Prediction of what Wagner will say re Duffy

[S_81 1,101]

I’m calling the club ruling him out of contention for Sunday and punishment being dealt with internally (aside from the court case, of course). I sincerely hope Wagner doesn’t say he’s available to play. It would be an appalling miscalculation by the club. 

[Bomber 57]

We need a squad who are fully focused on the job in hand and I am afraid that Duffy will have his head elsewhere - I would be utterly surprised and disappointed if he plays 

[Robert N. LiM 6,279]

6 minutes ago, Bomber said:

We need a squad who are fully focused on the job in hand and I am afraid that Duffy will have his head elsewhere - I would be utterly surprised and disappointed if he plays 

I'm not convinced by Wagner, far from it. But I think his care of the players is first-class (iirc Gibson was full of praise for his support during their daughter's hospital stay). I think he'll make the right decision on that score, whatever it is.

 

On the issue more generally, I'd just say that I think drink-driving is an unforgivable crime and if Duffy is convicted, the club should sack him. But he's also entitled to a fair trial and, while I think I would suspend him pending it, I don't think it's ridiculous for the club to stand by him until then.

Edited May 9 by Robert N. LiM

[norfolkngood 1,174]

i know exactly what Wagner will say Duffy can play up front as striker if needed

 

in all seriousness he shouldn't be near the squad !

we need Professional , well prepared players who are peak fitness 

[GodlyOtsemobor 2,830]

" I couldn't believe that there was yet another thread on the pink un vebsite about Shane " 

[TheGunnShow 7,377]

Something about Mercy, not being a Stepping Stone and possibly a reference to Warwick Avenue somewhere.

Wait, wrong Duffy.

[Satriales 993]

He won't say anything, aside from the club are dealing with it internally.

[cambridgeshire canary 7,797]

4 minutes ago, Satriales said:

He won't say anything, aside from the club are dealing with it internally.

Indeed, it will be kept professional and stay behind closed doors. And if anything is said it will be along the lines of "it's being delt with internally I cannot speak further on the issue"

Edited May 9 by cambridgeshire canary

[S_81 1,101]

1 hour ago, Satriales said:

He won't say anything, aside from the club are dealing with it internally.

He’ll have to say whether he’s available for selection, as he will be asked it 

Edited May 9 by S_81

[AJ 1,358]

He'll likely refuse to talk about it, and that's probably justified given it's between Shane and the police now

[S_81 1,101]

6 minutes ago, AJ said:

He'll likely refuse to talk about it, and that's probably justified given it's between Shane and the police now

He can’t dodge questions about whether Duffy is available for Sunday 

[Feedthewolf 5,885]

2 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

On the issue more generally, I'd just say that I think drink-driving is an unforgivable crime and if Duffy is convicted, the club should sack him. But he's also entitled to a fair trial and, while I think I would suspend him pending it, I don't think it's ridiculous for the club to stand by him until then.

We've already not sacked Flynn Clarke who was given a prison sentence for causing serious injury through dangerous driving. Not making any moral aspersions about what Duffy has (or may have) done, just saying that there's a pretty clear precedent there.

If we tried to sack him then the PFA would get involved, it'd be lengthy and ugly, and given his likely wage and the two years remaining on his contract, it might not end particularly favourably for the club.

As I've said elsewhere, though, it'd probably be wise to remove him from the squad for the duration of our playoff campaign. We don't need that kind of distraction, and the rest of the squad need to be fully focused on the task in hand (rather than getting pissed up and stacking their car into parked vehicles despite only living half a mile down the road).

[chicken 3,084]

I'm going to throw a curveball in, a bit of devil's advocate.

Paul Merson.

Pretty sure there was a thread on here a couple of years back I think, after a documentry.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that drink driving is ever ok.

What I am saying is that there could be more at play here than the 2d black and white.

[S_81 1,101]

2 minutes ago, chicken said:

I'm going to throw a curveball in, a bit of devil's advocate.

Paul Merson.

Pretty sure there was a thread on here a couple of years back I think, after a documentry.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that drink driving is ever ok.

What I am saying is that there could be more at play here than the 2d black and white.

Duffy could well be an alcoholic. And needs help if so. But it doesn’t change the actions of this week or the message that is sent out to players, club, fans and community if he’s in Sunday’s team. 

[chicken 3,084]

2 minutes ago, S_81 said:

Duffy could well be an alcoholic. And needs help if so. But it doesn’t change the actions of this week or the message that is sent out to players, club, fans and community if he’s in Sunday’s team. 

Who gets to decide what that message is?

[S_81 1,101]

Just now, chicken said:

Who gets to decide what that message is?

Hopefully someone with some standards at the club, as they’re distinctly lacking from some on this messageboard 

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

If he remains in the squad I would be very surprised. 

[chicken 3,084]

2 minutes ago, S_81 said:

Hopefully someone with some standards at the club, as they’re distinctly lacking from some on this messageboard 

That's interesting. It seems there are a lot of people trying to state what the message is, would be, isn't and to those or them or that lot.

I won't be deciding the message nor will I be trying to interpret it.

