Chase vs Wynn Joneses

[nutty nigel 7,598]

The city stand was the reason we lost Sir Arthur and got Chase. Disgraceful to force the great man out the way they did.

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

Odd how a worthless OP can spark an interesting debate. So, leaving

aside a comparison with Chase, to take a fact-based look at Smith and

Jones''s managerial record...They took over late in 2007 and so

inherited Mike Walker II. If his appointment by the previous regime had

been sentimental, then S&J''s first managerial decision, to sack him,

was the polar opposite. Whatever the sad background to Walker''s second

time in charge, he was not the manager he had been. I remember Peter

Grant telling a Scottish paper that training was so lax he kept going

back in the afternoons to stay in shape.Enter Rioch. An external

candidate with an undeniably impressive record overall, and with no

links to Norwich City. Quite a coup for S&J. The argument

that the next choice, of Hamilton, was a cheap bumping-up of a coach

doesn''t bear scrutiny. He had been a manager for 18 years, with fair

sucess, at Tranmere, Wigan, Leicester and Northern Ireland before

becoming Rioch''s assistant. And as such an experienced manager he is

hardly likely to have commanded a salary markedly lower than any

comparable external alternative.The same experience and salary

arguments apply to the choice of Worthington, who had managed Blackpool

for two and a half years. But if sacking Walker, choosing Rioch, and

sacking him and Hamilton were signs of steeliness, the next big decison,

to hold on to a busted flush of a manager into the 2006-07 season

looked (at the time) sentimental, and ushered in an era of short-term

from which it took nearly three years to recover.The choice of

Grant arguably fits into the category of  the cheap bumping-up of a

coach with links to the club. S&J''s first gamble, and one that

failed.As to Roeder, fans really cannot have it both ways. They

cannot complain that he was a bit of a b*stard when that was what he

needed to be to repair the wreckage he inherited and drag us from rock

bottom to safety with a game to spare and still accuse S&J of

sentimentality. Or to complain about the less successful second season.

That we were still in the Championship to enable us to be relegated to

the third tier was down to the cold-blooded choice of Roeder.There

might have been, just, an argument for trying Gunn. There was none at

all for carrying on the failed experiment of someone linked to the club

who probably was cheap and didn''t even have coaching experience.That

leaves the choices of Lambert and Hughton (it being too early to assess

Adams, though I think I know which way that is going). Both experienced

managers. Both external. Neither with previous connections to the club.

No traces of sentimentality or cheapness there.To tally up, out

of eight managers, four have been external, with managerial experience,

and with no links to the club. Of the three bumped up from with, two

had already been managers. That leaves the "coach-only" external gamble

of Grant, and the non-coach internal uber-gamble of Gunn.The

supposed policy of cheap and sentimental choices is exploded by the

facts. The clear-eyed decisons, including the sackings, easily outnumber

the mistily sentimental, which number hanging on to Worthington and twice choosing Gunn.Yes but, I can see at least one poster reply..The answer to that "Yes but.." can wait for a while.

[Bury Green 0]

How so, I was only fifteen back in 1985?

[TCCANARY 263]

 

The fire was October 1984.

 

 

[The Butler 0]

Just a quick point PC, Delia and Michael were leading lights in the "Bring back Walker" campaign, leading to their involvement with the Management of the club.

Chase joined the board in 1982, becoming chairman in 1985.

So was more involved in the rebuilding of the City stand than has been mentioned.

I think he decribed it as like going to the theatre with the grass as the stage!!

[nutty nigel 7,598]

Because, choosing my words carefully, there were allegations of wrong doing about the building of the new stand. The whole board ended up resigning and a trusted committee took over. When the new board rose from the ashes we had (Surprise, surprise) Robert Chase as Chairman and Jimmy Jones as Vice Chairman with no Sir Arthur to be seen. A very different story to when Sir Artrhur replaced Geoofrey Watling and made sure Watling stayed around saying how much he was needed. Sir Arthur was never about promoting himself within the football club or within the community. He has one hell of a lot more to do with saving the club than anyone gives him credit for. Mr Norwich and Mr Norwich City for me....

Does anybody remember the only time we had an EGM called? It was not long after that when Ken Brown got the sack. Chase wasn''t just unpopular in the last 2 years of his tenure. It was as bad in the first 2 years.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="The Butler"]

Just a quick point PC, Delia and Michael were leading lights in the "Bring back Walker" campaign, leading to their involvement with the Management of the club.

Chase joined the board in 1982, becoming chairman in 1985.

So was more involved in the rebuilding of the City stand than has been mentioned.

I think he decribed it as like going to the theatre with the grass as the stage!!

