Frozen out players.

[Plonk]

3 hours ago, Hougoumont said:

 

Strange you should say that...Wilson is on record as saying he was a model professional, no trouble whatsoever.

Read di canios book the mans a lunatic by his own admission. His views on Wilson and Atkinson are interesting!

[Plonk]

3 hours ago, Burnsie said:

And if you'd have said a lobber boss that he's a lobber would you not expect some form of comeback?

Yes mate one of us would leave. If I was right he would go. If I was wrong I would go. My point was a good manager gets the best out of his staff. If all my staff, or even some, were telling me that, and things were going wrong in my business I would be having a long look in the mirror. Bad managers blame everyone else except themselves. 

[Guest wilyfox]

It's a shame they've been exiled - if that is indeed the case. That's not the outcome anyone wants, but I guess sometimes happens if differences cannot be resolved. I do believe we can cope better in their absence than last time this happened. Dawson is more ready now than 2yrs ago, and we have Luongo to succeed Hutchinson when he returns. A big 3 months ahead for Monk & squad to play their way back into contention. The ability is there to perform. It's down to execution. 

[Anlaby Owl]

What i don't get about all this is the following. 

Employment law is pretty much the same accross the board. 

Assuming there is some dissent, why has Monk not sat everyone down together to get everyones feedback and then done the same individually to lay the law down/issuing warnings where necessary and letting everyone know where they stand.  This doesn't and never did need to be a public flogging.  Even though monk didn't name names, saying that some players need to go is just creating a hornets nest and totally unprofessional. 

 

Now none of us really know if such action occurred before the public outcry and assuming for one minute that it did, the players involved would surely be in breech of contract.. Leaving monk free to turf them out the door.  

 

I can't help but think that monks nose is not totally clean in all this simply because this hasn't happened. 

[Hookowl]

6 minutes ago, Anlaby Owl said:

What i don't get about all this is the following. 

Employment law is pretty much the same accross the board. 

Assuming there is some dissent, why has Monk not sat everyone down together to get everyones feedback and then done the same individually to lay the law down/issuing warnings where necessary and letting everyone know where they stand.  This doesn't and never did need to be a public flogging.  Even though monk didn't name names, saying that some players need to go is just creating a hornets nest and totally unprofessional. 

 

Now none of us really know if such action occurred before the public outcry and assuming for one minute that it did, the players involved would surely be in breech of contract.. Leaving monk free to turf them out the door.  

 

I can't help but think that monks nose is not totally clean in all this simply because this hasn't happened. 

 

I presume it all depends on how the players contracts are worded as to whether they can be accused of breach of contract.

They could be sacked for gross misconduct but I doubt there are grounds for that.

[William 1867]

I think Monk is now on very sticky ground now. He’s made his bed and will have to lay in it.

He got his attacking players in and needs to get results now and if he does that is all we all want.

In The Stir today he has more or less said he’s made mistakes so let’s hope he’s learned something.

7 points from next 3 games a must.

UTO

 

[Nero]

It's not as simple as 2 frozen out big head players. Against Wigan I thought some of even the mild mannered lot such as Reach Lees Harris Bannan etc seemed to just be going through the motions. Inexcusable yes, but there was obviously something up.

Hopefully the 3 new lads will galvanise the squad behind Monk and this will be a bump in the road.

 

[Anlaby Owl]

38 minutes ago, Hookowl said:

 

I presume it all depends on how the players contracts are worded as to whether they can be accused of breach of contract.

They could be sacked for gross misconduct but I doubt there are grounds for that.

Im self employed but previous to that, all my contracts utilised the words 'any reasonable request'  and 'Follow the standards of behaviour expected by....' as a way of outlining the fact that i would be expected to do as i was told.  Surely any big organisation would follow the same protocol as opposed to 'you can do what you like' or totaly emitting any behavioural protocol. 

[Costello 77]

1 minute ago, Anlaby Owl said:

Im self employed but previous to that, all my contracts utilised the words 'any reasonable request'  and 'Follow the standards of behaviour expected by....' as a way of outlining the fact that i would be expected to do as i was told.  Surely any big organisation would follow the same protocol as opposed to 'you can do what you like' or totaly emitting any behavioural protocol. 

It might have been that the club were holding off until they knew we had cover.. timings and that..

[the monk]

6 hours ago, room0035 said:

 

I just think the likes of Westwood, Hutch as co are easy targets. Bruce came in last season and these two were the core of the team both are proper professionals and when you hear them talk about the team they love the place. 

 

Westwood has 18 months left on his deal does that mean he will be sat in the stands for the next 18 months or does someone at the club find someone to take him?

How is it easy to target 2 senior pros ?

Surely the easy targets would be Dawson, Fox, Palmer etc 

 

You say they are proper professionals, how do you know ?

Why isn't Westwood on the bench ? (If he isn't injured)

Why did Jos play kids instead of these two?

[rafterowl]

2 hours ago, Anlaby Owl said:

What i don't get about all this is the following. 

Employment law is pretty much the same accross the board. 

Assuming there is some dissent, why has Monk not sat everyone down together to get everyones feedback and then done the same individually to lay the law down/issuing warnings where necessary and letting everyone know where they stand.  This doesn't and never did need to be a public flogging.  Even though monk didn't name names, saying that some players need to go is just creating a hornets nest and totally unprofessional. 

 

Now none of us really know if such action occurred before the public outcry and assuming for one minute that it did, the players involved would surely be in breech of contract.. Leaving monk free to turf them out the door.  

