Roeder on Sky Sports

[Common Sense 0]

I was unfortunate to arrive home from work to see our favourite ex manager Roeder speaking to a reporter from the Cheltenham Race Meeting.

My uncle who use to work at Colney always said Roeder & Clark talked about racing all the time & on the TV he actually seemed to have more knowledge of racing than football.

On football, it was "West Ham are too good to go down & will be ok cause they won`t need 42 points which took them down when he was there"

Arrogant as usual.

What got in my throat, he claimed he could not look at the Championship table as it upset him to see his Newcastle there.

Not one mention of NCFC,

Obviously does not get upset looking at League One...the creep !

[morty 0]

He has a face I''d never tire of punching.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

I rue the day Norwich City ever employed Roeder.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,701]

When you think that he left us with around £700K in his pocket it makes it even worse. A man at the end of his career and we helped his retirement. I had a lot of time for him, and actually think he was a good football man. But the Colney stories of locking the door of his office so he could watch the racing, and being at Newmarket the Friday night before a big game does suggest he gave up when still employed by us.

[Klobo7 0]

The most annoying thing is the number of people that told me we had made a mistake, that he was a one season wonder and that it would end in tears...

[birchfest 401]

I too was suckered in when he joined, of the names floating around he seemed  to be a decent choice with premirship experience.... oh how I was wrong. I also thought he was a ''nice guy'' in football, but that soon proved not to be the case when he start to criticise the fans who turned up week in week out to watch the dross on the pitch performed by players we didnt even own. I hope he sees our sucess over the coming years with Lambert and realises he wasted an oppitunity to make a name for himself at a truely great great club with huge potential.

[Divs crew! 0]

*W..KER* enough said!

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]I rue the day Norwich City ever employed Roeder.[/quote]

Yes I agree. Although I think Grant did nearly as much damage as Roeder, and Gunn did nothing to help the slide.

I think the tenure of all three is best forgotten.

[Klobo7 0]

At least Grant had the balls to put his hands up and admit he wasnt the man for the job, unlike Roeder and Gunn who just kept digging until we got to where we are today. Grant was more of a supporting role in this horror show.

[Canary Man of Kent 0]

[quote user="Klobo7"]At least Grant had the balls to put his hands up and admit he wasnt the man for the job, unlike Roeder and Gunn who just kept digging until we got to where we are today. Grant was more of a supporting role in this horror show.[/quote]

I think Grant was the turning point from having good championship players to having average/poor championship players. He comes out of the whole thing with a better reputation the Roeder primarily I think, because Roeder was such a PR disaster and a horrible man to boot.

 

[jew 0]

roeder is a c un t

[Evil Monkey 52]

In fairness to Gunn, his initial stint in charge may have seen us relegated but he at least had the excuse, in his own mind, that he was working with dross loan players who had long ago given up trying and whose morale was shot.  Those excuses were shot to pieces come 5pm on the 8th August 2009. But he did sign Grant Holt.In fairness to Roeder (and I shudder at saying those words) he had virtually no transfer budget to work with, and was working under Doomcaster.  Together they decided that the loan policy was the best way forward for the football club and tried to make it work.  They failed.  Miserably.  But at least those players, mostly, were no longer a financial burden once we''d been relegated.  And he at least had the excuse - again, in his own mind, initially - that he was working with players who weren''t his own.Grant, however, spent loadsamoney on dross.  He brought a past-it Cureton back to the club, paid £1m for a shot-stopper rather than a goalkeeper, and spend God-only-knows how much money on other fringe players who made so little impact at the club that I forget most of their names.For me, Gunn and Roeder, regardless of their ''abilities'' (and I use the term loosely here) were cleaning up the mess that Grant left behind.And that''s without even mentioning who appointed a rookie manager and gave him a significant transfer kitty in the first place.....

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Simon, I think that turning point came when Worthy splashed out on Hughes, Jarrett and Robinson.

[Klobo7 0]

[quote user="SimonOTBC"]

[quote user="Klobo7"]At least Grant had the balls to put his hands up and admit he wasnt the man for the job, unlike Roeder and Gunn who just kept digging until we got to where we are today. Grant was more of a supporting role in this horror show.[/quote]

I think Grant was the turning point from having good championship players to having average/poor championship players. He comes out of the whole thing with a better reputation the Roeder primarily I think, because Roeder was such a PR disaster and a horrible man to boot.

 

[/quote]

There were poor, but they were ours. Roeder left us so far up dirty brown creek it was laughable

[John 0]

In my view Grant did more damage than Roeder, and so did Gunn. Gunn relegated us, won something like 1 in the last 8 of that season, and followed it up with a 7-1 home defeat in the division below, while Grant diassembled a football club merely lacking a spark of enegy to challenge for promotion into one of the favourite relegation candidates, while Roeder saved us from relegation under about as desperate circumstances as one can be... Admittedly only to put us back in contention of course though (however, unlike Grant, not as one of the favourites for the drop, having never dropped us into the relegation zone himself). And as bad as Roeder was, he did bring in a long list of useful players, albeit ''mostly'' on loan, unlike Grant, that could just about boast 2 players, however much we may have overpayed for them (David Marshall and Darel Russell).However, there is no hiding from the fact that Roeder, financially speaking, severely f***ed us over, like his predecessor Grant. And his spiteful and bitter media personality did more than anything else in disassociating him from Norwich.... And the rest of the world really.

