Is McNally still at Norwich City?

[danielsroundabout 9]

As we rapidly approach a crisis point for our team, I am struck by the anonymity of our Chief Executive. As the number of supporters who demand managerial change swell at an alarming rate, we hear nothing from him. Not even a word of support for his man Neil, although granted, that would be hard to deliver with any credibility.

Surely we must hear something tomorrow.

[Hucks6 169]

We will here nothing.He will still be here collecting his wages off over million

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,751]

McNally was and is charged with employing the very best candidate available to manage this football club............he has failed and with it not only has not done his job, but failed each and every one of us.

If he is not capable ,then its time for him to go and for someone else to take over his role.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]McNally was and is charged with employing the very best candidate available to manage this football club............he has failed and with it not only has not done his job, but failed each and every one of us.

If he is not capable ,then its time for him to go and for someone else to take over his role.[/quote]Hear, hear!!! Bring back Neil Doncaster I say![:''(]

[Jim Smith 2,317]

. There is no doubt he is a hard nosed operator and was what we needed at the time he came in but the amount of money he has taken out of our club is ridiculous and what has he actually done to justify if? Appoint Paul Lambert and hike ticket prices across the board whilst annoying quite a few people in the process. The last 18 months have been notable for his much lower profile and indecision in the key area of the first team manager. It''s all just very out of kilter with the first 3 years he was with us.

Fed up with hearing about the "miracle" of us being debt free. I think most of us on here could manage to clear a debt of circa £24m given £150m + of sky money over 3 seasons. Again that all comes back to appointing Lambert so credit for that but we are now well overdue another good decision.

[hogesar 9,672]

First of all, it''s the entire board. Not just David McNally. Just like it wasn''t only David McNally who made Lambert happen. Yes, he may well have been at the front of it but it required the rest of the boards backing.

Now, people won''t like this, but a Board who get one manager right out of 3 is generally doing ok, if you compare it to similar clubs who have gone through many, many more poor managers than we have.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

Hogesar it may equally surprise you that I don''t think Hughton was a bad appointment when he was brought in. At the time, he did the job we needed in the first season and steadied the ship in the wake of Lamberts departure.

What killed us with Hughton was the indecision and lack of ruthlessness over his sacking and that was strange because when Bowkett and Mcnally came in that was an area I really thought had been addressed at boardroom level. The first three years of their reign had been characterised by confident and decisive actions and a confident public presence even if we did not all agree with all of them where they concerned off pitch matters. I met Mcnally on a couple of occasions during Lamberts tenure and he told us he always has a plan B manager in mind/lined up in case the current one walks. I believe Hughton was always that Plan B and

For the last 18 months, however, something has changed. It''s all gone very quiet from the top and the Hughton departure/appointment of Adsms had a very different feel about them to when Lambert and Hughton came in. I can''t put my finger on what it is but something seems to have changed.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="Jim Smith"]Hogesar it may equally surprise you that I don''t think Hughton was a bad appointment when he was brought in. At the time, he did the job we needed in the first season and steadied the ship in the wake of Lamberts departure.

What killed us with Hughton was the indecision and lack of ruthlessness over his sacking and that was strange because when Bowkett and Mcnally came in that was an area I really thought had been addressed at boardroom level. The first three years of their reign had been characterised by confident and decisive actions and a confident public presence even if we did not all agree with all of them where they concerned off pitch matters. I met Mcnally on a couple of occasions during Lamberts tenure and he told us he always has a plan B manager in mind/lined up in case the current one walks. I believe Hughton was always that Plan B and

For the last 18 months, however, something has changed. It''s all gone very quiet from the top and the Hughton departure/appointment of Adsms had a very different feel about them to when Lambert and Hughton came in. I can''t put my finger on what it is but something seems to have changed.[/quote]Jim, this is a well-known syndrome in business generally that I have seen at first-hand a few times. A new regime comes in, often with the aim of being the polar opposite of the old, and is decisive and makes all sorts of changes. But things quieten down after a while, in part because not everthing the old regime did was wrong (and that was certainly true of us), and in any event a business where there is perpetual change is a business in chaos.As to the specific question of sacking managers, the situations with Gunn and Hughton were very different. With Gunn everything aligned perfectly, culminating with the 7-1, to enable the new regime to act decisively. If we had drawn that game or lost 2-1 Gunn would have stayed in the job for at least a while longer.With Hughton last season there was never, despite what many fans claimed, an obvious moment when he had to go, at least until West Brom at home. And even some posters who wanted him out wondered then and now whether he should have been kept on until the bitter end. In my view the board hasn''t gone soft. It has just encountered circumstances where there were not easy answers.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Jim Smith"]Hogesar it may equally surprise you that I don''t think Hughton was a bad appointment when he was brought in. At the time, he did the job we needed in the first season and steadied the ship in the wake of Lamberts departure.

