Monk has totally transformed the club in a short time and has done what laudrup couldn't do and that is bring the club back from the brink of disaster. The club is now back in the hands of someone who knows what he is doing. Laudrup has gone very quiet now as he knows the club will make mince meat out of him in any court should he dare to go down that route which i doubt because he wont really want to go to court with a tax evasion still hanging over his head. He should take what we give him and be satisfied with that...
Laudrup didnt deserve what we dished out , but ungratefulness was never far on this board and the board that did the sacking .
No of course he doesn't deserve it we should have let him ruin the club once and for all and be done with it, perhaps you would be happy then
Well I suppose I have the moral high ground here because I never slagged off ML (I'm aware that post wasn't aimed at me). The argument that Monk shouldn't get the job because he's done little different to ML is the same as saying he should get the job because he's no worse. ML management credentials were questionable coming to us. He had one good season and one mediocre season. As to how and why he got sacked... I couldn't give a ****. It happened. So we ended up with Monk. What gets me is the continual complaining about Monk's managerial credentials when my expectations aren't that high (because of his lack of experience). The C. Diff game aside, he drew a couple, lost a couple and maybe he's learning now to win a couple. All this sounds like I want him to get the job and that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying we should hold off the griping if we win 4-1. Man City or Chelsea win like that and they're hailed as being able to win ugly and is a sign of a successful team
Will Monk be able to get the points when the full intensity of the League is underway? Just a thought as after the start of the league season - ML's Swansea played on average a game every 4.8 days which included 2 International breaks when several players played at least 2 games. (35 games - W11 D9 L15) A win every 2.26 games GM's Swansea played on average a game every 5.6 days which included 1 International, break (15 games - W4 D4 L7) A win every 3.75 games When we were playing games 3 -4 days apart GMs Swans only gained a single win! Norwich (Cardiff 7 day break, Newcastle 6, Villa 7) And all against teams who are on their knees. I'm not saying GM won't be able to do it I'm just concerned that when players are mentally and physically tired will he be able to keep players calm and playing well. My gut feeling is no, an extra day to rest / prepare is a huge bonus.
Your fighting a losing battle Bob, you will either be labelled a "Monk Hater" or a "ML Fanboy" by some of the guys here for pointing out stuff they don't like to hear. They prefer the basics of 15 points from 12. They like to ignore the teams played, whether home or away. As it doesn't bode well for them. Its not about liking/disliking a manager, its about a bit of transparency for those singing Monks praises when so far, we are no better off.
Thanks for the reply, I'm sure you're right. Maybe the 'devil you know' is the right option but I read this morning that the board is split (how the Observer would know that I'm not sure) because GM had only delivered 4 wins in 12, but there could be many reasons including some didn't agree with getting rid of Laudrup. My original bit of maths started as a simple way of looking to player fatigue being responsible for training time niggles. GM may have needed time to bring things together following a season of high intensity and is now gaining the rewards. To finish on 40+ points would be quite an achievement. The bonus is we are playing some awful football but getting results, but I think we've got lucky with fixtures in since mid March. Personally I liked ML's laid back approach but it obviously didn't meet with universal approval. But he's gone and we move on.
