Jump to content

Monty13

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    5,480

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by Monty13

  2. Posted

    6 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

    Don't forget, whether we like it or not, the club will have to put out something that Zoe is comfortable to support.

    I don’t think anyone is calling for the club to stick the knife in or attack her husband. A simple this does not reflect the views of NCFC style statement should be the response, if she can’t support that that’s a huge conflict of interest.

    I’m one of those that has the view that Zoe is her own person and shouldn’t be tarnished by association with whatever her husband does just because she’s his wife, but by that same token she has to embody that. Publicly supporting the core values of NCFC shouldn’t be an issue for any employee.

  3. Posted · Edited by Monty13

    1 hour ago, Midlands Yellow said:

    That statement is to the point and something like this needs to be done ASAP. 

    Exactly it’s not hard to write it should have been out and made already. Taking the time to make a short distancing statement that’s so obviously required is not a good look IMO.

    • Like 2

  7. Posted · Edited by Monty13

    9 minutes ago, hogesar said:

    We made money on Watkins, to be fair.

    I doubt that when you include, agent fees, signing on fees and wages. Didn’t lose much is more likely which isn’t a bad return anyway for a punt.

    The point being he was a total flop as a player so judging Knapper on one signing (that’s just a loan anyway) is really premature.

  9. Posted

    1 hour ago, hogesar said:

    I think that's unlikely when it's still in the articles.

    I mean, is this the only requirement? If Knapper takes us to League One it's OK because he was more commercially professional?

    I would be talking about how lucky we are yet, especially taking his first signing into account.

    Marley Watkins was Webbers first signing, let’s give Knapper some time maybe.

  10. Posted

    The Pinkun tweets been deleted, they’ve replaced it with a tweet saying they don’t support discrimination, which in itself makes it clear the comment was discriminatory, at least from their perspective.

    People are questioning why they posted it in the first place, which I find odd. Journalists job is to print what is said, hiding what he said would be doing him a favour he doesn’t deserve. The failure if there is one, and maybe we’ll find out more when the whole interview is released, is potentially failing to challenge him on what he said not publishing it.

  11. Posted

    2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

    If you buy nobody and suffer another meek relegation there’s no guarantee that you come back up the following season though. Even if we had Buendia for one more Prem season he would have likely been off if we’d been relegated again, a player of that calibre isn’t going to be happy yo-yoing for eternity and then we’d be back to where we are now anyway having to alter the style of play because it simply didn’t work without him.

    I don’t blame the club for rolling the dice. In hindsight Smith was a poor choice but I can understand the thinking of trying to switch to a more pragmatic style, it’s just that it’s taken a few transfer windows to alter the personnel on the pitch to play that way 

    I don’t think anybody was suggesting we’d have kept Buendia after another relegation, perhaps even more unlikely we’d keep hold if he’d steered us to an unlikely survival. The fact we sold him wasn’t an issue given our model, the timing and manner was.

    • Thanks 1

  12. Posted · Edited by Monty13

    12 hours ago, hogesar said:

    And somebody can be accused of making a racist comment without necessarily being a racist.

    Which is true, someone clumsily, inadvertently or unthinkingly saying something racist does not make them a racist.

    His comment as said though appears racist whether intended or not. Especially because by all accounts it’s clearly not true about two of those mentioned by name, the five of which seem to have only been linked together because of the colour of their skin.

    • Like 1

  14. Posted

    34 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

    Monty, the counter argument is that if we had held onto Buendia the lack of extra signings (which would have caused uproar here) would just as much have cut the legs off the season! I understand Parma's argument, and particularly the point about the psychological damage it may have caused.

    But there was also the potential for psychological damage in going into an Premier League season with some glaring gaps in the squad (and yes, I get the claim that the extra money ended up being mainly wasted, but that is a side issue to the overall argument.) My point is that I don't see there is an absolute certainty here.

    PS. Just seen that Big Fish is making a similar point.

    I’m not sure. I agree it would have been met with much nashing of teeth on here but I doubt the psychological damage would have been so pronounced. It’s clear we bought Tzolis and Sargent with an eye in future value, a few older heads and freebies would have been far cheaper. Let’s not pretend there was no money to spend, we brought in more than Rashica, Sargent and Tzolis.

    Of course nothing is certain, I would just argue the effect of losing Buendia was highly probable to be highly destructive and played out as expected IMO. Yes keeping him was also massively uncertain, I would simply argue it was less so.

