Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just now, McRightSide said:


Not easy to get rid of an investor who doesn’t want to leave

I think i thought that first :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DEH9 said:

 

Aye, which is what he said. 


But Monk and Owlstalk said he is 100% responsible for results.

 

Which is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McRightSide said:


Afraid it is

 

Saying he’s responsible and then saying the culture is preventing proper performances.

 

So what’s the truth, does he have the responsibility for results or should he be allowed a free pass because of the culture (I.e not responsible for results)


I don’t think it’s that binary.

 

Monk good/bad.

 

And, that’s what most people want to discuss on here.

 

Personally, I think he’s underwhelming. But, I wouldn’t sack him without other guarantees/plans/visions, in place.

 

Its pointless.

 

If getting shut of Monk makes you happy - good for you. Monk is symptom of the complete rudderless position of the Club.

 

He’s irrelevant in the grand scheme. A patsy.

 

Which is why he was appointed.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McRightSide said:


But Monk and Owlstalk said he is 100% responsible for results.

 

Which is it?

 

Right. That's what I just said. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sherlyegg said:

Why doesn't he get rid of him then?

Good point. DC refuses to discuss him never mind explain his role. Almost as if saying his name 3 times makes him appear, like Candyman. 

 

He's involved in recommending and interviewing managers, recommending and signing players and appears with the squad on match days.

 

Seems he has a lot of involvement, over and above being an advisor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ReadingOwl said:


I don’t think it’s that binary.

 

Monk good/bad.

 

And, that’s what most people want to discuss on here.

 

Personally, I think he’s underwhelming. But, I wouldn’t sack him without other guarantees/plans/visions, in place.

 

Its pointless.

 

If getting shut of Monk makes you happy - good for you. Monk is symptom of the complete rudderless position of the Club.

 

He’s irrelevant in the grand scheme. A patsy.

 

Which is why he was appointed.


I just want to know if I should hold Monk responsible for the results or not

 

Owlstalk said I should because Monk said it but apparently I shouldn’t because he isn’t responsible.

 

Very contradictory 

Share this post


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

 

Centre half, it's where he stands most games!

 

With Borner injured and Lees in the worst form of his life, this is exactly where he should be. (In contrast to most, I don't reckon a lot to him as a midfielder...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ReadingOwl said:


I don’t think it’s that binary.

 

Monk good/bad.

 

And, that’s what most people want to discuss on here.

 

Personally, I think he’s underwhelming. But, I wouldn’t sack him without other guarantees/plans/visions, in place.

 

Its pointless.

 

If getting shut of Monk makes you happy - good for you. Monk is symptom of the complete rudderless position of the Club.

 

He’s irrelevant in the grand scheme. A patsy.

 

Which is why he was appointed.


Pretty much agree with everything here,  I do wonder though why Monk keeps saying things can get better in the summer,  If we was stuck with Doyen and there the issue how could he think owt will get better in the summer 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Royal_D said:


Pretty much agree with everything here,  I do wonder though why Monk keeps saying things can get better in the summer,  If we was stuck with Doyen and there the issue how could he think owt will get better in the summer 

 

 

 


Because at least he can offload the problem players

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad that people are starting to talk about the shady characters at S6 to be honest. Fair play to Matt, he's been banging on about Paxiao et al longer than most.

 

My biggest suspicion with all this is if Chansiri is so naive in the whole affair, why has he not publicly named AM as his right hand man, or given him the role of Director of Football? He obviously thinks this is all something which fans should be kept in the dark about, which worries more than anything.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sherlyegg said:

Why doesn't he get rid of him then?

He has been in from the start so he Chansiri may see him as someone he trusts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:


Sometimes you have to read between the lines. Look at what isn’t being said, as opposed to what is.

we love you bryan oh yes we do, we love bryan oh yes we do, we love you bryan oh yeah, oh bryan we love you.

Look at the Executive Boxes, look at the sponsorship deals, look at the 10 year season ticket offers.

I's standing over there by the tomatoes, and here he come, running through the pole beans, through the fruits and vegetables, nekkid as a jaybird,

If you don’t, you end up like Bolton and Bury.

and I hollered over t' Ethel I said, "Don't Look Ethel", but its too late, she'd already been incensed.

But with your name on the back of a seat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McRightSide said:


I just want to know if I should hold Monk responsible for the results or not

 

Owlstalk said I should because Monk said it but apparently I shouldn’t because he isn’t responsible.

 

Very contradictory 

 

 

My postman is responsible for delivering my mail.

Sometimes he accidently puts em through next doors box. 

Dozy b*stard .

 

Sometimes I don't get any mail at all. 

 

Sometimes the van breaks down. Sometimes his gaffer outs him on a different route. Sometimes he's told he can't deliver me packets over a certain size but other times he can.

 

I'm not a fan of my postie. I don't think he's a great postie. 

 

But I don't blame him for everything that happens at Royal Mail which impacts his ability to get my mail to me.

Share this post


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

 

With Borner injured and Lees in the worst form of his life, this is exactly where he should be. (In contrast to most, I don't reckon a lot to him as a midfielder...)

 

This is a joke right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 


Because at least he can offload the problem players


agree with this. I really don’t think Monk means anything else apart from he can get rid of some out of contract players. I would love it to be more but just can’t see it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, flo said:

He has been in from the start so he Chansiri may see him as someone he trusts. 

Well that went well. Reasonable to question DC's judgement in that case :ph34r:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, flo said:

He has been in from the start so he Chansiri may see him as someone he trusts. 

 

Or is held to ransom by.

 

Or contractually obliged to use.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ReadingOwl said:


That can be true.

 

But transparency, credible plans  and communication solves that.

 

Or, an underwater phone.

 

Its not that difficult if you’ve nothing to hide. That way, you take people with you.

 

Whatever is said by the club is instantly dismissed by certain fans and used against them.  It all become fake news so I can imagine DC thinking what's the point .

 

Cynicism is top dog.  

Share this post


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

Question is, where's Bannan going to play if you've got Hutchinson, Waddle and Pelupessy in centre mid?

 

Centre back. That’s where he’s usually stood anyway 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, McRightSide said:


I just want to know if I should hold Monk responsible for the results or not

 

Owlstalk said I should because Monk said it but apparently I shouldn’t because he isn’t responsible.

 

Very contradictory 


I don’t rate Monk - but that’s a gut feeling. It’s not scientific, no appointment can be.

 

But, conversely you have to take his appointment in context. The tools he’s been given, the support he has. Has he been a fair go?

 

Do I know all the behind the scenes nuances, the politics? What his instructions are. Or, what Jos’ were?  No I don’t.

 

So, is he really a failure - or, is he doomed to fail?
 

Personally, I think anyone post Christmas could have done as well. Virtually anyone.
 

But Monk is the symptom - not necessarily the problem.

 

Sacking Monk is the Chairman’s “get out of jail card”.

 

And you’ll all be placated for a while. And, the Club will continue to rot.

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

×
×
  • Create New...