Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
city-till-i-die

How many games do we give Adams

Recommended Posts

I''d agree the only entertaining stats lecture I can recall was someone falling asleep and then falling off their chair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Koreacanary"]Why the witch hunt every time Norwich win a game?

"anti-club malcontents"

yes, those pesky anti-club football club supporters.[/quote]i don''t think it goes far enough contrary to what herman says i think these traitors should be hung from lamp posts with cards round there necks saying " i doubted the final victory" [:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because the anti-club malcontents are tedious with their ignorant abuse. Given them some of their own back is adequate punishment. If they don''t like it then they should not give it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Koreacanary"]Why the witch hunt every time Norwich win a game?

"anti-club malcontents"

yes, those pesky anti-club football club supporters.[/quote]

 

Probably for the same reason we had a witch hunt for those easlily satisfied forelock tuggers everytime we lost.[;)]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Koreacanary"]Why the witch hunt every time Norwich win a game?

"anti-club malcontents"

yes, those pesky anti-club football club supporters.[/quote]oh dearperhaps someone could point out to you that this thread started AFTER we lost to Wolvesit was brought back after we won two games, to challenge the original commentsthose who posted the comments were challenged as to whether they still stood by their views............... as those who challenged them originally, still held their views

none of the former have stood by their views or have even commented since the two wins......... that''s all

do try to keep up(it shouldn''t be too difficult)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="City1st"][quote user="Koreacanary"]Why the witch hunt every time Norwich win a game?

"anti-club malcontents"

yes, those pesky anti-club football club supporters.[/quote]oh dearperhaps someone could point out to you that this thread started AFTER we lost to Wolvesit was brought back after we won two games, to challenge the original commentsthose who posted the comments were challenged as to whether they still stood by their views............... as those who challenged them originally, still held their views

none of the former have stood by their views or have even commented since the two wins......... that''s all

do try to keep up(it shouldn''t be too difficult)

[/quote]Simply not true. I stand by every word of what I posted, not least the argument  that the diamond should be ditched:Preamble. I didn''t see Sunday''s game. I didn''t want Adams. I wanted

Mackay. But when the latter played hard to get there wasn''t an obvious

other candidate. And there still isn''t.Firstly, we did have

several players missing from the starting eleven. Either from suspension

(O''Neil) or injury (Howson), not being fit (Fer) or not being regarded

as starting-match-fit (Tettey and Lafferty and possibly Pilkington). The

line-up for Watford and/or Blackburn could be sharply different and

different-better rather than different-worse.Secondly (trusting

to posters who know more about tactics than I do), it was a mistake to

play the diamond. I don''t like the system in itself because it lacks

width and potentially exposes the full-backs. Given the players we had

available it was a double mistake. It needs someone better in possession

than Johnson at the bottom tip, and the Hoolahan of two or three years

ago at the top tip. And probably someone better than Grabban at holding

the ball as the lone striker.Managers need tactical intelligence

and strength of character. The latter best exemplified by flexibility

and being willing to admit mistakes. Adams seems to have wanted the

diamond as his system of choice. The requisite strength of character

would be shown either by continung with the diamond but making changes

of personnel. O''Neil and/or Tettey and Lafferty in, for example. Or,

better still, by dumping the system. Embarrassing but the right thing to

do. A common garden 4-4-2 or a 4-4-1-1, for example.Inflexibility

cost us last season. If Adams shows the same lack of willingness to

change he should be given much less time than if he demonstrates that he is learning from his mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So PC stands by his views despite increased doubts about MMs spending, it now becoming obvious checks on MM were not satisfactory, doubts about MMS style of play and MM acknowledging he made inappropriate and unacceptable comments and the teams performance under NA. PC then goes on to say that he sees NAs ability to change his views as a laudable quality. Amusing that PC does not see the contradiction in his post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adams big tests are still very much in front of him , won against 10 men , had the benefit of a dubious penalty against Blackburn , and only managed to scrape home against a team that will be bottom 8 . We could still be doing much better had we appointed Lennon .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Cheap Cheap Canaries"]Adams big tests are still very much in front of him , won against 10 men , had the benefit of a dubious penalty against Blackburn , and only managed to scrape home against a team that will be bottom 8 . We could still be doing much better had we appointed Lennon .
[/quote]

3 Good wins and you can still only moan? I question your ability to support our club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cheap Cheap Canaries"]Adams big tests are still very much in front of him , won against 10 men , had the benefit of a dubious penalty against Blackburn , and only managed to scrape home against a team that will be bottom 8 . We could still be doing much better had we appointed Lennon .[/quote]

So you won''t be happy unless we win EVERY game. Get real, isn''t it great just to enjoy the football after two years of utter shit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do we go on replying to Cheap Cheap Canaries'' obvious wumming?