  15. Posted

    6 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

    Short of there being a legal document saying we had to let Buendia go, and I have never seen that suggested, then indeed we had a choice, to keep or to sell. The problem with claiming selling Buendia was a massive act of self-harm is that it rests on the absolute certainty that if we had kept him (and so not had that £33m extra to spend) then we would have performed better that season. But I know of no way of demonstrating that as a probability, let alone proving it as a certainty.😍

    I do agree Purple in part. However I think the argument is, or at least mine would be, you’re right we don’t know if we would have still been relegated with him (I suspect we likely would) or whether we even would have been much better than the previous PL campaign.

    The issue is his sale cut the legs off that season before it began, probably led to Farkes dismissal, Smiths appointment and a period of declining fortunes we are just now showing signs of recovering out of with the help of Attanasio.

    It may be long term it kickstarted a series of events that leads to a stronger future, but that certainly wasn’t intentional. What’s undeniable is the money spent from his sale did nothing to improve our fortunes that season.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    4 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

    Stuart Webber:

    “If I’m going to go back into football, it needs to be a club where if they’re not in the Premier League already, and you’ve got to get there, I’ve got the resources to help stay there. I don’t want to go through what I’ve been through twice here, which is the first Premier League season we spent £750,000 on Sam Byram, then after relegation we had to sell (Ben) Godfrey and (Jamal) Lewis due to the impact of Covid. 

    “Then we go back up and have to sell (Emi) Buendia to try and add to the squad. It is so hard and you get no thanks at the end. 

    “Burnley look like they will get relegated, same as us, and they have spent maybe £100m. I’d say give me a scenario where I had £100m and didn’t have to sell our best player, which was Buendia, and I wouldn’t say we would have stayed up, because the level of the Premier League is outrageous, but we would have given it a good shot.”

    So anyone left that was in any doubt now knows that our model, our circumstances and our own decision-making chose to sell Buendia.

    And that it was undesirable, imperfect, destructive and an act of sporting self-harm due to our financial constraints and absolutely nothing to do with any behaviour - good, bad or indifferent - by Buendia. 

    The Shakespearean fulcrum indeed. And there the action pivoted.

    In so many senses. 

    Parma 

    @Monty13

    It’s been so obvious that’s what happened based on the chain of events, but at least Webber now confirms it.

    I understand his frustration but he clearly wanted to spend the cash, if the cash wasn’t there that’s just an unfortunate reality of our situation, there was no changing it.

    • Like 2

  18. Posted

    5 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

    P16  W11. D4. L1. points 37

    thats 2.31 points per game 

    Leicester are currently top on 2.2 points per game. 

    If Josh had been fit throughout and we'd achieved 2.31 points per game we would currently be top with 85 points

    He’s our best player IMO, shades it over Sara for me.

    A striker who can score 25+ goals a season at this level (which he likely would have done if not injured) is unbelievably valuable.

    He really is a complete no. 9 at this level. I wouldn’t swap him with any other Championship striker personally.

    • Like 3

  19. Posted · Edited by Monty13

    19 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

    He's always been considerably better than his critics suggested. I do wonder at time whether he tried to do too much and ended up being jack of all trades, master of none. Sometimes in an effort to be everywhere on the pitch he lost a bit of defensive discipline.

    I think his stint at the back has been great for him. Not only has he played very well there, I wonder if it's made him a better midfielder, more aware of his defensive responsibilities and more aware that he can (paradoxically) do more damage by staying deeper and playing those excellent QB passes.

    I think he’s suffered for years from not being a defensive midfielder when so many people want one on the pitch.

    Then because he’s the most defensively minded of our CMs he seems to get stick for not being a specialist. Where as Sara in comparison is a great player but far worse than Kenny defensively, Nunez is improving but ditto IMO.

    We have finally seemed to settle into a system that works defensively without a specialist DM though, at least at this level.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    I think many people have always been far too critical of the mistakes he makes compared to what he brings in terms of carrying the ball and his passing ability.  

    I do think this season at times he’d looked just about as good as he ever has, yesterday being a case in point.

    • Like 2

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, Google Bot said:

    With the players available we've always looked far more fluid and see the system for what it is.  It seems that we've now found our confidence after a torrid 2 year period and it's paying dividends in regards to our ability to not give the ball away or looking like sheep in the headlights

    Long may it continue, and i'm so pleased for Wagner who's come under some really harsh criticism and good on the club for sticking with their man.  It seems that he has changed tact across this season and we're now playing a higher quality of football and it's great to see us passing it around with flair.

    However, it needs pointing out that as good as things are, we're in a precarious position due to the importance of players like Gunn, Sarge, Sainz and Sara.  Losing either one of those could have quite a negative impact.  But that's the cards as dealt.

    I’d add Kenny to those 4 and probably Stacy as well. Losing any one of those 6 on their current form could be enough to derail us.

×
×
  • Create New...