Chase vs Wynn Joneses

[Tumbleweed 106]

I''m pretty sure that no one would moan about the style of play if we were winning. But last year we were boring to watch and still lost. I would love exciting entertaining etc football, I still recall The Chief and his pace terrorising defences for instance. But if we ground out results and got promoted I''d be pretty chuffed.

The issue is the decision making about how to generate the results. Nobody has even mentioned the appointment of Neil Doncaster (I don''t think) as CEO from being Club Secretary- a curious appointment to rank with many others.

There is definitely a culture of safety and choosing the known quantity- a risk aversion which perhaps goes too far, arguably just as unproductive as if they got all gung-ho and just went crazy.

I don''t believe in comparisons with Chase, South etc and I really can''t remember the dates when they took over,. However while off the pitch we may be much healthier we, I would bet, are pretty much exactly where we were when they took over in terms of league position. Make of that, if true, what you will.

[Indy 3,298]

Since last month its been painful to be on here so kept out of things.

This thread is very interesting one.....the normal NCFC board protectors shouting how good things are under Delia & Co others argue the case for previous custodians.

I preferred Chase''s & before his time for football, how can anyone who experienced these years, league cup win, FA cup semis, 3 place finish and Europe really say under this current leadership they have enjoyed the football more!

I liken Sutton to Ashton debacle so both Chase and our current board have done the same when money was required to fund other things or pay bills.

People are right to point out football has moved on so much that its unfair to say who has been more value to our great club, but lets not forget that should Delia & Co sell I''m sure they would get a healthy return on their investment in this club. Not to mention the constant media attention gained for Delia over the past 18 years being our clubs owner.

The current board are doing a job none of us would want, they want the best for our club and Adams to this point has been a disaster.....playing players out of position, buying defenders and strikers and not using them even when we are losing near on every week. He was a gamble as would any manager be.

The thing for me asthose before there comes a point where everything passes its sell by date and sorry for me the club needs a new injection of money, energy and direction, new owners might not be such a bad thing now.

We are at a point where we are debt free and could build on this with the right people, but already the warning sign is there....we are going to have to go into debt for a period of time to cover costs this season. Without promotion the higher wage earners will be shown the door and the long rebuilding phase might be required Adams or whoever incharge.

Sad that we are at a crossroads and a great time for club and owners to maybe part company for the goid of everyone. I''m sure there would be a buyer out there but would they pass the Smith & Jones criteria!

All boards past, present and future make calculated gambles which will pay off or bite them.....the same for every club.

[Bury Green 0]

Purple,

Swansea away last term was truly a horrendous day out, I really couldn''t imagine anybody who made their way to South Wales could ever have believed the manager would be in charge on the Monday morning.

Purple, I will accede to your own interpretation of summer 2009 but with one caveat, namely a face to face discussion with a partner of one of The Big Four. The presence of both the new Chairman and Chief Executive was instrumental in retaining the confidence and support of the clubs key stakeholders. The Chairman pretty much admitted this point at his first AGM when briefing the shareholders that he had managed to bite retaining their confidence and overseen a restructuring.

The other moot point in the context of this thread goes back twenty years to the end of the Chase era and one of the nastiest Binners you could ever imagine, a truly vile individual.

This vermin lived in BSE and was dealing in Corporate Recovery for the clubs bankers at the time at sat loudly in a local pub braying about how he''d been able to do his level best to screw the club into the deck.

Whilst I understand this sort of thing falls into the realms of the tediously esoteric I can hand on heart say this shyster warranted a bloody good kicking. Wether or not he was telling porkies is another matter but, such things remain in the memory and neither was I alone, there were one or two other of my BSE Yellows who had first hand experience of this ----.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

[quote user="Bury Green"]Purple,

Swansea away last term was truly a horrendous day out, I really couldn''t imagine anybody who made their way to South Wales could ever have believed the manager would be in charge on the Monday morning.

Purple, I will accede to your own interpretation of summer 2009 but with one caveat, namely a face to face discussion with a partner of one of The Big Four. The presence of both the new Chairman and Chief Executive was instrumental in retaining the confidence and support of the clubs key stakeholders. The Chairman pretty much admitted this point at his first AGM when briefing the shareholders that he had managed to bite retaining their confidence and overseen a restructuring.