What killed us with Hughton was the indecision and lack of ruthlessness over his sacking and that was strange because when Bowkett and Mcnally came in that was an area I really thought had been addressed at boardroom level. The first three years of their reign had been characterised by confident and decisive actions and a confident public presence even if we did not all agree with all of them where they concerned off pitch matters. I met Mcnally on a couple of occasions during Lamberts tenure and he told us he always has a plan B manager in mind/lined up in case the current one walks. I believe Hughton was always that Plan B and

For the last 18 months, however, something has changed. It''s all gone very quiet from the top and the Hughton departure/appointment of Adsms had a very different feel about them to when Lambert and Hughton came in. I can''t put my finger on what it is but something seems to have changed.[/quote]Jim, this is a well-known syndrome in business generally that I have seen at first-hand a few times. A new regime comes in, often with the aim of being the polar opposite of the old, and is decisive and makes all sorts of changes. But things quieten down after a while, in part because not everthing the old regime did was wrong (and that was certainly true of us), and in any event a business where there is perpetual change is a business in chaos.As to the specific question of sacking managers, the situations with Gunn and Hughton were very different. With Gunn everything aligned perfectly, culminating with the 7-1, to enable the new regime to act decisively. If we had drawn that game or lost 2-1 Gunn would have stayed in the job for at least a while longer.With Hughton last season there was never, despite what many fans claimed, an obvious moment when he had to go, at least until West Brom at home. And even some posters who wanted him out wondered then and now whether he should have been kept on until the bitter end. In my view the board hasn''t gone soft. It has just encountered circumstances where there were not easy answers.[/quote]

That may be the case Purple and indeed there is probably a case in every job where after a few years of the same people in the same jobs/roles things can go a bit stale but I still feel there has been some sort of change of dynamic at boardroom level in the last 18 months or so. Whether its because there has been some sort of boardroom power struggle or something else has triggered it i don''t know.

I have no proof and acknowledge that this is all speculation and conjecture but you hear stories, rumours and bits of gossip and the way the Hughton departure was handled and Adams appointment was just so different from almost everything we''d done int the previous 3 years. I may not have agreed with everything the club did during those 3 years (i feel the ticket pricing is short sighted and general customer/fan/business community relations have suffered a bit) but you did feel an overwhelming sense that we had two hard nosed businessmen running the club day to day who would not be influenced unduly by sentiment if the football side of things was not right, I also don''t see them as the type of individuals to accept a line such as "but who else is there" which was what was being trotted out last season.

[ur just a man in a jacket 0]

Some of you are deluded - yes DM has made some business decisions which havent been to our liking but do any of you remember what our club was like under Doomcaster? We were days away from administration under that tool.

Just remember the grass is not always greener.

[Dubai Mark 0]

He is now probably in South America looking for a new coach as he has run out of options in Europe.

But that aside, which really jarred my off at the time, I actually still believe he is a top CEO......but, do believe that he and the club need better PR, much better.

[Horse Renoir 1]

Ugh Doncaster...

See that''s the problem, McNally couldn''t keep Lambert, Hughton was a failure in his second season, some of the players we''ve signed in the last couple of years have been huge wastes of money/ Imo we''ve overpaid for pretty much every player since Lambert left and McNally has overseen these deals. We look like a 3 Million team of Championship also-rans. Then there''s Adams who hasn''t failed yet but it''s looking bleak.

