I suspect that he is just being disdainful of smaller clubs, pandering to what he thinks his supposed legions of faithful, big-club supporting readers want to hear.
Sure, we have brought in a lot of loanees, a whole team in fact. What is the problem here? We spent £0 in the transfer window, sure beats the many other teams in this division ploughing themselves millions into debt to gamble on the chance of promotion. At least half of the loanees, maybe more, have "buy at the end of the loan" clauses in them. The owners are the same, so I don't know how much that matters, but I'll assume that many of the players will be transferring to us permanently. We're a few weeks into a big project. New players, many of which arrived injured, are being slowly slotting into Zola's plans, which include an entirely new style of football. You can't expect immediate results, we have good players here with a good homegrown/British base of players too who do and will continue to feature in the side. Samuel's stats were WRONG. Chalobah only English guy in XI? Nosworthy and Murray, both English born (albeit playing for other countries but that's irrelevant...) When Hogg/Eustace return and Deeney starts we have 5/6 ENGLISH in XI.
I can't respond to a Daily Mail article without briefly mentioning that they supported Hitler in the 1930s. Anything is forgiveable, but let's never forget that. Anyway, this guy (who wasn't alive in the 1930s) makes some very powerful points. He's not arguing that this will definitely be bad for Watford (on the contrary, for a Daily Mail writer with a strong opinion to openly admit that what he dislikes could work is virtually unheard of). He's saying that the nature of the link between us and the other clubs shouldn't be allowed, that the loan loopholes should be closed, and that we have lost our most powerful way of attracting youngsters. Where I disagree with him is that players would rather play for Udinese than Watford. At the moment yes, but if we go up it will be very much personal preference as to whether the player would rather play in Serie A (with a few UEFA Cup trips to Russia, Turkey and Scandinavia), or the Premier League.
How can you judge a team after 7 games? and who are they to call a player bad, without seeing them play?
A while ago someone asked (sorry for not remembering who) 'Have we lost our Watford?' I asked 'Well, what is our Watford?'... ...I think the article sums it up, from my point of view, "Last season, they were a tight little unit managed by Sean Dyche who, against all odds and expectation, finished a very creditable 11th in the Championship with a squad of mostly British players." Even, during my time as a fan, this has been the situation most of the time. I am (was) proud that we were indeed a tight little ship, now we are in unknown waters.
- don't buy any papers but I wont even look at the Sun in the barbers etc - ever since they did their Elton John bit.... and I don't keep a bible by my bedside either
Leo, do you mean the headline 'Elton takes <name> up the ailse,' pun headline, when he got married? That was a cracker ! lol
Somewhat ironic... isnt it? Quite often people on messageboards dismiss something they're read in the media by accusing the journalist of being lazy. Personally i think its a cop out to do so.. without explaning why you think so (which i see you did tbf) For the record i feel the article is actualy pretty knowledgeable & well researched. I also feel it echoes what a growing number of Watford followers have been thinking.
Have to disagree there - I don't really consider it to be well researched at all. For instance, to my eyes, he has simply cast his eyes over two team sheets (Bristol City and Middlesboro matches) and not put any thought into his conclusions. When comparing the two line-ups he, conveniently fails to mention that three players have moved on and two players are currently injured. When, for reasons best known to himself, he claims that our team sheet lacked 'English' players (hardly a cardinal sin these days), he conveniently forgot Nosworthy and Murray. When bemoaning the fact that our playing staff lack 'British' names, he apparently wiped the names Bond, Thompson, Hodson, Dickinson, Forsyth, Smith, Garner, Iwelumo and Anya from our roster - all of whom have played at varying points this season and all of whom are British. At a pinch, I could add the name Yeates to that - he may be Irish, but the name is English. His article may well echo what a growing number of Watford followers have been thinking, but that doesn't make it accurate. Many of those may well have been in the disaffected numbers who were calling for Sean Dyche's head this time last season.
But you've highlighted just one aspect of the article.. He covers many aspects of the situation and i would say he seems to have done his research about them.
Maybe so, but it is one aspect that is rather central to his argument. He is using it to try to convince any casual reader not in the know that his opinion is accurate, that our situation is indeed detrimental to the English game when it's not. The rest of the info he has researched is readily available from a variety of sources - the Wobby, the OS or even these boards. Yet he has failed to properly analyse our situation - possibly even applied his own spin to the facts to show his opinion in a better light. Either way, it's poor journalism IMO.
Poor journalism one thing.. lazy journalism another. I was really trying to get across the fact that accusing a journalist of being lazy & then not explaining why you feel that is so is a cop out.. and a growng trend on messageboards. NB I feel we all add our own spin to how we see things... and after all this is an editorial and not a news item so he is doing what most of us would do and cherry picking the facts that go with his opinion.
Of course we all have our own ideas on football, players and club owners, but without different ideas there would be little to talk about. Read any message board comments after a game and despite having watched the same match two people will have very different views on what they have just seen. I believe that the writer of the article is a West Ham supporter, and just how much of what he thinks might subconsciously be because of dealings with Nani and Duxberry when they were there. I cannot say that I found his thoughts original, many of them had been expressed on here by people who are not paid to write. I feel that if he had written more about the state of English football in general, using WFC and others as an example of where he thinks it is going wrong then it would have made for a more interesting read. Just my feelings of course and anyone can say that I am wrong. That is what a good message board should be, with contributors putting over their point of view in their own way.
The team is still a tight unit. Obviously not everyone can see, but at training they all laugh and joke with each other and they all get on really well. There are no cliques and you often see players sharing cars in and out of training. Hogg and Forsyth always arrive together and often Yeates gives one of the coaches a lift. Also since Deeney has been back he has been in a banter war with Fitz Hall over his dress sense. They are a big family and I think this will just grow as time goes by and the english gets better.
This article really got my goat. Yes, some of his points are almost valid, but i found it agressive and hostile. What does he have against Watford! Yes, we have 42 players and a lot of them are loanees. Yes, we're all worried about the youth system and set up. However, having said that, i know that our youth are being nurtured in the right way, from what i hear. But, the 'loanees' (and i put that in inverted commas coz i don't truly believe that's what they are in the long term, or some of them anyway) put their all into each match. They play as if they care about Watford, and winning. They're not lazy...and we've had some homegrown lazy players in our time, as well as players who we have bought who we've wished would try harder. I haven't had the impression from any of these 'loanees' that they're not trying. Do they have Watford in their hearts? Probably not, but as has been said, it's very unsual to find a Doyley or a Mapps. We're unlikely to see many. I don't have a problem with what's happening at the club at the moment. Maybe i'm naive but i'm still excited for the future. The future feels far more secure and pozzotive than it has done in the last few years and that goes a long way. Is it Watford? Not in the same way but things evolve. Are we using a loophole for our own ends? Yes, most definitely...and that can be seen as good or bad, but i think it's good, if we are to get where the Pozzos want us to go..and be honest, who wouldn't want us to be in the Prem if we can get there...by whatever means and through however many loopholes we can?
Let's hope this continues. team spirit is essential, I am worried it might be eroded with so many new arrivals.
I've got two words for the article - Peterborough United. They certainly haven't been as active as us in the transfer market, so it's a group of players that are used to each other, and as far as I'm aware their squad is primarily British players and look at their start to the season. There is also the fact that international clearance has to be gained for players moving between countries, even if both countries are in the EU (I think it also has to be applied for players moving from countries within the UK/RoI if they're not from any of the 5 countries), whether the move is a loan or permanent. The FA could've always denied it for any of our new intake except Almunia, Hall and Chalobah but they didn't.
