Medwyn Williams asks the question on everyone’s lips. Should Garry Monk be Swansea City’s new full time boss? When Huw Jenkins and the Swansea City Board took the decision to relieve Michael Laudrup of the Swansea Manager’s job in early February Swans captain Garry Monk was asked to act up as Head Coach “for the foreseeable future”. Six weeks earlier at Spurs, Tim Sherwood had been appointed from within the club’s youth set-up but by contrast handed an eighteen month contract. Just over four months on however, speculation is already rife as to who might be replacing Sherwood this Summer. Meanwhile, at the Liberty, the situation with Garry Monk is still very much on-going with the Swansea Board ideally placed to either offer him the position long term or alternatively bide their time and undertake a more considered and measured approach in appointing his long term successor (which might well have been on-going for some time by now). There are those who have criticised the Swans for not appointing Monk on a permanent basis whilst others have done likewise for not appointing a more experienced manager or coach to take the helm or assist him in some way. It’s now looking as if the away win at Newcastle has all but guaranteed the Swans Premier League survival and the Board’s decision has arguably been vindicated. I believe once the season has ended that the Board need to act and appoint a new man to take over the helm and to manage Swansea City Football Club. But the Club owes it to Garry Monk, doesn’t it? The most common argument goes that Garry Monk has been a great servant to the club as player, captain and most recently as Head Coach. Fair comment, but equally, SwanseaCity have also been a great employer providing him with that rarity in the modern game, ten years of continuous employment at one club, an opportunity to captain that side and that club whilst being supported to pursue his second career via training for his coaching badges whilst still playing. If truth be told, many Swans fans thought the club were being extremely generous to Monk when in August 2011, at the age of 32, they offered him a three year deal and once again in February 2013 when they offered him a further twelve month player contract extension. This for a player who made 16 Premier League appearances in 2011/12 and 11 appearances in 2012/13 and none so far during the 2013/14 season. What has been widely cited and recognised has been the leadership qualities that Garry Monk has brought to the club. However, if you look at it from purely a financial perspective, that leadership input could equally have been provided (over the past year or eighteen months at least) via the capacity of a coach as opposed to a Premier League player (certainly based on how few games played) at a fraction of that cost. I don’t mean to denigrate Garry Monk or criticise his contribution to the club but I do want to challenge the widely held sentiment that the club somehow owes him. In reality it’s simply a professional arrangement that has benefited both parties, which is exactly as it should be. Why Not Garry Monk? If we look at Garry Monk’s record as Swans Head Coach in the Premier league as of Newcastle away it stands as played 11, won three, drawn three and lost five. If you simply multiply that 11 match record over 38 matches i.e. over the course of a Premier League season that’s 41.45 points, which is better than Michael Laudrup’s record between February 2013 and February 2014 and enough to guarantee survival, most seasons. However, I would argue that given the strength of the squad and that this is our third season in the Premier League that we should have been looking to at least match previous performances and indeed if we win all of our remaining matches I hear you say we may do so…Therefore in mitigation, Monk took over mid season/February and hasn’t had the advantage of a pre-season to prepare or a full season in charge and the benefit of making his own signings and despite this has it would appear done enough to keep us up. However, there are other factors which need to be considered in making the appointment of Swansea City’s manager. Performances and Tactical Management Performances under Monk have been very mixed with still no real consistency. Particular highlights have been the 3-0 thumping’s of Cardiff and Norwich respectively and the 2-1 away victory at St James’ Park representing our first Premier League away victory since the 2-1 defeat of Fulham on the 23rd November. Other noticeable results have been our first away point at Stoke since becoming a Premier League side and the 2-2 draw at the Emirates. Less impressive amongst others have been the home defeat to WBA and the away defeat and performance to newly promoted Hull. Initially, Monk oversaw a return to some of the pressing and higher tempo which had previously been a hallmark of successful Swansea sides and the exit from the Europa League surely heralded this on a more consistent basis given the reduction in matches. However, this hasn’t happened on anywhere near a consistent basis and by comparison to say Southampton who for most of the season have worked tirelessly at pressing and closing down opponents when they lose the ball, the Swans have all too often appeared lethargic and laboured