IMO, Adams has found the right formation in the 4-2-3-1 used in the last 3 games. With Jerome joining, I wonder if we''ll see a 4-3-3 in some games as well as a slight variation on the former.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree, and disagreed at the time, with Purple on the relative merits of McKay as a manager and the hypothesis he presents for why MacKay didn''t get the job ahead of Adams. But, and it is an important but, I respected the way he made his case and accepted the possibility that he might be right and I might be mistaken.

The reason this thread runs and runs is beacuse the same cannot be said for the posts that started this thread - some of which City 1st has rightly named and shamed.

There is no way these could be justified by losing by the odd goal to difficult opponents when down to 10 men. These non-supporters had clearly been waiting since Adams appointment hoping for failure and such an opportunity. The claims were preposterous - the board were happy with mid-table champs, lacked ambition, were salting away the cash for profit. telling lies, deliberately downgrading the team, Adams was a cheap option etc.

Not only that they were presented with such poisonous misanthropy caricaturing those involved as the cook, the radio presenter etc.

As Parma Ham has pointed in his separate thread out they were also totally wrong about how prepared we were for this season.

What is deeply ironic is now some of those who haven''t completely disappeared until the next downturn in fortunes are trying to describe the response since as a witch hunt.

There certainly was a witch hunt, but it stopped when when we started winning!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BigFish"]I disagree, and disagreed at the time, with Purple on the relative merits of McKay as a manager and the hypothesis he presents for why MacKay didn''t get the job ahead of Adams. But, and it is an important but, I respected the way he made his case and accepted the possibility that he might be right and I might be mistaken.

The reason this thread runs and runs is beacuse the same cannot be said for the posts that started this thread - some of which City 1st has rightly named and shamed.
[/quote]BigFish, that is typically decent of you. Equally I accepted other

posters'' preferences for different candidates, while believing then (and

still believing) that on the evidence publicly known at the time Mackay

was head (if not head and shoulders) above the available rest, with

Adams as least as good as any of the others. To start factoring

in the recent evidence about Mackay''s offensive texts (which if had been

an NCFC director would have had me voting against him) would be to

indulge in what I believe in US sports parlance is called Monday-morning

quarterbacking.As to why Mackay didn''t get the job, I continue

to rely on the statements from the two national reporters closest to

affairs at Carrow Road (specific quotes available) who both said it was

Mackay effectively walking away from us (seemingly because he seemed to

want to hold on for a job in the Premier League) rather than the other

way around. If the reason had been the directors only

discovering during negotiations details of Textgate or financial

irregularities (they knew all about Tan''s earlier very public

complaints) then the Carrow Road machine would somehow have found a carefully-expressed way

itself or through others to let fans know there had been

something private behind their decision to say No to Mackay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That leaves the question that if MacKay thought (correctly as it turns out) that he would get Premiership offers why did both sides even bother to talk and to what stage did the talks get?

As to his merits I think we will end up agreeing to disagree. I see no evidence from MacKay using Tan''s millions to get Cardiff out of the Champs (at the second attempt) and then wasting them on very poor preparation for the Prem that indicates he would have been a good fit to City - very similar to what seems like Parma Ham''s analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Intriguing though it is Purple, if McKay had signed a None Disclosure Document with Cardiff which as far as I''m aware he most certainly did then what could have been gleaned at interview?

Such a document wouldn''t necessarily cover him from answer a question relating to potential charges being brought by his former employer relating to acts of alleged financial impropriety.

As mentioned last week this is the line of attack used by

Michcon de Reya in obtaining a warrant, the results of which are well known.

"So Malky, do you know of any other reason why we shouldn''t offer you the job, potential legal charges from Cardiff perhaps?"

At that point he would have known what was brewing and the None Disclosure Document doesn''t cover him from informing our Board of what was going on.

All hypothesis perhaps but based on what we now know it''s not unreasonable.

Still so long as Neyul keeps up the good work it looks like we have dodged a massive bullet, a week in football is as we know a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Bury Green"]Intriguing though it is Purple, if McKay had signed a None Disclosure Document with Cardiff which as far as I''m aware he most certainly did then what could have been gleaned at interview?

