What's all this nonsense about "we should be "? There are no points awarded for "should have won",or for excuses in general. The bottom line is that the team has been poor for most of the season,starting off with a 1-4 stuffing by Man.Utd. The writing was on the wall straight away, as far as I was concerned,but excuses were being made within minutes of the final whistle,and have proliferated ever since. We deserve to be where we are - FACT! New manager needed before next season,whichever League we are in.
The team has slid down the table despite the style of play that was supposedly going to sweep them into the top ten,or even higher. Something was wrong,needs to be identified,and put right. Some players will leave the Club before next season,and replacements brought in.
It grieves me to be so damning,Valley,but we are merely a shadow of what we were. People's expectations were SO high after last season,and early Europa,but then it all seemed to go pear shaped. Oh,and Monk isn't the answer,but I'm not even sure what the question is now. Really disappointed with how things have gone.
Yes it does indeed, and summed up in 'we have shot ourselves in the foot all season', Chico's sending off yesterday was symbolic of this and our season overall. I hear many excuses regarding referee's, injuries, Europa, etc, etc, but for me our x manager must surely take the rap for where we are currently, his lack of understanding of our game, his lack of attention to detail has cost us, he failed dismally to address the slump of last season, and had most of this season to sort it out and failed throughout, and I have come to the conclusion that Laudrup for all his career achievements as a player, is flawed as a manager, the same story is told in his previous clubs too, where the fans will testify to. As an example of Laudrup's inept approach to player man management, when questioned regarding Chico's Diving his response was half hearted and resigned to the fact that there wasn't much he could do, now again we have issues with this player, who was reported to have picked up a brick to throw at Monk, in training some months back. It takes a good man to manage all the personalities in the squad, and in fairness to Martinez ans Rodgers they both excelled at that, but Laudrup was simply woeful. There have also been signs throughout the season that some in our squad have got to big for their boots, and I'm hoping that that will be addressed in the summer, I have my list of players that I want to see the back of, and I hope we get that clear out starting next month. Garry Monk I respect, but he is not the answer. I feel so strongly after this season farce that we need to be ruthless in getting rid of the dross, Tiendalli, De Guzman, Lita, Alvaro, Ngog, Vorm, Chico, all need to go in my view, and if Ashley Williams moves on then I'll not lose any sleep over that and wish him the best where ever he goes!............
The dross though really only refers to fringe players with the exception of Vorm & De Guzman (who I'd keep personally ) but I agree but they're another issue , one thing for sure is that we need to look at actually who's calling the shots at the club , if Monk is only the "figurehead" and the Boards' puppet then thats not good for our future ,the uncertainty and lack of clear leadership can only be to the detriment and will not help us move forward .
Your post is fair enough in parts, Dragon but, for me, flawed in others. No one knows the true story of the Chico/Monk incident. Was there any provocation involved for instance? As for Garry Monk, you might respect him but I don't. The fact that he has been a good servant of the club counts for little in my book. It's easy to be a good servant when you've got a cushy number that pays telephone numbers over and above your comparative ability. Had he had more ability he might well have been on his bike years ago like any other football mercenary. His options were limited, which is probably why he stayed with us. As for respect, I have a problem in respecting someone so adept at slipping a knife in the back. People are far to ready to accept that he was doing it for the good of the club. Any chance that he was doing it for the good of Garry Monk and his ill concealed ambitions? Any chance that he was holding a grudge because effectively he had been demoted to not our third, not our fourth but our fifth choice centre back? Any chance that he might have felt a sense of injustice that Ki, not even a centre back, was selected ahead of him in the Capital One Cup Final? People have been quick to point out those that said he was a good appointment but few have quoted others like Gary Lineker who described Laudrup's dismissal as bonkers and, most recently, Ian Wright who couldn't understand it. There are many others as well who said much the same thing. The quotes are out there if you have any doubt. I accept that Laudrup had his faults. name me one manager who hasn't? If Laudrup was perfect, he wouldn't have been with us in the first place. Perhaps he was too insular and his man management could have