The other moot point in the context of this thread goes back twenty years to the end of the Chase era and one of the nastiest Binners you could ever imagine, a truly vile individual.

This vermin lived in BSE and was dealing in Corporate Recovery for the clubs bankers at the time at sat loudly in a local pub braying about how he''d been able to do his level best to screw the club into the deck.

Whilst I understand this sort of thing falls into the realms of the tediously esoteric I can hand on heart say this shyster warranted a bloody good kicking. Wether or not he was telling porkies is another matter but, such things remain in the memory and neither was I alone, there were one or two other of my BSE Yellows who had first hand experience of this ----.[/quote]That may be true, and I have always entertained that possibility, particularly as far as Bowkett is concerned. If I was one of our lenders I would have been happy that Smith and Jones had replaced Munby (who was ill anyway) with Bowkett.But that is a long way from one madcap and always factless thesis spouted here, that Bowkett was actually forced on an unwilling Smith and Jones by the banks, as opposed to the much more believeable version told by Bowkett that he was headhunted by Smith and Jones, who knew they needed a heavy-hitter to repair the damage, and worked so hard to wear down his initial reluctance that he eventually agreed.

[Indy 3,298]

Bowkett was never forced on the board but Smith & Jones were guided into making changes to the structure, I know that much.

What they did and how is entirely their choice at the time but certain lenders were leaning heavy on the board at that time.

There are some who would like to believe it was all the idea of Delia & Michael.

Just to push one more point I was at the gunn club the nightDelia stated If you can find another mug to take over, I would sell my share of the club for a pound! (Probably not word for word, but it wad said).

[Crafty Canary 495]

Blimey, the old girl is a mug. Some on here think she is a cut crystal tumbler.

[nutty nigel 7,531]

I love how the stuff that people "know" contradicts itself so many times over. Perhaps the people who really do know put out different stories to different people and see what comes back. That''s the best way to flush out a mole. Maybe you''re doing your source a disservice Indy. You might just have outed them ;)

[nutty nigel 7,531]

I liked Tumbleweeds post. He just has an opinion and states it.

I like forming my opinion on what I see and the facts I know. Doesn''t mean I''m right. Others like to read between the lines to form a more comfortable opinion. Doesn''t make them wrong either.

Because opinions can''t be wrong. Even if they''re backed up by distorting the facts or even falsifying them the opinions can''t be wrong. But I don''t like history being altered in that way.

I very often read posts on here that portray our club going from the top of the Premier League, winning cups and qualifying for Europe under Chase to scratching about in division 2 old money under Smith & Jones. I''m afraid that''s just taking the rewriting of history to a ridiculous level. Chase himself took the club from those heady heights to the unacceptable low. When he finally pocketed the contents of Watling''s wallet and waddled off into the sunset that''s where he left us. When Smith & Jones replenished Watling''s wallet we had already experienced a full three years of decline since those heady days. So I always judge Chase on his complete record and Smith & Jones on theirs. And in my book you could add them together, multiply them by any number you like, and they still wouldn''t come close to the late great Sir Arthur.

[ricardo 7,385]

So apart from bank, card, Library card, Driving License etc etcJust how much was in Watling''s wallet?and don''t give me that old bollox about there''s those that know and those that don''t.[;)]

[TIL 1010 4,738]

[quote user="ricardo"]
Just how much was in Watling''s wallet?

and don''t give me that old bollox about there''s those that know and those that don''t.[;)]
[/quote]

We could get you an answer ricardo but unfortunately due to a poster being banned for publishing an anti Archant blog on here that may now never be possible. [:P]

[Indy 3,298]

And its funny how only certain posters will have nothing said against the current custodians! Even when they have no right to question others.....I couldn''t give a rats arse Nutty if you believe me or not.....I don''t have a mole just a relative who works in the high reaches of the financial sector and has for many years. We''ve been down this road....

Can I ask you why you don''t think we were more successful under Chase than the current board? What do you base this on?

