GARRY MONK vs NEW MANAGER THREAD

[davetherivelinowl]

4 minutes ago, sexpistol said:

I would take Warnock in a heartbeat.

So would I but I take it it was a joke suggestion cos he'd never come here.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

11 minutes ago, trevdi9 said:

 that's one of his sackings covered  team wise now ask yourself why the owner was peed off , now what about the others , or why three  of them were seeking legal charges ( All  freely available on google) or why he was sacked at Swansea for bad man management ,,  but no matter after the drop since Christmas I can't see it getting any better , but there you go ,

 

So you want to discuss Monk's sacking at Birmingham, then when you don't like the response, you suddenly want to discuss his sackings at his other clubs instead?

 

Fair enough.

 

 

Given the contexts in which he's worked, I'd say Monk's done at least a decent job at all of his previous clubs and arguably none of his clubs have benefitted from sacking him, other than Leeds...but that had a lot more to do with a change of chairman, 40+ players and appointing Bielsa than it did sacking Monk.

 

Swansea were two points above the bottom three when he took over from Michael Laudrup. By the end of that season they were 9 points clear and comfortably avoided the drop.

 

The following season, he led Swansea to 8th in the Premier League, missing out on European football by four points. In his final season at Swansea, they were 15th in the Premier league after 15 games, at which point he was sacked. They finished the season in 12th.

 

He then took the reigns of a Leeds side who'd finished 13th the season before and guided them to 7th in the Championship, before resigning at the end of the season. Leeds finished 13th again the following season.

 

Following that, he moved to recently-relegated Middlesbrough and had them sat 9th in the Championship, three points off the top six at the halfway point, before being sacked. Pulis took over and they finished in the top six by three points, before missing out on the playoffs the following season.

 

He then took over at Birmingham City, who were in the bottom three with 11 games to go. They survived the drop by five points. The following season, despite a nine point deduction, he took Birmingham to 17th place, before being sacked. Birmingham finished 17th but with 11 fewer points the following season.

 

I'm not saying he's the next Guardiola, but he's not a bad manager, either. Given the contexts and what he's had to work with, he's done at least a decent job at every club he's managed.

 

As for Gibson's legal proceedings, Monk came out and defended himself pretty strongly against Gibson's accusations. I've not heard much about the progress of it, so we'll have to see what comes of that. 

[RevOwl]

4 minutes ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said:

 

Imagine genuinely believing that any manager wouldn't want players as useful as Westwood, Forestieri and Hutchinson in the squad if these players were allying their undoubted talent with the right attitude and application. 

 

No manager would leave out such a player if all of the above were in place, would they?

 

Imagine criticising a manager for selecting Odubajo when there are simply no alternatives, thanks to the ridiculously threadbare squad he inherited - when the games started coming thick and fast and fatigue set in, I'm sure Monk would much rather have had greater depth to fall back on, but Bruce signed Odubajo, so that's who he can select.

 

Imagine thinking that Monk genuinely rates Pelupessy as anything more than a squad player, having played him for a grand total of 917 minutes all season (just shy of 25% of the time he could have played him).

 

Imagine thinking all the above and having the temerity to claim your inane drivel amounts to 'common sense'.

 

You couldn't make it up.

 

You're staying what you only think monk or another manager would do. I'm telling what he does do and it's scandalous that he's been allowed to get away with it at this once great club. He's created a way of playing that's left us with no identity and where players aren't capable of doing what ever it is he's trying to get them to do. You say a manager wouldn't play the above named players if the attitudes were as you say they are now? I'd play Jack the ripper in the starting 11 if I thought he was the best player I had in that position. I can just hear Maradonnas manager now, yes you are the best player on the planet but you've got off field problems or your attitude may not be right so i'm not playing you. I'm going to put  player in with less ability than you and just keep my fingers crossed. Sort yourself out and come back when the Monk blinkers have fell off.

[GLOwl]

One thing that really annoys me when debating with some people is that they just don't follow the thread of the conversation. They counter argue themselves and when you point it out they deny it. They ask questions and when you answer they say "what's that got to do with it?".

So are they wind up merchants or lacking intelligence

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

21 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

We are discussing the manager, that's what the thread is about so I am not moving away from anything. The state of our squad this past season was not great but it wasn't the 23rd best in the division - that is what Monk turned it into results and performance wise. If it all fell apart due to the loss of one striker that is his responsibility. He went out in January and replaced him with a striker who still wasn't fit after a 3-month lock down!