been better but, lest you forget, behind his back he was being undermined by Monk and his co-character assassin Ashley Williams. We know they spoke to Jenkins but how many PLAYERS did they infect with their poison? We know that Leon, for instance, was reluctantly dragged in at one stage. Yes, certain players have come out in support of Monk. But it's what you do isn't it, in that sort of situation? No player in his right mind would OPENLY criticise the dismissal. It would be tantamount to committing hari kari for their career with us and completely disrupt the club. But I wonder how many players didn't like what went on and spoke privately between themselves? Certainly, the players Laudrup brought to the club wouldn't have been happy. As for the rest, Wayne Routledge for one, is on record as saying how pleased he was with Laudrup's coaching, relishing the fact that Laudrup didn't tell you what to do, he showed you how to do it. So now we seem to have a deep rift within the club where certain players appear to have been ostracized eg Pozuelo, Canas, Michu? etc. Did they speak out of turn? It's not good, none of it, but remember that there's a lot more to being a manager than man management. There's the tactical side of the game and having the contacts to bring in quality players - not only having the contacts but the ABILITY and pulling power to bring in players who normally wouldn't give the club a second glance. As for man management and motivating the players, we didn't exactly look motivated against Palace, WBA and Hull did we? Expected results in those games would have seen us safe by now but we are in very real danger of relegation because of three horrendous performances that, collectively, were worse than anything produced by our team since we hit the Premier League. Bad times for us but I hope we can survive, regroup and move forward next season under an experienced manager. I don't think the board deserve it but the fans certainly do.
Best management change this season Tony Pulis (Wouldn't want him here but he's shown what can be done to change a team and take players with him.) Next season (whatever division) I want a hard nosed boss who will maintain our style and take no nonsense from players or board. Now Tate has more or less gone, Monk is damaged goods and Leon maybe in his final season we have no ties to our desperate past.
With all due respect Ivor, but the likes of Linker have no idea what has happened so their opinion is irrelevant on the matter. The performances under Monk have been much better and we have been creating more chances and scoring more goals, it's just we have a very poor defence, second half of Palace and game against Hull excluded from that statement of course. De Guzman (who has been much more effective under Monk) among others have also come out and said a change was needed. As for Monk, maybe, just bloody maybe he's doing the best he can for the sake of the club. Look at Laudrup's press conference, all he banged on about was winning the cup and getting into Europe, that's all well and fine, but he was risking relegation to progress in the Europa for his own personal benefit. He wouldn't give a toss if we got relegated, Monk on the other hand, I suspect would. As for the deep rift in the club, that was plain to see under Laudrup. As for Poz and Canas not featuring, long may it continue if it means that Leon starts every game. Have you not thought that maybe they aren't playing because they aren't putting the effort in training. I find it appalling the way some have questioned Monks loyalty and affection for the club and seem hell bent on criticising him at every opportunity. Laudrup's management career falls apart eventually wherever he is.
To try to tag Laudrup for where we are now is absloute rubbish . Laudrup was 3 wins and 3 losses in his last 6 games, with the team finally getting healthy , when the people responsible for this ****ing mess we find ourselves in spun they re magic by sacking Laudrup .....only fools
I totally agree that our position lies firmly at the door of laudrup,There is no question about it and if you read any of the players comments you can see that Jenkins is absolutely right in getting rid and promoting monk to try and fix the mess laudrup left behind and that has to start with getting the club running smoothly again and to get the team playing as a team as if you take the players word for it then monk is doing exactly that. you will read that the players all want monk as the boss next season and i know from certain sources that Jenkins and the board are very happy with the progress monk has managed to install in a very short space of time with the mess he had inherited from an inept manager. You can speculate all you want but the players and the fans trust tell the real story of what is going on behind the scenes and things could not be better. So i would get use to having monk as the manager for at least another season if i was you and probably longer if we can hold on to him and accept the players know more than any off the cuff rubbish spoken on here.