S
uch a document wouldn''t necessarily cover him from answer a question relating to potential charges being brought by his former employer relating to acts of alleged financial impropriety.

As mentioned last week this is the line of attack used by

Michcon de Reya in obtaining a warrant, the results of which are well known.

"So Malky, do you know of any other reason why we shouldn''t offer you the job, potential legal charges from Cardiff perhaps?"

At that point he would have known what was brewing and the None Disclosure Document doesn''t cover him from informing our Board of what was going on.

All hypothesis perhaps but based on what we now know it''s not unreasonable.

Still so long as Neyul keeps up the good work it looks like we have dodged a massive bullet, a week in football is as we know a very long time.[/quote]Nothing at all, Bury. What is now being suggested is something different. That, having decided to consider Mackay as manager (which undoubtedly happened), we either discovered - or had leaked to us (by Tan presumably) - some information on Textgate or on the financial goings-on at Cardiff that was not in the public domain.That is possible, of course, but that would have had to have happened AFTER we started talking to Mackay. If we had known anything reprehensible beforehand we wouldn''t have looked at him at all. Moreover if we had suddenly dropped Mackay that would very quickly have gone round Planet Football. If a club run by Delia Smith has dumped a "legend" without giving a reason what nasty secret lies behind that etc etc etc?The obvious explanation remains the likeliest. That Mackay fancied his chances of getting a job in the Premier League, which, as BigFish says, happened, or was on the verge of happening, and was less keen on us than we were on him. Until there is some evidence of this new alternative theory I will go with that obvious and likely explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My word, Occam''s Razor has made it to the Pink Un, most, how shall we say, parsimonious of you!

Oh I''m not arguing at all, it''s just I find the whole shenanigan deeply intriguing.

For those who like a good conspiracy out of the Icke/ Alex Jones stable, we then we sold Pilkington to Cardiff for what appears a rather low fee.

One can but wonder if we sent him down the M4 with a bow attached and a nice bunch of flowers for Vincent!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My view / guess is based on the following:

- 6th April - Hughton sacked

- Adams appointed caretaker manager

- Board draws-up short list

- Assumption: interviews take place early-May

- It''s reported that Malky is preferred choice (this seems consistent across various media sources)

- Assumption: Adams is contingency.

- 9th May - Malky drops legal case against Tan and issues an unreserved apology.

- 11th May - Norwich''s last game of the season.

- McNally says after the game: "The Board will confirm who our manager will be in the 2014-15 season in a statement to supporters within a week."

- The ''within a week'' deadline comes and goes.

- Assumption: the Board are troubled by Malky''s apology & legal case. (I assumed the apology was to smooth his appointment at NCFC)

19th May - Delia, McNally & Co appear on Radio Norfolk and extend the ''within the week'' deadline.

22nd May - Adams appointed manager.

As I said in an earlier post, I understand that the Board offered (or were about to offer) Malky the job but the Tan apology gave them cause for concern which ultimately led to Adam''s appointment.

Whether this is true or not, I don''t know, but it makes sense to me.

Other plausible explanations obviously include: Malky wanted a Premiership job; Malky wanted more money or assurance about the transfer budget; Malky wanted to bring in his own team and didn''t want to have McNally''s management board imposed upon him.

Who knows. The upshot is, the Board seem to have made the right call which is pleasing as I was starting to lose confidence!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s simply - the club will have done due diligence which is a standard procedure including speaking with people that know MM and consulting with lawyers. Anything else is a fanciful attempt at denying they are wrong by people who obviously have no knowledge or experience of how these things are done in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m fairly sure that most people have a grasp of the concept of due diligence. For those that didn''t prior to reading this thread, I''m sure they do now you’ve explained it so many times. Thank you.

Regardless of what you think, I would suggest that MM was the preferred candidate when McNally said the new manager would be announced ''within a week.''

Therefore, if the Board are as diligent as you think, McNally would have kept his mouth closed until he''d done his due diligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s not a question of what I think it is a matter of knowing from professional experience what happens. You expect everything to be resolved quickly but when a an issue arises you make further enquiries which take longer and when you don''t have a satisfactory answer you pull out.

Everyday example buying a house - you make an offer subject to survey expecting no problems and then the survey comes up with an issue that needs further investigation and then you pull out hence reference to complications at the time.

