William Darby 0 Posted October 12, 2011 [quote user="Mungo Bumpkin"]I''d suggest that the success the club had under Worthy was inspite of him and not because of him. We got promoted because we hit on a stable starting 11 that was never materially effected by injuries. Worthy should have been given his cards on the balcony of City Hall that fatefull evening, instead he was allowed to kill off any chance of survival (let alone prospering) we had by signing a string of duffers like Helveg and starting the season with no recognised strikers - signing Ashton in January was too little too late.Mungo[/quote]Helveg was okay. He was always looking to play the ball instead of walloping it. The way we played didn''t suit him. Anyway If Worthington was given half the budget the Lambert has been given I''m sure he would''ve done slightly better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HazzaJet 253 Posted October 12, 2011 When Roeder arrived I expected a top-half finish, as he had managed Newcastle (had PL experience). I was shocked at his performance though. However, he did sign Hoolahan and sent Chris Martin out on loan. The main problem was that he favoured loan signings. When Gunn arrived in Roeder''s place I did believe he would keep us up. When we got relegated I also saw us winning the title with him, until the season kicked off with a 7-1 home defeat to Colchester. Gunn did sign Grant Holt though.Roeder and Gunn did do a few good things for the club and as many have already said, if we had stayed up, would we have Lambert and would we be back in the PL? Personally I just see us in the bottom half about 14th-18th Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rock The Boat 1,332 Posted October 14, 2011 I actually respect Roeder''s right to decide who is and who isn''t going to be part of his squad. He gets paid for making those decisions and stands or falls by them. In the case of Hucks, it was a risk to extend his contract. Darren was getting towards the end of his career and he had hip problems. When you consider that Huck''s replacement was a certain Wes Houlahan then I think Roeder''s decision was the right one.Of course, none of that excuses Roeder''s extremely bad handling of the situation and his poor man-management skills eventually caused him to lose the players trust and ultimately his job.I''m sure many of us have worked for a bullying, pushy boss at some time or other. They can be very effective in the short-term by snapping people out of their complacency and therefore can be very effective for a time - just as Roeder was when he first arrived. But people do not repond positively in the longer term when faced with constant criticism or bullying from their manager. I feel sorry for people who have to put up with years of this kind of behaviour in their workplaces while the nasty bosses often get promoted because of their short-term successes. At least in football it is relatively easy to get rid of a bad manager.Anybody here working for a Roedent-type boss? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
norfolkbroadslim 223 Posted October 14, 2011 [quote user="Rock The Boat"]I actually respect Roeder''s right to decide who is and who isn''t going to be part of his squad. He gets paid for making those decisions and stands or falls by them. In the case of Hucks, it was a risk to extend his contract. Darren was getting towards the end of his career and he had hip problems. When you consider that Huck''s replacement was a certain Wes Houlahan then I think Roeder''s decision was the right one.Of course, none of that excuses Roeder''s extremely bad handling of the situation and his poor man-management skills eventually caused him to lose the players trust and ultimately his job.I''m sure many of us have worked for a bullying, pushy boss at some time or other. They can be very effective in the short-term by snapping people out of their complacency and therefore can be very effective for a time - just as Roeder was when he first arrived. But people do not repond positively in the longer term when faced with constant criticism or bullying from their manager. I feel sorry for people who have to put up with years of this kind of behaviour in their workplaces while the nasty bosses often get promoted because of their short-term successes. At least in football it is relatively easy to get rid of a bad manager.Anybody here working for a Roedent-type boss?[/quote] Was Huckerby''s replacement a certain Wes Hoolahan though? Yes in the longer term Hoolahan has done well and shown his skill, but initially and more relevantly under Roeder''s management was this the case? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Big Vince 318 Posted October 17, 2011 Trying to nutmeg me again Nigel? We will see..........firstly, Chase was hounded out of the club by the fans so he didn''t get a chance to atone for his sins. Even his grandchildren were getting abuse at school. Forget the money, was it worth him carrying on in those circumstances, he was only human like the rest of us? Though some seemed to think he had the hide of a rhino. As I recall, every home game was a "Chase Out" event when it got to 1995-6. Mr Watling concluded it would be best to step in and save everyone from themselves, as he did 40 years earlier. I will tell you very clearly why I am anti Smith, MWJ, Foulger plus Munby, Doncaster, Skipper, Cooper. Like Lambert, I am extremely ambitious. It is simply unacceptable for a club of Norwich''s size to be outside the top flight for so long. These individuals had from 1996 to 2009 to get it right, but apart from one half-hearted attempt, they all failed miserably. From Watling through to Chase the club had been building. Under Smith and Co they were declining. The latest saviour of Norwich was actually Roy Hodgson as it was he who recommended McNally to the failing Canary board. Let me put it another way, Nigel: where would the club now be if Hodgson had not recommended McNally, and McNally had not gone out on a limb from the rest of the board in order to say that Gunn must go and that Lambert must replace him, because, if you know your Canary history, you will remember that Delia and the other gang members were going