Well if this is the best he's got we're f**ked and so for that matter is his coaching career. Every **** move he makes on the touchline is recorded for posterity on video. This is something he will not be able to walk away from. It's not about loyalty or affection ... currently it's about competence of which there is very little, and historically it's about a pattern of not being able to tolerate and get with the program of foreign coaches - Sousa and Laudrup. In this matter he is culpable, but not soley responsible. This conduct shouldn't have been tolerated by HJ/Board but it was and they must share the blame in undermining the key people they hired to do a key job and then completing the sabotage by denying funds and acquiring utter **** players to support them at critical times. This BTW also happened under Rogers - cast your minds back ... we got Moore and no sooner had he arrived and played one game than Rogers said WTF and went out and got Borini. And Lineker's point is valid. He's been around the game long enough and has enough connections in the game to be able to assess Laudrup / Monk and or talk with those close enough to make that assessment and have an informed opinion about it. And as Ivor has pointed out he's not alone. Politeness only his stopping football analysts over here from laughing at Monk before / during / after matches. He commands no respect whatsoever.
Because a player has been here for many years that doesn't equate to loyalty. We'll see how loyal he is if a bigger club comes in for him but of course that won't happen. Fans seem to equate length of service with loyalty and it's just not so. Monk was a player of limited ability in the lower divisions who was a good servant to the Club and got paid handsomely for it thank you very much. It's a two way street. He may care for the Club but so do the rest of us and we are the ones that help to pay his rather large salary. That shouldn't put him above criticism when it's warranted. As for Laudrup I agree we were drifting under him but he should have been given say, 5 more games to sort it out. People were coming back from injury and Laudrup deserved that for his achievements the season before. I know it's with the benefit of hindsight but he couldn't have done worse than we actually did could he? The way he was sacked was despicable imo and showed the club up in a very bad light. I know others see it differently and it's probably best not to rehash it again. When Monk stepped in it should have been until the end of the season only not "the foreseeable future" because right now we might not have one in this Division.
Valley "As for Monk, maybe, just bloody maybe he's doing the best he can for the sake of the club." A few years back I had what I thought was my dream job with a company I had really admired. But I realised I wasn't doing a good job. For the sake of the company I left (I actually nominated my successor who turned out to be brilliant). I learned from that getting the job isn't even close to doing the job.
I agree with those who think that Monk shouldn't be manager next season. I thought he'd only be in charge for Cardiff and Stoke, there was then a two week gap for the club to get somebody else in, obviously they had nobody in mind to take over other than Monk for the foreseeable future. If Monk can sort the defence out, we should beat Villa and Sunderland and might get something from Southampton and NUFC as we are creating more and scoring more under him than we were under Laudrup. As for the squad, there seems to be real divisions there. From the outside there seems to be a division to pre Laudrup players v Laudrup signings, and I think this has been the case all season. As for Lineker in the know, why should we listen to him, when we dismiss the postings of those on here who have heard stuff from those who are supposedly in the know? Can't have it both ways. The legal advice that Laudrup was taking also seems to have amounted to nothing, unless I've missed something. Laudrup had to go, but should Monk have been in charge after the Stoke game is a valid point. That said, we have done okay under him and certainly no worse than under Laudrup in the league this season.
