Westwood

[cowl]

All things being equal, I expect the club to allow for an honest competition amongst the players for a starting shirt.

 

Still, it's clear there will be times when in anticipation of moving a player on (for whatever reason), the club will face the dilemma of how to utilise that player until they can actually be moved on.

 

In the past 4 years the club's solution of choice to this dilemma seems to be to merely exclude the player. I don't doubt that this could sometimes be the most pragmatic thing to do, but it's the sheer number of times this seems to have happened in the last 4 years that makes me wonder whether the club can't seriously find a much better solution.

 

Even in the extreme, if we had to subsidise 99% of an outgoing player's wage, it would still represent a saving.

[Hookowl]

15 minutes ago, cowl said:

All things being equal, I expect the club to allow for an honest competition amongst the players for a starting shirt.

 

Still, it's clear there will be times when in anticipation of moving a player on (for whatever reason), the club will face the dilemma of how to utilise that player until they can actually be moved on.

 

In the past 4 years the club's solution of choice to this dilemma seems to be to merely exclude the player. I don't doubt that this could sometimes be the most pragmatic thing to do, but it's the sheer number of times this seems to have happened in the last 4 years that makes me wonder whether the club can't seriously find a much better solution.

 

Even in the extreme, if we had to subsidise 99% of an outgoing player's wage, it would still represent a saving.

 

I'm not disagreeing with your ideas on this but what if said player decides he doesn't want to go out on loan ?

I'm not saying this has happened because obviously I don't know what is discussed between a player and the club, but if this does happen how would we know ?

It wouldn't be in the player's or the club's best interest to make such a thing public.

[fred mciver]

1 hour ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

You have no idea about the ins and outs of his dealings with Doyen as you have shown here with your speculation re. Westwood.

 

New owner without previous football experience is ripped off a bit by predatory agents and advisors and not everyone signed was successful either.

 

Hardly surprising or groundbreaking stuff is it?

 

 

Read Footy Leaks and you'll have a good idea about Doyen. Or follow Hirsty saga.

 

Last point, fair enough as Villa's owner's shown.

 

But our guy coulda followed his fantastic fellow Thais at Leicester and let people who know what they are doing run club they've bought. 

Edited October 3, 2018 by fred mciver

[sonofbert2]

6 minutes ago, fred mciver said:

Read Footy Leaks and you'll have a good idea about Doyen. Or follow Hirsty saga.

 

Last point, fair enough as Villa's owner's shown.

 

But our guy coulda followed his fantastic fellow Thais at Leicester and let people who know what they are doing run club they've bought. 

 

Why?  Just because they're from Thailand?  Why would anyone want to give away the secret of their success to a rival and anyway, do you think Leicester have never bought a bad player or fallen out with one?  Of course they've done both several times.

 

I've read Footyleaks and if you think Doyen are unique in the game or somehow worse than their peers then you're very wrong.

 

The faults are with the modern game and ironically your support for Westwood probably goes against your views on agents and advisors.

[cowl]

27 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

 

I'm not disagreeing with your ideas on this but what if said player decides he doesn't want to go out on loan ?

I'm not saying this has happened because obviously I don't know what is discussed between a player and the club, but if this does happen how would we know ?

It wouldn't be in the player's or the club's best interest to make such a thing public.

 

Like I say, it's the sheer number of cases over the last 4 years that has my querying it at all. I'd struggle to believe that in all these cases the sticking point would be that the player doesn't want to go out on loan - though, of course, it's very plausible that it will account for some cases.

[FreshOwl]

Av heard Westys starting tonight 

[room0035]

2 hours ago, sw1867 said:

 

How do you know any of this isn’t true?

 

Why does any of that affect the truth in that Dawson has been doing well and will get better as he gets more experience.

 

Your FF analogy is just nonsense.

Its what everyone is saying on here none of its true but why let that bother people for finding any excuse why he should play.

 

For me he is our bst player in that position and other than an injury last season has been one of the most consistent performers over the last 5 years with Keiren Lee for me when fit they both should be in the starting 11. But my views don't agree with a lot on here, so be it, thats why every looks different.

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

 

I'm not disagreeing with your ideas on this but what if said player decides he doesn't want to go out on loan ?

I'm not saying this has happened because obviously I don't know what is discussed between a player and the club, but if this does happen how would we know ?

It wouldn't be in the player's or the club's best interest to make such a thing public.

 

Fair points but I'm sure I've heard before that DC has been reluctant to let players go out on loan to rivals in the same division so hard to say which side is at fault regarding any potential loan. Obviously the club have recently allowed Rhodes to do this but that was seemingly a needs-must situation with the alternative being to keep him and face a more stringent/longer transfer embargo.

 

Even if it is Westwood refusing a permanent or loan move, the club have increased his contract to such an extent that any interested clubs are probably unwilling to match that and would rather wait until he is available on a free once we have paid him a handsome sum for nothing for 18 months - it doesn't reflect well.  

[Hitcat]

25 pages of utter balls.

