For full articles visit www.theswanseaway.co.uk Is anyone else growing increasingly tired of the constant speculation surrounding Michael Laudrup, which seems to be mainly driven by the Evening Post? The problem is that given almost all of the quotes we are reading are invariably taken out of context, it's hard to actually discern what the hell is going on at the Liberty. At the moment I'm choosing to stay positive. If you ask any manager "what would happen if you don't get sufficient funds to invest in the squad?" they're likely to respond with something akin to "well if that was the case, I'd have to assess the situation and see what the best options are", and in truth that's the only quote which seems to have driven the current wave of conjecture regarding Laudrup's transfer kitty this summer. I thought an interesting exercise would be to strip away all of the journalism surrounding the quotes, and see what we're left with. Who knows, maybe we're worried about nothing. Here are as many as I could find: Laudrup's agent - Bayram Tutumlu; Huw Jenkins: Before... Huw had previously gone on a charm offensive; Michael Laudrup From the BBC; From Skysports; So, what are we looking at here? It all seems centred around the transfer budget, and it appears that assurances were given when Laudrup signed his new contract that he'd be given ample funds to improve the squad. If there was a number mentioned, you'd have to hope the Swans honour that (and I have no doubt they would) whereas if there wasn't, it's possibly been a case where the two parties have distinctly different perceptions of "ample funds". One thing bothers me with this story though - who exactly is suggesting the Swans aren't willing to stump up in the transfer market this summer? There's been the vague rumour that the Swans are interested in Pierre Emerick-Aubameyang, but that we won't (or can't) meet the asking price, but in truth I'm still not comfortable about signing a £10 or £11million pound striker - more for the contract demands that would surely come with such a player. No doubt the board will play hard-ball, but you'd be hard pushed to find an £11million pound striker who'll accept less than £40kpw. Aside from that, there's been no indication the board have reneged on any kind of agreed transfer fund, and given that the transfer window is closed and Laudrup is currently on holiday it seems hard to fathom just why there is a constant stream of speculation coming out of SA1. I'll reserve judgement for now, but if it turns out this was just newspaper speculation it'll have severely marred the relationship between the local rag and the club, and it may be that we see reduced press access as a result. That may not be a bad thing to be honest. Personally, while I'm a sucker for a good quote I still don't think there's anything in this. Whatever the issue is, I find it very hard to believe that it can't be resolved in an amicable manner, and that Laudrup will be backed in the transfer market as well as the club can afford, without jeopardising it's financial footing one iota. And that's the way it should be.
Why doesn't the EP say fcuk all until they actually can report about something other than speculation ? The latest http://www.southwales-eveningpost.c...a-City-talks/story-19123609-detail/story.html (Just to get SA9 going again )
I could understand if these reports were coming out towards the end of the window and we had bought no one, but it really seems like EP are jumping the gun.
Good Post So, what are we looking at here? It all seems centred around the transfer budget, and it appears that assurances were given when Laudrup signed his new contract that he'd be given ample funds to improve the squad. If there was a number mentioned, you'd have to hope the Swans honour that (and I have no doubt they would) whereas if there wasn't, it's possibly been a case where the two parties have distinctly different perceptions of "ample funds". Pretty much agree with everything you have said especially this. I have put something similar in another thread.
Didn't we a similar thing with Sousa and the Evening post? While Martinez and Rodgers were media darlings who gave the local press everything and got a nice spin on things in return. Sousa and Laudrup seemed/seem more reluctant to give them anything and it's almost as if the EP have turned on them as a result.
Danish media reports 4 reasons for Laudrups unhappiness: x Graham was sold without any new player coming in - Michu was played out of position for the 2# part of the season. x Aspas went to Liverpool and not Swansea (over price issue), this is why we constantly hear about the money being there but not being spent. x Swansea being "forced" to sell their players when ever bigger clubs come around: Allen, Sinclair and now Williams are mentioned as specific examples x And finally ( I believe this might be a big issue). That The board insists on buying GB-players, even though ML doesn't believe they represent value-for-money. Bartley and Proctor mentioned.
According to ML it was his decision and it paid off according to latest reports http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/Michael-Laudrup-says-selling-Danny-Graham/story-19132405-detail/story.html#axzz2Ugnswq4U
Proctor was a punt from the get go early in the Rogers regime. Don't remember how much we payed for him. Bartley is the great mystery. He has a tendency to pick up serious injury and not notice until it becomes too serious to play. He had a great game - I thought - against Arsenal alongside Chico and really looked part. The Liverpool game buried him ... apparently. With Monk and Tate getting older / not up to it and Gower gone - we do need some domestic players - which is the great problem - limited value available that can perform the way we need without paying silly money.
Nothing to see hear Notice most of the quotes being bandied around are old and used; before the season ended. The quotes then were used as fuel and spun to incite speculation of Laudrups possible move to Barca, Real, Paris SG, Man City, Everton and Killay AFC. Now, mixed in with later, though undated, quotes a new 'story' has miraculously emerged. So where has this story come from? I suggest it is born from EP's need to sell sell sell papers. The biggest news in town is The Swans and, I suggest, a vast proportion of the EP sales revenue can be directly attributed to reporting on all things Swans. During the off season this constant flow of revenue is severely interrupted. The sound of silence booming from the Liberty is deafening the EP. Currently all of the squad, management, backroom staff and half of the board are away on holiday so there are no stories or quotes forthcoming for the EP to misinterpret. So what do they do to feed our need to read. Simple, they turn their well worn pants inside out and try to kid us all that they are fresh. Thomas Jefferson sums it up “The most truthful part of a newspaper is the advertisements.” He also said “The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.”
It's not just the EP though is it! The Mail ran the issue Laudrup is having on Transfers, and while we are prudent, we can't maintain a lower league mentality, now that we are in the Premier league, so something will give, and it's not as if what Laudrup is having issues over is something new, Martinez, Sousa and Rodgers had the same problems, so there is no smoke without fire, and I hope that our board wake up to the huge tasks of next season, and support Laudrup, he doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable man!................ Mail Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...rup-clash-Swansea-board-transfer-targets.html
Papers pick up on what the local rag says. It's what they do. Before you know it you have a snowball of half truths. My only real concern in all this is that players considering coming here may be put off if there's a whiff of Laudrup walking. That's a real problem that doesn't involve speculation.
The mail ran the SAME story. Its called Computer-assisted reporting where "journalist" use a thing called Automated Content Access Protocol to add to, re-spin and "pass on" same stories. Tabloid/internet journos live by this method hence same or similar stories appearing in very quick succession all over the internet. Why true journalism is dieing and why we get a constant stream of **** in the press.
