kingsidney Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 2 hours ago, Junk Smuggler said: Anyone else think the statement has been made so that it doesn’t appear he’s a disruptive influence on a dressing room? That way any new club will take that into account. I just find it odd that the same players frozen out by Jos are frozen out by Monk. Or just 2 terrible managers who misread the room & performances and results plummeted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maxine Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Good on him for clearing it up. Shame Monk won't play such a brilliant keeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shandypants Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 15 hours ago, mrrodge said: I will never understand players being told they aren't part of a managers plans especially when under contract. It definitely limits the manager in terms of selection but I think it’s better for the player to know. Wouldn’t you like to know? I know that I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 5 hours ago, Maxine said: Good on him for clearing it up. Shame Monk won't play such a brilliant keeper. It's rather difficult to select someone who keeps telling you he ain't fit. Good job Dawson is available otherwise we would be in a proper mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Bulgaria said: It's rather difficult to select someone who keeps telling you he ain't fit. Good job Dawson is available otherwise we would be in a proper mess. Is that fact or just more of the same kind of rumour that led to the statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maxine Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Bulgaria said: It's rather difficult to select someone who keeps telling you he ain't fit. Good job Dawson is available otherwise we would be in a proper mess. He isn't fit, I didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Binky Griptite Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Not read 31 pages (I've read two) but there could be a perfectly logical, reasoned, contractual explanation for the whole thing. Westwood signed a new contract in the summer, naive to think this only extended his term... it might also have refinanced his salary... shift its from all base salary to (equivalent of) 70% base salary, 35% appearance fee - thus slightly increasing his overall package IF he plays (makes sense as you need two decent keepers but don't want to have them both on full whack), saves Wednesday a decent chunk if he doesn't. SWFC towing the line in terms of financial fair play, Westwood not at his best, decision made to play Dawson on a third (I'm guessing) of Westwoods salary to lower the wage bill so we can turn to the FL and say 'look, we're trying here'. Is Dawson a third of the keeper Westwood is? Open to debate but if Monk is brought in with a view to working within a constrained budget (like at Birmingham) then a high cost keeper is arguably the most in danger player in the squad. Honest conversation had been Manager and playey and attempts made to engineer a January departure, but they don't come to pass for whatever reason. No personal malice, no falling out, no need to bash any player / non playing personnel. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue and white Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 7 hours ago, REDAs_biG_piECE said: Genuinely heartbroken reading this statement Westwood is one of the few genuinely class players we’ve had since the premiership days and his record speaks for itself. One of the reasons I fork out £640 a year for a season ticket is to see genuine quality like him who has that edge not to see a young pretender who whilst a nice lad and decent shot stopper will never be in the same league 34 is also no age for a keeper and we’re living to regret this decision already Gutted That's it in a nutshell, we fans are paying premiership prices to allegedly watch watch quality players and promotion chasing teams, which is a complete joke. Chansiri want reporting to tradeing standards because its false advertising, mind it wouldn't be the first time his false advertising got us in trouble. Edited February 18, 2020 by Blue and white Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WatfordOwl Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Binky Griptite said: Not read 31 pages (I've read two) but there could be a perfectly logical, reasoned, contractual explanation for the whole thing. Westwood signed a new contract in the summer, naive to think this only extended his term... it might also have refinanced his salary... shift its from all base salary to (equivalent of) 70% base salary, 35% appearance fee - thus slightly increasing his overall package IF he plays (makes sense as you need two decent keepers but don't want to have them both on full whack), saves Wednesday a decent chunk if he doesn't. SWFC towing the line in terms of financial fair play, Westwood not at his best, decision made to play Dawson on a third (I'm guessing) of Westwoods salary to lower the wage bill so we can turn to the FL and say 'look, we're trying here'. Is Dawson a third of the keeper Westwood is? Open to debate but if Monk is brought in with a view to working within a constrained budget (like at Birmingham) then a high cost keeper is arguably the most in danger player in the squad. Honest conversation had been Manager and playey and attempts made to engineer a January departure, but they don't come to pass for whatever reason. No personal malice, no falling out, no need to bash any player / non playing personnel. It's a 'possibility' however the burning question would be why, a club who was not in a particularly good state financially would offer one of it's highest earners a new contract. It's the responsibility of those running the club to ensure that funds are in place to honor contracts, operational costs etc.... If you cannot afford to