 

The manager had no clue what was the best way to play and couldn't even set us up to be compact or hard to beat when faced with not knowing the best way to utilise his squad. 

No faith in him at all based on what I have witnessed.

 

We weren't the 23rd best team in the division - we were the 16th best under Monks' management. Not overly surprising, given the state of our squad and the club as a whole.

 

It is his responsibility to ensure the loss of Fletcher didn't affect us massively, but for a fixture-packed month of the season, he had to do that with a choice of Winnall, Rhodes and Nuhiu. I can't say I expected the goals to flow!

 

As for the Wickham signing, it's notoriously difficult to sign top-quality match-ready players in the January window so it's often a bit of a gamble; unfortunately this one didn't come off. The damage was done last summer when Bruce released Hooper and Matias, then someone - not sure who as we had no manager at the time - signed off on the sale of João without lining up a single replacement. I assume Bruce would have wanted reinforcements if he'd stayed, but Chansiri decided to stumble into the season with no manager in place to make such calls.

 

Of course, when a team carries next to no goal threat, it tends to invite pressure on their defence. Which wouldn't be such a problem if we had something approaching a decent defence, but when Fox and Palmer are your first-choice fullbacks and Iorfa suddenly becomes a standout player, you know you're in trouble.

 

I won't lose any sleep if Monk is sacked, but I don't think replacing him with any of the realistic candidates would be a great improvement. The one advantage he has over anyone else is that he's seen the very worst of this squad of ours, and there's no way he'll want to go into next season without addressing some of the glaring issues which have hamstrung him so severely. If the chairman can back him and allow him to bring in the players he wants in order to address our many shortcomings, then maybe we'll be able to judge him a bit more accurately.

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

38 minutes ago, RevOwl said:

You're staying what you only think monk or another manager would do. I'm telling what he does do and it's scandalous that he's been allowed to get away with it at this once great club. He's created a way of playing that's left us with no identity and where players aren't capable of doing what ever it is he's trying to get them to do. You say a manager wouldn't play the above named players if the attitudes were as you say they are now? I'd play Jack the ripper in the starting 11 if I thought he was the best player I had in that position. I can just hear Maradonnas manager now, yes you are the best player on the planet but you've got off field problems or your attitude may not be right so i'm not playing you. I'm going to put  player in with less ability than you and just keep my fingers crossed. Sort yourself out and come back when the Monk blinkers have fell off.

 

If Forestieri had been fit enough, I'm sure Monk would have played him. The fact that one of his teammates called out his lack of effort in training says it all, really. As for Westwood and Hutchinson, without knowing exactly what went on, it's impossible to know the rights and wrongs of it. 

 

I'm not saying this is the case in this instance, but sometimes an individual, no matter how talented, needs moving on for the long-term good of an organisation. I've seen it in my own workplace - the most naturally gifted, incredibly hard-working person I ever worked with ended up picking fights with every member of leadership and management, before training their sights on some of their younger up-and-coming colleagues. By the time they were ushered towards the door, they'd become a totally toxic presence who was dragging their team down with them.

 

Again, without knowing the full story, it's hard to know whether leaving out Hutchinson and Westwood was a necessary evil.

 

I did enjoy this bit, though: 'Sort yourself out and come back when the Monk blinkers have fell off', especially as I'd just finished writing a paragraph beginning, 'I won't lose any sleep if Monk is sacked...'

 

[Sefton owl]

If not on his hols at Skeggy, he definitely needs to make a statement on all of this within the next week. I think for him to come out fighting may get some fans back on his side, albeit temporarily. 
 

I hope he doesn’t hide behind any of this.

[bladeshater]

2 minutes ago, Sefton owl said:

If not on his hols at Skeggy, he definitely needs to make a statement on all of this within the next week. I think for him to come out fighting may get some fans back on his side, albeit temporarily. 
 

I hope he doesn’t hide behind any of this.

Don't expect a statement thanks for asking tho

[@owlstalk]

3 minutes ago, Sefton owl said:

If not on his hols at Skeggy, he definitely needs to make a statement on all of this within the next week. I think for him to come out fighting may get some fans back on his side, albeit temporarily. 
 

I hope he doesn’t hide behind any of this.

 

Why on earth would Garry Monk issue any kind of statement?

 

Why?
 

[bladeshater]

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 

Why on earth would Garry Monk issue any kind of statement?

 

Why?
 

Because that's the way his brain engages

[pazowl55]

3 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

Why on earth would Garry Monk issue any kind of statement?

 

Why?
 

Think some are hoping he makes a statement to announce his resignation.

[@owlstalk]