[nutty nigel 7,531]

I didn''t say we were more successful under the current board than we were under Chase. Where have you read that? What I''ve said was that we didn''t decline from the days where we all enjoyed it more through the current board. Chase did it all on his own. Literally. You can have a different opinion but you can''t rewrite history to prove it.

 

What does your relative from the high reaches of the financial sector know about all those people running around every lending institution in London professing to represent Norwich City in Chase''s wake? I''d seriously be interested Indy.

 

 

 

 

[nutty nigel 7,531]

[quote user="ricardo"]So apart from bank, card, Library card, Driving License etc etcJust how much was in Watling''s wallet?and don''t give me that old bollox about there''s those that know and those that don''t.[;)][/quote]

 

A business card for a guy at Barclay''s bank. Allegedly. Oh... you mean money...

 

Was he considerably richer before the two transactions or after? Will we ever know who was greedy....

 

 

[Indy 3,298]

Off you go again being slightly pedantic, you know we''ve discussed this before and I''ve already stated what I know earlier on in this thread.

You can have your opinion and I''ll have mine regarding this board and Chase, each have made mistakes, the money during Chases time wasn''t in tv as it has been since. We have always historically been a selling players club and probably will if we don''t get promoted.

For me I enjoyed our football more, the past few years I have found myself questioning if I want to bother coming anymore, something I never have in the past. Not blaming the current board but football is becoming boring, players are disconnected from the fans and the board are holding fast to their ideals.

I think I might not bother posting again, its hard work...one day back and the same person being high and sarcastic.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="ricardo"]So apart from bank, card, Library card, Driving License etc etcJust how much was in Watling''s wallet?and don''t give me that old bollox about there''s those that know and those that don''t.[;)][/quote]

 

A business card for a guy at Barclay''s bank. Allegedly. Oh... you mean money...

 

Was he considerably richer before the two transactions or after? Will we ever know who was greedy....

 

 

[/quote]One thing you can be certain of Nigel is that he isn''t as wealthy nowadays.

[nutty nigel 7,531]

Indy, it was a genuine question. I''m intrigued by the history of our great club.

So we both enjoyed the football more before Chase destroyed the dynasty started by Sir Arthur and John Bond. So we do have something in common.

[chicken 0]

[quote user="Big Vince"]£21 million debt prior to Lambert

[/quote]How is that the current majority shareholders fault?[quote user="Big Vince"]Erik Fugelstad, Matty Jackson. [/quote]Both solid players for us, at the time and position we were in the league etc. It''s worth noting that Jackson was so rubbish he went on to help get Wigan promoted.[quote user="Big Vince"]Zema Abbey.[/quote]Had serious injury problems that essentially more or less ended his professional career. Very easy to look back in hindsight about all of the players that didn''t make it due to injury. Notman, Gialanza etc.The fact that you fail to mention notable players who were far, far worse for us such as Brellier just goes to show your lack of knowledge.[quote user="Big Vince"]Relegation x 2 from Premier League[/quote]Vs Chases x1. And lets not forget how he masterminded that. Yes, he bought lots of land - but to do it he sold lots of very good players, against the managers wishes. Against the players wishes in some cases. He sold the loyalty of the playing squad. The expression is "tore the rug out from under our feet".As a result, those that took it into their hands to look after our club afterwards had to try and get the club and team into a shape that could handle the debts and yet still mount a challenge for promotion. All of this, at a time when our average gates were 15-18,000.So when you look at that and see that we have been promoted twice, and arguably at a time in football where the difference between the haves and have nots is far, far greater than in the early ''90''s.I have always said, and will stand by it, that Chase could not have possibly made those decisions at a worse time. Another season with that team, another top 4-6 finish, more European football, more money, with the amount of money that was coming into the premier league at that time, would have been more beneficial than selling our best players.And lets not forget, at a time when the economy wasn''t so great either.It took what? 15-20 years for that land to mature and give the club any sort of return. Colney was bought, supposedly to be the site of a new stadium. A new stadium?!! Brilliant if we were premier league, but he sold our premier league squad. It worked out ok to an extent, but no where near what was planned.So far as I have seen, and am aware, since then - all business decisions have been relatively sound. There don''t seem to have been many decisions to invest in something that ''may'' make the club money in 15-20 years.[quote user="Big Vince"]0 Cup finals