pay your employees, then it's a pretty basic oversight all things considered. I'd also add that if we are probably going to get clouted with a fine and points deduction, does it not make more sense to think 'sod it', play the best time and take the hit? I'm not hammering any other players here, but it makes sense to be sending your best 11 out if available to play when you're not having the best run of form. Questions need to be asked at the top of the club, the fans have given their commitment time and time again with the promise of having the best players on the pitch by paying the highest prices. This was what DC pitched to the fans and now after 3 seasons of stagnation, we're expected to swallow that he made a balls of it. All this does is disconnect the fans from the club further than what it already is, and doesn't appear to be changing anytime soon. Past events would allude me to believe that dissenting voices won't exactly be welcomed on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Bulgaria said: It's rather difficult to select someone who keeps telling you he ain't fit. Good job Dawson is available otherwise we would be in a proper mess. Monk stated that Westwood decides when he is fit for selection. Westwood dictates when he is available Edited February 18, 2020 by Bulgaria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 2 hours ago, Maxine said: He isn't fit, I didn't know that. He might be now, but he apparently hasn't been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 2 hours ago, Grandad said: Is that fact or just more of the same kind of rumour that led to the statement? Monk stated that Westwood decides when he is fit for selection. Westwood dictates when he is available Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 9 minutes ago, Bulgaria said: Monk stated that Westwood decides when he is fit for selection. Westwood dictates when he is available Don't all players do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
83owl Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 2 hours ago, Binky Griptite said: Not read 31 pages (I've read two) but there could be a perfectly logical, reasoned, contractual explanation for the whole thing. Westwood signed a new contract in the summer, naive to think this only extended his term... it might also have refinanced his salary... shift its from all base salary to (equivalent of) 70% base salary, 35% appearance fee - thus slightly increasing his overall package IF he plays (makes sense as you need two decent keepers but don't want to have them both on full whack), saves Wednesday a decent chunk if he doesn't. SWFC towing the line in terms of financial fair play, Westwood not at his best, decision made to play Dawson on a third (I'm guessing) of Westwoods salary to lower the wage bill so we can turn to the FL and say 'look, we're trying here'. Is Dawson a third of the keeper Westwood is? Open to debate but if Monk is brought in with a view to working within a constrained budget (like at Birmingham) then a high cost keeper is arguably the most in danger player in the squad. Honest conversation had been Manager and playey and attempts made to engineer a January departure, but they don't come to pass for whatever reason. No personal malice, no falling out, no need to bash any player / non playing personnel. Why than would you not have that player on the bench? No appearance fee and a known quality replacement should an injury occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bulgaria Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, Grandad said: Don't all players do that? This imo is what's happened.. Westwood injured his shoulder I believe before Xmas... Monk wanted him playing and thought he should be available. Westwood had Xmas off, to monks anger, then when he returned, told Westwood what he thought and told him Dawson was now the number one. This has pissed off Westwood and Hutchinson chimed in. Monk doesn't want them dictating things. I agree with Monk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
83owl Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, NorfolkNChance said: Statement just made the news headlines on TalkSport (not much Prem on for them to get excited about). Basically they said SWFC fans are effecting Westwood’s mental health with their constant trolling. Simple solution - either don’t read it or turn your comments off. Easy to jump on the Mental health bandwagon at this time. Edited February 18, 2020 by 83owl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PriceAPP Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 22 minutes ago, 83owl said: Simple solution - either don’t read it or turn your comments off. Easy to jump on the Mental health bandwagon at this time. He’s affecting the fans’ mental health by not saying he’s fighting for his shirt ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 53 minutes ago, Bulgaria said: This imo is what's happened.. Westwood injured his shoulder I believe before Xmas... Monk wanted him playing and thought he should be available. Westwood had Xmas off, to monks anger, then when he returned, told Westwood what he thought and told him Dawson was now the number one. This has pissed off Westwood and Hutchinson chimed in. Monk doesn't want them dictating things. I agree with Monk. I see. And I guess that youre happy to take a stand - even though since Christmas weve W1 D2 L7 and conceded 18? You don't think he should change anything? Or should he just make wholesale changes to all 10 other positions (as he has?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreshOwl Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Why not on the bench then Keiren? Whiffs of BS to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 1 minute ago, FreshOwl said: Why not on the bench then Keiren? Whiffs of BS to me what if hes been told by Monk that he doesnt want him on the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now