both before and after Monk’s appointment. Whilst undeniably some of this can be attributed to the amount of matches played we have a larger and more able squad (to rotate) than during any other season during our Premiership tenure. For our recent victories in the Premier League it could be argued that the sheer momentum and feel good factor of Monk’s appointment turbo charged our victory against Cardiff and that both our victories against Norwich and Newcastle were against poorly performing sides that themselves allowed us too much time and space which we exploited. What’s also very noticeable is that it’s a high tempo, pressing and closing down style of play that’s been instrumental in helping both Liverpool and Atletico Madrid’s title aspirations this season. What also hasn’t changed is a sense that all too often the players don’t appear to have the confidence to take responsibility and assert themselves consistently on the pitch. All too often we see players in good positions who either slow down or hesitate and wait for support at the expense of taking on a man or to shoot at goal themselves, a great example of how this should be done was Marvin Emnes’ great direct and threatening run to the heart of the Newcastle defence which earned us the last minute penalty. Some of this undoubtedly rests with the players but equally the role of the manager is to encourage, cajole and get the best of what’s undoubtedly a very technically gifted squad that should be doing better at this aspect of the game. Monk has changed things around tactically as we’ve seen with JDG playing wide right on occasion and paradoxically whilst we’ve often seen Rangel badly exposed two on one as JDG drifts to the middle (or more accurately some would say still plays there) we’ve also had good results such as at the Emirates and St James’ Park using this system. The “intelligence” from inside the club is that the young Spanish coach Pep, who the club brought from Barcelona towards the end of Laudrup’s reign, has been in charge of the tactical and technical work whilst Monk has been the “leader of the group” and undertaking the man management. Whether or not this is true it’s encouraging to see some tactical variation but I’m not convinced that we’ve always used the squad properly to this end. A good example for me has been the indifferent form of Angel Rangel over recent months. At Chelsea Mourinho has replaced an old favourite of his in left back Ashley Cole with Cesar Azpilicueta who enjoyed a decent season in his customary right back position last year. Azpilicueta has made the left back berth his own despite competition from what was the England left back at the start of the season. In Neil Taylor we have an excellent left back who is capable enough at right back to represent Team GB yet hasn’t been played there by the Swans. Garry Monk as Taylor’s team mate will have been well aware of this fact and it’s all the more bemusing why he’s kept playing Rangel despite his recent lapse in form whilst Taylor hardly gets a kick. Rangel is also thirty one and in playing Taylor in this position we may well have identified a better option and at the same time persuaded a very good full back from surely now leaving in the summer to pursue first team football. Media Management I think Monk’s inexperience has been exposed a number of times by the media this season and I’m not convinced that he’s learned from it. There are those who think that having a swipe at Leighton James is legitimate others out of order but in all honesty he could very easily have side stepped it or dealt with it better. More concerning for me has been the public criticism of Rangel for the goal at Hull at Taylor for having cramp and “wasting” a substitution at the Emirates. On both counts he has a point but in my opinion one that should be made to the players and remain a private matter. We’ve been spoilt as a club with previous managers such as Roberto Martinez, Brendan Rodgers and Michael Laudrup projecting an extremely professional image of the club and Monk having played and interestingly captained the club during their respect stewardships should be more media savvy. Coaching and Player Recruitment At first team level the club currently has Monk (who’s currently I think still to complete his UEFA A Licence) who also doesn’t hold the required UEFA Pro-Licence to manage in the Premier League. The UEFA Pro-Licence requires 180 hours study and UEFA guidelines also suggest that coaches completing the A licence gain a year’s experience before doing the Pro-Licence. At the moment I’m not sure if the Swans have a special dispensation as Monk is a temporary appointment or whether the young Spanish coach, Pep, (as a UEFA Pro-Licence holder) is our registered person for that purpose at least and hence him sitting on the bench. I’m unclear as to whether or not either Alan Curtis or Kristian O’Leary hold either UEFA A or Pro-Licence qualifications. In addition, the club also employ Adrian Tucker as a goalkeeping coach who interestingly enough holds a UEFA Pro-Licence. I don’t believe that Garry Monk or the current coaching staff have the necessary reputation/gravitas to command the type of player that we as an aspiring mid-table Premier League club need to attract, certainly not players