There’s no way Monk decides who comes and goes

[Morepork]

7 hours ago, the third man said:

 

if that's true its his fault, no way would I take a job where whether I could do my job depended on someone else's decisions

You’d think.....bu you’re missing an important detail.

 

In the perverse world of modern football you’ll be paid handsomely for your job and compensated just as generously should you do that job badly and need firing. Hence why there are no shortage of managers on the merry go round.

 

Any manager joining our club under this regime is doing us and themselves a major injustice. Lack of expertise through the club, poor decision making from the top, third parties serving their own self interests etc, etc. 

 

Unless DC sells up the only way to break the cycle is for a manager to demand control as I believe Bruce did.

[gurujuan]

1 hour ago, oldishowl said:

What strategy is this.

The one where the owner decides not to sell players because they are part of the family.

You can’t possibly think we have a recruitment and selling strategy and process that is working well and it is all the coaches fault.

 

Nobody has complained more about our recruitment than you.

 

We do have one in place, and I never said it was working well. Recruitment in players, and coaching staff, has been woeful, and don’t worry, I’ll keep calling that out. Until we get a different owner though, or he has a change of plan, then the manager just has to get on with the job. 

[gurujuan]

3 minutes ago, Mishowl said:

I agree in principle but the players signed while the ‘committee’ were involved were far better than when Carlos was given the reigns. 
 

And yes, as reiterated by Carlos on numerous occasions, he had the reigns on signings during his time. 

Given how DC operates, nobody can believe any manager here was given the reins surely?

[McRightSide]

If Monk doesn’t have any say on transfers, then why are we waiting for him to ‘have a chance with his own players’ before sacking him?

[Owl999]

31 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Agreed but the number of fans still wanting to deny it is the case is astounding 

Completely agree with you,  I think a lot of those feel they aren’t a real fan if they give any form of criticism of the club .

[ChinaOwl]

2 minutes ago, Mishowl said:

I agree in principle but the players signed while the ‘committee’ were involved were far better than when Carlos was given the reigns. 
 

And yes, as reiterated by Carlos on numerous occasions, he had the reigns on signings during his time. 

 

I dunno where it starts and where it finishes. I do not believe Gray signed any of Vermijl, Bus, Melo or Lachmann and they were at the very beginning. That is where the wasted money began. There were some decent signings just after that but I do not who was and wasn't responsible. Wiggins was an odd one but at least we got money back for him. All I do know is that I am still unconvinced anyone else but the manager should be responsible for identifying targets.

[SiJ]

Unfortunately, the only thing that has been achieved during Chansiri's time at the club has been to make a lot of very average professionals (agents, advisors, players) very wealthy. 

 

 

[OwlBiSeeinThi]

8 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

More and more, I'm starting to think I dreamt that a manager as experienced and canny as Bruce ever thought managing our club was a decent career move, even if he only stayed for 18 games.

I'm not sure he did. We were his fall back in case the Newcastle job fell through. I get the impression he'd been working on that deal for a while.

[Sefton owl]

8 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

More and more I think that our recruitment strategy needs the most acute assessment 

 

it’s looking scary to me for sure

Yeah it is, im also starting to think this is the big wake up call needed. We’ve certainly had some fantastic results over the last few seasons but at some point we need to wake up and smell the coffee and hopefully this time is now. 

[ChinaOwl]

Take the four I mentioned, Vermijl, Bus, Melo and Lachmann. Who actually signed them and why? Does anyone believe Gray had any involvement. Doubt Chansiri would have known anything about any of them. So someone in the background. None of them were signed as part of any clear recruitment strategy. All of them I think are extremely average footballers who would not be considered as must haves by a promotion hopeful club in the Championship. None of them seemed to fit into either Gray's or Carlos' vision. So they were signed for non footballing reasons? Backhanders or kickbacks? Favours? I would like to to know the actual rationale.

