Jump to content


Lord Snooty

"I want players who are available for every training"

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, torryowl said:

but it is balanced …….we play 2 or 3 youngsters just about every game alongside  experienced players ….that wouldn't be the case if we also included those that jos as deemed dispensable 

But Penney, Baker and Thornily would benefit hugely from an experienced keeper that will organise them, talk to them during games and command the box. Confidence breeding confidence

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


9 hours ago, room0035 said:

I will be very interest to see if this philosophy stay should the team slip further toward the bottom 3 we are 7 points off the bottom 3 come 5pm on the  10th November we could be a lot nearer with two bad results against the teams currently in 1st and 4th in the league.

 

You hope the best for your team and hope things work but only one team in history has won anything with kids and Jos is no Ferguson.

The kids we have are nothing like the ones Fergie reared.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness to JL you cant fault that ethic,but to be equally fair,weve a fair few in the squad that cant match that expectation and it stinks becuase that should be the minimum requirement of any athlete that gets paid decent wonga to do whats basically a simple job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Hutchinson is fit he should play.

 

simple as that - play your best players and he’s one.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Avon barksdale said:

Irrelevant, pep had edersen, de Bruyne and silva to replace them, same with sane this season when he put Mahrez in. Our replacement for Jones and hutch is Connor kirby and he's not upto it at present . You play the cards your dealt with peps cards are clearly better than ours, and Jos ain't playing his very well. We're a mid table second division team we should be trying to find any advantage we can not introducing policies/morals that weaken us. 

 

I'm not sure how pointing out that Guardiola has treated players in the same way can be irrelevant to a discussion of a poster claiming that Guardiola would never treat players in the same way?

 

I agree that his original analogy was bizarre, though - I was just trying to unpick his thought process, but it turns out it was as clear as a hooker's glasses in an Amsterdam brothel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ka58 said:

If Hutchinson is fit he should play.

 

simple as that - play your best players and he’s one.

 No he isn’t , he’s a crock who was shot a long time ago. Pinning your hopes on this kind of dross is half the issue . We won’t be okay until we can ship all the deadwood out 

  • Disagree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ka58 said:

If Hutchinson is fit he should play.

 

simple as that - play your best players and he’s one.

 

He’s hugely overrated as a midfielder. 

 

Cant believe posters are seriously suggesting he could play RB. It defies all logic. He’d last 10 minutes as a full-back before being back on the sick-bay.

 

I would have no issue with him being entrusted with a run at CB, in a back three of Hutch-Lees-Hector, with Hutch and Hector shouldering the bulk of the responsibility to feed our midfielders.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RUMBELOWS91 said:

I've got about 20 7 year olds  that never miss a session. 

Can they play out from the back though. lol

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ka58 said:

If Hutchinson is fit he should play.

 

simple as that - play your best players and he’s one.

Hutch gets crocked off a stiff breeze.  Spare me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, debram said:

Theres no substitute for quality, a sensible solution should be agreed, george best often didn't train and could party the night before a game, would you leave him out, no way.

 

Playing devils advocate here, do you think if someone would have stopped George from partying and actually managed him; would he have still been an alcoholic and ultimately die of liver failure? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

 

Playing devils advocate here, do you think if someone would have stopped George from partying and actually managed him; would he have still been an alcoholic and ultimately die of liver failure? 

 

 

 

It wasn’t the partying.

 

Mrs Merton - “if you hadn’t done all that running around playing football, do you think you would have been so thirsty?”

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with Hutch is that he was managed under CC and only trained when he could, otherwise he was likely to breakdown.  Under Jos he wants players to train every session so unlikely Hutch will be selected under the current policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, WatfordOwl said:

I like Jos.

 

Speaks a lot of sense.

 

Rather than playing or perservering with a patched up team of crocks that cannot hold up to the rigors of 1st team football week in week out, he plays people who are fit.

 

No conspiracies with any of it, and a big reason why some arent, and won't ever be near the 1st team again.


I understand where you are coming from but his logic doesn't always hold true.

Why is Westwood not playing in the Under 23's games to improve fitness? The same can be said for Hutch, Boyd, Jones etc. These players have been in and around the first team historically and should be at least involved to some capacity.

It seems he has rules for some but not others. Kieran Lee in the past year has had the worst injury record yet he was allowed to come back into an Under 23's game. Marco Matias has played a handful of games since been at the football club. He's played far less games than Boyd & Jones throughout his career yet he seems to get a pass. Same can be said for Winnall recently. He's got injured again so do we now cast him onto the scrap heap? His logic and rationale would make sense if it was applied to the entire playing squad.

I just cannot get my head around why you wouldn't have players who are now fit in and around the first team. I completely agree that the likes of Westwood, Boyd and Jones aren't the future of this football club. I'm on board with this and actually align with this belief. The bit I'm struggling with is the now. They would certainly improve us right now; even if it means a place on the bench. 

