Jump to content

Daily Mail's Matt Barlow - SWFC's Hirst Snub


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Cosby Blunkett said:

 

It shouldn't be about having a first team place; and if it has got to that stage then it has been badly managed that it's come to that.

 

Last season or in the summer, the club could have sat the player down and offered him a pathway over the term of his new contract that would enable him to become a first team regular.

 

He may well have had his head turned by the promises of riches, it's possible that he's demanding being part of the first team set up, but it's the responsibility of the club to manage these expectations in a reasoned manner which looks after the best interests, both of George Hirst and of Sheffield Wednesday.

 

If it's got to the stage where we either offer him silly money and first team football or he's off then certainly we'd have to let him go. However I'd argue that it should never have been allowed to get ultimatums.

Some good points here, sometimes a bit of compromise is what's needed.  I don't know who is behind some of our decisions but at times it looks like a take it or leave it attitude prevails. We can take the hard line and run him out of town ala DiCanio, or we can compromise and do what's best for Wednesday.

Sometimes you have to make decisions with a long term view, He is probably not ready for th first team yet but with the number of subs I would have had him on the bench and given him a bit of game time to see how he copes. There have been a lot of games where we have been chasing the game, we could have given him a few minutes then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Watson said:

 

If the rumours are true (which I very much doubt), it's not so much about the money it's more about having a first team place. Agents picking the team no less, just what we need. 

Anyone who saw Joao rip the u19's a new one earlier showed just how far George is from a first team squad place...men against boys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If George was given a sub role, then the chances of him signing would’ve significantly improved. It’s then up to the boy to prove whether he’s ready. If he is, we all win, if not then they could’ve sent him on loan elsewhere. It’s so bloody simple and this stalemate is gonna cost Wednesday in the long run as by all accounts (and nowt to do with his surname) he’s excelled at every level.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, markg said:

who cares. bored of hearing about it.

 

not really bothered if he leaves now.

 

He is a world away from Joao's ability and he isn't a starter

 

3 minutes ago, Watson said:

 

Yeah looks too slight for me at the moment, must admit never seen him play.  If he played now he would be more than likely to be bullied by the defenders.  

 

Conjecture, nobody knows unless he’s given a go. Could be ready, might not. Him sat on his arse all season is a waste

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, thesexynortherner said:

Isn’t he refusing to play for kids side?

 

He should get his head down and do his job, whatever level that maybe!

 

Interesting twist on it.

The club preventing him from training with his peers makes it difficult to do his job.

Maybe his representatives will go down the route of "restriction of trade" to get his contract annulled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, daveyboy66 said:

Anyone who saw Joao rip the u19's a new one earlier showed just how far George is from a first team squad place...men against boys

I see where you are coming from with regards to Hirst at this moment in time, he looks like he needs to bulk up.

 

I like Joao but he is 24 Hirst is what 18 or 19, a lot of boys turn to men during that period.

 

Sometimes you have to nurture potential, Alex Fergueson was the master of this. Mourinhio is the opposite gets rid of young Lakaku and Dbruyne because they didn't fit his immediate plans.

 

Personally prefer the Fergueson way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

1 hour ago, Watson said:

 

So how would you deal with it to everyone's satisfaction?

 

It may well have gone too far now... 

 

The George Hirst situation is another indictment of our internal footballing structure in my opinion.

 

Carlos is Head Coach of the first team and decides (rightly or wrongly) that George Hirst isn't in his first team plans. So who is looking after the players development? Who is responsible for seeing the bigger picture beyond the match day squad and looking to the future? 

 

I'm not being critical of Carlos here, I don't think the long term development of a player or indeed a clubs footballing strategy should necessarily be in a Head Coach's remit. However, I think situations like this occur in the absence of a Manager/DOF/Technical Director.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Big Ron's Sovereign said:

 

 

Conjecture, nobody knows unless he’s given a go. Could be ready, might not. Him sat on his arse all season is a waste

 

I was at the Cambridge game and he was way out of his depth, sadly he's way down the pecking order

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoffrey 

Knows nowt, but will make things up on every subject to blame the club.

The club might be an easy target at the moment but he is the strangest " supporter " I have seen on here

Do you ever post about games when we win or does that upset you too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, crookesowl said:

I don't buy this BS from Carlos that it is out of his orbit and he can't get involved in contractual stuff.

 

He's the manager FFS. Surely he has some influence. 

 

People are misunderstanding my point. 

 

The article quotes Carlos saying he has nothing to do with contracts. If Carlos really wanted Hirst then I’m sure this would be sorted. It’s convenient for him to say these things are all out of his hands. 

 

That was my point. 

 

I agree with comments that Carlos is not interested - he is bothered about players that can deliver next week and he clearly doesn’t think Hirst can in comparison to his other strikers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cosby Blunkett said:

We had no issues with paying Lewis Mcgugan 18k a week to play table tennis.

 

Claude Dielna earnt thousands flexing in the mirror.

 

Urby was on big bucks for a season of sporadically playing for the U23's.

 

Yet we can't agree a deal with our best prospect in donkeys years. 

This 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, crookesowl said:

 

People are misunderstanding my point. 

 

The article quotes Carlos saying he has nothing to do with contracts. If Carlos really wanted Hirst then I’m sure this would be sorted. It’s convenient for him to say these things are all out of his hands. 

 

That was my point. 

 

I agree with comments that Carlos is not interested - he is bothered about players that can deliver next week and he clearly doesn’t think Hirst can in comparison to his other strikers. 

Bullseye, the last comment has hit the nail firmly on the head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cosby Blunkett said:

,We had no issues with paying Lewis Mcgugan 18k a week to play table tennis.

 

Claude Dielna earnt thousands flexing in the mirror.

 

Urby was on big bucks for a season of sporadically playing for the U23's.

 

Yet we can't agree a deal with our best prospect in donkeys years. 

 

We gamble on rubbish but wont take a gamble on a young player who could be a very good player.

 

As I said it is a gamble, and could turn out to be a waste of money, but no bigger waste the the ones quoted above and others

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...