 

I can't help but think that monks nose is not totally clean in all this simply because this hasn't happened. 

No one is really sure what is happening at the moment. If the players are frozen out then it is possible that Monk has done what you suggest but they have ignored him. The problem is that these player are probably financially secure and can and will do as they please. I also think that it would not be so easy to get rid of them through breach of contract.

Everything that has been said in this thread is just speculation.

[Mrmason69]

Why the hell would he keep playea zombie like Nuihi? What does it take to get frozen out at the insane asylum? 

Obviously players aren't frozen out because they don't have any ability or aren't trying because that accounts for over half of his current crop of cronies 

Isn't it strange that all of those who aren't frozen out are the flops who have failed year after year. He still keeps playing the flops who have consistently shown since the new owner came that they aren't good enough. 

There's a tight caucus of players who seem to control the who team and dictate team policy 

Monk has continued the peculiar wednesday tradition of refusing to play new signings. He's continued to continue with Sheffield wednesday peculiar policy of refusing to promote from the reserves. Please don't telly me that Borukov is worse that nuhi. Its impossible 

And yet he won't play him 

Monk is on record as saying that many of the team aren't trying. And yet he still plays them and doesn't freeze out those whom he admits aren't pulling their weight. 

So why are these players not frozen out and why are those whom have never had a decent chance to show what they can do, frozen out? 

Everyone keeps saying how Bannan is one of the best players in the league. If he's so good how come nobody else wants him? A player of such reputed quality would surely attract interest from other teams. And yet nobody whatsoever has ever wanted him. What does that tell you? In fact nobody wants any of our players who aren't frozen out.

Lets face it they are all proven in one thing. They are proven flops. 

Is it any wonder that wednesday struggled to sign anymore decent in the transfer window? 

We've got a crock from Palace who has scored 8 goals in five years and a player who couldn't even get a game with a team who are in the relegation places 

It's obvious that agents have told the decent young talent to keep well clear of bedlam. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by Mrmason69

[Guest LondonOwl313]

I always get the impression when I read Owlstalk that the consensus opinion is that outfield players are past it when they turn 28 and that goalkeepers aren't worth having once past their early thirties. There's no physical reason why the likes of Westwood or Hutchinson should be past it. But you need to be supremely fit to play football at this level or higher and that takes dedication and desire. It's probably true that players in their early 20s are more likely to have that dedication on the basis that 1. they've earned less money 2. they're less likely to have the same family commitments (and the thoughts of 'do I want to train this hard anymore') and 3. less likely to have niggling injuries which disrupt your training and make it harder to stay at the required fitness.

 

That's why most players retire rather than because their bodies are incapable anymore. Players like Giggs, Ronaldo or Ibrahimovic with minimal wear and tear plus that internal drive to keep succeeding are able to play until nearly 40.

 

Would imagine that a lot of our players are too comfortable here rather than incapable of doing the business anymore. Yes Westwood was in poor form before being dropped but can imagine he would be able to come back in and perform at a high level again if required rather than being finished. Only a weak manager would jettison our better players rather than dealing with them. Bruce didn't seem to have any issues with people management, just saying

[prowl]

4 hours ago, Anlaby Owl said:

What i don't get about all this is the following. 

Employment law is pretty much the same accross the board. 

Assuming there is some dissent, why has Monk not sat everyone down together to get everyones feedback and then done the same individually to lay the law down/issuing warnings where necessary and letting everyone know where they stand.  This doesn't and never did need to be a public flogging.  Even though monk didn't name names, saying that some players need to go is just creating a hornets nest and totally unprofessional. 

 

Now none of us really know if such action occurred before the public outcry and assuming for one minute that it did, the players involved would surely be in breech of contract.. Leaving monk free to turf them out the door.  

 

I can't help but think that monks nose is not totally clean in all this simply because this hasn't happened. 

How do you know he hasn't.

 

He's already said he's had one to one meetings with a number of players and intends to have discussions with the rest. That was said before the last game. I presume he didn't get the reaction he wanted from some and therefore took action.

[brando]

On 06/02/2020 at 15:09, Ferkorf said:

How have Westwood and Hutchinson been disruptive? Or caused chaos?

 

would be loads happier if ot was Nuhui and Rhodes....imo..we need Hutch and Westwood playing......

[SiJ]

I think if it was the first time this had happened, then I might have a degree more sympathy. 

 

As it is, this is the second time that Hutchinson and Westwood have seemingly managed to pi55 off, undermine a manager enough that they've got themselves banished from the first team. 

 

Judging by some of the replies, it appears that some of our fans can only think about the short term. 

 

Yeah, they're good player, have been good servants, but you can't have professionals (talented or not) undermining manager after manager. 

 

Talking about allowing a toxic culture to breed within the club. 

 

They've been banished by two managers now. 

 

So say if Monk goes in 6 months and a new bloke comes in. Could those all those sticking up Hutch, Westwood etc., honestly sit there and say this wouldn't happen again? 

 

We need a clearout and have done for a few years. 

[vulva]

It’s the kind of policy that works if you win games. 

[SiJ]

2 minutes ago, vulva said:

It’s the kind of policy that works if you win games. 

Which is where Jos had a problem. 

 

Tbf, this is a massive gamble off Monk. 

 

Team is in bad form, so if it doesn't pick up, then we all know what will be coming from some supporters. 

[The only way is S6]

Monk has thrown his cards all in with the 3 forwards in January. For various obvious reasons, I hope he wins the pot.

[vulva]

A number of players have already been told they won’t be getting contracts.