Jump to content

Monk vague over David Bates omission


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Ronnie Starling said:

I can't understand why Monk just doesn't come out with a statement along the lines of "all players have the opportunity to play by working hard in training and impressing. The players who played in the last game have the job of playing well to keep the shirt."

Because not all the players do have the opportunity. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Farrell said:

Never known a club sign so many players, pay their wages, and never play them.

 

Doesn't take a lot to work out why we are up shiit creek.

 

Hell of a business model.

 

We do love breaking records!

:Chansiri:

 

 

 

 



:duntmatter::duntmatter::duntmatter:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is monk acting on his own or is he under orders from the owner not to pick Bates? 

We all know that the owner has issued orders in past telling managers not to pick certain players. Is this happening again? 

We clearly have a problem a centre back both Borner and Lees are hopeless. They can't hold the line. Borner continually drifts out of position. Iorfa has to cover for them every match. This leaves a hole. Most of the goals we let in come from centre back errors. Teams are exploiting the hole and Borner and lees complete inability to defend properly 

And still Bates, a Scottish international isn't allowed to be picked.

I suspect he's said something to monk and il duce. That's sufficient to get banned 

Also, Monk has a history of blacklisting players. There's an eldless list of excellent players he's blacklisted. It's happened at every club 

Monk was my choice. Sadly he's got a very dark and disturbing side. So much so that every club he's been at has always eventually had a toxic atmosphere 

Add Il duce into the equation. A ruthless, corrupt megalomaniac and you've got a lot of trouble. Oh yes also add a first team squad that's dominated by proven flops and players who simply won't try and we've got a terrible problem. 

Monks peculiar attitude to Bates isnt surprising considering his track record. And il duce track record of abusing players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Monk clearly doesn’t think Bates is good enough and we have plenty of options at CB. With his previous comments about consistency and availability of players it makes sense that a loan player who isn’t a world beater doesn’t get used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CF_Owl said:

Monk clearly doesn’t think Bates is good enough and we have plenty of options at CB. With his previous comments about consistency and availability of players it makes sense that a loan player who isn’t a world beater doesn’t get used.

He has never had a chance. He can't be worse than donkeys like Borner and Lees. That's impossible. Please tell me who the plenty of options are that haven't flopped already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why if he has decided this was he not sent back in January and someone brought in that he decides is good enough ???

 

Anyway the decision I have made is that Monk is not the man to rebuild this squad or indeed get us enough points to get us out of a relegation battle this season. Monk Out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Why if he has decided this was he not sent back in January and someone brought in that he decides is good enough ???

 

Anyway the decision I have made is that Monk is not the man to rebuild this squad or indeed get us enough points to get us out of a relegation battle this season. Monk Out.


 

Ive just read and then re-read your post and am struggling to see the logic in it

 

Bates was brought to the club and given to Monk and yet you want Monk sacking for it?

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Bates thing for me mirrors the way Carlos treated Vincent Sasso, never played him even though he came in on loan, the excuse was it was a Paxo signing, Sasso then gets a chance as the fans were asking why is he not playing, I think Lees also got another groin injury that put him out for 2-3 months and he was one of the real success that help the team get to 6th and into the play offs.

 

We then signed him from Braga and barely played a game before leaving in the summer on a free.

 

For me when you have a team that is conceding goals left right and centre - Tom Lees who has been in awful form for the most of the season and Borner has now picked up an injury you have a defense centre half cover on the bench at the very least.

 

This is just another one that sparks of Monk knows best - and he has proved that he has slowly managing to change the team Bruce left him, from a team over achieving and pushing for the top 6 to a team fighting to stay in the league, unable to score goals and conceding at least 2 a game.

 

No other manager in football would still be here after taking 9 points from 42 and losing 9 of his last 14 games. But no other team in football has a muppet for a chairman who could not run a bath without flooding the house. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, @owlstalk said:


 

Ive just read and then re-read your post and am struggling to see the logic in it

 

Bates was brought to the club and given to Monk and yet you want Monk sacking for it?

Oh no I want Monk sacking as I want us to stay up and don't think he can win enough games to keep us up.

 

His vagueness on the Bates issue is just another issue I have with him. Good managers get the best out of what they have, look at Rowett at Milwall. Monk Cant.

Link to comment
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...