Unnecessary transfer activity

A new blog offering commentary on all things Norwich City FC from a proud "citizen journalist". I will criticise or praise our team without fear or favour. And abuse nurses if I'm in the mood because I am that sort of person.

Friday, August 25, 2006

Whomp that sucker!

The usual "experts" have been all over the media blathering about the unacceptabilty of Ben Thatcher's "tackle" the other night. And quite right too. Some younger readers may be confused, though, by the strange silence of champion "rent-a-quote" Graham Kelly on this issue. We greybeards who remember his evidence in the Gary Blissett case aren't though.

I've never had much time for the charming Stuart Pearce - but doesn't he deserve a grammy for this morning's spectacular change of tune? A thing of brazen beauty. Of course Mr Pearce didn't have the benefit of a TV replay - but then neither did fellow manager Harry Redknapp:

"I know that the referee has taken action by booking Thatcher, but the FA have got to look at the incident. When I saw Thatcher running towards Mendes, I knew exactly what was going to happen five seconds before it did.

"I would have bet my life on it. How can it be a yellow and not be a red card? Do you have to kill somebody these days to get a red card?"

http://www.mcfc.co.uk/default.sps?pageid=115&pagegid=%7BAA113D0F%2DB095%2D4F9A%2D86F3%2D058F81E5ECFB%7D&newsid=357685&siteid=&pageno=&newscategory=&frommonth=6&fromyear=2006&tomonth=8&toyear=2006


Of course Pearce, like Thatcher, has form. I'm sure we all remember his calm and sportsmanlike response to this incident and can understand the context of his remarks the other evening:

"Tiatto foolishly decided to take the law into his own hands when Nedergaard blocked his run down the right flank. The little Australian, he of suspect temperament, with eight yellow cards to his name already this season, caught the Dane on the back of the head with a flying elbow and simply had to go..."


Sunday, August 13, 2006

A welcome return

Not only has the new style of football played by the club been a breath of fresh air - the huge increase in the standard of reporting of matters Norwich City by Archant is also hugely refreshing.

David Cuffley was on the ball with his critique of Mr Doncaster's description of the club finances - and his question as to what the £2 million infrastructure costs were was right on the money. Equally interesting is the question he didn't ask - "to whom was that £2 million paid". For all the supposed openness at Carrow Road I bet we never get the answer to either of those questions.

Time for a change?

I have called before for a change of Chief Executive - specifically wanting one from an accountancy background - and this week's Neil Doncaster column in the EDP provides further me with further cause for concern.

In respect of the Jarrold stand Mr Doncaster now says:

"After the securitisation (which paid for the Jarrold Stand, as well as paying off short-term debt and covering our losses for the year)..."

http://www.canaries.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/FirstNewsDetail/0,,10355~879749,00.html?

This is worrying because he previously thought we were paying for it in an entirely different fashion:

"The cost of building The Jarrold Stand and infill will be met through revenues generated by development of other land we own in and around Carrow Road, including residential development on land behind the Norwich and Peterborough Stand and the building of a new four-star hotel in the corner between the Barclay Stand and The Jarrold Stand."

http://www.canaries.premiumtv.co.uk/page/SouthStandDetail/0,,10355~346251,00.html

So why the change?

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Show us the money!

The article by Neil Doncaster in today's EDP raises more questions than it answers. By his own account "the club's cash balances were only £580,000 better off after our Premier League season than before". It is difficult to be precise about this, of course, because as always, Mr Doncaster is being more opaque than he at first appears.

Since then we have sold Thomas Helveg for £135,000, Mattias Jonson for £650,000, Damien Francis for £1.5 million and Dean Ashton £7.25 million (receiving - it appears from Mr Doncaster says - in excess of £5.75 million at that time). We have also received two Premiership parachute payments in excess of £6 million each.

Since then we have bought Jurgen Colin for £250,000, Andy Hughes for £500,000, Dickson Etuhu for £450,000, Carl Robinson for £50,000, Robert Earnshaw for £3.5 million and now Lee Croft for £600,000. And built a new stand for £3.2 million.

That is a still huge imbalance between incomings and outgoings - and the explanation seems to be a "player wage bill massively higher than in our promotion season of 2003/2004" - in other words the club is making a massive operating loss week after week. So what happens next year when there is no £6 million from Sky to cover it?

And, well as we played the other night the squad today is certainly no better than it was three years ago despite the fact that their wages are "massively higher"- evidence , once again, that the board's policy of allowing the manager to spend the player budget entirely as "he sees fit" is unwise?

And does securitising one year's losses over a very long-term really make sound financial sense?