The above makes you think we need a change but then compare him to Doncaster (throws up in mouth) ..All is not well at the moment and I think our CEO is a little bit too comfy here and has been bitten by the Norwich bug. I really do believe he''s fallen in love with this club the way he goes about things, but I think that''s impaired his skills massively. The cold, ruthless McNally of 2009 would never have appointed someone like Adams and I truly believe the new sentimental, NCFC loving McNally of 2014 wouldn''t have been able to sack Gunn so callously, make the necessary cuts back then or have the b4lls to go after Lambert.

Saying that I am terrified of what would happen should he depart because as we well know, after being treated like everyones cowering, defeated b!tch for years under Doomcaster, it can be so, sooo much worse!

[ca 1]

Yes David McNally is still with us thank goodness and unlike a lot of other CEO''s at other clubs is fairly accessible to fans by email, twitter, fans groups forums, after AGMs 

We would be in a far worse place without him in my opinion

[morty 0]

Why are people obsessed with it?Do you want him to give you a cuddle, and tell you everythings going to be okay? Or just pelt him with rotten fruit?

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="Darth Catbeard"]

 

I really do believe he''s fallen in love with this club the way he goes

about things, but I think that''s impaired his skills massively. The cold,

ruthless McNally of 2009 would never have appointed someone like Adams

[/quote]

 

 

I think you''re right Darth. And he''s got a wonderful job. I bet he loves working for good honest people who love the club and supporters. Some of that must rub off. But I''m perturbed about your phrase "someone like Adams" because Neil Adams was the outstanding candidate for the job. And surely we should always look to appoint the best which would mean someone like the outstanding candidate. Unless David McNally is telling porkies. If he is then scrub all the praise we may as well have Doomy.

 

 

[Horse Renoir 1]

I don''t believe has was the outstanding candidate though and I don''t think the board thought he was either. I wont pretend to know what went on through the summer but it''s common sense to state that if NA was always the outstanding candidate and the one the board wanted from the start we wouldn''t have had the massive delay in appointing him. Adams didn''t win any of his 5 games and there was only a very minor upturn in performance in a few of the last 5 games.

I honestly believe McNally thought there was no one else out there and as I said at the time obvious candidates Mackay/Zola/Sherwood/Lennon etc had achieved basically nothing of note in the game so far. I''ll admit in hindsight Lennons achievements now look a lot more substantial since Ronnie Deila took over, but at the time we all equated winning the SPL with Celtic was roughly equivalent to Everton/Spurs being plonked in the Championship and winning that so you can see why the board weren''t convinced by him.

McNally appointing Lambert was a shock to us all, but it was a brave move and came off of his opinion of him while working at Celtic. The obvious and boring/unspectacular appointment at the time would have been Boothroyd/Robins/Cotteril etc Or he could have stuck with Gunn (Which I''d equate to being roughly the same as appointing Adams this year. A club legend in their first managerial job with a poor record the previous year.

I believe if (somehow) everything that happened since 2009 had still happened up to this summer under a different CEO and we appointed McNally this summer he would have gone for Howe, Bowyer or maybe even McCarthy and would have used the clubs financial clout to get them here at all costs. I think he''s lost his edge and he''s a bit too comfortable and pacified here .

Also no way. McNally hasn''t been perfect but at least we don''t still accept every single small, insulting offer for one of our players, we aren''t appointing absolute catastrophes like Roeder or accepting Championship survival luke under Doncaster. McNally has spun things in the press to appease fans and he has made mistakes, but he''s no where near as much of a useless tool as Doncaster!

[nutty nigel 7,534]

Thanks Darth that''s a great reply. I think the reason why we find it hard to believee Adams was the outstanding candidate is because we don''t know what made him outstanding. We just get the conclusion of the selection process and have to wrestle with what we know about Adams and the people we assume were his competition. So in the end it boils down to trust. Do we trust the board to be honest with us or do we feel we''re being hoodwinked.

[Horse Renoir 1]

I think that''s why there''s so much animosity towards McNally on here now. Up until last year we all trusted him and our ''new'' board fully. While I feel McNally has settled too comfortably into his job and is playing to safe, basically he''s neglecting the part of his character that made him such a great CEO, most other fans now see him as clueless and someone who just got lucky with Lambert.

