Foulger's son on twitter...

[Supermarket Prodigy 0]

Basically confirming Culverhouse will be off soon. Shame.

Hope those tight wad, cheap skates have paid up.

[Supermarket Prodigy 0]

Mark Jones ‏@JonesyNCFC

@MichaelFoulger please tell me Cully & Carsa are going to stay? It would be great for our players!

Michael Foulger ‏@MichaelFoulger

@JonesyNCFC I''d love to say yes as Ian Culverhouse is a fantastic coach, unfortunately he will not be our coach for much longer...

[Jacko 0]

I think deep down everyone knew that it was pure brinkmanship from McNally in the press conference. You have Culverhouse and Calderwood on the payroll. Both technically have the role of assistant manager. I just don''t see how you can how two assistant managers and Paul Trollope on the training ground. I will be gutted to see Cully go as he is clearly an excellent coach.

[CanaryOne 0]

They were always going , dont really see the point in McNally stating anything different really as nobody including Villa and Lambert were taken in by it . Lets hope if they come back for players we say no and mean no.

[Hucka Hucka Huckerby 0]

My apologies for the spelling of Karsa ... Gutted with that reply!

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

[quote user="Ncfc"]They were always going , dont really see the point in McNally stating anything different really as nobody including Villa and Lambert were taken in by it . Lets hope if they come back for players we say no and mean no.
[/quote]

They may (or may not) have been always going. The point in McNally stating what he did, (assuming that they are going) was to put a stake in the ground. There is currently a dispute taking place surrounding the whole PL / AV scenario. It appears that AV have tried to ride roughshod over us with regards to PL. If that is the case, then I would fully expect our CEO to refuse AV the opportunity to give PL his management team (should he be asking for them) without compensation.

 

Alternatively, if they are going, I would expect a smooth transition from IC to the new incumbents (which may take some time). Thereafter, I would expect the CEO to place an embargo on any dealings with AV until the tribunal has come to a decision.

 

Remember, we are the aggrieved party here, and didn''t want PL to go in the first place. Now, I feel very sorry for IC & GK, in being potential pawns in this game. However, they were part of PL''s team and it appears that he has repayed their loyalty by doing the dirty on them. Would they really want to team up again with someone who has left them in the lurch?

 

Seems as if loyalty is a word that has a different meaning to PL than it does to everyone else. It''s one thing throwing out "club loyalty" to further one''s own career, but to dismiss the loyalty shown to you by your own management team...........and then "expect them" to be at your beck and call when you need them - and also expect them to pay out of their own pockets, the breach of contract payments if they do walk!

 

Perchance, Mr PL has an over inflated view of himself - after all, the media are past masters of building someone up only to bring them down again. Surprising as it may seem, I am not an anti PL person. I think what he achieved here was remarkable. However, they were not only his achievements - the players, staff, management, board and most importantly the fans all contributed massively to that success. Without doubt, whilst PL was good for us, we were equally good for him. The only difference being, we didn''t desert him!

[K Lo 246]

[quote user="Jacko"]

I think deep down everyone knew that it was pure brinkmanship from McNally in the press conference. You have Culverhouse and Calderwood on the payroll. Both technically have the role of assistant manager. I just don''t see how you can how two assistant managers and Paul Trollope on the training ground. I will be gutted to see Cully go as he is clearly an excellent coach.

[/quote]That''s gamesmanship not brinkmanship !!

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

Since when has twitter been the definitive authority for news such as this?

 

I can''t see why Foulger''s son would get involved in such a way, for a start. He would know that these are delicate matters for the Club, with posible legal consequences and I just cannot get the reasoning behind him apparaently lumbering in in such a way, especially on such a shallow, cult media forum that relies upon one liners.

 

The whole matter is far more serious than that and I don''t accept that particular "tweet" as valid.

  

[AndyCanary 0]

They can go with their heads held high knowing that they only followed their leader out and didn''t play part of his drama.

[lake district canary 4,830]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]

Since when has twitter been the definitive authority for news such as this?

