Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 30, 2010 I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell.Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
claud 0 Posted March 30, 2010 tbh, I think it''s fairly good that you got the "Didn''t realise this" reply. You could quite easily have been ignored and have received nothing considering how many texts/emails they must receive.I quite like Adrian Durham. I think that he has suffered massively as he has to provide the counter argument to his co-presenter, be it Ian Wright, Darren Gough etc. Talksport seem to like a good cop/bad cop format. Durham seems to be handed bad cop quite often. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The gut 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote]On a scale of 1 to 10 how annoyed? and how glad? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="claud"]tbh, I think it''s fairly good that you got the "Didn''t realise this" reply. You could quite easily have been ignored and have received nothing considering how many texts/emails they must receive.I quite like Adrian Durham. I think that he has suffered massively as he has to provide the counter argument to his co-presenter, be it Ian Wright, Darren Gough etc. Talksport seem to like a good cop/bad cop format. Durham seems to be handed bad cop quite often.[/quote]Personally I think he is an obnoxious self loving wanker who is far to keen on the sound of his own voice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 929 Posted March 31, 2010 Talk Sport? No thanks!Too many adverts & too much waffle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoots 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. I''m not going to engage in another dialogue on this MB on this subject because there are too many one-dimensional, dogmatic anti-Gunners on here and, in any case, it doesn''t matter now. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yobocop 1,083 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Making Plans"]Talk Sport? No thanks!Too many adverts & too much waffle. [/quote]Don''t listen then! it''s no big deal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
macdougalls perm 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Alf Tupper"][quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. I''m not going to engage in another dialogue on this MB on this subject because there are too many one-dimensional, dogmatic anti-Gunners on here and, in any case, it doesn''t matter now. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. [/quote]Yaaaaaawwwwwwnnnnnnn! The only anti-Gunners on here have been driven there by you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bury Yellow 2 Posted March 31, 2010 Well Alf, you''ve started it.So if we had appointed, say, Boothroyd we would probably have still gone down would we? All conjecture I know but i would say there was a damn good chance we would have stayed up.I will never forgive Gunn for a) Going for the job in the first place as he must have known deep down he wasn''t up to the job and b) to take it again when, what was let of our stupid board, offered him another go.I''m not sure if any league clubs clambered after his signature but I understand he''s not in football now.Apart from this terrible period I am not anti Gunn. He is a fine man and was a good goalkeeper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Jedi 0 Posted March 31, 2010 Alf, you are a total cent. Or is that cant...? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaun Tilly Lace 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="king canary"][quote user="claud"]tbh, I think it''s fairly good that you got the "Didn''t realise this" reply. You could quite easily have been ignored and have received nothing considering how many texts/emails they must receive.I quite like Adrian Durham. I think that he has suffered massively as he has to provide the counter argument to his co-presenter, be it Ian Wright, Darren Gough etc. Talksport seem to like a good cop/bad cop format. Durham seems to be handed bad cop quite often.[/quote]Personally I think he is an obnoxious self loving wanker who is far to keen on the sound of his own voice.[/quote]Danny Baker fits that description pretty well too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spm2866 0 Posted March 31, 2010 (My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis) **********These two criticisms are probably the best two things to happen to NCFC since we got promoted to the Premiership with Worthington.Gunn put his head on the block knowing City were going to hit rock bottom including whatever happened at half time against Cochester and Theo''s 7 goal antics slammed the final nail in City''s coffin which in turn resurrected the fine NCFC which we have seen PL & BMac nurturing ever since!The past is the past and it will forever be in our history like all other demises of our great club.OTBCNCFC since 1969 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaun Tilly Lace 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="spm2866"](My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis) ********** These two criticisms are probably the best two things to happen to NCFC since we got promoted to the Premiership with Worthington. Gunn put his head on the block knowing City were going to hit rock bottom including whatever happened at half time against Cochester and Theo''s 7 goal antics slammed the final nail in City''s coffin which in turn resurrected the fine NCFC which we have seen PL & BMac nurturing ever since! The past is the past and it will forever be in our history like all other demises of our great club. OTBC NCFC since 1969[/quote]Richard Balls wrote in one of his EDP articles that he thought the 7-1 debacle was probably a blessing in disguise, inasmuch as it hastened the departure of Bryan Gunn as manager of NCFC. I''m inclined to agree, as must 99% of City fans now. If BG had stayed on I feel we would be in the play-offs at best right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yorkshire Canary 118 Posted March 31, 2010 locally and nationally Gunn was and still is popular. Sadley the heart ruled the head when he was appointed as managed and the difference between him and Lambert speaks for itself Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 31, 2010 First off, I don''t think Gunn is nationally popular. The majority who do know him around the country probably couldn''t give two sh*ts about him. Like I couldn''t with a Chelsea or Arsenal player from days gone by.I would argue that his local popularity has gone downhill because of his stint in charge. I would also strongly question Gunn''s Mr. Nice Guy image that some people see. Knowing what I know.Back to the main point. Alf, your post is your opinion of course. However, I found your opinion to be complete bull. I even think Roeder would have kept us in the Championship, even though I cannot stand the man, I don''t think he would have taken us down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeagle 0 Posted March 31, 2010 Haha could have guessed Alf would have popped up on this thread! