Ah diddums

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Missing Lambo

Missing Lambo

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2011
2,688
3,243
113
Chester
Just been reading the stuff about De Canio's sacking and apparently the senior players didn't like the fact that PDC had had a go at them after their latest lacklustre (spelled C.R.A.P.) performance.

"The big nasty man came in and said it was all our fault, so I told teacher and she made him stand outside" the Black Cats skipper told the Noddy Times.

Now look. I think De Canio is madder than a bucket of frogs, but might he not have a point when he says that players need to take some responsibility? Contrast with our own man, who when it was suggested that he might take a bit of credit for the way Saints outplayed Liverpool simply smiled and suggested that the credit was due to the players. Surely then, if Saints go and lose 3-0 at home to Palace next time out, the players deserve a bit of stick don't they?

I'm close to sounding like the Daily Mail (aarrrrggghhhhhh) but surely this is all about rights and responsibility being out of balance?

P.S De Canio is still a prat, of course!
 
Lambo is a scouser - rejoice! said:
Just been reading the stuff about De Canio's sacking and apparently the senior players didn't like the fact that PDC had had a go at them after their latest lacklustre (spelled C.R.A.P.) performance.

"The big nasty man came in and said it was all our fault, so I told teacher and she made him stand outside" the Black Cats skipper told the Noddy Times.

Now look. I think De Canio is madder than a bucket of frogs, but might he not have a point when he says that players need to take some responsibility? Contrast with our own man, who when it was suggested that he might take a bit of credit for the way Saints outplayed Liverpool simply smiled and suggested that the credit was due to the players. Surely then, if Saints go and lose 3-0 at home to Palace next time out, the players deserve a bit of stick don't they?

I'm close to sounding like the Daily Mail (aarrrrggghhhhhh) but surely this is all about rights and responsibility being out of balance?

P.S De Canio is still a prat, of course!
Click to expand...

Talk about missing the point.
 
Lambo is a scouser - rejoice! said:
And what is the point? That De Canio is mad? That he is known to rant and rave? Sunderland knew this
Click to expand...

The point being that just because they earn a lot of money doesn't mean they have to sit there and get abused by their boss. I wouldn't stand for it, and neither would you. So why should they?
 
Players have too much power at times, sure.

That doesn't mean that they have no right to complain if a petty tyrant is throwing ranting fits to the detriment of the team, though. If your boss created an ill-defined project, had a large hand in ensuring that it was not running smoothly, and then took to haranguing you in front of your coworkers and the public because you weren't making it work, you'd surely take the complaint up a couple levels, would you not?
 
I think the point is that most decent managers [Pochettino, Adkins and the like] would never openly criticize their players in public? Its one thing taking a player to one side having a dig, but an entirely different thing to go public.
 
Sometimes footballers need that kind of treatment. There's plenty of evidence to show that they're not the most professional bunch, and they either need to be whipped into shape or be sold. Di Canio was at least attempting a departure from the short-sightedness that their board and previous managers have shown, and trying to assemble a gelled, professional squad.
 
I think the salient point is whether PDC was actually managing badly and sending them out there to get slaughtered or whether they were poorly disciplined, didn't train hard enough and didn't take directions. This we will never know so its hard to know who's side to take.
 
I think the players didn't like being criticised in public...what happens in the dressing room, stays there. This was what made Dani cross...he was shocked that Lamella went public about him smacking him round the face. Apparently hitting Lamella round the chops was acceptable, but him complaining about it in public broke the footballers' secret code of silence :)
 
Joe said:
Sometimes footballers need that kind of treatment. There's plenty of evidence to show that they're not the most professional bunch, and they either need to be whipped into shape or be sold. Di Canio was at least attempting a departure from the short-sightedness that their board and previous managers have shown, and trying to assemble a gelled, professional squad.
Click to expand...

"When soldiers lack discipline, the fault lies with their commander." Tywin Lannister.
 
Pie said:
"When soldiers lack discipline, the fault lies with their commander." Tywin Lannister.
Click to expand...

I can hardly argue with that great man, but in the case of these Sunderland players the fault probably lies with their previous commanders.
 
Points being missed here in abundance, not least by the pedants. I am not saying that a manager has a right to rant. I do not approve of that. What I am saying is that if the job is being screwed up everyone in the workforce needs to look at themselves. Blaming the boss is the easy way out.

And yes Di Canio is still an idiot, and shouldn't be appointed to manage a piss up in a brewery. That does not mean that his argument that players need to accept some responsibility isn't valid.
 
Lambo is a scouser - rejoice! said:
Points being missed here in abundance, not least by the pedants. I am not saying that a manager has a right to rant. I do not approve of that. What I am saying is that if the job is being screwed up everyone in the workforce needs to look at themselves. Blaming the boss is the easy way out.

And yes Di Canio is still an idiot, and shouldn't be appointed to manage a piss up in a brewery. That does not mean that his argument that players need to accept some responsibility isn't valid.
Click to expand...

If Di Canio was managing a piss-up in a brewery, I would very much like to be there.
 
Is is not something to do with how the critique is delivered - with PDC there was no round about way of doing it - he delivered with a meat cleaver and tank it was brutal and harsh - he doesn't seem to understand ego's or doesn't give a toss about them - it comes down to man management - there are of course ways of delivering critique unfortunately he couldn't do it in a way that could be accepted hence the player revolt.
 
Problem is that this season, these players are largely his signings, unlike the mob he inherited. So if they need a bollocking (and I think they probably deserved it) so soon after the start of season, he has clearly signed the wrong players. I don`t envy who ever has to try and turn that shambles around.
 
AberdeenSaint said:
Problem is that this season, these players are largely his signings, unlike the mob he inherited. So if they need a bollocking (and I think they probably deserved it) so soon after the start of season, he has clearly signed the wrong players. I don`t envy who ever has to try and turn that shambles around.
Click to expand...

Actually, they don't appear to be his signings; he's the head coach rather than the manager, and thus doesn't appear to have much influence over signings.

Now, the clearout is more his doing, as is the impetus behind the overhaul, but by all indications the individuals brought in largely owe to Roberto De Fanti, their DoF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back