from abroad. This is not intended as a criticism of them or suggest that they shouldn’t have a future at the club. Once Premier League survival is guaranteed for our fourth season our first team recruitment strategy needs to focus more on quality than quantity and building up a squad as was arguably the case last season. To do that we need to bring in players who are either experienced at this level or an equivalent top league in Europe and who will be able to go straight into the first team. Such players will be looking to work with a manager and staff group who have a combination of reputation, coaching know-how and experience with training facilities to go alongside that. The club have invested heavily in two new modern training complexes and now it’s time to add the right caliber of coaches to the first team squad. Garry Monk is unlikely to be a name that attracts such players (however unfair that may or may not sound) although there’s a strong argument to be made that he should be an essential part of the new managers plans. The Board of Swansea City will appoint a new manager who (as has been the case over recent years) is prepared to work to the Swansea way e.g. work in large part with the current squad, within a more modest financial envelope (by most Premier League standards at least) as regards transfers, signing on fees, wages etc., with fewer staff (as compared to say Sam Alladyce or Mark Hughes command when appointed) and crucially to play a certain brand of football (i.e. not Sam Alladyce or Mark Hughes J). The Board it could be argued would be well advised to stipulate to any new manager that appointing Garry Monk as Assistant Manager or first team coach as part of a succession plan was also an essential requirement of taking on the job. Who Next Then? Someone with experience and someone with a name to attract players who’s also committed to playing an attractive, high tempo, pressing/closing down style of play. I’m not suggesting a high profile name = our next manager, that’s only part of the criteria. Ronald Koeman has been mentioned but I’d be a little nervous of him. He’s managed in Holland and Portugal relatively well and currently his Feyenoord side are second behind Ajax but his one season in a comparatively top league (La Liga) saw him sacked by Valencia in the 2007/8 season after 34 matches. There are others such as Oscar Garcia the Brighton boss who in my mind might prove a better fit. He played for Barcelona, Valencia and Espanyol and coached with Cruyff at Barcelona for three years before managing Maccabi Tel Aviv and now Brighton who despite selling arguably two of their best players in Liam Bridcutt and Ashley Barnes are still in contention for a play-off place in a highly competitive Championship. He has a head start as he speaks the language and understands the culture and is young, ambitious and plays a similar style of football. I understand that Steve Clarke is very well thought of by some within the Liberty although his record at WBA wasn’t the most inspiring and he favoured a slightly more direct 442 approach which would signal a departure for the Swans Board who’ve previously appointed managers who play a 433/451. It’s looking like Marcelo Bielsa might well take over at Marseille but he’s always been my first choice for the Swans job since Laudrup left and given the freedom to put in place his blue print of how a hard working, high tempo, pressing game could be employed by not only the first team but by all of our coaches across all age groups. Whilst Bielsa has not been a roaring success everywhere he’s gone he is extremely well respected, a real devotee of the game with a fine eye for detail utilising stats, videos and detailed reports long before they became common place and is a real tactician. He has a strong belief in team shape and keeping players tactically close and when at Bilbao would work on having no more than twenty five meters between the center forward(s) and center halves. He was also a very strong advocate of moving the ball at pace from the back to the opposition penalty area in order to catch the opposition off guard whilst not playing the “long ball”. Such an approach could well suit us as at times this season we’ve been too stretched as a team with opposition sides using this space to their advantage and at other times laboured and lacking in pace when we attack. So why on earth would he want to come? He’s 58 in July and what might well prove attractive is an opportunity to manage in the Premier League with a “small side” i.e. against the odds and to create a legacy that someone possibly Garry Monk could continue after he left. He’s probably not earned anywhere near the salary on offer to a Premier League club such as the Swans and this might provide him with a degree of financial security that a man of his age might find appealing. Garry Monk could potentially provide an ideal foil to Bielsa in respect to building bridges between such an appointment and the squad Monk knows so very well whilst at the same time providing him with the time and crucially the guidance and mentorship to develop and evolve as a coach and ultimately manager. - By Steven of SOS (Swansea oh Swansea) THOUGHT THIS WAS SUCH A GOOD READ THAT I HAD TO PUT IT UP! ...................