[Animis]

What I still find odd is the January signings - we clearly needed a centre midfielder even with Hutch and Luongo fit and available. Luongo has been injured pretty much since his sending off against Blackburn in early Jan, and Hutch was already banished, so it heightened the need. We then go and sign an attacking midfielder and wide man - both of which we had cover for already.

 

Is it that hard to loan a central midfielder - it's not like they're the white rhino of the footballing world.

[oldishowl]

3 hours ago, cowl said:

 

This is true - and in many ways that's ideally how it should be, but in that ideal scenario there would still need to be a proper support structure at the club, which is something we don't appear to have anyway.

 

Many of us by now are probably having major doubts about Monk, but there's no doubting that given the current structure (or lack of) at the club, there surely can't be anyone who should be overruling the manager on the ins and outs to the first team squad. Of course, the club may fail to carry out Monk's wishes due to financial restrictions - but I'd hope that's all it is, because those tweets from Biggs are hinting more at Monk's advice just being ignored.

 

I'd really like to know what really happened with the rumoured transfers of Rhodes to Wigan, and Westwood to Huddersfield.

I think those two not leaving are the things Monk is talking about.

 

Having presumably said the two were surplus to requirements his life would have been easier if they had gone elsewhere but the deals seem to have failed because DC/Paxo couldn’t sort the financial side

[full fathom five]

8 hours ago, Grandad said:

I'm more ann more convinced he left when it became clear how we were run

and i don't blame him

[Roscoe P. Coltrane]

1 hour ago, ChinaOwl said:

Take the four I mentioned, Vermijl, Bus, Melo and Lachmann. Who actually signed them and why? Does anyone believe Gray had any involvement. Doubt Chansiri would have known anything about any of them. So someone in the background. None of them were signed as part of any clear recruitment strategy. All of them I think are extremely average footballers who would not be considered as must haves by a promotion hopeful club in the Championship. None of them seemed to fit into either Gray's or Carlos' vision. So they were signed for non footballing reasons? Backhanders or kickbacks? Favours? I would like to to know the actual rationale.

For me the signing of Urby Emanuelson was the most bizarre...

Definitely parked here as a favour, kickback IMO..

[torryowl]

1 hour ago, gurujuan said:

Given how DC operates, nobody can believe any manager here was given the reins surely?

a lot do ...how many times have we've  read carlos spunked xxxx millions on dross …..

[myHero]

9 hours ago, Animis said:

Who actually is 'the Club'. I doubt it's DC - no doubt he has some say, but day-to-day footballing matters, I don't think so.

 

Are we saying DC still has the likes of Paxo involved?

He's not the Club is he. We're clearly part of something bigger, where we have to take players like Wickham on loan for the benefit of the Paxo Chicken Group plc.

 

I fear Sheffield Wednesday are now as relevant in modern football as Bradford Park Avenue. 

 

The whole thing is rotten to the core. 

[ChinaOwl]

20 minutes ago, Mrs Blenkinsops shed said:

For me the signing of Urby Emanuelson was the most bizarre...

Definitely parked here as a favour, kickback IMO..

 

I have my suspicions about this da Cruz fella. I'm not convinced that Monk signed him or knew anything about him. I think this is another out of the Urby repertoire. 

[@owlstalk]

1 hour ago, McRightSide said:

If Monk doesn’t have any say on transfers, then why are we waiting for him to ‘have a chance with his own players’ before sacking him?

Alternatively you could ask what’s the point in sacking him and getting someone else in to suffer the same squad?

[torryowl]

9 hours ago, the third man said:

 

if that's true its his fault, no way would I take a job where whether I could do my job depended on someone else's decisions

ive had a diversity of jobs and have always had to follow company policy and do as my boss told me .…..you saying you wouldn't take a job if you couldn't do your way ?

[Dick_Turpin]

25 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

Alternatively you could ask what’s the point in sacking him and getting someone else in to suffer the same squad?

Because that someone else may be able to manage them better. That’s entirely the point if you can’t change the players.