Believe me or not but clearly some people here are showing the natural predisposition to ignore information when it does not match with their preconceived misconceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T - I understand what due diligence is from professional experience. I don''t generally feel the need to exert a pompous tone on the Pink Un message board in order to demonstrate whether or not I hold a suitably senior position within an organisation and therefore understand what due diligence is from ''professional experience.''

I also know from ''professional experience,'' that the level of DD you undertake with a potential employee, with whom you have previously had a professional relationship with (as Delia, Michael and MM have had) and who is in dispute with a former employer would be relatively light touch.

I''m not arrogant enough to think that I''m reading the tea leaves completely accurately, nor am I stupid enough to think that you are either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is frustrating when people deny new information in an attempt to maintain their anti-club stance when you know it is wrong.

If someone is subject to a legal issue then it would be normal to consult a lawyer. You don''t expect an issue so you do indeed expect to complete quickly but when the lawyer does not give a satisfactory answer you pull out.

Entirely up to individuals whether they believe reality or not. It is also arrogant when people will not change their views when new information comes to light, continually try to criticise the club when the club has more information, knowledge and experience and won''t admit the club made the right decision. Such is the pinkun message board. It would also be presumptuous to think my comments were even directed at one particular individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it''s frustrating when people claim to have an absolute knowledge of something that they clearly do not.

And it’s frustrating when people completely change the issue that’s being discussed. I am not taking an anti club stance. If anything, I have given the board credit in their appointment of Adams.

If you re-read my first message from earlier this afternoon, you''ll see that I don''t claim to have all the answers. I''m simply offering an opinion and contributing to a discussion that you seem to have a peculiar obsession with knowing best about.

Due diligence encompasses a broad range of enquiries so saying that MM was overlooked following a DD process is a pretty safe bet. What I''ve tried to do is add some context.

I am in agreement that some form of DD will have been completed. Equally, I''m not deluded enough to think that normal protocols will have been observed due to the circumstances.

I have it on good authority that Malky’s abrupt cessation of his legal claim against Cardiff and his unreserved apology to Tan caused a stir in the NCFC board room and that they were uncomfortable following additional enquiries. However accurate or otherwise my information is, it sounds plausible - to me at least. It is also entirely possible that Malky himself decided not to accept the manager’s position, assuming it was ever offered to him. We simply don’t know.

Now before we send the rest of the message board to sleep, I''m going out for a good steak and with any luck, to get my leg over. Goodnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Kingston Yellow"]Now before we send the rest of the message

board to sleep, I''m going out for a good steak and with any luck, to get my leg

over. Goodnight.[/quote]

 

While our beloved Canaries are playing? Get your priorities right

Kingston buddy[;)]
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
" That, having decided to consider Mackay as manager (which undoubtedly happened),"reallyyet a few days ago you were telling us that they had interviewed him, as in

"And in wanting  Mackay I was only mirroring the

views of the directors of Norwich City who, by all reputable accounts,

not only interviewed Mackay but made him their first choice,"
so had they considered him ?or had they interviewed him ?or had they interviewed him and then considered him ?had they interviewed him and then considered him and then offered him the job ?had they interviewed him and then considered him and then offered him the job, but he dillied and dallied............... ?which one is itas it seems to change by the day which leads me back to my original thought purple that you are simply making it up as you go and changing your story, by the daya sort of thinking woman''s wiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KY agree with your last comments. Your scenario is the most likely in my experience. My posts were not directed at you. I don''t claim to have any absolute or inside knowledge at the club.

I do know that some people make speculation up to ctiticize the club which is not consistent with normal business practice as they are arrogant enough to think they know better than the club. As I support the club I point out nonsense where I see it on my travels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have thought MM knowing what was going on would be eager to take any job rather than impose conditions or hang on for an uncertain premier league job having previously been sacked. We may never know for sure what exactly happened but we do know we were better off appointing NA rather than MM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Couldn''t be happier with Neil Adams - considering he''s still learning the ropes at senior management level, the results this season have been very impressive and the vibe around the club is clearly getting better by the day. I always thought the Wolves match away with a sending off was just ''one of those games'' and early indications would very much suggest this to be the case. Providing we get the rub of the green with injuries and suspensions, I will be very surprised if we don''t win the league - I actually don''t think we''ve quite slipped into gear yet and feel there''s much more to come. Not bad for a ''radio presenter''...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...