to stick with Gunn so that he could take us to League Two and then the Blue Square. Let''s face it, Delia has a slapstick sense of humour and rather likes going to these tiny grounds, playing village teams in Somerset like Paulton Rovers. If this is how the Gang of Three saw the future, until McNally gave them lobotomies, then I should not want their money and, moreover, they have tripled the club''s debt since Chase in any case. So all in all they have rather squandered their own money, as they did the parachute payments Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lake district canary 0 Posted October 17, 2011 A bit OTT BV I think.No club has a divine right to be in the premiership. Football is a roller coaster, building, reorganising when things go wrong, success, failure, reorganise again etc.Even Manure have been relegated in their time as have Man City more recently.Surely you have to credit DS and MF for sticking with it, learning from mistakes - I mean, look where we are now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,537 Posted October 17, 2011 This one''s hardly worth a reply Vince. That''s 10 posts and ten attacks on Delia Smith and anyone who was a director at the club along side her. In your post you have us in the Blue Square now! If Chase had stayed where would you have us now? I''d hate to make a guess but it''s certainly not the Premier League. Nice of Roy Hodgson to make so much effort on our behalf. Was he a friend of Big Bob or did he just feel sorry for us? Answers on a postcard...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigFish 1,988 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="Big Vince"]Trying to nutmeg me again Nigel? We will see..........firstly, Chase was hounded out of the club by the fans so he didn''t get a chance to atone for his sins. Even his grandchildren were getting abuse at school. Forget the money, was it worth him carrying on in those circumstances, he was only human like the rest of us? Though some seemed to think he had the hide of a rhino. As I recall, every home game was a "Chase Out" event when it got to 1995-6. Mr Watling concluded it would be best to step in and save everyone from themselves, as he did 40 years earlier. I will tell you very clearly why I am anti Smith, MWJ, Foulger plus Munby, Doncaster, Skipper, Cooper. Like Lambert, I am extremely ambitious. It is simply unacceptable for a club of Norwich''s size to be outside the top flight for so long. These individuals had from 1996 to 2009 to get it right, but apart from one half-hearted attempt, they all failed miserably. From Watling through to Chase the club had been building. Under Smith and Co they were declining. The latest saviour of Norwich was actually Roy Hodgson as it was he who recommended McNally to the failing Canary board. Let me put it another way, Nigel: where would the club now be if Hodgson had not recommended McNally, and McNally had not gone out on a limb from the rest of the board in order to say that Gunn must go and that Lambert must replace him, because, if you know your Canary history, you will remember that Delia and the other gang members were going to stick with Gunn so that he could take us to League Two and then the Blue Square. Let''s face it, Delia has a slapstick sense of humour and rather likes going to these tiny grounds, playing village teams in Somerset like Paulton Rovers. If this is how the Gang of Three saw the future, until McNally gave them lobotomies, then I should not want their money and, moreover, they have tripled the club''s debt since Chase in any case. So all in all they have rather squandered their own money, as they did the parachute payments[/quote] Blimey have we been relegated and no one told me. Was I dreaming MOTD Saturday? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Graham Paddons Beard 2,431 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="PurpleCanary"]Two observations. One is that this "legend" nonsense (which really should just be for children, like Father Christmas) gets in the way of sensible discussion. Secondly, this is one side of the story. Huckerby''s side. Roeder, if he went public, might put what happened in a different context. Without his version it is impossible to make cast-iron judgments.[/quote]My understanding is that Roeder signed the same "gagging order" that Worthy signed PC, but presumably these dont last for ever, so we may one day find out his side of the story? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,562 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="Graham Paddons Beard"][quote user="PurpleCanary"] Two observations. One is that this "legend" nonsense (which really should just be for children, like Father Christmas) gets in the way of sensible discussion. Secondly, this is one side of the story. Huckerby''s side. Roeder, if he went public, might put what happened in a different context. Without his version it is impossible to make cast-iron judgments.[/quote]My understanding is that Roeder signed the same "gagging order" that Worthy signed PC, but presumably these dont last for ever, so we may one day find out his side of the story?[/quote] Almost certainly true, GBP, about a confidentiality clause, although I suspect these things are meant to last forever. Having said that, it didn''t stop Worthington not long ago giving a highly tendentious interview to Darren Huckerby, in which everything good that happened (such as signing Huckerby) was entirely attributable to Worthington himself (the board and Carl Moore had nothing to do with that at all, apparently) and everything bad (such as relegation) was someone else''s fault. As for Roeder, there are always two sides to a story, and we have only ever heard the anti-Roeder side. I am not saying his version would make him loads of fans, but it might put some of what are perceived as his failings into context. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hairy Canary 704 Posted October 17, 2011 As for Roeder, there are always two sides to a story, and we have only ever heard the anti-Roeder side. I am not saying his version would make him loads of fans, but it might put some of what are perceived as his failings into context. It might throw some light on things but as there is no chance of his version being made public any time soon we are left with what is known.Huckerby can only put one side of the story but he is not alone in his impression of Roeder. There was a sacked kit man, a disgruntled groundsman, the loacl radio presenter (Neil Adams), supporters at the AGM, a player who revealed he was on the verge of going on strike and these are just the ones who went public. Add that to the fact he messed up the team, destroyed moral (players and supporters) and left the club on the verge of relegation. You may want more evidence but for most of us that is plenty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,562 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="Hairy Canary"] As for Roeder, there are always two sides to a story, and we have only ever heard the anti-Roeder side. I am not saying his version would make him loads of fans, but it might put some of what are perceived as his failings into context. It might throw some light on things but as there is no chance of his version being made public any time soon we are left with what is known.Huckerby can only put one side of the story but he is not alone in his impression of Roeder. There was a sacked kit man, a disgruntled groundsman, the loacl radio presenter (Neil Adams), supporters at the AGM, a player who revealed he was on the verge of going on strike and these are just the ones who went public. Add that to the fact he messed up the team, destroyed moral (players and supporters) and left the club on the verge of relegation. You may want more evidence but for most of us that is plenty. [/quote] Hairy, I''m quite happy to leave the last word on this to Peter Cullum. Asked if after he bought the club he would want Roeder to stay on as manager he said he very much would: "I''m a fan of his." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,537 Posted October 17, 2011 You do enjoy adding volatile ingredients to the mix don''t you Purple[:O] I''m becoming a big fan[;)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mello Yello 2,296 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Hairy Canary"] As for Roeder, there are always two sides to a story, and we have only ever heard the anti-Roeder side. I am not saying his version would make him loads of fans, but it might put some of what are perceived as his failings into context. It might throw some light on things but as there is no chance of his version being made public any time soon we are left with what is known.Huckerby can only put one side of the story but he is not alone in his impression of Roeder. There was a sacked kit man, a disgruntled groundsman, the loacl radio presenter (Neil Adams), supporters at the AGM, a player who revealed he was on the verge of going on strike and these are just the ones who went public. Add that to the fact he messed up the team, destroyed moral (players and supporters) and left the club on the verge of relegation. You may want more evidence but for most of us that is plenty. [/quote] Hairy, I''m quite happy to leave the last word on this to Peter Cullum. Asked if after he bought the club he would want Roeder to stay on as manager he said he very much would: "I''m a fan of his."[/quote]Delia and Micky were backing and calling for City fans to support Gunny and they were rather keen to keep him as manager - when they attended a NCFC London supporters group meeting. A few days later on........Gunny, was GORN! What made them change their stance?.... Wasn''t Roy Hodgson''s recommended to the ''Stowey Twoey'' future CE of NCFC..... was it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YankeeCanary 0 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="Mello Yello"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Hairy Canary"] As for Roeder, there are always two sides to a story, and we have only ever heard the anti-Roeder side. I am not saying his version would make him loads of fans, but it might put some of what are perceived as his failings into context. It might throw some light on things but as there is no chance of his version being made public any time soon we are left with what is known.Huckerby can only put one side of the story but he is not alone in his impression of Roeder. There was a sacked kit man, a disgruntled groundsman, the loacl radio presenter (Neil Adams), supporters at the AGM, a player who revealed he was on the verge of going on strike and these are just the ones who went public. Add that to the fact he messed up the team, destroyed moral (players and supporters) and left the club on the verge of relegation. You may want more evidence but for most of us that is plenty. [/quote] Hairy, I''m quite happy to leave the last word on this to Peter Cullum. Asked if after he bought the club he would want Roeder to stay on as manager he said he very much would: "I''m a fan of his."[/quote]Delia and Micky were backing and calling for City fans to support Gunny and they were rather keen to keep him as manager - when they attended a NCFC London supporters group meeting. A few days later on........Gunny, was GORN! What made them change their stance?.... Wasn''t Roy Hodgson''s recommended to the ''Stowey Twoey'' future CE of NCFC..... was it? [/quote] Come on Mello......surely this type of stance is standard fare throughout the football world. Hardly invented here at Norwich by our current majority owners. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,562 Posted October 17, 2011 [quote user="nutty nigel"]You do enjoy adding volatile ingredients to the mix don''t you Purple[:O] I''m becoming a big fan[;)] [/quote] I''m shocked, nutty, quite shocked, that you should think I was trying to be provocative.[;)] Of course Cullum could have said he wanted to get rid of Roeder and bring back that Worthington chap, but didn''t, for some reason...[:D][;)][:D] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thecanaryfan 0 Posted October 19, 2011 What is done is done people. Why look back to the dark ages when the future is so bright?And Hucks, If that is you, come back and play again please. Young Pilks needs some competion!! [:)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites