Its not about eating humble pie trunds, Its about giving monk the opportunity now that the club has seen fit to put him in charge in a time of turmoil. I think he has done fantastic work behind the scenes to get us through the season and we should not now discard him and say thank you very much but you can go now. that is not right. Jinx would not have put him in charge if he thought he could not do it and will give monk every backing to succeed but at the end of the day it is only monk that can make that happen and i agree that he has earned the chance to try. There is no humble pie for anyone whether he fails or not its about giving one of our legends a chance of management that we all know he is working hard to achieve..
Valley like all Swans fans I am fully behind the team and want them to win the remaining 3 fixtures. Further more, unlike some here I have never booed the team at matches, in this league or any other. I will credit Monk with the win at Newcastle, when for the first time a substitution payed off. His previous substitutions were unfathomable, cost us games and points. Picking Lita for the team was laughable. For me Monk and his mate Ashleigh Williams have been the biggest cause of splits at the club, both are starting to belive they are bigger than the club. Everyone here is talking of us winning the remaining 3 games, I hope they are right, but I have seen this head in the clouds attitude since Monk took over, we are still in a dogfight and could stiil go down. Until that is mathematically impossible I cannot relax with this man in charge.
But dai, this happens at all the clubs, people are put in as interim manager and then not given the full time job at the end. If Giggsy wins his last 3 or 4 games and they play well maybe Man Utd should give him the job. I just dont think you can take a chance on his inexperience in the PL. Gm has done well as i said and i think under him we have shown more grit and determination. But I feel there is a better candidate out there who can move us forward and has more experience.
As much as I understand that Daimundgeezer may not like where it is heading, the discussion is about whether Monk should be given the job or not, and for me this discussion is very relevant, after all, we sacked our last manager who had IMO a better return based on the fixtures. So will continue. That's a nice big IF, seeing as we couldn't even beat west brom or palace at home, yet you go on about IF we win our final 3, he has won 3 from 11, what makes you think he will win his final 3. Talk about wishful thinking to use for stats, that really is clutching at straws. Monk has taken 12 from the last 11, you are right. So Monk has played 36% of his games in charge against bottom half clubs at HOME Laudrup only played 17% at home to bottom half clubs Monk sacrificed the cups to focus on survival ML focused on the cups. Was all that sacrificing worth the extra point? And hell I am being kind saying the extra point, because Monk has had a much more favourable run than ML did this season. Yet served up pretty much the same return rate, which for the games given, is ****. From the opposing fixtures against the same 11 (so for ML it was) Top half teams Home = Played 5, won 1 (Newcastle), drew 2 (Stoke, Liverpool), lost 2 (Everton, Arsenal) = 5/15 Away = Played 1, won 0, drew 0, lost 1 (Chelsea) = 0/3 Total = 4/18 Bottom half teams Home = Played 1, won 0, drew 1 (Hull), lost 0 = 1/3 Away = Played 4, won 2 (WBA, Palace), drew 1 (Norwich), Lost 1 (Cardiff) = 7/12 Total = 8/15 ML in those same 11 fixtures but reversed, picked up 12 points. Not bad for 1 home team against a bottom half club. So tell me, why was ML sacked? You also keep going on about failings, of course ML had his failings, hell even Fergie had failings, no-one is naive enough to not realise a manager has failings, as no manager is perfect, but we got rid of a manager for a poor run, yet replaced him with Monk, who tbh, has done much worse if you look at the fitness, fixtures and choices made. Yet those who were happy to see ML gone, are singing his praises, it beggars belief.
Laudrup and Momk did equally as bad duriing a stretch , Monk did it against an easier shedule with a healthy team ., Laudrup did it with an injury landen team against mostly top teams . Guys like Taff will never look at reasoniing , they have they re blinders on and thats all they see .
So Jenkins makes his first big mistake and you want rid. If we got relegated we would still be in a far,far, better position than when he took over. A championship club with no debt and tens of millions in the bank. FFS get a grip. Some fans getting way ahead of themselves and think that we have a god-given right to be a permanent Premier League side.
I dont think anyone here thinks we have a god given right to be a PL side. Certainly not me. I long remeber my away trips to Macclesfield and York on tuesday nights. But, i beleieve most fans want us to give ourselves the best chance of staying among the elite for as long as possible. That is why the debate some strongly belive GM is the man to do the job and some strongly believe he isnt and a new man would be better suited to the job.
It's heading nowhere, that's the problem Ok, maybe not nowhere but round and round in circles, I suppose that's technically "somewhere". And I'm referring to "Monk v Laudrup". Quoting/analysing Monk's record as manager and saying he's not good enough for permanent manager on that basis is a perfectly valid opinion. Comparing it to Laudrup's is not relevant in any way. You may as well compare his record to any previous manager in that case and it'll still be as irrelevant to him getting the job permanently. He'll get the job or not on his ability, not his ability compared to laudrup's.
