I liked both posts. That's what a forum should be, 2 people who care debating passionately is what gives this place life... Don't get the attitude of trying to sillence the person who has a different opinion to yours under the auspices of loyalty to the club. We are all loyal to Swansea City F.C. That's why we're here. We are the trainspotters of footie.
Swanselona:- (1) The Ki loan condition was a mistake but as it turned out was only a minor one from which the board hopefully will learn. (2) Laudrup lost the dressing room and had to go. Sousa made the decision to move to perceived bigger club although no one seems to comment on this. (3) If a player decides he wants to leave and does not perform it has a detrimental effect on the morale of the rest of the team and of course the club need to move him on and get the best deal possible . (4) I agree totally with your fourth point.
Swansalon's comments are reasonable, rational, and in the best interests of the Club ... IMO. Gratitude is one thing, letting sentiments cloud the analysis of the here and now and as a result fail to hold people responsible accountable is an approach that will only lead to a bad result. The Trust is a significant shareholder in the Club - I would hope that the person that represents the Trust's interest on board and the Trust leadership itself has the acumen and strength of will to be proactive on the Board and not just sit around like an ass-licking ornament nodding in approval on every occasion. The interest of owners and the interest of the supports proxied by the Trust is not necessarily one and the same thing. IMO - it is one of the Trust's roles to guard against ill-conceived decisions based more on personality and emotion than prudent business. The Trust have been remarkably silent on the happenings of this past season. I don't like that, quite frankly. Silence means we have no idea what their thinking is nor what they see their role on the board to be. Just as we need players to play at the level of the Prem, we also need executives and directors capable of running an organization with level of energy, acumen and sophistication a Prem level club requires.
So I will. If I remember correctly, Sousa was happily preparing for the next season having narrowly missed getting into the playoffs when out of the blue HJ permitted Leicester to talk to him. I don't recall HJ making much of an effort to keep him around, and HJ certainly didn't have to permit any contact at all. Why would a manager stay where he's clearly not well supported, and had not been well supported through most of the season, when another Club is willing to do so. So saying that Sousa made a decision to move is technically correct, nobody but he could decide to go, but it fails to capture the true context of the times and misrepresents Sousa's state of mind as purposely wanting out.
I agree with a lot of what Yankee Jack says but the trust is not the majority shareholder and in the end the trust member is a lone voice crying in the wilderness and not able to do much if the majority decide on a different course.
Yankee if I remember correctly there was a lot of talk that we were about to get rid of soussa at the end of the season after certain players had ran to HJ over his methods. Then we got lucky and Leceister came in for him and instead of having to pay compensation we actually received some.
Yankee I accept and am interested to read your comments about Sousa. If I remember rightly he wanted funds for new players which the board were not prepared to give him. This was also one of the reasons that Martinez left.
Jenkins didnt want Sousa anymore , and Sousa didnt want us anymore , ... two way street is how I viewed it . Sousa wanted to spend , Jenkins didnt after the players Sousa brought in already were less than impressive .
The Trust's position is around 25% - I think. Granted not even close to a controlling interest, but that doesn't mean they should just show up for the tea and biscuits either - that person needs to be able to take a position and argue it and report back when he believes that contrary decisions are being made. That rep has a role to play, the Trust has a role to play ... and there are umpteen thousand people that go to the ground on match days and tons more that watch on TV from near and far that have a role to play.
Under the circumstances facing Sousa, ANY manager would want and absolutely need to spend. Sousa didn't bring in Beattie or Kuqi. These are the two "stellar" center forwards that the Board provided in serious (not mock) support of Sousa who started the season with a projected -23 goal difference. Sousa had never heard of Beattie. Instead Sousa made Pintado work his balls off and got the defense to actually be a defense ... so much for Monk not liking his tactics ... which not only saved us from relegation but almost got us into the final promotion contest. If you remember, the Board's next major attempt at bringing in a forward was Luke Moore. Rogers took no more than two looks at him and went out brought in Borini from Chelsea on loan. JDG .... the Board wouldn't spend money on a player good enough to play in the 3rd/4th playoff in the World Cup Finals .... but our manager had to get him on a loan. Sound familiar.
I have supported the Swans for 58 years and the level we are at now is unbelievable compared with what we were when I started the journey. The present board deserve praise for getting us to the Premier League, the new training grounds, the development of the academy and hopefully the stadium expansion. For the development of the club we need to stay in the League we are in now. This is where I start to get a little uneasy. I wonder if the board have the ambition to meet the expectations of the fans and move us on. Whilst I do not mind the players we have signed so far I feel we need to consider higher profile signings. To do this we need to keep raising our profile and to compete in Europe which is why I consider the domestic cup competitions very important to us. It is going to get harder each year and Laudrup was right when he said we have to improve the squad to stand still.
I would have thought that the Trust should be writing a monthly report or so to update the supporters on what the club is up to behind the scenes. I'm not seeing divulge transfer deals etc but stuff like what the club is aiming for over the next few years, results of any votes that the board took, etc.
The trust is nothing more than a voice piece on the board with no real power. It was the trust that was the ones who first lobbied the board that Laudrup should go and it was jinx who wanted to stick with laudrup in the hope the season would improve, Well it did not improve and we fell like a stone to just 2pts off relegation and not a lot of time left and a decision was made to change the way we played and that meant laudrup needed to go. The trust even though they don't have a vote were still influential in the sacking of laudrup....
1) The Ki loan was a mistake, and I would say more than a minor one myself, considering the injury crisis we were going through. Both the board and ML are to blame though. What about the backstabbing by the board pre ML sacking, ML knew that the games against the big clubs, like us fans knew, were somewhat less important, I mean anything from the big clubs are a bonus, and thats all they really are, but then why did HJ say what he did in the match programme? It was personal, everyone could see that. It was a dig at the manager. I mean what chairman, says good job in person, shakes hand, then sacks them over the phone. Its unprofessional on so many levels. And they need to be able to take the criticism for it. They are not perfect, they will make mistakes, just like they will make some great decisions, but if your willing to praise, then be willing to criticise, I personally am willing to do both. Are you? 2) Laudrup lost the dressing room, who exactly? Monk? Williams? Because the team IMO played worse under Monk than they did under Laudrup. Yes we were not quite right under ML, but I think it had more to do with losing some of the old guard. And if ML lost the dressing room and had to be sacked, should we now sack Monk considering the current exodus of players, mainly the likes of Pablo, Michu, or is that deemed as salvageable. Both smack of the same problem, groupies in the team, whether the Spanish lot, or the old guard, both are as bad as each other, so lets sack Monk too shall we? Or not? Either way, that does not explain why HJ and ML hadn't spoken for months before the sacking, as we were doing just fine earlier in the season, so clearly a rift in the dressing room wasn't the reason for that. This was much more personal if you ask me. 3) Like Suarez's request and tantrum to leave last season, that didn't quite hurt Liverpool's morale. And definitely didn't quite go to plan for Suarez. Liverpool played hard ball, he knew he would have to play or sit on the bench (didn't they put him to train with the reserves as punishment?) Look how that turned out, Liverpool had him for another season, and profited 35m on what Arsenal offered last season. Sorry, £34,999,999 profit Granted they don't all turn out like that, but I refuse to agree that the club should bow down to player pressure. Instead, I would chuck them in the reserves.
I am not pro or anti Laudrup or Monk just pro Swans. It is well documented Ki and Laudrup did not get on so he may well not have featured much if he had come back. The players and not just the West Ham debacle appeared to have lost their desire on the pitch for the last few games under Laudrup. This resurfaced under Monk and if Vorm had been 2 inches taller we would have been unbeaten in our last 4 games. Whilst I don't approve of players blackmailing their clubs in most cases if you don't move them on and get a fee you are just cutting off your nose to spite you face. Unless you see backstabbing yourself no one can know exactly what's going on. As I stated in a previous post whilst appreciating what the board have done up to now, I did query whether they have the ambition to move us on. Whilst the Champions League is out of reach we should be trying to get back into the Europa League. Incidentally I never approved of Laudrup's view about 2 Leagues and agreed with Jenkins that we shouild try to win every game even though we all know this is not possible.
So,e fantastic comments above from swanselona,yankee and nosu Making me fall in love with this board all over again k..