I certainly feel we were all hoodwinked with Adams appointment, I still don''t want him removed yet as it''s far too early. This team, while talented has shown over and over again how mentally fragile, immature and inconsistent it can be. Neil deserves until just before Xmas for me to turn things around and if the board and McNally make another mistake with the next appointment then I''ll lose faith in this hierarchy.

Thankfully, it''s not looking utterly hopeless and pointless like Hughtons last few months were so I''m willing to keep the faith with Adams and McNallys judgement at the moment. But if they drag this out too long like they did with Hughton when we needed a change or if they appoint another tepid, uninspiring safe choice that will ultimately fail then I''ll join everyone else in calling for a change at the top

[nutty nigel 7,534]

I''m the opposite Darth. I always believe people until they give me good reason not to. This doesn''t mean I''m right though, you could be right and we are being hoodwinked. If so that then opens a whole new can of worms. Not least of which is why are we being hoodwinked? And what''s the advantage to the board and club to not appoint the outstanding candidate?

[Horse Renoir 1]

I''m all for giving the club the benefit of the doubt. But what sane human being would honestly believe in July this year that Neil Adams is the best and most outstanding candidate to get us promoted this year? Maybe some more established and sentimental members of our board like Delia etc but nobody, from the outside looking in, with an impartial view, would have thought Neil Adams had shown himself to be the best candidate to get us up. I believe McNally wanted Mackay but got wind of the media sh!tstorm brewing and in panic, seeing no other obvious candidate appointed Adams. Or maybe they wanted someone else and had a different reason to appoint Adams over them. Basically given the time it took to appoint someone I''m 99% certain Adams wasn''t their man and they''ve been carefully misleading us.

Now don''t get me wrong I believe all those in PR positions in any business put spin on all of their actions to appease fans/shareholders etc So yes I believe we have good reason not to believe them, but not because they''re dishonest, but because they''ve played it very safe, some members of the board believe this is the safest (outstanding) option and have sold it to us on the back of his youth team achievements.

Now it''s been my friends stag night tonight so i''m on my phone, a little bit p155ed and I hope I''m making some sense. Bottom line is they never thought about the outstanding candidate, they wanted the safe ''knows the club'' option and once Mackay fell through they went for Adams. My point all along has been the old, detached McNally wouldn''t have even considered a person with no experience and would have gone with someone young, hungry who has proven themselves at over performing with a poor Championship club like Howe/Bowyer/McCarthy. Just like he did with Lambert.

Again I apologise if that''s a bit disorganised, I hope you get my meaning :P

[nutty nigel 7,534]

You do well to cope on your phone and to do so while your a bit ''disorganised'' is what I''d call outstanding. I''m on my phone now so this will be a lot briefer :)

What you are describing is what I meant about wrestling with what we know about Adams compared to what we know about the people we think he could have been up against.

I think Delia''smore savvy than you credit her with being. Having owned the club for 18 years I doubt she could be hoodwinked with a load of old flannel. And anyway, if you were paid 1m? pa would you risk the lot trying to hoodwink your employer?

[Bury Green 0]

AGM tonight I think, I''m sure he will be getting his enscisors sharpened to a fine edge.

[ca 1]

[quote user="Bury Green"]AGM tonight I think, I''m sure he will be getting his enscisors sharpened to a fine edge.[/quote]

No its Tuesday Nov 25th 7:30pm

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="Bury Green"]AGM tonight I think, I''m sure he will be getting his enscisors sharpened to a fine edge.[/quote]

 

"absolutely and entirely wrong of course".

 

 

 

 

[Bury Green 0]

Excellent, I can attend.

Just as I did at St Andrew''s Hall and just as I have done for pretty much every AGM.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

I can remember an EGM AT St Andrews Hall. Nowt to do with Tilly though! I think the original Chase Outers were lead by Harry Serruys (sp?) Were you at that one Greeno?

If you''re at the bar first mines a coke....

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

Neil Adams was the difficult, risky choice. Not the easy one.

McNally and the Board were well aware of the obvious criticisms and potential risks. That they appointed Neil nevertheless, shows huge belief in him and his (potential) abilities.

Much of this thread implies that the board were unaware and are now "shown up". This is classic, ill-thought out keyboard simplicity.

Events will decide, but the calculation was made with open eyes.

Parma