Jump to content
@owlstalk

Dom on Monk not having back room staff..

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, AwokenGiant said:

 

But didn't Chansiri say from day one, that no money would be spent on the ground until we got Prem status. I am led to believe the training ground has had some dough spent on it. 

So never then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why Dom has got the nomination as spokesman for DC and GM. 

Does Dom just give his own opinion or is he using his vast knowledge of the club to publish answer he has heard previously. 

I thought he was going to interview DC directly with questions supplied by OT contributors. 

From what I've seen so far it seems like DH is giving his own opinions. Please correct me if I've got it wrong. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, A12owl said:

Not sure why Dom has got the nomination as spokesman for DC and GM. 

Does Dom just give his own opinion or is he using his vast knowledge of the club to publish answer he has heard previously. 

I thought he was going to interview DC directly with questions supplied by OT contributors. 

From what I've seen so far it seems like DH is giving his own opinions. Please correct me if I've got it wrong. 

 


You’re wrong I’d suggest.

 

My understanding is that he is currently being sent questions.

 

But questions already asked previously - he already has the answers. So he’s “re-answering them” prior to his interview.

 

Thus, I presume he won’t be answering them again.

Edited by ReadingOwl

Share this post


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

What situations dont allow a manager to bring in his own team? Money may be one, but what else?

 

Joke

 

Court injunctions? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t know if it’s been said already but I thought it was pretty widely suspected that Birmingham blocking Beattie was the financial obstacle Monk referred too.

 

Why waste money on getting Beattie in now if he can come for free in the summer?

 

We’ll be rebuilding more than just playing staff in the summer after all, hopefully anyway...

Share this post


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

 

Take a look at the club's "coaching staff" page. The club is well aware they're short, as they've filled this page with anyone in the backroom, including kitmen! If they didn't, the page would look proper embarrassing.

 

Under Bruce, the same page contained six headshots, whereas now it would be just three. While Bruce had FOUR outfield coaches by his side, Monk has just one - the least qualified of them all.

 

It's an utter shambles. Incredible that you can't see it.

Last month the club's YouTube channel published a training session, and something about it doesn't feel quite right. But that could be my confirmation bias kicking in. How does it look to everyone else?

 


 


Inside training; I thought this was gonna be a picture of hutch and Westwood’s living room counting a big pile of cash for doing fuckall. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Birmingham didn’t block anything. Monks backroom staff are on longer deals there and were unwilling to move here unless Monk was on a longer deal or they were paid off by Birmingham. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether DC has been advised to not spend any unnecessary money while this EFL charge process is going on.

 

Bringing in new coaches isnt exactly necessary when we already have a set.  We'd have to pay people off - and then also pay the new ones - or at the very least add to our staffing fees.

 

Likewise on players - hence the loans (which in my opinion are 'free' to us as their wages are covered by their parent clubs... certainly with Wickham)

 

Big mess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, vulva said:

Birmingham didn’t block anything. Monks backroom staff are on longer deals there and were unwilling to move here unless Monk was on a longer deal or they were paid off by Birmingham. 

 

Beattie was told to stay away from Birmingham first team.Not sure if he ever returned or was placed on gardening leave

 

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/update-provided-on-birmingham-city-man-amid-speculation-of-garry-monk-reunion/

Edited by Anthndav
Article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Anthndav said:

 

Court injunctions? 

Who knows. Sounds a right mess though

Share this post


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

 

Beattie was told to stay away from Birmingham. Not sure if he ever returned or was placed on gardening leave

I think the 2 stories are linked. Beattie probably wanted to come, wanted paying up/a deal, Birmingham refused and some toys came out of the pram. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, toppOwl said:

 

All the managers under DC have had a rolling 1 year deal.

The short termism at this football club is absolutely pathetic...

Share this post


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

 

Take a look at the club's "coaching staff" page. The club is well aware they're short, as they've filled this page with anyone in the backroom, including kitmen! If they didn't, the page would look proper embarrassing.

 

Under Bruce, the same page contained six headshots, whereas now it would be just three. While Bruce had FOUR outfield coaches by his side, Monk has just one - the least qualified of them all.

 

It's an utter shambles. Incredible that you can't see it.