Im with Jenkins and the board with a big Yes. He deserves a chance like we gave Martinez and lets be fair here Martinez never had the games or the pressure that monk has had to deal with. so yes he deserves his opportunity at this time...If he fails then so what we can always replace him but we should not take away his dream that has been thrust upon him so unexpected....give the guy a go...
Absolutely NOT! He must be replaced at the end of the season, in fact he should be moved out of the club altogether. He's been a disruptive influence in recent years. All this nonesense about loyalty is utter twaddle, if any of the big clubs had come in for him a few years back he would have been away without hesitation. To players and managers alike it's all about playing of managing a top team. Clean sweep required I'm afraid.
Dai - it's actually "young Pep" who's getting the job then, with Monk as his assistant I wouldn't mind Monk staying on and learning from someone better but as our next manager, no, he's not ready. Maybe in the future but to be honest I can't see it.
Garry could be a coach or assistant manager with a view to taking the reigns in the long term but I worry about transfer dealings with him. It seems Laudrup had to fight with the board to sign Bony and that worked out bloody well. The board then go and sign N'Gog. Laudrup 1- 0 The board. Will Garry have the draw, the knowledge and the stones to stand up to the board and sign real quality or will he just be a 'yes' man and guarantee that we sign up more Championship level players rather than better players to help us push on?
No for me. We owe him nothing — he was paid to be here, we gave him "security" as a player. He is not qualified to be a Prem League coach - no credentials (badges), no experience, not much expertise as a coach, no playing experience at the highest level to draw from, and his motivational ability is a myth (it took Curtis to speak out to really get the players focused). He has been disruptive with at least two of our previous managers who are much better qualified than him. I ran some numbers about three weeks ago and the team's performance under Monk in all but one minor metric were worse than team's performance under the last same number of games under Laudrup (I shall update my analysis to cover the Villa match on Monday and publish - it will be interesting to see if there has been any improvements). The Prem is not a league to gain experience and we cannot be in the business of being a "training wheels" club; not at this level. It's about risk and the cost of dropping out of the Prem makes that approach far too risky to even be given a second's thought.
From another point of view .... to be successful in the Prem it appears that clubs have to embrace foreign players and coaches, and coaches that get European / Spanish style football in particular, can manage such squads and can manage multiple competitions concurrently (e.g. Prem + Europa). Unless I am mistaken there is currently only one domestic manager that has shown the capacity to do that; Rogers at Liverpool (and so far only in a one competition season). Moyes doesn't have it based on his latest showing. Drawing from this, if we want to avoid the annual drudgery of competing for the magic 40 points amongst the cellar dwellers of the Prem, then we need to adopt the same or highly similar model to the top 7 or 8 clubs. We already have a lot of foreign players, players with international caps, and a youngish squad -- probably the youngest squad in the Prem this season. This type of squad takes a particular type of coach and based on the model of the top clubs really does suggest that we go with a non-domestic coach (are there really any good domestic ones around at the moment). Monk is not in this mold. Perhaps if he went abroad to build up his experience he could come back and be very effective.
Well said Yankee. Agree with both comments. Good post Dragon and well spotted but we've had this debate with I think over 70% saying no thanks and the comments are the same here. I don't buy this 'give him a go' rubbish. No offence. You give someone a go when you've nothing to lose. We have a hell of a lot riding on this appointment and the League is such that ten games in you could be well adrift and virtually down the plughole. Also, comparing it to the Martinez era is pure folly imo. That was in a lower division and is the ideal place for a young manager to learn his craft. In fairness to Monk there are not many coaches in the world that would ever be capable of getting the best out of their team whilst simultaneously learning the ropes in the Prem. Even Tim Sherwood, a guy who is a no nonsense type of coach that seems to have something about him has struggled at Spurs, and he's been coaching behind the scenes for a while. Monk may be one for the future but not yet. Not now.
NO from me, which has been my stance all along. No personal objection to Monk gaining experience under a more qualified coach but whether that coach would fancy working with him, knowing how adept Monk is at slipping the knife in behind the scenes, remains to be seen. Word gets about in football and it's an open secret that Monk undermined Laudrup and, to a lesser extent, Sousa. People talk (and are talking right now from what I've heard) and no coach will want the job knowing that there's an inbuilt faction (including the likes of Williams) at the club ready, willing and able to disrupt his work if his methodology doesn't please.
