Unnecessary transfer activity

2007-08-26T12:42:00.000-07:00

Norwich City's support

2006-12-19T16:45:00.000-08:00

"It's loyal and steadfast. It's not always noisy, but it's always there." Unless it's too busy working for a pro-war anti-muslim pornographer, of course. Can we expect to hear in the coming weeks how Worthington's ventures into the transfer market were sabotaged by the Duke of Edinburgh and some shadowy figures from the British secret services?

I don't want to say "I told you so" but...

2006-12-01T01:33:00.000-08:00

According to Clancy

"the board believed that it should back the judgement of former manager Nigel Worthington and did so, sanctioning player wages during 2005/6 which were only marginally lower than during our year in the Premier League".

As I may have said more than once - what more evidence do the board need that this policy

"We allocate the amount to be spent by the manager as he sees fit. Whether he chooses to spend it on one or six players, on free transfers or wages or loans is really down to his judgment. It is not the board's place to tell the manager who to buy and we would never dream of doing that."

is fatally flawed?

Granty is streets ahead of his predecessor as a manager but never again should the club jeopardise its future by failing to at least question the judgement of an ex-footballer.

Good old-fashioned common sense (part 5)

2006-12-01T00:45:00.000-08:00

According to Shaun O'Hara: "Failure to win promotion at the end of 2006/7 will reduce our income by a minimum of £7m. While the club remains in the Championship it will be necessary to generate surplus funds for future players by selling assets."

So was it really that wise to structure the Green and MacKenzie transfer deals so that the vast bulk of the money was only payable AFTER the end of 2006/7? Apparently it was :“I wouldn't accept that there's any weakness in any of the deals that have been done" says Neil Doncaster. I wonder who negotiated the deals then?

More comment on the accounts to come next week.

Taking the piss

2006-11-26T06:16:00.000-08:00

In the EDP of 14th November we were told:

"Dickson Etuhu has promised City fans there will be no repeat of his last East Anglian derby performance when the biannual clash of the cross-border rivals takes place this weekend "

and

"Ipswich is the big one," said Etuhu. "On a personal level I can't wait to win that game because the last game I played against them I was absolutely awful."

and

"But that game is gone now. It's Ipswich we're concentrating on now - and you can put money on me to score."

On the 15th November Gary Doherty explained:

“It was unfortunate that the Stoke game came in between but I think there were a few factors why we didn't perform that day that have been ironed out.”

and

"With City up to ninth in the Championship table, Doherty feels they can do more than grind out 1-0 wins.

He said: “Results breed confidence and sooner or later, someone's going to get a good pasting.”"

and

“It may be a good time to play them,” he said. “They've lost their last two games so if we can go there, put them under a bit of pressure and maybe get an early goal, that would quieten the crowd.”

Of course I could quote hundreds of examples from the last couple of seasons of our players talking big in the press and then taking the piss out of the paying supporters once they get on the pitch. So is it really that surprising that the fans are no longer prepared to give unqualified support to players who are not willing to walk the walk.

Granty is working with the squad that Worthington built and (with one or two honourable exceptions) it is characterised by gutlessness, indolence and arrogance. Time to get rid.

What's another £400,000 between friends?

2006-11-26T06:03:00.000-08:00

Way back in January 2005 we were informed on http://www.canaries.premiumtv.co.uk - when discussing the subject of record transfer fees:

"That particular honour is now held firmly by new striker Dean Ashton, who cost the Canaries £3m when he completed his move from Crewe on Monday. "

Then back in August of this year Neil Doncaster when discussing the Ashton transfer said that regarding the £3m figure "the reality is, as is so often the case, far removed from the perception" and that "we actually paid £4.5m in total for Dean". Which is very odd. Why on earth did a club that "suffers at times from a desire to be as transparent as possible for the benefit of supporters" publish a transfer figure that was so "far removed" from the reality in the first place?

And, of course, it gets odder still, as Doncaster has now revealed that yet another £400,000 is to be paid to Crewe. Will it never end?

The ever-expanding transfer fee

2006-11-23T03:06:00.000-08:00

So how much did will we end up paying for Dean Ashton? Back in the heady days of summer Clancy informed us that "we actually paid £4.5m in total for Dean" not, you will note, "will have paid". So presumably the £400,000 that will be paying to Crewe in January is on top of that?

For years the reason that the club is not "awash with cash" was blamed on Chase. I wonder if the "Ashton cost us more than you thought" excuse will last as long?

Clancy may be in for a shock in January though - Granty is a lot brighter than some of the previous incumbents at Carrow Road and is well capable of subtracting £1.75 million and £400,000 from £3.5 million, and then adding back the MacKenzie and Green fees and coming up with a nice big transfer budget. Will Clancy "be as transparent as possible" with him and admit that the reason there is no money is because the finances are out of control?