At the end of the day Monk will only be in charge if he is a success next season if he has a poor or indifferent start then he will be replaced so what is the issue, there is none other than the club backing one of our own and giving him his chance of management the same as Martinez...There is no issue here. If the club has the confidence in monk then who are we mere mortals to say they are wrong, who knows at this point can say if he can or cannot succeed and only by giving him a chance will we know for sure, After all the same discussion was done when martinez took over and we all ended up pleasantly surprised... And this crap that jinx should go if monk is manager and fails is utter rubbish and an unnecessary over reaction...
Dai you are right no one does know whether he will succeed or not. But dont compare giving a man a chance in league 1 (who in all fairness has become one of the best PL managers) to taking a risk with an relatively untried man in the PL. You are also right when you say that if the club have the confidence they should go for him. I do worry though that if he has an indifferent start we can replace him. That may well be to late with a transfer window closed and a poor squad possibly put together. I know there is always january but again that may well be to late.
The current survey is saying 72% against Monk for manager and 28% for him There is only one person hugging monk and thats Ash, the games we have played should all be more than winnable regardless of who is in charge. We have a top class striker playing up front winning us games more or less on his own, defending our set peices and scoring goals to keep us in the league, Monk is blessed with a fully fit squad and one game a week where motivation does not come from the manager but from the fact players will have a 50% wage cut if they go down,lets not dress it up as something different. I like Monk and i think he has done as well as can be expected but its not about Monk its about getting the right profile manager for the job who also has relevent managerial experience. Monks time will come ,just not now !
Ashley Williams must take more than his share of off pitch problems . From indirectly causing Laudrups agent getting fired to whispers against Laudrup behind the scenes , I actually hope Williams gets sold on at a profit. Great player , but poor discipline toward team unity imo , its all about him .
Jenkins' FIRST big mistake?????? Think on, Uzi. He failed to back Sousa at a critical time and cost us a shot at promotion that season. Luckily we then achieved it under Rodgers but it was no given and we might have missed out again for years to come. Masterstroke then to appoint Rodgers? Not really. Rodgers was the FIFTH choice so Jenkins and the board didn't fancy him that much. They say it's better to be born lucky than rich. As for getting a grip, mine's perfectly secure thank you very much. Whilst the exact details of Laudrup's dismissal remain clouded, there is no doubt about the manner of it. The actions of Jenkins and the board were utterly devoid of class and heaped embarrassment on the club. Amateurs!!! At this level there is no room for sentiment or negligent performance and I haven't even gone into the vexed question of him not knowing the detail of Ki's contract and other issues of contract in the past. However, it remains to be seen about the Monk situation. The board might appoint someone else but they may opt to go with Monk. If they do and Monk is successful (which for the sake of my club I would hope was the case), I will happily hold up my hands and concede that I was wrong.
But I'm comparing it with the record of a manager that was SACKED by us as a club, just 3 months ago. So his record is very much relevant, as if Monk is no better than the guy we sacked, why would we give him the job? Thats like selling an iphone 5 cos its crap, and buying the iphone 5s (?) cos it has pretty colours. But its still just as crap.
The Board's record has been excellent over a ten year period but I do worry about some real **** ups made recently. The way Laudrup was sacked was amateurish and poorly handled whether you agreed with it or not. The appointment of Monk was perhaps understandable at such short notice but when we had to get dispensation because he didn't have all his badges it again smacked of unprofessionalism. But what worries me more than anything is this talk of Jenkins being a salaried Director of Football. Is there any truth in this? I'm not convinced we need anyone in such a role let alone someone who has never been a manager. As much as Jenkins deserves credit for his and the Club's achievements he has given us cause for concern recently imo.
Laudrups sacking will go down in history as one of the biggest mistakes made by a board and chairman in thé Premier . The why , how and tming of the sacking was absolute lunacy .I hope Monk keeps the job , now that he has it.
Dare I ask why it was the biggest mistake. Why was it lunacy? We dont know if Laudrup would have kept us up, we dont know if Laudrup would have won his last 6 or 7 games and we would have ended up on 50 odd points. All we can work on is that as it stands it looks like monk will keep us in this League. we can only surmise on what might have been and what might be in the future. Technically if GM keeps in the league then the boards desicion has to have been the right one, as we would have survived. By the way I am in the group that would have been happy if Laudrup had stayed but could understand why he didnt.
Agree with that last comment tlf. It was a bold decision to sack him but we were drifting. Only time will tell I suppose. I'm less concerned with what's done is done issues though. Is there any truth in Jenkins being a Director of Football? A mate of mine seems to think so but I've no idea if it's true. Very perplexing if it is.