0 Cup semi-finals

0 top six finishes in PL[/quote]When you have clubs like Spurs spending £100million+ to make a dent into the top six, it is increasingly harder for other clubs to compete. You often do get one club, a Southampton, the other year it was Newcastle, who do manage to do so having spent less. But again - times have changed. We were not competing as a club with ten plus years of premier league money behind us. To be competitive in the top half of the premier league it would take several stages of development, turnover of the squad and in my mind take at least four-five seasons.It''s the unrealistic nature of some folk that seems to be behind what a lot of these moans are grounded in.The European run was the height, the peak that this club has seen, arguably one of it''s highest moments, contested by cup wins perhaps.There is so much more to football. I would say that Chase''s predecessors had more to do with the success the club achieved on the pitch. Off it he drove it to the brink of ruin.

[Indy 3,298]

Well you went on the attack as normal and being sarcastic, if you are interested, now a FD but prvious was one of the first financial business risk and management for a large company who were involved at that time.

As said the outcome was that our board were leaned on at that time to make assurances and take measures, which they did. If you believe or know that Delia & Michael acted off their own bat sacking Doncaster and seeking more high profile members like Bowkett & MacNally than fine, I can only believe what I have been told as I have no reason not to believe what I was told back then.

As I have always said Delia & Co have nothing but respect from me as its harder than any of us can imagine being in their shoes, they have made mistakes, they are too loyal at times, but they have done the best they can, have invested heavily into the club and we have enjoyed some success as well as some very tough times.

I do think that now is the time they should be actively looking for a new owner, what avout you Nutty want them to carry on or have a fresh new owner with a new dynamic plan with investment? Knowing that owners like managers are a risk, you never know if you get a Soithampton or Leeds outcome.

[Tumbleweed 106]

Indy- in one of your previous posts you talked about not enjoying football quite so much and disconnection with the players. I think for many of us who went through the pre-Sky years this will resonate loudly. I remember the old Main Stand and the grubby old South Stand, the pre-N&P river end etc, the chopped up pitches, the serious lack of facilities, comfort and catering. Even the programmes have become all fancy-dan glossy.Somehow football was more simple. I''m not harking back to some rose tinted view of how it used to be as there was a lot of cr**piness and the hooliganism lent it a dangerous edge at times, but we went, listened to JAG reading the results on radio 2 as we trudged home, waited for the pinkun to arrive on a Sat night, watched MOTD and that was it. Now we also have incessant news, comment, speculation, big money transfers who work and who don''t, and rampant short-termism. Football ownership at the level we once occupied is now a game for bored billionaires and mugs.

The money changed the game, I agree with you that there is a disconnection between fans and players, but the days of Chase were in my view straightforward compared to the challenges now. He got a lot of stuff wrong but the model of bringing through the youth for later big money sales was a valid one, especially for us when we hadn''t really yet got much pedigree in the old Div One. Only Southampton seem able to do this at the moment, and they had to go bust, wipe off debt and get funded by a rich benefactor''s estate.

I sometimes yearn for those simpler days, it just seemed less stressful, I never felt as low after losing at home under John Bond or Ken Brown as I seemed to under Hughton. Maybe our expectations are now higher as we have had fleeting tastes of life at the top. It is another debate altogether as to whether that is our place or it exists somewhere else in the football hierarchy.

[ricardo 7,385]

Well here we are at over 8 pages of the same old circulatory argument that has been going on for twenty five years. There are some facts that we know and there are some facts that we will never know. The only thing we can be certain of is that a lot of water has flown under Trowse bridge in the meantime.To save a lot of time, effort and repetition in future we should have a dedicated thread on this subject where all those hundreds of posts can be archived and read by those with nothing better to do all day.Personally. I''m now off for coffee with Mrs Ricardo and then perhaps a lunchtime taste of my favourite Italian beer at the local wine bar.