The perceptions and the reality

2006-11-04T15:41:00.000-08:00

Back in early August Neil "The Chief" (Wiggum?) Doncaster used his EDP column to "set the record straight" on the mistaken perception "that the club should be awash with cash". One of the reasons he gave for this "huge gap between perception and reality" was that we actually paid much more for Dean Ashton than anyone thought. Astonishingly, given the club's commitment to openness Mr Doncaster failed to mention a far more significant reason why the club was unable to "compete on equal terms with the likes of Birmingham City and West Brom" - the reason being that much of the transfer fee receivable from West Ham in respect of the transfer of Dean Ashton had not been paid. And, as we now know, it still hasn't.

In the summer Nigel Worthington was pilloried for his lack of transfer activity. I wonder why the Chief Executive of a club that "suffers at times from a desire to be as transparent as possible" failed to mention that the manager's inactivity was due not to dilatoriness but due to the fact that his transfer budget was in West Ham United FC's bank account? Mysterious omission isn't it?

West Ham United, a club that made an operating profit of £13.4 million in the year ending 31st May, and which is described by their chairman as being in a strong financial position, have signed nine players since the end of last season. We have signed two. But, to be fair, they did have the use of our transfer budget as well as their own.

Back in May our newest board member wrote of the Ashton transfer saga "with the benefit of hindsight, it would perhaps have been better to cash-in and reinvest last summer". Curiously he failed to mention that the deal eventually struck was structured in such a way that we were unable to re-invest the following summer either - unlike "cash-rich" West Ham who really filled their boots.

I wonder if Clancy will use his EDP column to let us know which bright spark negotiated the Ashton transfer deal with West Ham? Somehow I doubt it. Or failing that I wonder if he will tell us if, had Ashton signed for Wigan or Manchester City, much of the transfer fee would still be outstanding more than nine months after the event. I doubt that too.

On an unrelated personal note I am forswearing alcohol and undertaking a strict physical fitness regime. That way I hope to live long enough to see the transfer fee for Rob Green paid in full.

Isn't the answer obvious?

2006-09-25T03:29:00.000-07:00

Remember this?

“I will stand up and be counted and take the flak that comes,” he said. “The one thing I want the players to do over the next fortnight is look in the dictionary and see what the word honest means, because they seem to have forgotten what that means, ie for themselves, for me and, most important of all, the football club and the supporters who pay hard-earned money, travel the width and breadth of the country to support them and they throw that performance and the performance against QPR two weeks ago back in their faces."

Sounds a bit like this doesn't it?

"Worthington again pointed the finger at his players, as he had done after the accusing them of lacking desire and passion, but admitted the buck stopped with him.“I don't ask for a lot from the players but I do ask for passion and desire, and we didn't show that in abundance,” said Worthington.“But that comes from me and I have got to deal with it and make sure we sort it out.“There are no excuses. We've got some good players here but today the performance levels were not good enough.”And although three Championship managers lost their jobs last week, Worthington insists he does not feel under any pressure.“I don't feel any pressure, I feel disappointed for the supporters who have travelled a long way, paid good money, given up a lot of time to see that,” he said.“What I am disappointed with is the performance level. I can deal with all the other bits and bobs, that is part of the job nowadays.“If you don't want to be in it get out. I want to be in it, I enjoy it. I have said before I love the job and certainly from my point of view it won't be from the lack of trying."

Two matches, nearly 11 months apart, yet nothing has changed, as even the manager (but apparently not the board) can see. And really is the problem actually the players? Of the team that started on that grim November day at Wolverhampton only three (Doherty, Colin and McVeigh) started on Saturday at Plymouth. And it's interesting to note that the player singled out for especial criticism after Wolves - Adam Drury - was unavailable on Saturday - as was the more normal target of the manager's ire - Darren Huckerby.

A fortune spent, almost an entire new team, a new coach, yet still the same old problems remain. Everyone else has long since worked out what the answer is - how long before the Stowmarket property developers get it?

2006-09-20T03:21:00.000-07:00

So it's come to this

2006-09-19T04:55:00.000-07:00

At last some honesty comes out of Norwich City: Nigel Worthington has been telling it like it is. We are tonight visiting a club that (even ignoring their points deduction) are in the bottom half of League One. Any team with pretensions to promotion to the Premier League would approach this game with a view to playing them off the pitch - particularly as the pitch is "a lovely pitch to play on" according to Mr Worthington. Not us. We are going there to "battle and compete" says Nigel. Which gives us great insight into how he views the squad he has spent millions assembling.