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Howson is now! 0 Posted March 31, 2010 Was Durham the one who called Carragher a bottler for retiring from the England squad so Carragher rang up, had a go, and offered for him to come up to Melwood and then they''d see who the bottler was? That was effing hilarious.When I heard Lampard had rang in to a talk show to defend himself I just assumed Durham was up to his old tricks but that was someone else that time.Whoever said they feel a bit sorry for Durham as he has to be a counter arguer to whoever the guest is, I do get the impression he is the sort of person who relishes that situation and likes nothing more than to do what he does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 31, 2010 Yes, they were talking about the Carragher incident only recently. The previous poster was right when they said that Talksport do play the good cop/bad cop thing. Durham often plays bad cop, saying things that he maybe doesn''t really believe just to get a reaction from listeners. It tends to work.Sometimes I agree with him, and other times I don''t i.e. The Bryan Gunn thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Binky 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Alf Tupper"][quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. [/quote]Alf - I''ve nowt better to do so I''ll be the lone supporter for you on this. Gunny may or may never make a good manager but I was totally convinced at the time that GR had wrecked the club and the lack of a decent pool of contracted players was GR''s legacy for whomever took over. Nothing has caused me to change that view and I don''t believe anything ever will - except maybe Huckerby, Hoolahan and Lappin all privately giving me the nod that Roeder was a good manager really. Our position then just outside the relegation zone was not so dissimilar to West Ham''s now - except they still have a half decent squad of contracted players. Without a Grant Holt in the side I''m not even sure Lambert himself would have kept us up but certainly he is probably the man most likely to have done. Now, (tin hat on) - I don''t know for certain that Theo is a useless goalkeeper andarguably, we have a lot to thank him for (and Nelson''s back pass and Doc''s lack of turning speed to counteract Lisbie, that first match ofthe season). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 929 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Norfolk Lutonian "][quote user="Making Plans"] Talk Sport? No thanks!Too many adverts & too much waffle.[/quote]Don''t listen then! it''s no big deal. [/quote]I don''t - having been there for about 7 years now. After being a regular listener everyday between 7 & 9 in the morning and then 6 & 8 in the evening going to & from work, I worked out that in each hour of progamming I was getting no more than 20 minutes of debate/information. The rest was just junk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Row D Seat 7 0 Posted March 31, 2010 I think it''s ok. I usually listen to it between 5-7. Never at any other time. Maybe on the odd weekend when I''m not watching Norwich.They seem to have cut down the adverts just lately. They have 2 or 3 adverts every fifteen minutes, which isn''t bad. Much better than an awful local radio station I used to listen to which was full of presenters who sounded as if they all had colds. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barclay_Boy 0 Posted March 31, 2010 Talksport - Absolutely brilliant, best thing EVER to happen to radio bar none. Car radio is never tuned to anything else. In three competitions it has given me winnings of a new bathroom suite (courtesy of Wicks), a signed/framed picture of Darren Huckerby, and a crate of bitter. Also whilst winning these comps it has given me the opportunity to plug NCFC. Adrian Durham has generally been very positive in all his comments towards Norwich, as has Ian Wright and Darren Gough. And they slag off Leeds Utd at every opportunity! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Depraved 0 Posted March 31, 2010 No presenter is as annoying as Alan "I am the god of football" Green Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eadienhucks 0 Posted March 31, 2010 i wouldve kept txting till they put it right! lol :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grantroederdisaster 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell.Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote]To be fair if Roedernowherehad not been sacked we''d of went down anyway and god himself couldn''t of kept us up last season!I''m surprised a National media outlet like talksport would even recognise Norwich City cause outside of East Anglia its as if we don''t exist! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dylanisabaddog 4,746 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Alf Tupper"][quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. I''m not going to engage in another dialogue on this MB on this subject because there are too many one-dimensional, dogmatic anti-Gunners on here and, in any case, it doesn''t matter now. