Jump to content

Hutch


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's 100% total speculation that Jos and Monk couldn't manage egos/personality

 

It's just totally made up

Complete made up speculation

OK.  I'm not wanting to go back and forth with you about this but how can you state that with such a level of certainty?  You might as well say everything that is not officially put out by the club is speculation; however, we know that it's not speculation, as much has been proven true.  

 

I'm only asking, I just want to know and don't want an argument.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, shandypants said:

OK.  I'm not wanting to go back and forth with you about this but how can you state that with such a level of certainty? 


No argument from me mate 👍


But ask the same question to all those who trot out the 'monk and jos just couldn't handle their personality/egos'

People are happy to state that as absolute fact but there's no evidence whatsoever that it is

 

They're literally just making it up or repeating what someone else has made up

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, @owlstalk said:



Ask the same question to all those who trot out the 'monk and jos just couldn't handle their personality/egos'

...and here is my answer,  there is some level of truth and some speculation in almost everything we here on here, other social media and from our friends.  

 

If Monk and Jos removed Hutchinson and Westwood for reasons other than personality then its even more damning on  those two managers because that means they saw them as surplus to requirements and anyone with eyes in their heads can see that Hutch and Westwood are valuable to the team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, airborne_rat_of_s6 said:

I think you are speculating on this point.🤣

Owltalk-home of fish-wives and gossips.



As opposed to Twitter and Facebook and blokes down the pub?

 

Come on...

Be honest..


It's 100% total speculation why Monk and Jos left Hutchinson and Westwood out


Let's be honest


Totally brutally honest


The people saying they were left out because the managers couldn't manage their ego or strong personality - they all just made it up


It's not a criticism it's just an absolute fact

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Asio otus said:

Agreed. What happens in the dressing room and training ground etc should always be kept in house.

 

 

Big time


One person posted 'Monk/Jos can't handle their big personalities' and then it stuck as a thing and people have blindly repeated it since without asking themselves if what they were posting was actually true


It's 100% speculation why those two were left out

  • Like 1

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's 100% total speculation that Jos and Monk couldn't manage egos/personality

 

It's just totally made up

Complete made up speculation

I'd say it's more an educated guess, looking at the way they handled players with bigger (perhaps awkward) personalities. In Monk's case, not just at Hillsborough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet it was total speculation that many on here peddled as the truth that SH and KW were bad eggs, disruptive influences and troublemakers.

They based this on nothing more than because Monk had frozen them out after Jos had, those players must be at fault.

Not based on facts or truths, putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5, 100% speculation and wild theories.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's 100% speculation


A wild assumption


Posted by someone and then adopted as fact and trotted out repeatedly as though it's definitely the truth

 

What is the point in OwlsTalk then?  The vast majority of stuff is speculation, assumption and conjecture.  Why are you talking down the thing that makes YOUR site thrive?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shandypants said:

What is the point in OwlsTalk then?  The vast majority of stuff is speculation, assumption and conjecture.  Why are you talking down the thing that makes YOUR site thrive?  

 

I'm not talking it down


I'm saying what it is


I'm not saying it can't be said/posted


Just saying that it's 100% speculation (which is absolutely is)

 

That's all


No judgement from me - just saying it how it is


If anyone is getting angry about what I'm saying it's because they're embarrassed at posting stuff as fact that isnt'

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's 100% speculation


A wild assumption


Posted by someone and then adopted as fact and trotted out repeatedly as though it's definitely the truth

 

It's not 100% speculation, because the facts are both players weren't played when fit under those two managers (despite their undoubted superior ability to those that replaced them). So whoever you blame for what's gone on behind the scenes, the fact is both managers failed to get them on the pitch and contributing, where as Carlos, Bullen, Bruce and Thompson have all managed it.

 

So whether they couldn't manage them, or didn't want to is the question.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He brings us drive and leadership, for me under different management and used regularly as a cb than we've had Hutch would probably have been made captain as I think he has more natural leadership then Lees and bazza then and is more vocal and a better organiser than Lees too. 

Maybe a few of our managers struggled with strong characters in the team, hence we ended up with so many mice like reach and a side really low on agresssion, steel steel and leadership hence our failures in crucial games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

I'm not talking it down


I'm saying what it is


I'm not saying it can't be said/posted


Just saying that it's 100% speculation (which is absolutely is)

 

That's all


No judgement from me - just saying it how it is


If anyone is getting angry about what I'm saying it's because they're embarrassed at posting stuff as fact that isnt'

I'm not angry or embarrassed - I'm just baffled by your stance on this; particularly when you consider your own comments (which I presume are 100% speculation and wild assumption) on things like MR C having our pants down (I agree with that BTW).  

Edited by shandypants
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...