For what it''s worth, i''m aware that i''m practically opening the pink ''uns equivalent to ''Pandora''s Box'' here, but i just felt the need to get some things off my chest. I''ll take responsibility for any arguments, trauma or panic attacks i may incur, though i can''t profess to have the energy to satisfy an endless tangent of discussion over the matter. [:$]

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,698]

I remember when his name was announced as our new manager - to say I was underwhelmed is an understatement!

[yellow blood 0]

Roeder''s own horse won on Tuesday at Southwell. Called Neduardo (or something similar)

[Jacko 0]

Horrible, horrible man. Thought he was that everyone at the club was beneath him. I was honestly devastated the day we appointed him. He basically had about 11 games in charge where we went on a good run and that saved us. The writing was on the wall from about March onwards when Leicester thrashed us. We went from being about 9th and looking safe to only staying up on the penultimate game of the season. That slump continued the next season.

Lets get one thing straight Roeder had a player budget of £8 million. Thats right £8 million. That was a big budget in the championship. What do we have to show for that which he signed. Hoolahan? Thats about the limit of it. Plus he would have got rid of Chris Martin and Michael Spillane if he had got his way. I don''t think it can be over estimated the amount of damage he did to this club. Its a shame Lambert will not have a fraction of that money to spend next season because I know who I would have prefered spending it.

[John 0]

Apart from the financially speaking, where there were a number of good transfers, or atleast ones that had the face value of a good transfer, i just don''t see the ''major'' drop that came with Roeder.Grant had a team that could of well competed for automatic promtion, let alone the play-offs. But he brought them well into mediocrity, and then sold the likes of Safri, Etuhu, and Earnshaw (albeit with contracts playing a part in that), and then brought in the likes of Fotheringham, Strikhavka (750K + add ons), Lappin, Cureton (750K), Otsemebor, Gilks, Brown (250K to 350K), all ranging from utterly useless on the pitch, to League One standard, and spent a whole million on David Marshall, who in all honesty is 3/4 of that at the very most. The only thing close to an astute buy was Russell, and i''d still reckon him to be well over priced at about 450K. The following season he left us tons of points adrift from safety, with no wins in 11, rooted at the bottom of the table, and now seemingly, almost blame free for it. He was truly dire, and it is with him that the damage done to the club could not of been, and never will be over estimated.Roeder brought us from a team that was performing akin'' to a League Two outfit at the very best, to one that avoided what was supposed to be an almost certain derby humiliation, and went on a 14 game unbeaten run, with only one 2-1 loss in 16ish games away to the league toppers at the time. He brought in the likes of Evans, Taylor, Pattison (who did help... Honest), Pearce, and Bertrand on loan, and made us a genuinely good side until Evans went a little off form and we began to fall apart, and ran relegation a little closer than it looked like it would of been a few games before the final run in.Next season he brought in players who i really rated, and the fact they didn''t work out is more to do with luck, lack of effort on their part, or cruelty on Roeders part. Clingan, Bell, Bertrand, Lita, Hoolahan, Kennedy, Sibierski, Stefanovic, Omozusi, Lupoli. All players i rate, almost all of them rated by the sane football fan at the time, but they were (for the most part) just awful on the pitch unfortunately. However, given that, he can never be held accountable for falling into the relegation zone. Gunn most certainly finished that job though, with the likes of Killen, Carney, and Leijer.I think most peoples views of Roeder are severely distorted because of what a p**** he was to be honest. We did get some real s*** in the past few years, and albeit Roeder was amongst the worst, he was by no means THE worst.

[Bird Table 0]

Worst. Manager. Ever.

[Klobo7 0]

To be fair to Grant...Didnt Safri leave in a bit of a sulk? And he didnt really have much say in the departures of Earnie and Etuhu because of their release clauses.

As for Roeder he did bring in some good players (Bertrand) but they simply werent ours. He wasted 2.5 million on players that were not going to be there 6 months down the line. He left us with barely enough first team players to fill a matchday squad. He was ultimately responsible if you ask me.

By the time Gunn took over, which should never have happened in the first place, the damage had already been done.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

One massive rule when appointing football managers -

Don''t appoint managers that are old and have been in management for a long time at a few clubs, because their only motivation is the green notes and nothign else!

Grant I respect for holding his hands up and admitting he wasn''t the man for the job!

Gunn was put in an impossible position by the at the time clueless Doncaster and Mumby cause he was never going to turn the job down!

Roedernowhere - Its a slur on football managers to have this despicable person labelled as one!

No motivational skills!

No man management or people skills which made him a negative force with everyone involved at the club!

Just an old has been (not much) on the look for one last big cash cow to top up his pension, at a club he thought couldn''t afford to sack him!

