Not me! If players think they are bigger than the club, then they can clear off, Monk is in charge and I trust him to do what's best for the squad!â¦â¦â¦â¦â¦â¦â¦â¦â¦
Without knowing the facts Vetch you seem redily and happily to lay all the blame at Monks feet. Do you know something we don't or do you make up scenarios to support your views? I would fibd that bizarre.
The truth is Valley,that absolutely no-one knows anything about what goes on at The Liberty,yet that doesn't stop people coming up with their own interpretations,hoping to look good,and impress the easily impressed. Monk is the new kid on the block,and doing what the unwise new kids do,i.e.,cause friction. I have been in management,and he has already broken some golden rules. To date he has done precious little to justify the adulation of the sheep. Now,in time he may become something worthwhile,but until then my jury is out,and he has a mountain to climb to emulate Laudrup. Let me repeat myself,I am NOT ANTI MONK,far from it,I want him to succeed,but I feel able to air my opinions,and will continue so to do. Unfortunately,this forum only seems to work for some if everyone is singing the same song.
It was an ironic post roof, highlighting the fact that Vetch was doing the same thing that he was criticising.
Wha?? He's been here longer than just about everyone. I'm not accusing you of being anti Monk and I agree that we can't tell what goes on behind the gates of Mordor, but if Garry Monk is the unsettling influence now, why was he not when he was club captain over the last ten years? When the other new foreign players arrived? He's been present when Rodgers took over, Paulo Sousa took over, his old pal Martinez took over and was never seen as such then (as far as I'm aware). Sorry Vetch, I just don't see it.
Here you go again, you state correctly that nobody knows what is happening and then state that Monk is the one causing friction. You also suggest that this forum only works if everyone is of the same opinion yet label the pro Monk brigade as sheep. I would argue that the Laudrup v Monk debates etc helped improve the forum. You can't have it both ways Vetch.
Read Monks book, had alot to say about Sousa, same with Laudrup on the USA tour . So out of his last 4 managers he has had things to say about 2 of them . I get what Vetch is saying and agree with alot of it but Monk is the man in charge now and in fairness its another managerial technique to cut a few heads to make the others jump up and take notice. Time will tell with Monk, he will do his best to succeed and thats all we can ask for, i personally think its a mistake to let go the likes of Michu,poz,pablo and canas but of course we are struggling to find out the real details. Monk is in the middle of it somewhere though, as his fight with chico tells us . Monk has the club at heart and perhaps thinks he is doing what he thinks is best for scfc. The board are backing him and he is working hard to pay bak the faith, i think the job is too early for him but we will soon find out .
I don't want anything "both ways",but a level playing field would be nice. Sorry to disagree,Valley,but debates re Monk and Laudrup have been terminated,i.e.,thread closed ,on too many occasions. It is my opinion,from what I have read,that there is friction in the camp. Since Monk is now in charge,he is responsible.
Sorry,should have said "new kid on the managerial block". I assumed readers would make that distinction.
More nonsense from the mystic of free will. Who are you referring to? anyone in particular? or are you simply staining your canvas with vagaries? Who was waxing lyrical about the boy, but now thinks the boy has the plague simply on the hearsay that Monk doesn't rate him? How do you know Monk doesn't rate Pozuello? do you have any secret facts to share? Monk doesn't rate him you say. What is your slant on that? define your insinuation in simple terms. We agree that it is very difficult to respect such a dismissive attitude, but you often dismiss Monk based it would seem on conjecture and hearsay so, as I have asked, if you have a bone-fide fact to bolster your malice then share it or ..........
Stumpy - I've been the biggest critic of some of the speculation and conjecture that goes on here but there are some things we do know or some things that can reasonably be inferred from events we know are real. Firstly, Pozuelo is definitely out of favour - this is based on the fact he hasn't traveled to the U.S and fits with my mate speaking to him a while back when he said he wouldn't be seen in a Swans shirt again and was on his way out. I don't know if you're aware but I posted a dated photo here to prove this conversation took place. Now this may be down to Monk not liking him / not rating him or it may have come from the player. If it's the former then that's that - it's the Manager's decision but it's curious bearing in mind many posters here rate Pozuelo as a young prospect and many experienced pros too. But hey ho, the Manager has the final word but it's not unreasonable to question that judgment. If it's the latter and the player doesn't want to play for Monk/ us again then it could be argued it's the Manager's job to 'do a Suarez', hold him to his contract and play him. As that isn't going to happen it's a reasonable inference Monk doesn't rate him enough. Either way the conclusion's the same - rightly or wrongly Monk doesn't rate Pozuelo.
Same could be said of Michu and Pablo I've always considered Poz as a player who could get through brick wall defences and that gave him an edge. Shame if he goes IMO.
Shame on any player that leaves for any reason but its monks shout and he calls the shots. He is not going to divulge any players reasons for leaving whether its the player who wants to leave or that monk himself has told a player he wont get much game time if any this season. Good luck to all the players moving on but they are of no concern now as we move on to the new season with a fresh outlook and a new set up not just the first team but throughout the club.....
I know that's what you meant, but the point I'm making still rings true for me. If he's able to be depicted as a destructive or toxic influence now, I would have thought we would have heard more of it before. That's all.