And it does seem that someone has been feeding truth serum to Mr Worthington. Most people would, I think, be inclined to agree with Chris Lakey's assessment of the last week as "disastrous". Not so Mr Worthington who thinks "we had an average week by our standards". Let's recap that "average" week so that we can better understand what the manager's view of our current "standards" is:

We started off by getting thrashed at Coventry - a team so desperate in the striking department that they actually paid money for Leon "he scored against the scum, that's all he's ever done" MacKenzie. And we even had the assistance of a referee who failed to send off Shackell in the first minute and then booked a Coventry player rather than award a clear penalty. Mr Worthington added to the success of that day by picking an unfit player who duly exacerbated his injury and is now out for a month.

We followed it up by throwing away a two-goal lead at Southend, a team with no pretensions whatsoever to be challengers in this league.

And we rounded things off in style at "Fortress" Carrow Road stumbling to defeat against a very moderate Palace side. It says a lot for our standards that our keeper was the man of the match and that we had no shots on target.

Most teams with eyes on the play-offs would look at the three fixtures we had and consider 5 points to be the sort of return to expect in an "average" week. It says a lot for the standards that Nigel Worthington has set that he regards one point as "average".

At the end of last season in excess of 10% of season ticket holders failed to renew. How much higher will that figure be this time if this is what our "average" weeks are like?

Not good enough.

Whomp that sucker!

2006-08-25T10:21:00.000-07:00

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..."

A welcome return

2006-08-13T06:39:00.000-07:00

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?

2006-08-13T06:30:00.000-07:00

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?

Show us the money!

2006-08-10T00:19:00.000-07:00

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?

I'll fight against this until the day I die

2006-07-30T13:55:00.000-07:00

Another dream I have,' says Delia, 'is inspired by Real Madrid, who have a chapel at their ground where staff and supporters can go to Mass. In this country it would have to be a non-denominational chapel. But I don't see why not.'

Good old-fashioned common sense (part 4)

2006-06-16T03:13:00.000-07:00

I have remained from commenting further on last season, largely because I didn't want to add to the misery it induced in me. But one thing concerns me so much that I feel impelled to offer my thoughts:

In January "Neil Doncaster" told us "The cash to sign Robinson has been raised through loans to the Club from Directors Delia Smith, Michael Wynn Jones and Michael Foulger, for which we are very grateful. The loans cover the full cost of the player's wages this season and the transfer fee."

That's right - in January 2006 a club which had organised two successful share offers, seen attendances increase year on year, and reaped the financial benefits of a season in the top flight was in the position of borrowing the nominal transfer fee for Robinson, and, indeed borrowing the wages of just one extra employee.

How did we find ourselves in this parlous state? I'm not sure - but I do hope the board will consider a couple of suggestions that I have to make.

Firstly, Mr "Doncaster" has set out the board's policy (or lack thereof) in relation to transfers:

"We allocate the amount to be spent by the manager as he sees fit. Whether he chooses to spend it on one or six players, on free transfers or wages or loans is really down to his judgment. It is not the board's place to tell the manager who to buy and we would never dream of doing that."

I suggest that the manager's many blunders over the past 2 years show that this policy is flawed and that the board should scrutinise not only each individual transfer, but also consider whether the huge volume of transfers he undertakes is consistent with what Mr "Doncaster" says is the board's belief in "stability and continuity".

Secondly, it would appear that the club had simply allocated too much money to the manager, regardless of whether he was spending it wisely or not. Mr Doncaster is a lawyer. If the Chief Executive of the club had been an accountant I wonder if the same situation would have arisen? I suggest that the board consider appointing a Chief Executive from a financial background, and leave Mr Doncaster to handle other matters - notably the contract negotiations with which he deals so well.

Good old-fashioned common sense (part 3)

2006-04-20T04:00:00.000-07:00

"Neil Doncaster" writes:

"We therefore have an average away support of 1,552 in comparison to an average of only 1,082 visiting Carrow Road. And taking into account that, along with Plymouth Argyle and Cardiff City, we are a geographically isolated club with much further to travel than most other clubs, these are seriously impressive figures."

Mr "Doncaster" is clearly unaware that the journey from, say, Preston to Norwich, is the same distance as the journey from, er, Preston to Norwich. Surely anyone with a bit of "good old-fashioned common sense" could work that out? But then anyone with a bit of "good old-fashioned common sense" should also be able to spot that replacing a team of talented, motivated championship-winners who love the club with a bunch of expensive and disinterested journeymen is not necessarily a strategy for success.

Why don't the board listen to the manager?

