countless training sessions. As a scout he has seen a wide variety of games at all levels.

You can understand why he thought that he could do the job ... many ex-players jump to management with little managerial experience.

In short, I don''t think he should be criticised for wanting the job.

The Board should be criticised for giving it to him ... it''s their responsibility to filter out candidates.

They picked a man with no managerial experience ... they should have learned from the last time they did that (Peter Grant).

[HazzaJet 252]

Let''s forget about all this now. When Lambert came in he encouraged the players to forget about the defeat. I agree Gunn wasn''t fit for the job but I hate seeing all this criticism of him. In my opinion Roeder should have done far better as he had experience, which Gunn didn''t have. However, when Gunn came in he was left with a side that Roeder had wrecked. If Roeder hadn''t gone, I still think that he would have taken us down, as although he never took us into the bottom 3 during his reign as manager, I think that we were only 3 points clear of the drop-zone when he was sacked, and it had got to a point where a win was a very rare result for us.Anyway, I''m starting to wonder whether a 7-1 home defeat on the opening day of the season was a good start, as it got rid of Gunn, and I doubt we would be 2nd in the league at this point in the season if Gunn had stayed on, even if he''d won 7-1 (which he wouldn''t)

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Broadstairs Canary"]Singing canary ...

He inherited a team which had been OUT of the relegation zone for over a year.

He had 17 games to stabilise the league position.

He brought in 9 of his own players in January.

He was tactically out of his depth as shown by his inability to tinker with things after opposing managers changed tactics during a game.

His teams played with no confidence and the worst thing of all ... no passion, belief or guts on that last day at the Valley.

Yes, bringing in Holt was a good move but buying the leading scorer in League 2 is hardly shewd.

However,

It''s not his fault. His love for NCFC meant that he couldn''t turn down the offer to do the job.

The fault lies with the Board who employed a man with NO managerial experience when the club needed it most.

For his playing days, charity work and love for the club he must always remain a Norwich City great ... but as a manager he was fatally out of his depth and should have been politely pushed away from the permanent job.[/quote]Yes. The "poisoned chalice" argument is nonsense. Gunn had every chance to keep us up.There is a very simple comparison. Forest, in worse trouble than us,

below us in the table, appointed someone who knew what they were doing.

We appointed someone who didn''t know what they were doing. Forest

overtook us and stayed up. We went down.

One manager is still in football, in charge of the team he saved from relegation and which is now in an automatic

promotion place in the Championship. The other manager is now working for a

phone company.

[/quote]

A brilliant example.

[morty 0]

No Broadstairs canary, I really can''t see how he thought he could do the job.Yes, the board must take some blame by appointing the cheap option but lets face it, none of us really thought Gunn was going to become a successful manager suddenly, I don''t even know if he has any coaching badges.He was appointed in the hope that a club legend could "rally the troops"

[CambridgeCanary 0]

Theoklitos, Otsembor, Drury,Gill,Nelson,Doherty,Whaley,Tudor Jones, Holt, Martin and Hoolahan.

Recognise that?

It is Gunn''s team against Colchester.  His first team in every sense of the phrase this season.

How many are first teamers under Lambert assuming fitness?

5 yes 5!!!!!  Russell and Smith were  not even on the bench.

It is true that he does not deserve all the criticism and that internet abuse has been unbalanced.

It is also true that the team we will watch this afternoon is Lambert''s just as that team was Gunn''s despite 5 of those players not having been signed by Gunn.

 

 

[Mello Yello 2,282]

[quote user="morty"]No Broadstairs canary, I really can''t see how he thought he could do the job.

Yes, the board must take some blame by appointing the cheap option but lets face it, none of us really thought Gunn was going to become a successful manager suddenly, I don''t even know if he has any coaching badges.

He was appointed in the hope that a club legend could "rally the troops"
[/quote]

And he was cheap....When it came to football decisions, our board were as much use as ''bees with hayfever''....

And as for our previous CE?....Too many other business interests to focus on the club.