Poor decision making based on spite, personal dislikes and to go along with the boards plans (disasterous loan policy) cause he was grateful to have the job!

[Jacko 0]

I have to take issue with a lot of what you are saying John. I don''t think it is possible to overestimate the damage Roeder did to this club. Firstly if you look at his managment from a practical aspect everything simply didnt add up. How could we justify paying loans fee such as 700k to Chelsea for Bertrand when we were only going to have these players for a year. How did selling Shackell, a permanent player in order to pay for Sibierski''s wages whilst on loan make any sense at all.Ultimately we were going to have no money and no players at the end of the season. The worst of both worlds. We spent 8 million on the player budget and to be honest the only two decent permanent players we got from that Clingan and Hoolahan.

You have glossed over some of the utter rubbish he signed which a complete waste of money such as Troy Archibald Henville and OJ Koroma. Koroma was described as a ''beautiful mover.'' I can only assume he pulled some good moves out at Mercy because he awful on the pitch. Henville he never even bothered to watch and he only realised the guy wasnt up to when he trained. Hence why he often had to player full backs such as Drury and Grounds at centre back rather than that guy. That lack of professionalism showed that no lessons had been learnt since the days of Hamilton admitting he had signed players he had never watched. Lets also remember if this bloke had had his way both Chris Martin and Michael Spillane would have gone to Luton for peanuts because Roeder didnt like them. I agree that loan did them both a world of good but that was never his motive. He just couldnt wait to get either of them out the door quick enough and it was entirely vindictive.

Roeder was also a dreadful manager because his tactical awareness and man management skills were horrendous. He played Darrell Russell up front for the vast majority of the campaign on the basis he scored twice against Colchester in pre season. Others masterstrokes in man management included signing David Bell who he knew had a bad ankle injury and then expecting him to play when he blatantly wasnt fit. Was it really a surprise Bell underperformed and didnt like the management under those circumstances?

I also dont buy the ''we werent in the bottom 3 when he left'' argument. Anyone who saw that replay against Charlton must have realised he had to be sacked. We got deservedly beaten by Charlton side who had forgotten how to win. His only response was to throw the ace up his sleeve Carl Cort on. Gunn should accept his share of the blame for relegation but he did have precious little to work with.

Rant over but it had to be said. That Mick Dennis article about keeping Roeder still makes my blood boil.

[Puzzy magnet 0]

A better manager than Gunn though.

[Ivana_rubyatitz 6]

[quote user="Puzzy magnet "]A better manager than Gunn though.[/quote]Talk about damned with faint praise...

[still holding out for new heroes 0]

[quote user="SimonOTBC"]

[quote user="Klobo7"]At least Grant had the balls to put his hands up and admit he wasnt the man for the job, unlike Roeder and Gunn who just kept digging until we got to where we are today. Grant was more of a supporting role in this horror show.[/quote]

I think Grant was the turning point from having good championship players to having average/poor championship players. He comes out of the whole thing with a better reputation the Roeder primarily I think, because Roeder was such a PR disaster and a horrible man to boot.

 

[/quote]

It was Worthy who started the mediocre Championship players route Hughes, Jarrett et al

[still holding out for new heroes 0]

[quote user="Bird Table"]Worst. Manager. Ever.
[/quote]

Hamilton will always be my most disliked

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="SimonOTBC"]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]I rue the day Norwich City ever employed Roeder.[/quote]

Yes I agree. Although I think Grant did nearly as much damage as Roeder, and Gunn did nothing to help the slide.

I think the tenure of all three is best forgotten.

[/quote]

 

You can''t pin the blame on Gunn for relegation. Grant and particularly Roeder did the damage. Gunn took over mid-January, inherited a shower of sh_t and had no money to spend. Gunn''s decision to take the job was foolish and revealed a naivety that is ill suited to the rough and tumble of football management. The 7 -1 defeat at home to Colchester should IMO be seen as a one-off, the sort of one-off result that many managers have to choke on at some point in their careers. Gunn''s bad luck was that it happened at the start of his career with the squad he had assembled. It was also his bad luck that a new man at the helm, McNally, was appointed after Gunn''s position as manager had been re-affirmed. I think that stuck in McNally''s throat (only my opinion of course) and McNally anyway had his own opinion as to who the best manager for the club would be. The fact that he was proved right and that Lambert has been immense only clouds the issue as far as Gunn is concerned. I suspect he would have done a pretty good job for us and would have grown in confidence and stature but of course we shall never know now, and if you''re a Norwich fan through and through like me it doesn''t matter anyway. We have Lambert and look nailed -on for promotion. In short though ( ! ), IMO Grant and Roeder were the real villains of the piece and Gunn was the collateral damage.

[Bird Table 0]

[quote user="still holding out for new heroes"]

[quote user="Bird Table"]Worst. Manager. Ever.[/quote]

Hamilton will always be my most disliked

[/quote]Hamilton always seemed more of a comical buffoon. Roeder was nasty, vindictive and divisive. But both were equally incompetent and best forgotten.

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Is he still taking the ugly pills?