[ZLF 274]

Comparing to chase is, as others have rightly pointed out,  a different footballing world which did not have the distorting sky money benefitting the large clubs;   its over 20 years now since Blackburn won the trophy and the days of a villa, forest, derby, everton winning the title are long past - swansea qualifying for the champs league and beating bayern?   Aint gonna happen without billionaire backing.    Having said that Chase crippled the club threatening its very existance.

 

When I look at the current owners reign I find it difficult to, overall,  be anything but thankful.   They are fans and have put a decent proportion of the money they have into the club.  They are not multi-billionnaires but they have twice rescued us from near bankrupcy,  one of which was while they were at the helm.    The first was through gross financial mismanagement of the oddly now lauded Chase (another example of a non playing  

 

The use of finances has been for the benefit of the club,  with a ground and training facilities that will endure.  McNally is here to primarily manage the clubs finances and that is why he has a decent bonus,  which would have been more if the 1st team had met their objectives - that does seem like a reasonable and proportionate bonus plan. Yes he is well rewarded but the vast majority of the players (and the manager?) are paid significantly more - and it seems to me that he has at least delivered (the main?) part of his role while the squad and manager failed in their objectives (Yes Adams was only in charge 5 games,   but he started outside the relegation zone and failed in the target he was set to stay there).

 

As far as the managerial appointments all of them bar on had some merit and given the fact that the vast majority of appointments are doomed to failure their record is not so bad.  Most appointments - even the one could not agree with,  were greeted with praise from the majoirty of fans.  Given that EVERY management appointment is a risk appointing someone who has impressed is not something I can criticise.     The sole exception for me was Gunn;  with no coaching or managerial experience I will never comprehend how that came to be (even allowing for our restricted budget at that time)

 

The biggest criticism I have of these owners is the delay in decisions - they seem to be too "nice" and going back to Worthy through to Adams they have allowed clear signs that their best managerial days are missed.   Like adams they should have taken a decision earlier rather than the inertia we seem to possess.    We are back in that cycle now for me. 

 

We do still have the opportunity to gain promotion this season.   However another 4-6 games with more than say one win and player confidence will have sapped further making a resurgence harder to deliver.    For me the Reading defeat was crunch time;   we cant allow the current run to continue beyond the new year at the very latest and not have replaced adams. 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="chicken"][quote user="Big Vince"]£21 million debt prior to Lambert

[/quote]How is that the current majority shareholders fault?[quote user="Big Vince"]Erik Fugelstad, Matty Jackson. [/quote]Both solid players for us, at the time and position we were in the league etc. It''s worth noting that Jackson was so rubbish he went on to help get Wigan promoted.[quote user="Big Vince"]Zema Abbey.[/quote]Had serious injury problems that essentially more or less ended his professional career. Very easy to look back in hindsight about all of the players that didn''t make it due to injury. Notman, Gialanza etc.The fact that you fail to mention notable players who were far, far worse for us such as Brellier just goes to show your lack of knowledge.[quote user="Big Vince"]Relegation x 2 from Premier League[/quote]Vs Chases x1. And lets not forget how he masterminded that. Yes, he bought lots of land - but to do it he sold lots of very good players, against the managers wishes. Against the players wishes in some cases. He sold the loyalty of the playing squad. The expression is "tore the rug out from under our feet".As a result, those that took it into their hands to look after our club afterwards had to try and get the club and team into a shape that could handle the debts and yet still mount a challenge for promotion. All of this, at a time when our average gates were 15-18,000.So when you look at that and see that we have been promoted twice, and arguably at a time in football where the difference between the haves and have nots is far, far greater than in the early ''90''s.I have always said, and will stand by it, that Chase could not have possibly made those decisions at a worse time. Another season with that team, another top 4-6 finish, more European football, more money, with the amount of money that was coming into the premier league at that time, would have been more beneficial than selling our best players.And lets not forget, at a time when the economy wasn''t so great either.It took what? 15-20 years for that land to mature and give the club any sort of return. Colney was bought, supposedly to be the site of a new stadium. A new stadium?!! Brilliant if we were premier league, but he sold our premier league squad. It worked out ok to an extent, but no where near what was planned.So far as I have seen, and am aware, since then - all business decisions have been relatively sound. There don''t seem to have been many decisions to invest in something that ''may'' make the club money in 15-20 years.[quote user="Big Vince"]0 Cup finals