[Lord Horn 0]

[quote user="Panic Dem"][quote user="singing canary"]my point is . the constant grief and how people talk about gunn . its wrong . if you dont like the post dont answer. i feel the guy deserves a bit more respect than the constant slagging off the man seems to get . he was hardly given a fair chance and has taken the flak for other managers cock-ups as well .people seem to forget he was sacked after a 4-0 away win , how does that make him a crap manager.[/quote] I couldn''t agree more with you. I too have been mystified by the unpleasantness directed at Gunn time and time again on this MB. I often read the silly claim that Gunn got us relegated. The club was like a stricken oil tanker heading for the rocks when Gunn took over, there was little chance of avoiding the inevitable. Gunn inherited a hopeless situation but during the summer he cleared out the wannaways, brought in some excellent players and created an excellent squad. the pre-season campaign was the most successful i can remember. Then Colchester United happened. Full house full of expectation, l''il ole Colchester (we all thought here for the slaughter - look where they are now) and Theoklitis - Gunn''s only mistake IMO. One heavy defeat and the McPowers that be seized the opportunity of getting rid of Gunn despite an excellent 4 to zero victory away at Yeovil only a few days later when I witnessed some of the best attacking football from Norwich in years with Hoolahan, Hughes (Gunn acquisition) and Holt (Gunn acquisition) exceptional. Holt of course scoring a hatrick. None of us can prove either way whether or not Gunn would have been a good manager with his own players because he was robbed of that chance but in my opinion he would have done. Enter Lambert who has undeniably done a great job and of course I support him totally. However, the "adulation" he receives from many posters on here does get up my nose. I read yesterday one poster saying "well of course Lambo is the master of man management and it''s him who has got the best out of Holt" ! What botox. It was Gunn who bravely (at the time) spent the bulk of his budget on Holt, it was Gunn who had the vision to realise that Holt would be the next Norwich striker legend and under Gunn Holt had already started to perform. Holt, benefitting from the support of Hoolahan (a man dropped by Lambert for vital matches and a player that Gunn had refused to sell and so made a tartan enemy) scored a scintillating hatrick in 45 2nd half minutes away at Yeovil. Support Lambert by all means, as I do myself, but please stop the rot spewed out on a daily basis about Gunn. it''s ill-informed, misguided, follow the herd, vacuous nonsense. The king is dead long live the king.[/quote]

Now I really hope that that is the best bit of irony I''ve seen on here in a long time.  If not, then I hope the that you can get back to the home before it closes after matches (if you actually attend any!).

[Herman 9,717]

[quote user="Lord Horn"]

[quote user="Panic Dem"][quote user="singing canary"]my point is . the constant grief and how people talk about gunn . its wrong . if you dont like the post dont answer. i feel the guy deserves a bit more respect than the constant slagging off the man seems to get . he was hardly given a fair chance and has taken the flak for other managers cock-ups as well .people seem to forget he was sacked after a 4-0 away win , how does that make him a crap manager.[/quote] I couldn''t agree more with you. I too have been mystified by the unpleasantness directed at Gunn time and time again on this MB. I often read the silly claim that Gunn got us relegated. The club was like a stricken oil tanker heading for the rocks when Gunn took over, there was little chance of avoiding the inevitable. Gunn inherited a hopeless situation but during the summer he cleared out the wannaways, brought in some excellent players and created an excellent squad. the pre-season campaign was the most successful i can remember. Then Colchester United happened. Full house full of expectation, l''il ole Colchester (we all thought here for the slaughter - look where they are now) and Theoklitis - Gunn''s only mistake IMO. One heavy defeat and the McPowers that be seized the opportunity of getting rid of Gunn despite an excellent 4 to zero victory away at Yeovil only a few days later when I witnessed some of the best attacking football from Norwich in years with Hoolahan, Hughes (Gunn acquisition) and Holt (Gunn acquisition) exceptional. Holt of course scoring a hatrick. None of us can prove either way whether or not Gunn would have been a good manager with his own players because he was robbed of that chance but in my opinion he would have done. Enter Lambert who has undeniably done a great job and of course I support him totally. However, the "adulation" he receives from many posters on here does get up my nose. I read yesterday one poster saying "well of course Lambo is the master of man management and it''s him who has got the best out of Holt" ! What botox. It was Gunn who bravely (at the time) spent the bulk of his budget on Holt, it was Gunn who had the vision to realise that Holt would be the next Norwich striker legend and under Gunn Holt had already started to perform. Holt, benefitting from the support of Hoolahan (a man dropped by Lambert for vital matches and a player that Gunn had refused to sell and so made a tartan enemy) scored a scintillating hatrick in 45 2nd half minutes away at Yeovil. Support Lambert by all means, as I do myself, but please stop the rot spewed out on a daily basis about Gunn. it''s ill-informed, misguided, follow the herd, vacuous nonsense. The king is dead long live the king.[/quote]

Now I really hope that that is the best bit of irony I''ve seen on here in a long time.  If not, then I hope the that you can get back to the home before it closes after matches (if you actually attend any!).

