Very criticial of the Pozzo and how they've run our club.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ar...lumnists/columnist-1020688/Martin-Samuel.html Not sure what to think really as he has some good points such as saying its dangerous to rely on such a loan system as players are unproven and unconnected to the club or even to the style of football required BUT its a little harsh to dimiss the venture as a failed project this early. Also we have hardly filled the whole team with these new players and I suspect on Saturday we'll see Hall/Doyley play instead of Cassetti and Neuton so really we'll only be playing the 3 that have started almost every game. Actually I think we've played more of the "old" squad that I though we might - plus Eustace and McGinn have been injured.
In reality, borrowed or bought, all new players at any club are unproven and unconnected to the club - in fact very few in the game are connected in the way the likes of Doyley is to Watford. As to the style of football, the current crop of loanees in our 'gang of 42' (interesting that no reference has been made to the numbers who have gone out on loan) have been signed given their likely familiarity with the system Zola employs. There simply is no other way to assess their suitability than to see them perform in 'real Championship games' - and playing them all at once would be a recipe for complete disaster. So, naturally, it will take time - at least the journalist has the good grace to admit that. But he's only a journalist - he has no right to state unequivocally that what Watford are doing should not be allowed to happen. I don't really know anything of his 'history' - perhaps he is simply another of those legions who, for reasons best known to themselves, simply begrudge smaller clubs like ours the opportunity for success and deride them at every opportunity? To borrow from his own headline "Why The Daily Mail is a snapshot of all that's wrong with the modern newspaper".
Good point BB - I doubt the likes of Garner/Yeates and Dickinson care too much about the club itself or us fans... People need to get away from the fact there aren't too many Doyley type players around British or otherwise.
I think the whole article smacks of poor journalism. He seems to have looked at the table and our squad list and has used those as a guide. He has not seen that we have only had one off/bad day (derby) and we were unlucky not to get a point against Ipswich and Bolton. The only problem I see is if the loan players who arent playing or arent good enough dont get sent back, Belleck for instance. We dont want to be a daycare centre for them, and with Deeney and Iwelumo I cant see him getting a place.
I tend to agree with most of the article - will there ever be another local lad blooded from the Academy after 50? I doubt it. Will Watford ever sign another player? Maybe not - unless the FA close the loophole on overseas loans. There are likely to be less and less UK players in the squad in the future. As a community based club we promoted our Academy and created good, rounded individuals, a number of which turned proffesional. We used the loan market and assisted a number of very talanted UK footballers to come through among them: Foster - Johnson - Cleverley - Lansbury etc None of that is likely to happen in the future. I am trying to feel a connection with the club in the same way I used to but it is difficult. I grew up with the Jim Bosner ownership but my formative years were with Elton & Graham - Graham Taylor actually had a part in the way I live my life, he influenced me and I believe made me grow to be the man I am now. Obviously only in part but nevertheless he was an important Peer to respect and look up to. The current regime does not, on the face of it, have much to aspire to - even if as is likely we become successful in the coming years. I live in hope that they succeed in changing my mind (and that all that is going on at present is short termism to get us through) but I must be honest, I am quite depressed about what has happened to our local community club and I believe others are too.
The matter that he has skated over quite comfortably is just what Baz had done to us. It is open to guesswork just how bad things were when the Pozzos took over, but we may be lucky to have owners who do at least have a connection with football.
Chris - We've already had the 51st this season and we will sign players because some of these loan signings are viewed as potential pernament transfers IF good enough ofcourse.
I actually agree with most of the article. If Watford had not been being driven into liquidation I would not have chosen this model. Had someone else come along who could have got rid of Baz and had enough money to fund our development of young players , sell a player or two each year and occasionally buy in a "Danny Graham" and to have kept Sean Dyche I would have voted for that over what we have got. I think the only thing the Mail has got seriously wrong is they think the supporters have high expectations for the future whereas I think most of us are fairly nervous. Still Mr Right did not come calling so going with what we have is what I will support.
That is fair enough OFH and certainly the Pozzos are footballing people. I agree that Baz was not a good owner as well but whilst I work in comerce it is amasing how easy it is for situations to be manipulated and I do wonder whether the Bond holders were going to get more from the Pozzos and created a financial situation that Baz reacted immaturely to and he stopped paying etc. because there was no shortage of transfer funds coming in etc. I wonder how much was there a PR campaign created? I know, it's only my speculation and no other person will think I'm sane. But I'm allowed my opinion even if I'm in a minority of one!
They are unlikely to be signed by Watford - more likely by Udinese - unless of course the tax benefits are more useful in another country........
This is the Daily Fail so haven't even bothered reading it, but can imagine what it says, and personally think it is lazy reporting. I am pretty confident in saying that the large amount of loanees are a short-term solution, to get us challenging. Maybe not this season, but the idea will be to find which ones of these fit into our system, and play the we want them to, and send the rest back. As for long term, I still see out Academy playing a huge part in Watford Football Club. The only difference is that the local talent will be joined by a large number of foreign youth. Whoever we think can progress to the first team will, who won't make the grade will be released (or loaned to a new Pozzo 'family' member). Maybe we will have less youngster sjump ship to a larger club if we are progessing up the league structure,a nd play attractive, technical football. If we do get promoted and then become established in the Prem, unless Udinese continue to get Champions League football, then I would suggest we will become the largest income for the Pozzos, and more focus on developing our own players!
I am sure that we did the whole Baz thing to death on here, but there are a whole series of clues, if not facts, as to what he was up to. Without going through it all again, my belief now from my business experiences, is that he was intent on taking out far more than he left in, and it was the terms of the bond that reeled him in. I think that we will all have to keep guessing as to what did go on in those last few weeks of his reign as I don't think that the new owners will tell us. I hope that a question or two will be asked at the Fans Forum and something will be said to put the issue to bed now. The Pozzos have made a sizeable investment in the club which they will hope to see a return on in due course. It remains to be seen how quickly they want that return.
I take on board all the points refuting the article, made in particular by BB, but like Chris 13 and Leo I find this guy echoes my concerns. I am still very uneasy about the whole project. I am desperately hoping to be proved wrong.
Fine, I've read it, still have the same opinon... from Martin Samuel, who I never rated when he was a journalist for the Sun, writing for the newspaper-equivalent of TalkSport. As a West Ham fan, I wouldn't be surprised if he has some ill-feeling towards Duxbury and Nani, and generally there is a bias in his writing. Personally, I just think it is jumping the gun far too early on something that is a long-term project - yes, I will use the term project! It just seems to be a dig at us. Yes I may be worried if they start 11 of these loans in a match, but that simply isn't going to happen - it seems Zola realises there needs to be a mix of both! Edit: I may start getting worried if they change our colours and nickanme...
So you admit to buying them? Personally, I get my copies from neighbours - and keep them next to my toilet.
Oh it's Martin Samuels.... he has history. Not a very good sports writer imho, quite poor really. And the Daily Mail? Well they have history too... been slagging us ever since EJ gave GT the nod over the best mate of another not very talented sportwriter of theirs (a certain Jeff Powell) by the name of Bobby Moore. Got more chance of me making a donation to Abu Hamzas human rights lawyers than taking anything Samuels or the daily mail sports pages print on Watford seriously.
If the writer wanted an interesting story why did he not write about Brendon Rodgers and his way of making things taking time to start working and the clubs he has been with did not have the amount of money Liverpool have. Or is he being bias for the London teams.