It's hard not to point to a fallout with certain players or disagreements as his philosophy hasn't been implemented across the entire playing squad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ian said:

But still picked on the weeks where he has turned up?

No, use disciplinary procedures to end his contract, if he’s refusing to train then he’s in breach of his contract.  If his contract is up in the summer he’s two months away from being able to negotiate with a new club, we have to pay him while June, if he’s so troublesome why not pay him up and send him packing? It doesn’t affect FFP because it’s all in the same financial period, a wealthy owner like Chansiri could quite easily pay up in order to get such a bad egg out of the club.  I personally do not believe he’s refusing and have seen nothing to back that theory up, I be heard whispers about a bust up after the defeat at Birmingham last season but you hope there were one or two bust ups after such a performance as it shows they at least care, if Jos has sidelined him because Westwood refused to train on the Sunday then Jos is at fault, a fine was in order, if he’s constantly refusing to train he needs getting rid of.

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

 

Playing devils advocate here, do you think if someone would have stopped George from partying and actually managed him; would he have still been an alcoholic and ultimately die of liver failure? 

 

 

Would have been great if someone could have helped or managed him better then we may have seen more of his genius.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, debram said:

Would have been great if someone could have helped or managed him better then we may have seen more of his genius.

 

Completely agree! Man management like parenting isn’t just letting the player/child do as they please to keep them happy. Long term consequences often outweigh the short term gains. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Of course, if we get dragged into a relegation scrap again, then things could start to get very interesting.

 

Whether Luhukay would stick to his guns or ditch his strategy and go cap in hand to the likes of Boyd, Jones and Hutchinson would be very telling. I suspect he'd favour the former approach, but that's just my gut instinct.

If they are banished infinitum into football obscurity then they will never be ready when the call comes. Surely it’s better to try and maximise the use of talent you have rather than throw a huge chunk of your squad on the scrap heap? Beggars belief the fact that we have a small squad and someone has effectively dispensed with the costly services of players we are now crying out for. Did we learn nothing from last years’ injury debacle?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if he has a divided team of players he certainly has succeeded on dividing the fan base here.

 

The problem is is trying to fit a long term quart into a short term pint pot. 

 

Football fans don't work on those principles and it's a ruddy high risk strategy for any football manager.

 

I think most in principle support the rationale for the transition just not the way the transition is being handled. That the young players will undoubtedly learn by playing but whether all those lessons will be beneficial for their careers is another matter

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, swfcGibbo said:


I understand where you are coming from but his logic doesn't always hold true.

Why is Westwood not playing in the Under 23's games to improve fitness? The same can be said for Hutch, Boyd, Jones etc. These players have been in and around the first team historically and should be at least involved to some capacity.

It seems he has rules for some but not others. Kieran Lee in the past year has had the worst injury record yet he was allowed to come back into an Under 23's game. Marco Matias has played a handful of games since been at the football club. He's played far less games than Boyd & Jones throughout his career yet he seems to get a pass. Same can be said for Winnall recently. He's got injured again so do we now cast him onto the scrap heap? His logic and rationale would make sense if it was applied to the entire playing squad.

I just cannot get my head around why you wouldn't have players who are now fit in and around the first team. I completely agree that the likes of Westwood, Boyd and Jones aren't the future of this football club. I'm on board with this and actually align with this belief. The bit I'm struggling with is the now. They would certainly improve us right now; even if it means a place on the bench. 

It's hard not to point to a fallout with certain players or disagreements as his philosophy hasn't been implemented across the entire playing squad. 

2 of those players.........Hutch and Westwood aren't capable of playing a full season of games.

 

Westwood has been subbed more times than I can care to remember owing to injury, what if those have now caught up with him and we know his body just can't stand up to what's required of him? The same can be said for Hutch - if he's not banned he's injured more often than not.

 

Kieran Lee is a different case completely - had one bad injury and needs to be nurtured back. 

 

I agree with you that if players 'are' fit then they should be in and around the squad, but perhaps more is going on week in week out than we are privvy to. i.e. players attitudes towards a new tougher regime when they've had the rule of the roost previously or just because Jos does not fancy them to do the job he's asking. What's better for Jos & SWFC? A group of players that toe the line and at least attempt to implement what he wants on the pitch? Or a mix of some that coast and know they are on their way out anyway? 

 

Sad to say it, but I think there's a mix of a few things going on, which is reminisce of our 1st couple of seasons outside the PL, when we were waiting to ship a few out of the club that were tied to hefty contracts. 

 

We could end up in a downward spiral again by sacking manager after manager based on blind loyalty to players that don't have a future with the club.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Pale Rider said:

Absolute conjecture again. They aren’t playing for football reasons. That should mean, they’re not as good as the players he is picking. 

If you are going to back him do so without inventing some other reality. 

He just said it. Clear as day. FFS. people ask for clarity. He cant be clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
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

×