[/quote]

 

 

 

Twittering is for twits and prattling porpoises.

 

 

 

[Hucka Hucka Huckerby 0]

Oh I think it''s valid. He''s spilled the beans at 4am... Drunk & thought sod it, why not!

[The 12th Devine 0]

Why is there so much gnashing of teeth on this site about Lambert''s staff? Once Lambert went they were always going to go with him, unless they got the big job themselves (and I''m very glad Culverhouse wasn''t just bumped up a pay grade, as it would have smacked of a lack of ambition).

It''s really simple: we lost the manager who did a great job for three years in the sort of move many people had always anticipated; in turn we moved quickly for a decent replacement, who has brought his own team with him; finally, Lambert gets reunited with his backroom staff, who will be far more useful to him than playing second fiddle to Hughton''s tried and trusted coaching set up.

I hope this is confirmed very soon so everyone can just move on to the far more interesting issues – players, fixtures and 2012/13.

[First Wizard 0]

I''m actually past caring over this saga....stay or bugger off, City will still go on.

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

[quote user="The 12th Devine"]Why is there so much gnashing of teeth on this site about Lambert''s staff? Once Lambert went they were always going to go with him, unless they got the big job themselves (and I''m very glad Culverhouse wasn''t just bumped up a pay grade, as it would have smacked of a lack of ambition). It''s really simple: we lost the manager who did a great job for three years in the sort of move many people had always anticipated; in turn we moved quickly for a decent replacement, who has brought his own team with him; finally, Lambert gets reunited with his backroom staff, who will be far more useful to him than playing second fiddle to Hughton''s tried and trusted coaching set up. I hope this is confirmed very soon so everyone can just move on to the far more interesting issues – players, fixtures and 2012/13.[/quote]

 

 

That''s very noble and probably true, for the most part. However, two things are overlooked:

 

1. It may well have been decided that Ian Culverhouse has a continuing role to play in the progress of our own club. McNally has hinted as much.

2. There is an element of duplicity about the whole Villa/Lambert connection and the ones to  come out of it  badly as a result of this are NCFC.

 

By all accounts we do, for a  start, deserve compensation and perhaps as much as we have agreed with Birmingham City over Chris Hughton and Co. 

 

Whilst we keep Culverhouse and Karsa to their contractual agreements we can adhere to both by either making continued use of their talents or by getting the money we deserve.

 

Another thing here is Culverhouse''s continued silence. This is not unusual for him but I should assume that what that man wants as an outcome will be paramount. He would appear to be the pawn at the moment. I am sure that there is more to IC than that.

[Divs crew! 0]

 I agree with wiz .......[:)]

[Norfolk Mustard 106]

People in a privileged position such as Foulger’s son really should retain confidentiality regarding potentially delicate inside info. Although it probably won’t change the ultimate outcome in this case, I don’t think McNally and the rest of board will be overly impressed – mind you, Foulger Senior wasn’t exactly watertight at Fakenham Races either was he?

 

Somehow I doubt Foulger Junior will be on the end of heavy-handed Police treatment in the same manner the club thought fit for that 17 year-old who discovered the new 2012/13 strip!

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m actually past caring over this saga....stay or bugger off, City will still go on.[/quote]

[Y]

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

[quote user="Wiz"]I''m actually past caring over this saga....stay or bugger off, City will still go on.[/quote]

 

True, it gets warysome.

 

I still care though and a lot as others seem to as well. It''s a matter of  retaining a valuable employee or more money in the Carrow coffers  after all and it is  therefore quite important in determining  the manner in which "City will still go on." 

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

But isn''t there also a risk that the moment we stop caring is the moment Lambert and Villa see the opportunity to walk over us?

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]But isn''t there also a risk that the moment we stop caring is the moment Lambert and Villa see the opportunity to walk over us?[/quote]

Sorry Rudolph but you make it sound that this messageboard and Twitter hold the balance with how Villa will read the situation.

