Perspective

DragonPhilljack said:

We are only now catching up with last years season due to Garry Monk. Forget the stats for a moment, and look at the performances and the negative way we have played most of the season under Laudrup, so static we became under him, so predictable for teams to play against us, that there were reflections of our Sousa era. When you look at our last 2 games, you can see that Laudrup had sucked the life out of us, clearly there were issues with fitness, but I think it went a lot deeper than that, many I talked to after games, were not enjoying the football at the Liberty under Laudrup, and clearly Laudrup was failing to get the best out of our squad.

In the final analysis it cannot be ignored that in our first two seasons we were a clear cut above the relegation dross of half a dozen teams at the bottom, but too many times this season under Laudrup we looked part of the furniture at the basement, and that alone regardless of stats could not continue, Laudrup had to go. Getting back to our roots will see us comfortable where we should be in the top 10, we are good enough for that as we have proved in previous seasons!................

Click to expand...

Have to agree with this, watch every game home and away live and was getting frustrated seeing my team being slowly changed from a passing side with width to a static narrow one which was in danger of slipping further and further down the table. Injuries etc were not really the issue it was the fact that we were losing our identity as a side with flair and imagination under a manager who I held in high regard but who of late seemed to lack any desire to raise the tempo or spirits of our players. We all knew he was leaving in the summer and for him to disappear off to Paris after the worst display of the season at West Ham was the final straw for me. I was really worried that we would continue to drop further down the league and into the relegation mire and so something had to change. The transformation under Garry in just two games has been fantastic, he has brought back the self belief in the players along with our pass and move game which we have always relied on, still not completely out of trouble but am far more confident than I was a couple of weeks ago.

Thanks for that. Very interesting.

Looks like we were behind last season when Laudrup left and are now ahead. Made up 3 points in the last two games alone.

P.S. Spoke to two seperate groups of Danes today and they all agreed that it was expected and understandable. Not bitter at all.

Nice to get a perspective from non-groupies.

Nottage Jack said:

This is not actually correct. We were 2 points better off than last season (comparing teams played) when Laudrup left, with the last two games just maintaining that.

Not saying that we are not now better off with GM, as I think I have made it clear that I think we are, but from a points point of view only there is no change in the last two games when compared to last season.

Click to expand...

Are you sure?

I thought we only drew home to Reading last year and lost away to Stoke.

Nottage Jack said:

Thanks



As I stated, I actually agreed that it was time for ML to go. The way we were playing was stale , even if we were picking up the same points as last year (based on the teams we played). So whilst the decision to get rid of ML looks a harsh one if you JUST look at the stats, I think it was more to do with the background stuff / player unrest / training issues/ lack of interest by ML in training & transfers etc.

If you think about it, I suspect the 'master Magician ' Mr Jenkins himself, knew that the results WOULD improve even under ML after the tough fixtures we had Mid Dec to MId Jan, so he bided his time, let ML drown in the bad fixtures, and changed as soon as he could after, so that GM had the benefit of at least a potentially good ' honeymoon period'. My opinion is that if HJ had waited until the end of the season, our style would have indeed been 'eroded away' as he put it, even if we finished in a respectable position.. (look at where we finished under Sousa, very similar ).

Anyway, I fully support HJ in his decison and it goes without saying 100% behind GM. Thank you ML for the trophy, but we needed to move on.

Click to expand...

An interesting theory , and one which if true shows the man's/board are no dummies and not to be underestimated .I wonder if there is any truth to that it's certainly plausible and one which meant the board needed to show nerve and no indication of what they were plotting (apologies if that sounds melodramatic ) .

Nottage Jack said:

Thanks



As I stated, I actually agreed that it was time for ML to go. The way we were playing was stale , even if we were picking up the same points as last year (based on the teams we played). So whilst the decision to get rid of ML looks a harsh one if you JUST look at the stats, I think it was more to do with the background stuff / player unrest / training issues/ lack of interest by ML in training & transfers etc.

If you think about it, I suspect the 'master Magician ' Mr Jenkins himself, knew that the results WOULD improve even under ML after the tough fixtures we had Mid Dec to MId Jan, so he bided his time, let ML drown in the bad fixtures, and changed as soon as he could after, so that GM had the benefit of at least a potentially good ' honeymoon period'. My opinion is that if HJ had waited until the end of the season, our style would have indeed been 'eroded away' as he put it, even if we finished in a respectable position.. (look at where we finished under Sousa, very similar ).