Last month the club's YouTube channel published a training session, and something about it doesn't feel quite right. But that could be my confirmation bias kicking in. How does it look to everyone else?

 


 

Was it the " coaches" day off..:duntmatter:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bobness said:

 

What happened to the freed up wages of Bruce, Agnew, and Clemence? 

 

What happened to the £2m compensation? 

 

Not read the whole of the thread so I might have missed something. 

 

Monk said bringing someone in was part of the plan but it wasn't doable at the time and finances played a part. Howson said that Birmingham blocked a move.

 

Maybe the finances element was Birmingham have paid off Beattie but those payments will stop if Beattie takes a job in a specific time scale? Not necessarily finances on our part in this case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FreshOwl said:

No finances to bring in backroom staff lol are we a non league club?

Give it another couple of years and who knows the places we'll be going. 

 

:duntmatter:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, A12owl said:

Not sure why Dom has got the nomination as spokesman for DC and GM. 

Does Dom just give his own opinion or is he using his vast knowledge of the club to publish answer he has heard previously. 

I thought he was going to interview DC directly with questions supplied by OT contributors. 

From what I've seen so far it seems like DH is giving his own opinions. Please correct me if I've got it wrong. 

 

 

He's currently repeating stuff he already knows from his previous work, interspersing stuff from interviews with his own opinion.

 

He has asked for questions from fans as he hopes to speak to the owner next week.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, A12owl said:

Not sure why Dom has got the nomination as spokesman for DC and GM. 

Does Dom just give his own opinion or is he using his vast knowledge of the club to publish answer he has heard previously. 

I thought he was going to interview DC directly with questions supplied by OT contributors. 

From what I've seen so far it seems like DH is giving his own opinions. Please correct me if I've got it wrong. 

 




Someone posts press/media quote

*Ignores the topic and attacks the media person*

Every

Single

Time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, vulva said:

Birmingham didn’t block anything. Monks backroom staff are on longer deals there and were unwilling to move here unless Monk was on a longer deal or they were paid off by Birmingham. 

 

I'm embarassed to say that I thought a proven manager, such as Hughton, would even consider the job here. Realistically, why would anyone decent agree to a one-year deal, when the pay off of waiting for a longer term offer (and better working conditions) makes better sense? 

 

I was astonished when I learned Bruce agreed to a one-year deal, but we see where that went. 

 

Of all the positions at the club we should be investing in, it should be this one. Yet the best DC can do is offer one-year contracts, while at the same time sign ageing crocks to long term deals. 

 

It's almost as if DC doesn't understand how football works... 

Edited by bobness

Share this post


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

 

I'm embarassed to say that I thought a proven manager, such as Hughton, would even consider the job here. Realistically, why would anyone decent agree to a one-year deal, when the pay off of waiting for a better offer (and better working conditions) makes better sense? 

 

I was astonished when I learned Bruce agreed to a one-year deal, but we see where that went. 

 

Of all the positions at the club we should be investing it, it should be this one. Yet the best DC can do is offer one-year contracts, while at the same time sign ageing crocks to long term deals. 

 

It's almost as if DC doesn't understand how football works... 

 

It doesn't make sense does it. Signing players to long-term contracts is fair enough if they are young enough to have a transfer value and you are prepared to cash in. We have failed in either one or both of these respects too many times.

 

Signing a manager to long-term contracts is a risk if you have to dismiss them but that I'm afraid is a big part of football. If you don't offer a manager a decent contract you are unlikely to get a decent manager with any experience.

 

Bruce was seemingly an exception, happy to take a 1-year deal because he was looking at a period of rest at that time and we were prepared to wait for him and give him a significant salary. 

Share this post


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

Signing a manager to long-term contracts is a risk if you have to dismiss them but that I'm afraid is a big part of football. If you don't offer a manager a decent contract you are unlikely to get a decent manager with any experience.

 

There's a risk, but it's a necessary one if you want to hire someone well qualified. You need to factor in the cost of sacking them. Pretty standard stuff.

 

I could be wrong, but I'd imagine high risk managers  come on one-year deals. Which means it's a strategy of tin pot clubs, or ones lacking ambition. Come to think of it, we're both of those, carry on! 

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...