 

[sonyc 6,144]

Agree Broadstairs.....it''s not unusual for Culverhouse not to speak. But he could have said something over the last week. It wouldn''t be difficult for him to say a word or two. This whole loyalty thing makes me laugh....Lambert IS loyal to Culverhouse and Karsa basically because ultimately its all about him. Seems to me that Culverhouse would go anywhere with Lambert and that is the plan. Simply pack up your stuff, find a new home (near Birmingham) , say goodbye to all the pros you have worked with and collect a new perhaps higher wage. For. IC and GK it must be like being in the armed forces. Move every few years. Expect them both to be gone, without so much as a goodbye, by middle of the week. And we will negotiate compensation.

[goonuppersee 0]

One thing that that has yet to be discussed.....

 

 "He will not be our coach for much longer" doesn''t actually mean he''s leaving does it..................?

[AVIVADIVA 0]

[quote user="goonuppersee"]

One thing that that has yet to be discussed.....

 

 "He will not be our coach for much longer" doesn''t actually mean he''s leaving does it..................?

[/quote] No, but I think he''s probably past his peak as a right back unfortunately.

[Mr Jenkins 0]

[quote user="goonuppersee"]

One thing that that has yet to be discussed.....

 

 "He will not be our coach for much longer" doesn''t actually mean he''s leaving does it..................?

[/quote]

It could mean the KGB is going to asassinate him![:D]

[Yellowbeagle 0]

Time for the board to line up and give Foulgers attention seeking idiot son a thick ear.

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="Norfolk Mustard"]

People in a privileged position such as Foulger’s son really should retain confidentiality regarding potentially delicate inside info. Although it probably won’t change the ultimate outcome in this case, I don’t think McNally and the rest of board will be overly impressed – mind you, Foulger Senior wasn’t exactly watertight at Fakenham Races either was he?

 

Somehow I doubt Foulger Junior will be on the end of heavy-handed Police treatment in the same manner the club thought fit for that 17 year-old who discovered the new 2012/13 strip!

[/quote]Scanning through the thread I''m surprised you''re the only one to point this out. I don''t care who they are. People close to the club shouldn''t be spunking information out. IMO Foulger Jnr needs his knuckles rapped.  People will say it''s harsh maybe, but he should keep his gob shut. As I sure he must''ve have made a nice earner on Hughton''s appointment with the bookies.

[ABC (A Basingstoke Canary) 26]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="RUDOLPH HUCKER"]But isn''t there also a risk that the moment we stop caring is the moment Lambert and Villa see the opportunity to walk over us?[/quote]

Sorry Rudolph but you make it sound that this messageboard and Twitter hold the balance with how Villa will read the situation.

 

[/quote]

 

Doesn''t it??

 

I''m gutted!

[Jacko 0]

[quote user="K Lo"][quote user="Jacko"]

I think deep down everyone knew that it was pure brinkmanship from McNally in the press conference. You have Culverhouse and Calderwood on the payroll. Both technically have the role of assistant manager. I just don''t see how you can how two assistant managers and Paul Trollope on the training ground. I will be gutted to see Cully go as he is clearly an excellent coach.

[/quote]That''s gamesmanship not brinkmanship !![/quote]

No it really isn''t mate

Brinkmanship: the art or practice of pushing a dangerous situation or confrontation to the limit of safety especially to force a desired outcome

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Does no one believe football clubs look at social media and other methods to gauge the opinions of their support?

To placate their support Villa were persuaded to go for Lambert.

Too placate their support Norwich play hardball over Lambert and Holt (with a risk of the old pyrrhic victory).

If the general view of out Holt was we should sell him he would be far more likely to be sold, instead the Board are concerned about fan reaction which is odd because Russ Martin has spelled out how players feel.

For me, the firewalls of Culverhouse, Karsa and Holt are protections against the loss of other individuals who do actually representthefuture of our Club.

This is the reason why, Tilly and Co supporters need to remain fixated and supportive of the Club Board as they do damage limitation.