JW on Cardiff: "The context of the game shapes the approach. We want to win for the fans and leave them on a good note where they are excited for next season and believe on it. When you're a coach on the side, you want to see the passion, hunger and desire to win duels and run back. Tactically, you can set a team up, but if you don't have that and can't suffer or defend your box (then it's no good). Hopefully we can get that balance right tomorrow."
If I remember correctly, that is the exact opposite of what they were all saying at the start of the season. There were several appreciative comments from players about how much time they spent with the ball in training. So one has to ask why it changed. Would it be over-cynical to hypothesize that Thorup was fed up with players making elementary mistakes in positioning, failing time after time to anticipate danger until too late to do anything about it, standing off when they should challenge, etc. etc.? Maybe the best way of getting out on the training pitch with the ball would have been to cut out the mistakes, not repeat them game after game. Alternatively, maybe JHT was simply too scared to have them train normally in case any more withdrew to the treatment room with training ground injury. Or maybe they would have had more time on the training pitch if they hadn't appeared so devoid of energy and reluctant to exert themselves for more than 20 minutes on match days. Whatever, I hope we hear JHT's and Glen Riddersholm's side of the story some day, as we surely will.
Gunn's account of the handling of his contract situation doesn't reflect well on Knapper's man management: It's difficult because there wasn't really a conversation. It's one of them that I don't really know too much. I had a two-minute conversation with Ben (Knapper) last week when he let me know, and that was it. There wasn't a reason that I got. Obviously, the club just want to go down a different route, and I accept that and appreciate that. I feel sad, but I wouldn't say let down or disappointed. I think sometimes people and situations run their course and the club decided it was time for me to move on. As a fan and player, I would have liked a conversation to see what we could do, but I know what I'm worth. If this club is not going to align with that, then I'm happy to go elsewhere. I didn't really have a decision to make in the end. I can't say whether I would have stayed or not, but I wouldn't say I feel disappointed." https://www.pinkun.com/sport/interviews/25136870.norwich-city-angus-gunn-sadness-canaries-exit/
And the final sentence does not reflect well on Gunn's commitment to the Club. In fairness to Knapper, how long does it take to tell a player they are not in the plan, a replacement has been sorted out, your contract is not going to be renewed, thanks for your time here. good luck and goodbye.
I was wondering about the fitness levels and whether more time on the training pitch would have potentially been better for the overall fitness levels and perhaps prevented some injuries. We will never know!
Obviously Knapper and Gunns agent would have handled all these conversations. Gunn’s agent will have set a wage figure that they wouldn’t go below and it likely doesn’t fit with the clubs new wage structure. We don’t receive parachute payments any more and have to cut our cloth accordingly. Hence the move toward younger players with potential rather than ex-PL players on high wages. Football is a job at the end of the day and whether Gunn is a fan of the club or not he will want to maximise his earnings, taking a pay cut for doing the same job doesn’t align with that. He says as much “I know my value”, he will no doubt move somewhere offering the same or more money.
All that could be true Suffolk, but the bit that hurt Gunn was being told in a 2 minute conversation with Knapper. He deserved more than that. The pressure is on Knapper now to come up with a keeper of similar or greater quality for less money. Not easy.
I’d love to have kept Gunn, personally I love having people that support the club playing for it. But if negotiations have broken down and wages are the sticking point, what else is there to say but “Thank you for your service to the club, we are sorry to see you go but we can’t meet your wage demands”. The sporting director has to remain in some way detached from these situations to make objective decisions on the playing squad, the Head Coach develops the personal relationships with the players. Agreed, pressure is on Knapper when making a decision to let a fan favourite and fan of the club leave and also a top keeper for this level. Hopefully he finds someone even better!
Thorup made constant reference to the arduousness of the Championship schedule and the Saturday - Tuesday - Saturday routine. Had he been able to call consistently on anything like his full squad, it might have been different, but the series of injuries to senior players, exacerbated by needless suspensions and disciplinary lapses, plus the influx of physically more vulnerable teenage/early 20s players, undoubtedly handicapped him. Yet no allowance appears to have been made for any of this when it came to the decision to sack him.
This is why i'm still scratching my head about letting Gunn go. It must surely be wage demands now we're minus parachute payments. Either Knapper has someone in mind or this is a big gamble especially with the backup available.
Reyes at 21 is the same age as Gunn was when he played 46 games for us. Reyes is also supposed to be a talented GK - if he doesn't get his chance now when will he?
I'd be delighted if the club is convinced he's ready for the no. 1 shirt. That would save a lot of funds and be another great story for the club to tell other aspiring juniors. Long's not made the game day squad since Wilshere took over so I'm assuming Reyes will be at least no. 2 if not first choice.
Gunn had more experience at ManCity when he came to us, but I'd also be delighted, a little nervous, if the club feels Reyes is ready to be No 1.
Sorry to correct you Rick but he never played for Man City. His first experience of first team football was when he came to us on loan aged 21.
Gunn clearly had massive wage demands way out of kilter with what the club can afford. I wouldn’t read too much into the conversation as reported by Gunn. There is a system for contract negotiations and it is not done on an emotional level like that, plus he needs a story for his next move
Long is part of the problem here. I remember that when we signed him the Millwall supporters held street parties in the joy of getting rid of him. Why we decided to give him a lengthy contract joins the story of the Marie Celeste as one of the great mysteries of the world!! Do we really want him as a number 2 to Reyes in case, like all younger players, Reyes has a bad patch? The answer is obviously no but that cannot be a reason to hold Reyes back. I think we should take that risk especially if Reyes suffered a fairly serious injury we could do a short term loan deal for players like Ruddy or Krul to come in as emergency first choice.
I was wondering about the fitness levels and wondering about whether more time on the training pitch would have resulted in less giving the lead away
We’ve not even seen Dan Barden this season either. He played several games for us in an emergency a couple of years ago and is still contracted to the club, surely he could have been given a go.
Latest manager odds: •Jack Wilshere. 4/7. •Ralph Hassenhutl. 2/1. •Gary O’Neil. 3/1. •Steve Cooper. 6/1. •Russell Martin. 6/1. •Marti Cifuentes. 16/1. •Luke Williams. 25/1. •William Still. 25/1.