Personally, I am ambivalent towards Monk. He is filling in as best he can but irrespective of interim not being in his title, I doubt he'll be our sole manager next year. I see the appointment, maybe, of a director of football, European style, with Monk taking a lead role as a manager/coach. I also doubt we'll be relegated either, we are not that good this year, that's a truism, but I feel we are better than those below us as well as a few above. Sunderland and Norwich will go down. imo, with one other, between WBA, Fulham and Cardiff, with Cardiff currently favorites. But I wait to be proven wrong, time will tell. I have read the word respect a few times and I put it to you that Laudrup respected the Swans so little that he couldn't be bothered to take and or develop training sessions (widely known). Laudrup disrespected Bony (not his signing, Aspass was his prime target) by ignoring him and his situation, unfit and ankle injury. Bony secured off his own back extra training and a physio to improve his fitness. It is noticeable that our talisman is far happier since Laudrups sacking, same can't be said for the petulant Michu. Laudrup also disrespected Ki by banishing him to Sunderland for the season and not wanting him back when we needed him. Laudrup putting his ego before the needs of the team. Laudrup was complicit in the knowledge that his agent was adversely interfering in OUR clubs business both last summer and the January transfer window. Laudrup took regular unannounced 'breaks', God knows where but certainly away from his duties. I admit that Laudrup does have a lot of charisma, scrubbing up nice for the TV cameras. Maybe this is why many on here continue their unrequited love in with him, but remain blind to the contempt he's shown OUR club all year. Monk on the other hand has only ever wanted the best for Swansea City, nothing more. Is he good enough as a manager? not right now and I doubt he will manage another prem club. One thing he is though and that is he's 100% a Swan and has never disrespected the club. He will only do what he feels is right for us unlike Laudrup who will only do what he feels is right for him. . We do not know any of the FACTS regarding the true nature of Laudrup's dismissal; only Dai has all the FACTS, but, does anyone truly believe that our staunch, rock solid, Swansea bleeding board: and not just HJ but all of them including the Swansea supporters who sit on it, went against its nature, risked the club, its plans, its future, its survival in the prem; where the pot for survival remember, has never been bigger, by sacking Laudrup on a whim or something as trivial as a whinge about training?. I don't buy that at all. IMO, for our board to react as they did shows the scale, if not the nature, of the problem/issue before them. They knew sacking Laudrup, in the short term at a minimum, would greatly disaffect the harmony of our club and upset the fans, yet their reasons for dismissal must have been so damning that they felt they had to do it regardless. In the long term their actions may well threaten EVERYTHING the club has achieved over the last decade, but again they felt they still had to do it. For our board to sack Laudrup when they did the reason must have been a COLOSSAL one. To risk all and go against their nature, their history and execute an action so alien to them that they had NEVER done it before, insinuates that Laudrup isn't just a TV darling but also a very naughty boy.
I with a few others i suspect do not have the ear of Board members , cleaning ladies or other dignitaries of the club so I cannot accurately comment on whats happened but my one major concern is the lack of foresight from the Board regarding Laudrup's replacement ,that was and still may be our defining moment and can have a massive impact on the clubs future ., so when you say and I believe you're correct that the Board didn't make the decision to sack Laudrup lightly the why did they expect Monk to do any better .?
So much rewriting of history in one post it's tough to know where to begin. I will focus on the items list above and let others with more time tackle the rest. First, Laudrup didn't ban Ki to Sunderland. The Board, apparently, in their illustrious wisdom decided to handcuff the manager by giving Ki a contract with a guaranteed 20-start minimum. Laudrup wouldn't honor that, and no self-respecting manager would especially with the likes of Britton / Canas / Michu / JDG / Shelvey on-hand. The only remedy to honor the contract was to loan Ki to another club with minimal competition for places. Second, it wasn't Laudrup who wrote the recall clause heavily in Sunderland's favor in the loan agreement and then forgot about it way past the point recall. This little oh-**** moment belonged to HJ / Board / Legal Counsel (who should be fired for a ****-up like that). Routledge is on record as stating how much he appreciated Laudrup's coaching and the fact that Laudrup could show him what to do, not just tell him. Bony's goal production dropped 50% after Monk's take over - this is a fact and I have the numbers to back it up. The Board's reaction was not based on sound performance data but based on some delusional panic. They replaced the tactical dominance and player preparation of Laudrup with the myth of Monk's motivation skills .... all that shouting, swearing and arm waving stuff. Really useful, especially when nobody on the field pays a blind bit of attention. Our record under Monk is worse in just about every metric of performance measurement than under Laudrup. I'd be happy to give you the spreadsheet with the numbers. .... somebody else please take over and shovel the **** off the thread.