[/quote]

 

So it''s his fault we''ve only got a single story stand that''s preventing ground expansion.

 

 

 

 

 

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Does anybody remember the only time we had an EGM called? It was not long after that when Ken Brown got the sack. Chase wasn''t just unpopular in the last 2 years of his tenure. It was as bad in the first 2 years.[/quote]"They held a hastily convened emergency general meeting at St Andrew’s

Hall, with the skinheads outside chanting “Robert Chase is a homosexual”

– its proceedings rendered irrelevant in advance by the fact that Mr

Chase already owned most of the voting shares. Highlight of the

gathering was an impassioned speech from the floor by an elderly woman

decked out in yellow and green favours. “What I want to know,” she

demanded, fixing her gaze on the Chase satrapy, “is who are yer?‘

It was a good question. Nobody, eyeing Mr Chase and his line of

sheepish cohorts, seemed to know the answer. Mr Chase remained

impassive, like some trade union baron in the old, or perhaps not so

old, Tammany Hall days, happily aware that he will get his way despite

the squeakings from the gallery."More here ........

[nutty nigel 7,598]

[quote user="The Butler"]

Just a quick point PC, Delia and Michael were leading lights in the "Bring

back Walker" campaign, leading to their involvement with the Management of the

club.

[/quote]

 

Well that''s a strange one Butler. I don''t remember it that way. As I remember it was always going to be Walker after that AGM where Chase said he''d found the right wallet to line his pocket.

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,598]

Great find Lapp! I was at that EGM. I don''t think we''d ever had one before and we certainly haven''t had one since.

 

I don''t think Tilly ever got "chanting skinheads" outside on his jaunts to the Andrews....

 

 

[Bury Green 0]

So NN, my previous thoughts on ''He of the somewhat chubby grasping paws'' mightn''t be so far off the truth. The old main stand mysteriously burned down, it''s replacement was suspiciously small and even more suspiciously the Board that presided over this happy chapter all resigned only for our round faced friend to resurface together with Jimmy Jones.

It''s a great script isn''t it!

Whilst we are shooting the breeze on matters of history didn''t Jimmy Jones sell shares to Giovanni Di Stefano? If so just imagine what larks we could now be enjoying, he''d need to use Skype for Board meetings or a live link from The Hague.

Now back to our pleasingly rotund former chairman, another epic chapter in his tenure was his passion for a well timed trip to Michael Powell Rolls Royce and Bentley. Just after Sutton got sold to Blackburn he once agin mysteriously showed up in a brand new Mulsanne Turbo R, not wishing to cast aspersions in his direction of course.

Bless his little cotton socks.

[nutty nigel 7,598]

If you have a few mintes to spare Greeno have a look at this : -

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0huGBMRq1YA

 

My favourite bit that sums up Sir Arthur is when he publicly TELLS Norwich Union to pay up[;)]

 

 

[Bury Green 0]

Excellent, many thanks indeed for that. Insured for £2.5m and yet we needed up with a replacement significantly smaller.

Hmm.

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="The Butler"]

Just a quick point PC, Delia and Michael were leading lights in the "Bring

back Walker" campaign, leading to their involvement with the Management of the

club.

[/quote]

 

Well that''s a strange one Butler. I don''t remember it that way. As I remember it was always going to be Walker after that AGM where Chase said he''d found the right wallet to line his pocket.

 

 

[/quote]TB, Walker was appointed in June 2006 and Smith and Jones didn''t join the board until November 2006, and didn''t beceome owners until about a year later than that. They may possibly have wanted Walker back, but since they were not even directors at the time, let alone owners, it is a stretch too far to include that decision in their mangerial CV!

[lappinitup 629]

Just to get more of the flavour at the time, this from Joe Ferrari.......

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="The Butler"]

Just a quick point PC, Delia and Michael were leading lights in the "Bring back Walker" campaign, leading to their involvement with the Management of the club.

[/quote]

 

Well that''s a strange one Butler. I don''t remember it that way. As I remember it was always going to be Walker after that AGM where Chase said he''d found the right wallet to line his pocket.

 

 

[/quote]

TB, Walker was appointed in June 2006 and Smith and Jones didn''t join the board until November 2006, and didn''t beceome owners until about a year later than that. They may possibly have wanted Walker back, but since they were not even directors at the time, let alone owners, it is a stretch too far to include that decision in their mangerial CV!
[/quote]

Didn''t say they were.

There was a campaign started, of which the WJ''s were part of, to bring Walker back.

They were NOT involved with the running of the club then, but were obviously seen as "leading lights" of that campaign.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="The Butler"]There was a campaign started, of which the WJ''s were part of, to bring Walker back.