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. [/quote] Make up your mind. Either you want to post on this subject or you don''t.Perhaps I could help you make up your mind. If we had appointed Paul Lambert (or any manger with half a brain) we would have got away with it last year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stevie Wonder 0 Posted March 31, 2010 [quote user="Alf Tupper"][quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. I''m not going to engage in another dialogue on this MB on this subject because there are too many one-dimensional, dogmatic anti-Gunners on here and, in any case, it doesn''t matter now. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. [/quote]The main reason we were relegated was the fact the we won 1 and lost the other 5 of our final 6 games last year. We may have gone down with Roeder in charge as he had lost the fans but he always seemed to pull a result out when he needed it - Forest (a), Ipswich (h) & Charlton League (h) immediately spring to mind last year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0 Posted April 1, 2010 [quote user="Binky"][quote user="Alf Tupper"][quote user="Row D Seat 7"]I was listening to Talksport on Tuesday. The presenter of the show (Adrian Durham) was talking about players or managers that have one successful spell at a club, then a few years later they go back to that same club and have a less successful spell. Bryan Gunn''s name came up. Someone had text in saying ''Gunn was a good player for Norwich, but got us relegated as manager''. Then the ever so knowledgeable presenter responded with ''Come off it, Norwich were basically already down when Gunn took over''. I e-mailed in and told him that Gunn took over when we were outside the relegation zone. He had half a season to save us. He didn''t read it on-air, but I got a reply saying ''Didn''t realise this''. It annoys me when the National Media/SSN etc etc think they know everything about your club after just glancing at your league position or manager etc. I was glad to put him right.[/quote] Sorry but anybody with an ounce of sense would agree that Norwich were already deep in the sh_t, without hope and as good as relegated when Gunn took over. We''re going up with Lambert and hopefully Lambert will stay with us. However, the legacy that Gunn inherited was truly rotten to the core. More loanees than contract players (or as near as damnit), the playing staff utterly demoralised, the club without direction and run by imbeciles and so so on and so on. The combined experience of Gunn, Butterworth, Crook and Deehan couldn''t turn it around and IMO nor would anyone else. Our club at that time was like a ship heading for the rocks but the momentum was too great to reverse. My two big criticisms of Gunn are (1) he was completely mad to have taken the job in the first place and (2) Theo Klitis. [/quote]Alf - I''ve nowt better to do so I''ll be the lone supporter for you on this. Gunny may or may never make a good manager but I was totally convinced at the time that GR had wrecked the club and the lack of a decent pool of contracted players was GR''s legacy for whomever took over. Nothing has caused me to change that view and I don''t believe anything ever will - except maybe Huckerby, Hoolahan and Lappin all privately giving me the nod that Roeder was a good manager really. Our position then just outside the relegation zone was not so dissimilar to West Ham''s now - except they still have a half decent squad of contracted players. Without a Grant Holt in the side I''m not even sure Lambert himself would have kept us up but certainly he is probably the man most likely to have done. Now, (tin hat on) - I don''t know for certain that Theo is a useless goalkeeper and arguably, we have a lot to thank him for (and Nelson''s back pass and Doc''s lack of turning speed to counteract Lisbie, that first match of the season).[/quote]Hmmm.....I''m curious how this alleged conversation went down, when Roeder left Lappin in the reserves for the whole time he was manager (post the infamous Plymouth game). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
percy varco 196 Posted April 1, 2010 [quote user="Bury Yellow"]Well Alf, you''ve started it. So if we had appointed, say, Boothroyd we would probably have still gone down would we? All conjecture I know but i would say there was a damn good chance we would have stayed up. I will never forgive Gunn for a) Going for the job in the first place as he must have known deep down he wasn''t up to the job and b) to take it again when, what was let of our stupid board, offered him another go. I''m not sure if any league clubs clambered after his signature but I understand he''s not in football now. Apart from this terrible period I am not anti Gunn. He is a fine man and was a good goalkeeper.[/quote] Bryan Gunn is a fine and loyal man who misguidedly took one step too far in becoming manager. He will and has brought more to the community of Norwich than many will do.Loyalty and Paul Lambert are words that will not often be heard together. imo - get our promotion as champions on his cv and he will be off to Celtic in the summer. We must enjoy his work now as we will be watching his progress to Scotland manager in the years to come. we are a stepping stone on his and McNallys journey Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Disco Dale 0 Posted April 1, 2010 [quote user="king canary"][quote user="claud"]tbh, I think it''s fairly good that you got the "Didn''t realise this" reply. You could quite easily have been ignored and have received nothing considering how many texts/emails they must receive.I quite like Adrian Durham. I think that he has suffered massively as he has to provide the counter argument to his co-presenter, be it Ian Wright, Darren Gough etc. Talksport seem to like a good cop/bad cop format. Durham seems to be handed bad cop quite often.[/quote]Personally I think he is an obnoxious self loving wanker who is far to keen on the sound of his own voice.[/quote]Nothing winds me up more than when Adrian Durham is paired with Ian Wright.The hypocrisisy is unbeliverable.The shameless way Wright promotes his sons interests,even defending the one whos a cowardly thief.I remember one show those two were slating Phil Brown and Wright mocked the colour of Browns skin, Mr "Play the race card" himself. As for Durham you just know he was picked on at school and didnt lose his virginity until he was 25. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites