The people who need to agree with Monk are the FA. Doesn't matter if other managers agree with him really. The FA won't do anything about it though because none of the richer teams want it to happen as they know that their teams are the ones riddled with diving, playacting bastards who would rather dive for a penalty/red card than score a goal. Retrospective action for diving and playacting would hurt the top teams the most - and I doubt the FA want to damage the relationships with those teams. While the FA maybe the law, they are certainly under the thumb of the rich foreign owners.
Surely it does. If every manager came out and made a stand against this then the FA would have to listen and take some action. I agree that they wont and Monk is pissing in the wind, because god forbid somone give something against the top 4 sides in this country and make it a level playing field.
Unfortunately wont happen TLF. Each manager is his own Island I'm afraid. Even little Sparky Hughesy of Stokey Divey fame has changed his tune. The way he's been bleating it sounds now as if he advocates diving, this after calling for 'third eye' technology be introduced to review dives in the penalty box. sparkey to dull now to be taken seriously any more
A Stoke manager should know better and zip his lip. A set of rule changes to punish dangerous plays and diving would put a team like Stoke iin relegation.The as is rules favors a""Stoke"" type team
I don't agree with Monk one bit, why the hell should we be the moral compass for the rest of the league. Unfortunately Monks public stance on this has dumped this added pressure on our squad and like it or not, we will be under scrutiny because of it. We are now under the microscope and every time one of ours falls over in a tackle his actions will be analysed by every fan and pundit waiting for us to fekk up. NO other team has to deal with this. Morreno gave us an example of how this moral high ground can and will kick us in the arse. Morreno WAS blatantly fouled in the box yet stayed on his feet but lost the ball. His reaction betrayed a footballers frustration when he booted the ball into the hoarding. I suggest he did this not because he lost the ball but because he was frustrated that he lost a penalty opportunity, he was frustrated because he second guessed himself, stayed on his feet when fouled and we paid the consequences, we got NOTHING. Would he be a cheat if he dropped, no, would he be a diver, no, the player clearly fouled him, but I fear Monks words from the training field rang in his ears. Consequently we drew a game we could, at a push, have won. Consequences. Immoral it may be there's so many ways to spell it out for Monk, No one wants to be the ONLY seal in a sea of sharks. Never turn your cheek if someone's bitten the other one, Marquess of Queensberry rules don't apply if someone stamps on you nuts, just thought I'd slip that on in. Not saying we should cheat, but we should not be the moral compass for the league either; especially as the rest of the league will do anything they can, moral or not, to gain any possible advantage they can over us and each other. I think, some how, Monk has to unshackle the team, take the leash off the dogs so to speak and let them run with the pack. Wont be pretty all of the time but at least they'll be running in the same field.
So you agree that diving is ok then stumpy.. Monk is spot on to complain and i hope he carries on complaining about sub standard refereeing...
Agree with Stumpy. Valid points. Being street smart is the name of the game, and you can be street smart without compromising some core principles. Monk is a manager of a club in third place in the discipline rankings (i.e only two clubs have been carded and committed more fouls than us this season - Newcastle and Stoke). Monk's prima donna crusade on diving and poor refereeing is pointless in the short and long term - he might as well be farting against thunder for all the good it will do. Monk's focus should also not be on our players diving, because in general we are not a diving club, but on our players giving away lazy stupid s**t fouls and getting yellow cards for no good reason .... i.e. Shelvey. This costs us in a game and always will. Ref's can be good, they can be bad, but when we give them no choice but to f** with us on stupid s**t we're killing ourselves.
Why is he acting like a prima donna? Moses cheating and very poor referring decisions have been costing us point and possibly a place in the next round of the league cup. I'd be more concerned personally, if Monk just bent over and accepted being screwed by the referees. I fully agree with his stance. It's just a shame that other managers are to gutless to stand up to referees also.
Because we apparently don't dive, but we abuse the game in other ways .... and apparently far more than 84% of the other clubs. Also, the camera clearly showed that Rangel was hanging on to Moses' shirt before the player "dived" .... whether he dived to simulate a trip or Rangel was penalized for holding his shirt .... same difference, there was a foul that occurred on our part. Some other managers may be gutless, but some are also smart enough to know that they are much better off putting their effort and taking risks where it can return some value. For example, dealing with a player kicking the ball away stupidly, getting a yellow, then being dumb enough to body check a player off the ball for another yellow and red. This amateur hour stuff needs to be dealt with because it does cost us - and its all internal to the club.
We cant complain like we do when we lose to a bad call by stumpy and yankee's logic.....they are the first to slag off the ref when he gives a bad call against us ..We dont have any power or say when a ref is incompetent but monk does and he must continue to speak up....I have no interest in what other clubs do as long as monk stands up for us which he is doing.
And bitching at the match officials in public has focused whatever bias they carry against us. Why does a person like Monk, or anybody for that matter, believe that the only way to accomplish something is overtly losing his **** in public and pressing his case through the media. That always engenders so much ****ing sympathy from the people with the real power to do something about. So they politely invite him into a meeting, watch his videos, listen to him talk, give him some tea and biscuits and to the media everything is looking like they are taking him seriously ... meanwhile behind closed doors they don't give a toss and are pretty ****ing annoyed about the route he took to air his grievance. Net of it all nothing gets done and officials are now going to let any 50-50 calls go the other way and even if they don't mean to be biased will probably scrutinize us more than they otherwise would and make calls with that leaning.
your getting confused between bitching and making a legitimate protest yankee....thank god we have a manager who will speak up for his beloved club and wont shy away from his responsibilities....why should we let anyone walk all over us....good on him i say...
No I am not confused. There are proper channels and covert, smart and more efficient ways to press your case. A savvy individual wouldn't have walked the blank by himself but instead, behind the scenes, would have cultivated a group of managers with similar points of view and collectively, quietly pressed their case. Safety and additional weight in numbers and if the right managers are part of the group then even more weight would be carried. If you want something done this is the way to do it. Instead a newbie manager throws a little tantrum, gets his moment in the media spotlight because they have nothing else to talk about, luckily they treat him neutrally instead of making him the brunt of a joke or stressing and playing the Rangel shirt pull to make him look like he's talk out of both sides of his mouth and totally undermine his position. The FA decides not to make an example of him, meanwhile the officials organization gets his letter a few days after Monk goes off and then quietly invite around, play polite, and the whole thing fizzles out like a damp squib. No momentum, no result, the whole issue dead on arrival. I'm not saying it's not a legitimate issue, but .... if something is worth doing then it's worth doing properly. This wasn't done properly. It was shoot from the hip and now the opportunity, if one existed, has been squandered and waves of negative repercussions will result until refs et al get bored and find another team to be beat on. Look on the bright side. Warnock is back in the game. Sooner or later he's going to say or do something that will refocus the negativity.
You misunderstand me Dai. Not complaining about him complaining about referees and no I don't agree with diving. But I do agree with going down if fouled. Monk saying that he fines players for going down easy has put unfair pressure on them in my view. Go down if fouled but don't dive should have been the message, not stay up at all costs, Diving is cheating, accepting a foul is football. The spotlight is well and truly on our guys now because Monk publicly stated that he fines players if they go down easily, bad move imo. Basically he's set us up as morally superior to all other teams and its going to hurt when we fall off that horse. Its making us the centre of an unnecessary, but potentially volatile, debate I disagree with not his stance on cheating.