No doubt it'll be wrong. Might as well just settle on that now. Already seems to have been decided, no point arguing.

It's like minority report...

[Robert N. LiM 6,279]

9 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

We've already not sacked Flynn Clarke who was given a prison sentence for causing serious injury through dangerous driving.

Well, I think that's wrong. I get the point about the PFA, and understand that it might be difficult or expensive, but it just seems wrong to me. These guys are representing our club, and the city. The club should be making it clear that that sort of behaviour is unacceptable.

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

It depends on what he tells Wagner. If he has a wider personal or family issue then I'm sure that will be taken into consideration.

I suspect he won't play Sunday but wouldn't surprise me if he's back for the 2nd leg.

[Capt. Pants 5,008]

Just to add Flynn Clarke is not a precedent. The club has no legal grounds and is not bound by previous decisions and can be as inconsistent as they like. Each case will be treated on it merits.

Duffy will be dealt with as they see fit.

[ZLF 335]

It may be a wrong approach but we do lose a goal threat given leeds weakness at set pieces and that may become a decider while we are pending a hearing.

He broke the law & luckily no one was hurt, he will face sanctions from club and the law.  In a sport where sexual misconduct is regularly over looked and indeed we have other drunk drivers playing this season I'm not sure he is out of the squad.   Whatever the clubs decision is for sunday we, as fans, have be be behind it to give ourselves the best chances this weekend.

[hogesar 10,762]

It depends where his head is at. If he's still focussed then I suspect he's probably the best option we have at winning on Sunday. 

[Soldier on 290]

Might be wrong but thing Wagner will back him and say up for it to play out in court and we will support him.

throughly disagree with this decision if it transpires.

[shefcanary 2,951]

And this is what he said. Who got it right?

DW on Shane Duffy: “He trained as normal for the full week. The club made a statement and I don’t like to speak about it too much. It’s a legal process that’s ongoing. We will see how the week continues. Everybody is super focused.” #NCFC #LUFC

 

[Newtopia 573]

13 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

We've already not sacked Flynn Clarke who was given a prison sentence for causing serious injury through dangerous driving. Not making any moral aspersions about what Duffy has (or may have) done, just saying that there's a pretty clear precedent there.

If we tried to sack him then the PFA would get involved, it'd be lengthy and ugly, and given his likely wage and the two years remaining on his contract, it might not end particularly favourably for the club.

As I've said elsewhere, though, it'd probably be wise to remove him from the squad for the duration of our playoff campaign. We don't need that kind of distraction, and the rest of the squad need to be fully focused on the task in hand (rather than getting pissed up and stacking their car into parked vehicles despite only living half a mile down the road).

I generally agree with this.  Although there are always different situations and considerations.  If I was working for the club I would be particularly worried that it is drink driving, as that is a conscious, premeditated decision.  I hope they help him recover, although that should be separated from the disciplinary process.

There are lots of players who have been in the same situation in the past, Rooney, Toure, Adam’s, Pennant spring to mind, none of those were  sacked.
 

 

Edited May 10 by Newtopia

[Robert N. LiM 6,279]

18 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

And this is what he said. Who got it right?

DW on Shane Duffy: “He trained as normal for the full week. The club made a statement and I don’t like to speak about it too much. It’s a legal process that’s ongoing. We will see how the week continues. Everybody is super focused.” #NCFC #LUFC

 

 

16 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

I'm not convinced by Wagner, far from it. But I think his care of the players is first-class (iirc Gibson was full of praise for his support during their daughter's hospital stay). I think he'll make the right decision on that score, whatever it is.

 

On the issue more generally, I'd just say that I think drink-driving is an unforgivable crime and if Duffy is convicted, the club should sack him. But he's also entitled to a fair trial and, while I think I would suspend him pending it, I don't think it's ridiculous for the club to stand by him until then.

I got it right by virtue of covering all bases!

[S_81 1,101]

Well, Wagner certainly didn’t make the statement that he and the club should have  - which is that Duffy won’t be available for selection this Sunday. 
 

Yet more poor decision making from those in charge at Carrow Road. Another slip in standards. I remember when the club used to care about its standing in the community. No more. 
 

Not to mention the standards and respect that should be expected by the manager of his players. What a message to send out to the rest of the squad. Get bladdered during important game week, break the law, you can still play 

Edited May 10 by S_81

[S_81 1,101]

Wagner even said Duffy had trained as normal all week!? Says a lot about his training therefore. 3 times over the legal drink drive limit the late night before. 

[Mason 47 1,924]

7 minutes ago, S_81 said:

Well, Wagner certainly didn’t make the statement that he and the club should have  - which is that Duffy won’t be available for selection this Sunday. 
 

Yet more poor decision making from those in charge at Carrow Road. Another slip in standards. I remember when the club used to care about its standing in the community. No more. 
 

Not to mention the standards and respect that should be expected by the manager of his players. What a message to send out to the rest of the squad. Get bladdered during important game week, break the law, you can still play 

Bit OTT. He answered as ambiguously in manager-speak as he could, which they probably have to, given that the issue is far from over with plenty of legal implications

I will still be surprised to see him in the squad Sunday.