0 Cup semi-finals

0 top six finishes in PL[/quote]When you have clubs like Spurs spending £100million+ to make a dent into the top six, it is increasingly harder for other clubs to compete. You often do get one club, a Southampton, the other year it was Newcastle, who do manage to do so having spent less. But again - times have changed. We were not competing as a club with ten plus years of premier league money behind us. To be competitive in the top half of the premier league it would take several stages of development, turnover of the squad and in my mind take at least four-five seasons.It''s the unrealistic nature of some folk that seems to be behind what a lot of these moans are grounded in.The European run was the height, the peak that this club has seen, arguably one of it''s highest moments, contested by cup wins perhaps.There is so much more to football. I would say that Chase''s predecessors had more to do with the success the club achieved on the pitch. Off it he drove it to the brink of ruin.[/quote]Basically the £21m debt was their fault Chicken, or at least they can shoulder a large proportion of the blame. They had been majority shareholders for 15 years by the time they appointed Lambert. In that time they had failed over and over again to either get us to or keep us in the promised land of the Premier League through ridiculous managerial appointments. Recent history proves the external debt of the club would have been wiped out very quickly had they have appointed a capable manager. If new owners were to take over a company with a huge debt and take 15 years to clear that debt, the business would fold. Now I know that most football clubs are a slightly different beast to say businesses floated on the stock exchange, but with the appointment of Lambert it proves that the board of directors were only one good decision away from wiping out the debt. And the truth is that it appears that it took for the club to be on the verge of bankruptcy for their hands to be forced into making that good decision. Now that the debt is cleared it appears that we see a  return to the "it''s our ball" philosophy that seems to have underpinned the Joneses ownership of our football club. This disappoints me.

[TIL 1010 4,738]

Let''s remember that part of this £21 debt was caused by being forced to rebuild the old South Stand that Chase had neglected. Yes he built a new training complex at Colney but after he left the axe had to be swung and financial constraints saw the academy grind to a virtual halt for several years.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

Comparing to chase is, as others have rightly pointed out,  a different footballing world which did not have the distorting sky money benefitting the large clubs;   its over 20 years now since Blackburn won the trophy and the days of a villa, forest, derby, everton winning the title are long past - swansea qualifying for the champs league and beating bayern?   Aint gonna happen without billionaire backing.    Having said that Chase crippled the club threatening its very existance.

 

When I look at the current owners reign I find it difficult to, overall,  be anything but thankful.   They are fans and have put a decent proportion of the money they have into the club.  They are not multi-billionnaires but they have twice rescued us from near bankrupcy,  one of which was while they were at the helm.    The first was through gross financial mismanagement of the oddly now lauded Chase (another example of a non playing  

 

The use of finances has been for the benefit of the club,  with a ground and training facilities that will endure.  McNally is here to primarily manage the clubs finances and that is why he has a decent bonus,  which would have been more if the 1st team had met their objectives - that does seem like a reasonable and proportionate bonus plan. Yes he is well rewarded but the vast majority of the players (and the manager?) are paid significantly more - and it seems to me that he has at least delivered (the main?) part of his role while the squad and manager failed in their objectives (Yes Adams was only in charge 5 games,   but he started outside the relegation zone and failed in the target he was set to stay there).

 

As far as the managerial appointments all of them bar on had some merit and given the fact that the vast majority of appointments are doomed to failure their record is not so bad.  Most appointments - even the one could not agree with,  were greeted with praise from the majoirty of fans.  Given that EVERY management appointment is a risk appointing someone who has impressed is not something I can criticise.     The sole exception for me was Gunn;  with no coaching or managerial experience I will never comprehend how that came to be (even allowing for our restricted budget at that time)

 

The biggest criticism I have of these owners is the delay in decisions - they seem to be too "nice" and going back to Worthy through to Adams they have allowed clear signs that their best managerial days are missed.   Like adams they should have taken a decision earlier rather than the inertia we seem to possess.    We are back in that cycle now for me. 

