So why does the utterly useless Vasquez get a free pass for a disallowed goal in this very same thread? Let's have some consistency.
Rory donelly
- Thread starter pembs jack
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
So why does the utterly useless Vasquez get a free pass for a disallowed goal in this very same thread? Let's have some consistency.
And yet Dai is allowed to criticise,and insult Laudrup almost every time he posts,clearly he is also unable to let him go either.
Perhaps he needs your help,as well.
Still younger than Vasquez, who is apparently young and will learn from this to become great elsewhere. Or so we are being told.
Whats that got to do with what I said about Routledge , when you cant debate you throw the same **** and hope it sticks project . Do you have any thought to how Routledges improvement came about other than to say Laudrups gone , doesn't make a lot of sense really
A few pages back people are saying Vasquez was unlucky for his disallowed Europa League goal, and how it may have shattered his confidence leading him to be a headless chicken in every game he played for us. But Donnelly who was treated far worse and showed promise in the pre-season gets none of the same sympathy.
My opinion is that Donnelly would have done better than Vasquez who looked out of his depth from the first game he played for us.
I don't care what you said about Routledge. I was talking about your inability to deal with the fact Laudrup was sacked for poor performance.
If we are to help you move on then we need to stop deflecting the issue.
It's quite possible that joining The Swans' wasn't a good move for Donnelly. If my memory serves me correct,Liverpool and Everton were also wanting to sign him. Rodgers talked him into coming here. It hasn't worked out for him.
Project I dont think Vasquez does get an easy ride. I think he is a very poor player as do most on here. I would have him nowhere near the bech at any time. When we signed him it was clear there was no goals in him, 4 in 29 and they were scored in 2 games. But the difference I suppose is Vasquez isnt ours and was always going to return to where he came from at the end of the season. Where as Donnelly has been here for 3 years and doesnt seem to be progressing.
No need to regret it. Your comment was a completely normal turn of phrase. Don't hold yourself accountable for another's misdemeanor.
Like I say , when your stuck in debate , you say the same **** , . What Laudrup was able to get out of Routledge , that Rodgers and every other manager Wayne had couldn't , speaks volumes to Laudrups ability to spot talent , it's just a fact .
Here we go again. Poor performance,hmm. You sound like Dai.
Laudrup oversaw the highest P.L. finish - 9th.
Monk took us to our lowest finish - 12th.
Laudrup oversaw the team winning The Capital One Cup,
Monk hasn't emulated that. Of course,he may,but it's already in Laudrup' C.V.
Laudrup oversaw the team go on a successful European journey.
Monk has been to Europe,on holiday!
Laudrup signed some top class players'.
Monk hasn't signed any. He may,of course,but as of now ,that cupboard is empty.
Poor performance - my ass!
Vasquez certainly disappointed and had ample opportunities. Donnelly may well have suffered due to not being a Laudrup signing. We'll never know the truth,but I suspect he is not good enough for P.L..
In Rodgers eyes , Routledge wasn't good enough for the Premier . People get overlooked till the right guy finds a players strengths, not saying Vasquez is such a player , but Im not saying he isn't . You can never come to conclusions on a player till his career is over , Routledge is proof of that , it just takes the right man to bring a players talent to light
Okay, a balanced reply to this post.
The first two points are from the season before last. Laudrup wasn't sacked for poor performance across 18 months. He was sacked for poor performance in the 2013/2014 season alone.
Additionally, you say that Monk led us to our lowest position. But actually Monk accumulated more points per game and his team scored more goals per game than Laudrup's team in both the 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 seasons. On Monk's points per game ratio, we'd have finished on 49 points.
We call our European adventure successful, but we were lucky to get through that group. We smashed Valencia (a team well documented in Spain to have been a mess under a new manager at the start of the season. Like us, their league position stabilised after the sacking of their manager, but still finished their lowest ever placing in La Liga). But then struggled against the other teams in our group that we should have swiped aside, that the poor man's Valencia that we beat were swiping aside. A record of W2, D2, L2 would not normally progress through a European group. But thankfully for us, it did!
At the time of Laudrup's sacking, his last 10 league games boasted a record of W1, D3, L6. Our goal difference was -7 through those games. We dropped points to Aston Villa, Norwich, Hull and West Ham in those games. We can blame the injuries, but that's too simplistic. It's not been confirmed or proven otherwise that Laudrup's training (or lack of) was causing the players to be more unfit and pick up injuries. We don't know that if Laudrup had stayed in charge, whether the injuries would have ever cleared up. We can blame a small squad, but Laudrup only wanted 2 senior players per position, that was his choice.
All we know is that Laudrup was sacked. Monk took over. We survived. We go again next season. Fingers crossed we keep who we want to keep and buy some beauties.
Well,it's not "a balanced reply",at all.It's very Monkish.
I see no point in debating with people who's mind are closed,and opinions set in stone.
You stated previously that Laudrup had been sacked for poor performance,but now you clarify it.
Monk did lead us to our LOWEST EVER P.L. position,and you cannot alter that with maybe's.
To get to the later stages of The Europa Cup was a success,since very few people thought we would get that far. Had Monk been in charge you would probably be eulogising him.
By the way,I am not anti Monk,but there are many who post here are clearly anti Laudrup,with short memories and clear agendas to humiliate him at every opportunity.
Sad and very indefensible behaviour,in my opinion.
Incorrect. I have and will be questioning Monk's decisions closely, just as I did Laudrup's. But to call our European run a success is absurd. It was fun, it was the best in our history, but we were utter garbage against St Gallen and Kuban Krasnodar.
Laudrup was in charge for 24 games. Monk was in charge for 14. That makes Laudrup 63% responsible for where we finished this season. Under Laudrup's points per game, we would have finished on 38 points. Still safe, but with our arseholes still twitching today.
My opinions are set in stone and you won't change my mind. Mainly because I look at the figures and facts available to me and form my opinions based on that. The facts and figures don't change, so neither will my mind. I won't change yours though. So it's time to go and enjoy some sunshine!
Have a good day lads.