Anyway, I fully support HJ in his decison and it goes without saying 100% behind GM. Thank you ML for the trophy, but we needed to move on.

Click to expand...

Or looked at another way, if HJ had waited until the end of the season then ML might have emerged from the "drowning" period to have performed very well and then HJ would have lost his opportunity to remove him.

Yankee_Jack said:

Or looked at another way, if HJ had waited until the end of the season then ML might have emerged from the "drowning" period to have performed very well and then HJ would have lost his opportunity to remove him.

Click to expand...

Maybe knew he was leaving in the summer or had a very strong inclination that he was , we'd have been safe in the PL & if Laudrup walked then no money to pay out from the club basically a win ,win situation

For me it was an opportunity lost when Laudrup called Jenkins' bluff and agreed that Monk should join the coaching staff. We have had only two games to judge Monk's progress and it is possible that things could yet come apart. That, however, is an indefinable, and I am happy to give Monk full credit for the obvious uplift in our approach to the game. Tactically, I see no great difference. Anti Laudrup posters will try and point to greater width etc which is a nonsense. ML used width but varied it with wingers coming inside.

It is said that he used a lot of long ball. No, he used MORE long balls again to vary our game and make us less predictable. As I said, the greatest difference I saw over the two games was that the team did play with more spirit and fight.

But why an opportunity lost? Simply this. We could have had the best of both worlds with the two in tandem. Of course Laudrup had his faults but, as time passes, we will also see Monk's faults emerging because no one is infallible. We could have had a united camp combining Monk's undoubted assets and the best of Laudrup's. And with all the good will in the world, no way will Monk attract players to the club as Laudrup did/could have done in the future.

Unfortunately, West Ham was the catalyst. It was a desperate performance but don't think that Monk won't be responsible for something similar in the future, because he will. That's football. He will, however, benefit from all the players returning from injury and getting some game time - just as Laudrup would have. He will also benefit from us not having to play 2/3 games a week with the resultant drain on energy - just as Laudrup would have.

Think back. Shelvey's double aberration against Liverpool; Williams' suicidal pass against Hull; the two contentious penalties against West Ham at home (Cole) and Stoke. There's 8 points there without thinking too hard for other examples, not to mention that the team would have been playing with a lot less pressure and a lot more confidence with those points in the bank.

Fine margins indeed.

With the players we can afford there will always be bad losses and decisions going against us no matter who is manager , I agree Monk does`nt have the pulling power ML has but the extra revenue we earn by staying up year on year will attract some good standard players over the coming seasons as money talks in this game.
Jenkins has done very well but he is only the front man and Morgan will be as ruthless as needed to keep the prem money coming in so that we dont start nagging him to put his hand in his pocket to keep us rolling.

Very good post Ivor...

//

//* Apologies I was on my mates lappy.

What I said was the statistics are irrelevant because if you, I or anyone else thought Michael Laudrup was doing a good job or not there was a break down between him, Huw Jenkins + the board.

He had to go. Moving on ...

While having a laugh at the bloobies losing to Wigan I started to hear some naughty things aqbout Laudrup and his agent. Maybe others who know people at the Swans can confirm or hopefully deny this as I'd prefer not to believe it but it was from an 80%-20% source I can usually trust.

Allegedly Bayram Tutumlu was purposefully, deliberately and negatively influencing our transfer targets in Jan window.

We, the board, tried to sign a striker and winger from Eredivisie and La Liga but BT used his contacts to slander the Swansea board to all who would listen. He negatively influenced our transfer negotiations BEFORE we had started any dialogue with our targets.

He also used his contacts not only to slander our board but also to seed doubt on ML staying at Swansea.

Allegedly, ML made no requests to the board for any new players in Jan window, which was very odd. Also, allegedly he made no attempt to intervene or stop his agent from interfering in Swansea business

The board, during an emergency meeting, called when ML took his impromptu trip to Paris (PSG still trying to get rid of Laurent Blanc?) after the West Ham game, concluded that ML was culpable in the transfer shenanigans and that also he was covertly seeking posts elsewhere.

This is the bit I don't like - the board also concluded that the only way Tutumlu knew of our transfer targets was if ML had told him, how else would he have know ?

Due to this and not our form, ML was sacked upon his return to Wales. He is currently forbidden from entering any Swansea City facility or making contact with or talking to any Swansea City FC staff or players, senior and under 20's. He effectively is under the same ban as his agent.

Can any one else shed any light on this please, I'd like a little confirmation as I don't want to believe this, its too nasty and sheds a dark light on someone I held in high regard.

Nottage Jack said:

This is not actually correct. We were 2 points better off than last season (comparing teams played) when Laudrup left, with the last two games just maintaining that.

Not saying that we are not now better off with GM, as I think I have made it clear that I think we are, but from a points point of view only there is no change in the last two games when compared to last season.

Click to expand...

The problem with this is, that it assumes that the top teams prove a harder game, which is not always the case, as teams at the bottom can be very tough as we have found out too many times over the years, that's why I prefer to evaluate on the like for like week when comparing seasons, it is at the end of the day only an indicter, as stats can be deceptive to say the least!.............

Just put it in with the other excuses for Laudrup departure , theres no shortage of hersay floating around to shine Laudrup in a bad light .

Lets cut to the chase and look at laudrups record of wins not just this season but from day one and it dont take a brain surgeon to see that Laudrup had no motivation skills whatsoever and he could not master a game plan to beat his opposite number to save his life. It was the same old same old with no variation of game plan only players, He changed our philosophy and principals far to much that there was only one direction we were going and that was down. Jinx had no choice but to sack him and give the job to someone who knows the way Swansea works and would rather go down fighting than go down with a whimper. We have a better chance of staying up now than we did two weeks ago...

Very interesting Stumpy.

ML always seemed an honest and decent bloke while here so I hope there is nothing in any rumours about him being otherwise.It was a pity he didn't work out a bit longer for us but what's happened is beyond our control and I hope he does well in his future post as with our previous managers.
If it turns out there is any truth in the rumour above then surely that would be gross misconduct and a sackable offence and the club would be loathed to pay him a penny more ?

The sooner all this is put behind us the better so we can focus 100% on Monks reign instead .

Stumpy said:

While having a laugh at the bloobies losing to Wigan I started to hear some naughty things aqbout Laudrup and his agent. Maybe others who know people at the Swans can confirm or hopefully deny this as I'd prefer not to believe it but it was from an 80%-20% source I can usually trust.

Allegedly Bayram Tutumlu was purposefully, deliberately and negatively influencing our transfer targets in Jan window.

We, the board, tried to sign a striker and winger from Eredivisie and La Liga but BT used his contacts to slander the Swansea board to all who would listen. He negatively influenced our transfer negotiations BEFORE we had started any dialogue with our targets.

He also used his contacts not only to slander our board but also to seed doubt on ML staying at Swansea.

Allegedly, ML made no requests to the board for any new players in Jan window, which was very odd. Also, allegedly he made no attempt to intervene or stop his agent from interfering in Swansea business

The board, during an emergency meeting, called when ML took his impromptu trip to Paris (PSG still trying to get rid of Laurent Blanc?) after the West Ham game, concluded that ML was culpable in the transfer shenanigans and that also he was covertly seeking posts elsewhere.

This is the bit I don't like - the board also concluded that the only way Tutumlu knew of our transfer targets was if ML had told him, how else would he have know ?

Due to this and not our form, ML was sacked upon his return to Wales. He is currently forbidden from entering any Swansea City facility or making contact with or talking to any Swansea City FC staff or players, senior and under 20's. He effectively is under the same ban as his agent.

Can any one else shed any light on this please, I'd like a little confirmation as I don't want to believe this, its too nasty and sheds a dark light on someone I held in high regard.

Click to expand...

None of this surprises me, I've never seen us have such a disinterested manager? I can confirm some of what you say regarding Tutumlu, and I stated back before Jenkins kicked him out that he was a spiv of the highest order, which seems a very unusual bed partner to Laudrup's gentlemanliness approach in the media, if the board have any proof of some of this, which I'm sure they have from third parties, then Laudrup will struggle to get his compensation!.............