[/quote]

Sadly,judging from some of his other posts,i think he is serious[:|]

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="Broadstairs Canary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Broadstairs Canary"]Singing canary ...

He inherited a team which had been OUT of the relegation zone for over a year.

He had 17 games to stabilise the league position.

He brought in 9 of his own players in January.

He was tactically out of his depth as shown by his inability to tinker with things after opposing managers changed tactics during a game.

His teams played with no confidence and the worst thing of all ... no passion, belief or guts on that last day at the Valley.

Yes, bringing in Holt was a good move but buying the leading scorer in League 2 is hardly shewd.

However,

It''s not his fault. His love for NCFC meant that he couldn''t turn down the offer to do the job.

The fault lies with the Board who employed a man with NO managerial experience when the club needed it most.

For his playing days, charity work and love for the club he must always remain a Norwich City great ... but as a manager he was fatally out of his depth and should have been politely pushed away from the permanent job.[/quote]Yes. The "poisoned chalice" argument is nonsense. Gunn had every chance to keep us up.There is a very simple comparison. Forest, in worse trouble than us,

below us in the table, appointed someone who knew what they were doing.

We appointed someone who didn''t know what they were doing. Forest

overtook us and stayed up. We went down.

One manager is still in football, in charge of the team he saved from relegation and which is now in an automatic

promotion place in the Championship. The other manager is now working for a

phone company.

[/quote]

A brilliant example.[/quote]Broadstairs, I should perhaps stress this is not hindsight on my part. I made this Davies/Gunn comparison within half an hour of Gunn being appointed, saying:"With

a proven manager such as Davies you are maximising the chances of success.

With an unproven manager in Gunn you are minimising the chances of

success."  

[singing canary 0]

i pretty much saw every game gunn played in and before that .the best manager in the world would have struggled to get anything out of a team that was filled with other teams players . hence why roeder got sacked to start with .

lets put it this way if you took control of a company and all the staff are temps and could not care less , unless you replace them the company is never going to move forward,gunn had to not just replace a couple of players but half the squad. sods law says not all the players are going to turn out great, but low and behold the team lambert has taken over have proved they are good players . lambert has not made bad players turn good overnight(they must have been good players to start with) i am aware that training and tactics plays a massive part of which gunn sadly lacked. but it bugs me that such a big player for the club and how much effort he put in and still he gets grilled .

i am a big norwich fan without question , i just dont think the big man should take as muich stick considering what he has done for this club of which some people just cant see.

[John 0]

[quote user="singing canary"]i pretty much saw every game gunn played in and before that .the best manager in the world would have struggled to get anything out of a team that was filled with other teams players .[/quote].... Didn''t seem to trouble Birmingham under Steve Bruce. [:^)]

[city-till-i-die 7]

Its all irrelivant....we are second in the league...have a great manager and finally things are looking up for Naaarich City [Y]

IMHO gunny had enough games to save us from relegation...simple fact he didnt!!!!

That coupled with the 7:1 loss/battering on the opening day was the reason he got fired...simples

[John 0]

[quote user="city-till-i-die"]

IMHO gunny had enough games to save us from relegation...simple fact he didnt!!!!

That coupled with the 7:1 loss/battering on the opening day was the reason he got fired...simples

[/quote]Given the nature of that comment, i hate to say this now, but i have to say that i could never of seen Roeder doing either of those things (as bad as he was).By the end of his tenure as Norwich City manager, Roeder had put himself in a desperate position, not a hopeless position (like Gunn had by the end of his reign).

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Bryan Gunn: Top bloke, great goalkeeper, good ambassador for the club and a loyal servant for many years (although well paid, no doubt!), but a dire football club manager - way out of his depth. I would go as far as to say that any one of us couldn''t have done much worse if we''d been put in charge of team affairs for those few months. Thank goodness for Lambo.

[essex canary 0]

is the OP Bob Franklin??

I hope so as we really dont need two idiots like that

[Herman 9,717]

I''m afraid not Essex!!

[CUFC Linkin 0]

Yeah, as a Col U fan i havent really seen or heard much about him except he was a bit rubbish but looking at the circumstances there wasnt much he could do. In the 1-7 game, it was the players kicking the ball and letting goals in, not him. And apart from that game Norwich werent that bad, the relegation was more or less gonna happen no matter what. Would have been a sow start to the season, but i think you would have finished mid-table.

But i think in your case getting Lambchop has done you the world of good because he''s taken you higer in the league than Gunn could. As much as i hate him, Lambert knows a thing or 2 about winning.