They were NOT involved with the running of the club then, but were obviously seen as "leading lights" of that campaign.[/quote]

I can''t remember much about this campaign Buttles, who organised it? I''m guessing it must have been the silent majority or perhaps even, the inner circle. [:D]

[ricardo 7,396]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="The Butler"]There was a campaign started, of which the WJ''s were part of, to bring Walker back.

They were NOT involved with the running of the club then, but were obviously seen as "leading lights" of that campaign.[/quote]

I can''t remember much about this campaign Buttles, who organised it? I''m guessing it must have been the silent majority or perhaps even, the inner circle. [:D]

[/quote]ssshhhh

[Crafty Canary 497]

TIL1010 states that Tangie was banned for publishing an anti-archant blog. He didn''t publish a blog he put in a link to a blog written by someone else. This is no different you posting a link to the supporters'' trust.

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]TIL1010 states that Tangie was banned for publishing an anti-archant blog. He didn''t publish a blog he put in a link to a blog written by someone else. This is no different you posting a link to the supporters'' trust.[/quote]I think that would very much depend, for all sorts of reasons I can imagine, on the contents being linked to. It might be a very different kettle of fish.

[Crafty Canary 497]

However there is a difference between posting a link and being said to have published the blog.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]TIL1010 states that Tangie was banned for publishing an anti-archant blog. He didn''t publish a blog he put in a link to a blog written by someone else. This is no different you posting a link to the supporters'' trust.[/quote]Its very different, and you know it.

[nutty nigel 7,598]

Doc, last time this came up you said I''d got Tangie banned? Have you changed your mind about that now?

At the agm where big fat Bob announced he was legging it with Watling''s wallet there was already a campaign to get Walker back. This was before the Palace game and long before Martin Armstrong approached Smith & Jones that summer.

[Crafty Canary 497]

Plenty of posters post links to blogs and other sites such as YouTube. Does this mean they are the publishers of these blogs and clips? Of course not and to be technical Archant are the publishers of everything posted on this website. However I know this is above your pay grade.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]Plenty of posters post links to blogs and other sites such as YouTube. Does this mean they are the publishers of these blogs and clips? Of course not and to be technical Archant are the publishers of everything posted on this website. However I know this is above your pay grade.[/quote]I doubt you''re anywhere near my paygrade fella.You know full well the article was particularly disparaging about Sports desk Pete, claiming all sorts of pretty daft, paranoid conspiracy theories. Also bordering on libellous about Archant.

[Crafty Canary 497]

I''m retired so no longer have the extortionate salary I used to earn. Nice thing about retiring early is having the time to spend on those far flung holidays that my pensions allow me to afford even after the actuarial revaluations for taking them early.

You have your opinion of the blog others will have theirs. For it to be libellous there has to be damages to the libelled. Was a case ever brought? If not, why not? It still was not published by Tangie which is the unfortunate truth for you numpties, not that it will stop you maintaining your crude vendetta..

[morty 0]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]I''m retired so no longer have the extortionate salary I used to earn. Nice thing about retiring early is having the time to spend on those far flung holidays that my pensions allow me to afford even after the actuarial revaluations for taking them early.

You have your opinion of the blog others will have theirs. For it to be libellous there has to be damages to the libelled. Was a case ever brought? If not, why not? It still was not published by Tangie which is the unfortunate truth for you numpties, not that it will stop you maintaining your crude vendetta..[/quote]Crude vendetta?Frankly what I am seeing is you stomping around the place having digs at a group of people. And more often than not its you starting with the insults.Again.

[nutty nigel 7,598]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]I''m retired so no longer have the extortionate salary I used to earn. Nice thing about retiring early is having the time to spend on those far flung holidays that my pensions allow me to afford even after the actuarial revaluations for taking them early.

You have your opinion of the blog others will have theirs. For it to be libellous there has to be damages to the libelled. Was a case ever brought? If not, why not? It still was not published by Tangie which is the unfortunate truth for you numpties, not that it will stop you maintaining your crude vendetta..[/quote]

 

Crafty, it''s a shame this decent thread is getting ruined. Could it be because your old mate is out of his depth?

 

The vendetta, as I see it, was the continual inferences from you, your daft bro, your drowning mate and the publisher of that blog about me and others having influence over Pete. I''ll ask again.. Have you changed your mind about that now?

 

 

[ricardo 7,396]

10 pages Surely Goodwins Law will come into operation very soon.[:D]

[? 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]10 pages Surely Goodwins Law will come into operation very soon.[:D][/quote]

Lol you N......!