2006-04-10T03:09:00.000-07:00

Nigel Worthington talks a lot of sense, yet Delia and her chums don't take any notice of him. Back in September he told the Pink 'Un "Palace were as good as buried the Christmas that they went up with us, but they went on a tremendous run."
Remind me again, Nigel, just what was it that the Palace board did in December 2003 that ours didn't do in December 2005?

Nigel Worthington tells it as it is

2006-04-10T03:04:00.000-07:00

Said Nigel Worthington of the Preston debacle "It was one of our better away performances". This remark has attracted a lot of criticism - but in this case the manager is speaking the truth. A performance where we created nothing, had no meaningful strikes on goal, scored two own-goals and where most of the players were not interested does indeed rank as one of our better away performances - under this manager anyway. I wonder why he is still in a job?

2006-04-06T10:03:00.000-07:00

David Williams speaks!

2006-04-06T05:47:00.000-07:00

"I am sure Seb will tell you that his favoured position is through the middle," said David.
"However I have asked him to a job for us in a wide position on a number of occasions and to be fair to him he has always done a solid job for the team.
"I believe he is the fittest player in the group with exceptional stamina, his work-rate is very high and he has good pace, and he puts all these to good effect during the game."

All sounds grimly familiar doesn't it? Williams for manager? No thanks!

Why I won't be joining the march

2006-03-29T23:50:00.000-08:00

Whilst I would like Nigel Worthington to depart our football club as soon as possible I won't be joining the march on Saturday. One reason is that not being a pimply teenager desperate to get my picture on "Look East" I really wouldn't fit in. But mainly it is because the behaviour of the "Worthy out" mob is really no more rational than the "keep the faithers'". The latter refuse to offer any sensible explanation as to why the manager should stay, the former's view of the state of the football club is driven by the last result. Bad result at Palace - PROTEST! Good results ( albeit from patchy performances) against Leeds and Sheffield - NO PROTEST! Bad result at Burnley - PROTEST!

All very odd really because even when we were picking up those 7 points the same old problems were there for all to see. Players playing (struggling) out of position, our only tactic hoofing the ball towards a forward who left the club 2 years ago, no encouragement of youth, the transfer merry go-round spinning as merrily as ever, and so on and so on. No doubt a one goal defeat against Leicester and the clamour will increase, a one goal win and all will go silent until after the thrashing at Preston. But win lose or draw on Saturday it's all irrelevant - the truth is that with the current manager pursuing his current policies we are likelier to go down next season than up.

Please note: any protesters wearing nurses' uniforms should be singled out for special abuse.

Doherty speaks

2006-03-27T04:34:00.000-08:00

Gary Doherty tells the EDP: “Bearing in mind the sort of form we had been in.................................. we should have come away with all three points".

Er Gary - the sort of form we had been in was "no away wins this year" so actually if we had come away with three points it would have been a huge shock.

And another thing “The lack of consistency this season has been very disappointing,” said the big defender. Actually we have been very consistent Gary. Week after week of poor performances punctuated by the occasional bright spot (Southampton, Sheffield United, about 35 minutes at Leeds). We aren't an inconsistent but good side, we are a poor side which very occasionally comes up against a team whose style of play suits us.

(nb: as far as I know the "Doc" is not a nurse so I can get away with posting this)

Good old-fashioned common sense (part 2)

2006-03-26T04:47:00.000-08:00

We are often told that Norwich City have "limited resources". So having lavished in excess of three million pounds of our money on goal-machine Rob Earnshaw we might have expected our tactics to be altered to accomodate his playing style.
Not so. In our "must-win" game at Burnley Earnshaw (102 league goals in 233 appearances) was dropped so that we could accomodate elderly left-back Simon Charlton (5 goals in 476 appearances) in midfield. With tactics like that how on earth did we manage to lose to a side with no wins in their previous 6 games, and no goals in their previous 4?

Good old-fashioned common sense. You really can't beat it.

Please note that this post should not in any way be construed as an attack on the nursing profession.

The board

2006-03-25T02:55:00.000-08:00

So after the Leeds game it was Munby glad-handing the fans on the way out. Last night it was Michael looking glum sending us on our way. What chance it's Barry Skipper's turn next? Only in our dreams I'm afraid.

Please note that this post should not in any way be construed as an attack on the nursing profession.

You are the manager

2006-03-25T02:48:00.000-08:00

So then. Two goals down in a game we had to win to keep our slim play-off hopes alive what do you do?

a) Go for broke - throw the Doc forward (after all he's the ideal target for our hoof ball tactics) and go three at the back? Or
b) Nothing. Just cower at the back of the dugout and settle for 0-2?

Unsurprisingly we went for option b. Still, look on the bright side, Burnely is a nice trip out and we'll be back next year.

Please note that this post should not in any way be construed as an attack on the nursing profession.

2006-03-25T01:26:00.000-08:00