[room0035]

2 hours ago, GY-owl.4 said:

 

Seen more games this season than ever... still a ST holder, but seemed to have found a feed online for just about all our away games.

 

this post seems quite childish to me, or straw clutching... have you got a link where he has been labelled a trouble maker? or over the Hill? or injury prone? (you could argue that last bit is quite true tho) 

 

 From what ive read/seen Jos has said KW hasnt been a problem at all and its footy reasons. i have no reason to disbelieve him.

if it IS money reasons then its been taken out of Jos' hands anyway so why the criticism,

 

you could guarantee KW could get back up to the form of 2 or 3 seasons ago then it might have been worth while putting him back in. but last season he wasnt great and on the few occasions he played he was average and not fully fit. how many times did we sub him during games? too many. 

His arc is arguably on its way down, where Dawsons will be going up. while Dawson might not ever be as good as KW was in his prime, Jos is judging it on the here and now. 

 

 

 

I was replying to the excuse people are using for not playing Westwood.

 

Other than last season when he and most of the first team were injured his form has been one of the best of all the players we have over the last 5 years. Everyone has a bad game or so but in 150+ appearance he is averaging 1 clean sheet in 3 or 4 games, he gains us points in games we were not in and is the best keeper on our books.

 

I don't know why our manager thinks he is not as good as Dawson, I hope Dawson does really well and end up either play 300+ games for us or making us a packet if we sell him, but football is a results business and you put your best team out to try and beat the other team. For me the best team included Westwood - my view no one elses.

[Hitcat]

4 minutes ago, sw1867 said:

 

Pot Kettle Black.

 

So witty! Here have a medal.. 

[Hitcat]

Just now, sw1867 said:

 

Thanks mate

 

No worries. Electric wit like yours deserves all the plaudits it can get. 

[Guest Willow Owl]

3 hours ago, sonofbert2 said:

This thread and the attitude towards this situation sums up the worst in some of our "supporters" for me.

 

They sit and wait for our young keeper to make mistakes, or invent situations where he might have done better, purely to strengthen their argument in support of a keeper who has fallen out with the club and been sidelined.  All this when the team is doing reasonably well and rather than supporting the young lad now between the sticks and enjoying our decent start.

 

They are more anti-club than pro-team.

This 100% Top post mate, take a bow. 

[Hitcat]

3 minutes ago, sw1867 said:

 

Likewise sir.

 

As sad as I would be to lose your rapier like retorts, why not try adding to a debate instead of derisory comments often adding little or no value to the discussion.

 

You might find it changes your life.

 

I have commented on the situation. Furthermore, it didn't change my life. 

[fred mciver]

1 hour ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

Why?  Just because they're from Thailand?  Why would anyone want to give away the secret of their success to a rival and anyway, do you think Leicester have never bought a bad player or fallen out with one?  Of course they've done both several times.

 

I've read Footyleaks and if you think Doyen are unique in the game or somehow worse than their peers then you're very wrong.

 

The faults are with the modern game and ironically your support for Westwood probably goes against your views on agents and advisors.

Or Wolves. Or Bournemouth. Or Huddersfield. Or Cardiff, etc.

 

If we'd hired Pearson or similar after Carlos, secrets would have followed. 

[Sonny]

4 hours ago, room0035 said:

 

Westwood has not had a chance - he has been labelled a trouble maker, over the hill, injury prone etc when in reality its because he is on a good wage but instead of saying this we have all the rounduns week in week out.

 

More amazing insight here. Where do you get your inside information. You know everything.

[Hitcat]

17 minutes ago, sw1867 said:

 

Shame, I hope you find happiness else where.

 

You too sweetcheeks, you too.

[sonofbert2]

26 minutes ago, fred mciver said:

Or Wolves. Or Bournemouth. Or Huddersfield. Or Cardiff, etc.

 

If we'd hired Pearson or similar after Carlos, secrets would have followed. 

 

All of those clubs will have paid ridiculous agents' fees and bought players who didn't work out.  Cardiff's boss is well known to us, as are his methods and systems in purchasing some players.  If I've misunderstood the point you're making then forgive me.

 

Re. Pearson, do you mean the same fella who just stitched us up with regards to Hirst Jnr?

 

Am I missing something here?

[Hitcat]

37 minutes ago, Hitcat said:

 

You too sweetcheeks, you too.

 

I'm glad you've found ultimate happiness in this thread. Enjoy the match too. 

[fred mciver]

20 hours ago, sonofbert2 said:

 

All of those clubs will have paid ridiculous agents' fees and bought players who didn't work out.  Cardiff's boss is well known to us, as are his methods and systems in purchasing some players.  If I've misunderstood the point you're making then forgive me.

 

Re. Pearson, do you mean the same fella who just stitched us up with regards to Hirst Jnr?

 

Am I missing something here?

Pearson's so good the Leicester owners kept him in their group , even after his son's Thailand lark.

 

And didn't he even try to put Vardy our way for £5 million? Another Chansiri classic.

 

If we'd have taken Warnock when Milan wanted, we'd be in EPL by now.

 

I don't care who gets us there.