I just think everyone should hold their nerve and not let a Daily Mail article set the hares running. I look at it slightly differently as last year we wouldn't have been the subject of any newspaper article and pundits tipping us for relegation! Change is inevitable and for me it could have been worse and it is still early days, I've said I'll wait until mid way through the Season and then form an opinion, right now i'ts still Watford. Couple of things, reading through this thread prompted me to look at Granada as I thought if anyone should be concerned it's their supporters as more is coming out of Granada than going in, or so it seems. They lie 3rd from bottom of the Spanish Div 1 after 7 games, but more interesting is that they only have 5 former Udinesse players. Udinesse on the other hand are 6th from bottom of Serie A but doing slightly better. Keep the faith, it's just a different faith.
I think its the first time that I've been to Vicarage Road and the opposing supporters (Bristol City)have chanted "Eng-ger-land" at us and I think it sums up Watford at the moment. I just hope we don't become a laughing stock of the division by having too much foreign quantity and not enough foreign quality........
I dismissed it because of knowledge of the reporter and of this paper. From experience (meaning I have read a number of things of theirs) I find they try to be sensationalist. They highlight the negative areas without providing the counter-argument. All they want to is cause controversy, which sells (or they hope it sells). For me the paper is a joke and would never read it, although you would have seen slightly lower down from the quoted comment that I have read this particular article, and it was pretty much what I was expecting. I don't find it knowledgable at all, rather poorly researched, something that a non-Watford fan could probably research by reading some of the comments on the Wobby site. I think the Rookery guys have got it pretty spot on; http://www.fromtherookeryend.com/ The less said about Martin Samuel and his beloved West Ham the better!
Heard worse yellow but maybe it was a West Country compliment, I wonder if that bothers the likes of Man City, Chelsea or QPR.
There is freedom to work anywhere within the EU if you're an EU Citizen so some would not require international clearence. It is the Government who issue work visas not the FA. Other Players whos origin is South America or Africa for example were signed by Udinese and they come under that countries (Italy's) rules for issuing work visa's. The complication is the loan arrangement as to which countrys employment laws are relevant - I would think that since their registration remains in Italy that the Government see their documentation as being already carried out or certainly easier to confirm if it is needed. I cannot remember any of the Loanees being reffered to requiring clearance. They would definitly need some sort of visa though to enter this country. An interesting issue though.
But why does it need to be better researched than that? Its an editorial piece and he is giving his own personal views on how he see's it. He seems to have the basic facts of whats happened correct and has formed his opinion from there. No? PS The Roookeryend blog seems well balanced and isnt all negative about the article. Does that mean you arent as well?
martin samuel is not what i'd call a balanced journalist who 'calls things as he sees them'. as a cardiff fan i've witnessed the 'soul of the club being consigned to the dustbin'. however at the very least we will benefit from top quality players (bought, not loaned) , new training facilities and a bigger stadium. with watford it is a bit sad whats going on - you were doing well under dyche and not alot seemed to be wrong, 11th given the financial constraints could be seen as an excellent season. you are now part of a group of 3 other teams, each run for the benefit of udinese. stick in an a list celebrity manager who wont know anything about the championship (only surprise is they didnt go for sven) and a director of football with a dubious past, load the team up with foreigners there to be developed for other teams and hopefully make a few quid if it all miraculously falls into plan. this is on a different level of madness to whats happened here at cardiff. surely administration would be a better option?
Swamp, I am sure we would both be happy if the owners of our teams were from the nations involved but they are not. Watford would not be functioning if Lawrence Bassini had continued and I am sure Cardiff City were in the same sort of place before your Malaysians arrived. What is good about our experiment is we have players at Watford who are perhaps better than our normal level If they are no good they can be sent away, if they play well they will go anyway which is normal for us.
I'd say it is poor because it is purely one-sided. Surely if he wants it to be taken seriously, he should comment on all the facts, not just the ones that suits his argument. It comes across as someone wanting to have a dig at Watford rather than someone who wants to tell the public what is happening at the club. He likes to point out some 'facts', but conveniently leaves out plenty of others. Of course it is his 'right' to comment, but is also our right to respond, and suggest it is a poor article. He just obviously has a wider audience than we do on here. Yes there are some concerns about the club at the moment, but I don't know he can criticise us so much after such a short period of time. If we are doing the same in 3 years, if no academy products have come through and we are still filling our squad with over a dozen Udinese/Granada imports, then fine, write an article like this, but not after 3 months!
Oh, and I would like to say that the title "Why Watford are a snapshot of all that's wrong with the modern game" is so wide off the mark it's unreal. Personally, I would say the Premiership is pretty much what is wrong with football today. Paying £200k a week for players, charging £50+ to attend a football match, which is pricing the 'common man' out of watching a game that they made, rich foreign owners pouring tens and hundreds of millions into their club just so they can compete. One perfect example is Portsmouth... the need to spend the money they did just to try and compete with the big boys, but other than the FA Cup, failed... and look where they are now! How about Liverpool paying £35m for a player who they loan out a year later! How about a few stats for this season in all comps. 25 players used, 15 our 'own' 10 loanees. Of our own, between them they have started 50 (plus 10 as sub) while the loanees have started 27 (19 between Abdi, Pudil and Vydra alone) and 11 sub appearances. We are hardly foregoing our own players for these loaness. We do have a good core of our own, and Zola recognises that!
Hows this for a unit? They all look like they are having fun. Tweets from Fitz, Bonham and Hoban seem to indicate a good time was had by all.
And fair play to him for that. I honestly thought that he would spend some time 'assessing' Deeney for his suitability for the style of football he wants us to play before discarding him - but he at least realises that players like Troy are indispensable in this division for their attitude, style and work rate - I'd say that once he saw what Troy could offer he jumped at the chance to include him on the teamsheet. I only pray that he can help help him hone is shooting skills now.
Started a team thread for Saturday elsewhere but in reality if Hall and Doyley plus Deeney played which from what Zola said post match in terms of saying he changed the game much be likely we will only field 3/4 loan players..of which one is from Chelsea.
He is not saying that "the project" will not work, not even that Watford will not get promoted at some point. He is saying it should not be allowed to work, because it is wrong that any club should be allowed to take on unlimited loanees from one other co-owned club , becoming little more than the finishing school or school of last resort for the parent club. He says that way of working destroys the history of the "junior" club and undermines its own Academy. Who would disagree? It also subordinates the priorities of the manager to those of the owners, since the main aim of the club is now to develop a few players for lucrative sale from the dozens sent for polishing. Again , a sound point, and one that suggests that "proper" managers like Ferguson or Wenger or GT would never work in such a system. It is quite possible to believe that the Pozzo's saved Watford from administration, yet also think that this way of working is neither in the best interests of the wider game, nor consistent with Watford's identity as a "community club".
Thats pretty much how i saw the article and i think there is a tendancy to rubbish what he's written because he has spoken in negative terms about the predicament we are in now. Had it been positive i doubt people would have torn him or the article apart.. regardless of whether his 'facts' were accurate or not.