 

We do still have the opportunity to gain promotion this season.   However another 4-6 games with more than say one win and player confidence will have sapped further making a resurgence harder to deliver.    For me the Reading defeat was crunch time;   we cant allow the current run to continue beyond the new year at the very latest and not have replaced adams. 

[/quote]

Zipper - I by and large agree with what you say above although i would extend your "bar one" re the managerial appointments to "bar two" - the second being the current Adams appointment. I don;t think there was any rational merit to the Adams appointment - if they were impressed by his application then they are clearly impressed by the wrong thing!

A couple of anecdotes to throw into the mix here although they probably do nothing to clarify who is behind the recent decisions to (i) retain Hughton for too long and (ii) appoint Adams to the permanent job. I''ve often been pulled up on here by certain individuals for referring to "Mcnally" as being the decision maker rather than the board and perhaps this will in part explain why.

On 18 August 2009 Norwich were playing at Brentford. We will all remember that day because it was the day Norwich appointed Paul Lambert. Arguably, in the context of where we were when we appointed him and where we were and the state of the club when he left, the best managerial appointment of our supporting lifetimes. On that day, myself and half a dozen other London based fans had taken the day off and were enjoying a boozy old pre-match pub crawl along the river from Hammersmith to Brentford. By late afternoon we had reached Chiswick Bridge where we stumbled into a largely deserted pub down a leafy backstreet. As a group of quite well oiled football fans we stood out somewhat and most gave us a wide birth but after a while a couple came into the pub and came over to talk to us. It was Delia and MWJ. A few of us had met them previously so i am not sure if they recognised us or not but in any event it was obvious we were Norwich fans and rather than hide (which I would not have blamed them for doing given the events of the previous week) they came over and had a couple of drinks with us. This for me shows everything that is good about our current ownership and why, despite the fact i have been fiercely critical about some of the decisions they have made, I cannot ever subscribe to the conspiracy theories that they are in it for themselves or anything other than fans who deep down very much want the best for the club. I think at times they have been stubborn or over sentimental but I don''t believe anything is ever done for the wrong reasons.

Anyway the point of this anecdote is that we were asking them about the Paul Lambert appointment (which i think was actually confirmed whilst we were in the pub) and they were very honest about it all and said that they had had nothing to do with it really. They had brought in Mcnally in the summer (incidentally they said Mcnally was recommended to them by Martin O''Neill) and DM had said to them that he thought Lambert was the man so they had left him to it. They said they not been involved with interviews, i think they said they''d not met Lambert yet and in fact it was us who had to tell them that his appointment was now confirmed. They both seemed somewhat brow beaten by the Gunn saga of the preceding weeks but seemed genuinely happy to have Mcnally on board so as to enable them to take more of a back seat on football matters.

Fast forward a couple of years, I was at a supporters lunch in Delia''s after a home game. i think it was early in our premier league campaign and David Mcnally came and sat at our table. We asked him about whether he was concerned Lambert would be poached and about the rumours a few months beforehand that Lambert had been interested in moving to Burnley. he just said that if Lambert ever left he would go and get someone better and said he always had a Plan B lined up. Whilst he wouldn''t say who that was, later in the conversation he mentioned how he''d always been impressed by Chris Hughton. I was therefore, not in the least surprised when in the wake of Lambert leaving, Hughton appeared amongst the list of favourites for our job.

What point am i trying to make in all of this? Well I suppose that as well as the point that I do believe our current owners are fundamentally decent people, (even if they do sometimes get it wrong) the above encounters, rightly or wrongly, gave me the firm impression that when it came to managerial appointments during that period Mcnally was the key man at the club. he found the candidate he thought best, made recommendations to the board and they pretty much rubberstamped his recommendations when appointing Lambert and Hughton. Thats how most big companies with CEO''s and board work. What is therefore of interest now is that the whole Hughton departure and appointment of Adams have a very different feel about them and certainly one that is far more reminiscent of the pre-McNally era (i.e. we apparently didn''t have a plan B). It would therefore be absolutely fascinating to know if, how or why the boardroom dynamic has changed. Has Bowkett assumed a more prominant role? Has Mcnally just lost his edge after a good run in the job? Have Delia and MWJ and the board as a whole decided to be more involved again in these types of decision following the decision to delay sacking Hughton? Sadly i suspect we won;t get these answers unless we manage to bump into our owners in a quiet pub in the near future! If we do, however, I guarantee they will at least talk to you and have a discussion on the subject which is probably more than you would get at 95% of clubs.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

Or indeed has nothing changed and our majority shareholders and Foulger have just continued to be guided by the CEO over the managerial appointment?

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]Let''s remember that part of this £21 debt was caused by being forced to rebuild the old South Stand that Chase had neglected. Yes he built a new training complex at Colney but after he left the axe had to be swung and financial constraints saw the academy grind to a virtual halt for several years.[/quote]That''s tugging at straws abit Tilly. The owners were not forced to rebuild the South Stand because of Robert Chase''s neglect of it. They had to rebuild it because is was old and no longer fit for purpose. The asbestos roof was a health hazard, the walk ways a death trap and the stairs that led you up to the seating area at the back of the stand always left me with a sense of dread as I climbed them as an 8 year old lad. The fact the stand had to be replaced was not the fault of Robert Chase, Delia Smith or any previous owner or chairman of Norwich City. It was an old stand and had to be brought up to date with modern health and safety laws.

[TIL 1010 4,738]

[quote user="Iwans Big Toe"][quote user="TIL 1010"]Let''s remember that part of this £21 debt was caused by being forced to rebuild the old South Stand that Chase had neglected. Yes he built a new training complex at Colney but after he left the axe had to be swung and financial constraints saw the academy grind to a virtual halt for several years.[/quote]

That''s tugging at straws abit Tilly. The owners were not forced to rebuild the South Stand because of Robert Chase''s neglect of it. They had to rebuild it because is was old and no longer fit for purpose. The asbestos roof was a health hazard, the walk ways a death trap and the stairs that led you up to the seating area at the back of the stand always left me with a sense of dread as I climbed them as an 8 year old lad. The fact the stand had to be replaced was not the fault of Robert Chase, Delia Smith or any previous owner or chairman of Norwich City. It was an old stand and had to be brought up to date with modern health and safety laws.



[/quote]

Neglect was allowing it to fall into the state outlined by you which happened mainly under the Chase watch or are you saying it suddenly all happened after he left ? As you rightly say it had to be replaced and that fell to Delia & Co. as the Football Licensing Authority were about to close sections of it so part of the debt of £21 million you are laying at Delia''s door was completely beyond her control and not avoidable.

[Bury Green 0]

Consider how Honest Bob''s property dealings benefitted the club, when ever he gets discussed it seems to me that many are quick to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Under his tenure we rebuilt the Barclay, did two corner infills, the City Stand, acquired land around the ground and of course Colney. The value to the club of that basic raw ingredient in any balance sheet mustn''t be underestimated, after all there never going to be any more of it made.

The City Stand always seemed to be a massive opportunity lost, it was always way too small, of course there are always the questions about how the old main stand burned down and the tendering process the club engaged with for its rebuild. Perhaps any of you with a good enough memory could put a bit of flesh on the bones of that chapter?

Subsequently we''ve built the hotel, the Jarrold and Community infill, oh yes, the hotel. What a wonderful thing it is, perched manfully over the stadium prohibiting any possible chance of actually closing the ground in with a stand, marvellous just marvellous.

Then there''s the car park land behind the Jarrold, from memory this got binned out to Broadland Housing back in 2009 for a quick deal?

Yes Honest Bob did some deeply dubious things but I''d also counter with his property acquisitions actually helped keep the club alive or thereabouts.

"After a long and exhaustive tendering process the club are delighted to continue their relationship with RG Carter"

Words from the legendary Doomcaster if I recall it correctly, not they''d bought a load of shares at the share issue mind you.

[TIL 1010 4,738]

The City Stand was built as a result of a fire with insurance money which happened under Sir Arthur not Chase.

The Barclay and River End were largely financed with money provided by the Football Trust.

 

[Bury Green 0]

He became Chairman in 1985 I think, I just seem to recall it being rebuilt in the 1985-6 promotion campaign?