| FAO The anti-monk brigade 19:37 - May 6 with 10770 views | Jackfath |
Hello.
I would like to pose these questions to you.
Could you tell me what your opinion was when the board were about to and indeed did appoint both Brendan Rogers and Roberto Martinez? Did you at that time, have the same amount of belief that they were clearly not the men for the job?
I await your responses with eager anticipation.
|  |
| |  |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 17:31 - May 8 with 1016 views | Oldjack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:06 - May 8 by JackSomething |
How do you know anyone else in the club has any interest in becoming a manager? Do you know how much work Garry has been doing over the last few years in preparing to be a manager? Do you know how much he looked to learn from our managers in comparison to other players, planning ahead?
The answer to all these questions is that you know nothing and are therefore making yourself look rather silly. |
Well said ,some men are born leaders and people naturally look up to them, most are not |  |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:23 - May 8 with 991 views | JethroJack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 17:14 - May 8 by WarwickHunt |
It's a messageboard, put him on ignore if you don't like his opinions.
Shouldn't be tolerated? F*ck me... |
It's a messageboard, put me on ignore if you don't like my opinions.
For phuck sake..... |  | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:25 - May 8 with 984 views | Jackfath |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:23 - May 8 by JethroJack |
It's a messageboard, put me on ignore if you don't like my opinions.
For phuck sake..... |
Are you a grown man? | |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:30 - May 8 with 978 views | C_jack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:42 - May 8 by JackoBoostardo |
How is my comment a glaring hole? Are you trolling?
As already pointed out to you - and so I'm not the only person to hear this, but Garry has even stated he's been in the position to learn from previous managers. He's not always been on loan if you remember.
Your comments that it could easily be Ash or Leon just doesn't make sense, as they didn't appear to apply for the role when Garry did. It couldn't be clearer than that really. Garry was likely made the caretaker manager after the departure of Laudrup as he is currently taking his badges... again I don't think Leon or Ash are doing this (but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).
The process simplified:-
Garry Monk applied for the role after being made caretaker manager -> Application considered by the board -> Board accepted application as best suited candidate -> Monk officially announced as manager full-time [Post edited 8 May 2014 14:44]
|
I really don't think you're understanding the point, so I'll try one last time.
Your original argument, of which I said there were glaring holes, was that Garry Monk was 'suitable' for the job, because he had ' learnt' and 'played'under previous managers. of which I pointed out, so have many others. So then I asked, if Leon, Ash, Alan Tate and every other player who's given more than 5 minutes service are equally suitable for the job as GM, of which according to your original argument, they are. Which sounds bonkers for a PREMIER league club.
I think you are under estimating the actions that have occurred to get us where we are today. If you remember, GM was scheduled to be installed as ML's assistant, before his sudden departure. He wasn't kicking his heels one rainy day and decide to send his CV in to try his luck, this has all been planned.
Sorry if this upsets the godly image of our board, and slaps some fans out of their rosey daydream, but where we are today, with Garry as the manager, has been in the planning for near a year. The dressing room division, the intrusion of Monk into the set up, and inevitably ML departure. What a great coincidence.
That process you've ever so kindly simplified, is exactly what the issue is, how can you decide the best suited candidate, if they're the only one. "Blah Blah Blah prove that there was only candidate". Well can you prove that there was any others up for consideration? Not hard to think that blase argument up. |  |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:43 - May 8 with 948 views | JethroJack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:25 - May 8 by Jackfath |
Are you a grown man? |
Are you Warwickunt in disguise, what with your Avatar an' all? | | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:45 - May 8 with 943 views | Jackfath |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:43 - May 8 by JethroJack |
Are you Warwickunt in disguise, what with your Avatar an' all? |
Good grief no.
Now, are you a grown man? | |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:47 - May 8 with 942 views | WarwickHunt |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:45 - May 8 by Jackfath |
Good grief no.
Now, are you a grown man? |
He still lives with his mam, obviously. |  | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:49 - May 8 with 935 views | exiledclaseboy |
If we're successful next season it's going to be confusing for some.
I know, I know. You all "hope you're wrong" and you'd all "love to be proved wrong" etc.
Aye, aye. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:55 - May 8 with 918 views | Drizzy |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:49 - May 8 by exiledclaseboy |
If we're successful next season it's going to be confusing for some.
I know, I know. You all "hope you're wrong" and you'd all "love to be proved wrong" etc.
Aye, aye. |
Not Dwight. He's looking forward to be proven right when Monk fails. |  |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:56 - May 8 with 915 views | exiledclaseboy |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:55 - May 8 by Drizzy |
Not Dwight. He's looking forward to be proven right when Monk fails. |
Ah but then he changed his mind a few posts later and joined the "Hope I'm Wrong Club". He's a bit confused, bless 'im. He needs a few more lessons. | |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 20:02 - May 8 with 885 views | JackoBoostardo |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:30 - May 8 by C_jack |
I really don't think you're understanding the point, so I'll try one last time.
Your original argument, of which I said there were glaring holes, was that Garry Monk was 'suitable' for the job, because he had ' learnt' and 'played'under previous managers. of which I pointed out, so have many others. So then I asked, if Leon, Ash, Alan Tate and every other player who's given more than 5 minutes service are equally suitable for the job as GM, of which according to your original argument, they are. Which sounds bonkers for a PREMIER league club.
I think you are under estimating the actions that have occurred to get us where we are today. If you remember, GM was scheduled to be installed as ML's assistant, before his sudden departure. He wasn't kicking his heels one rainy day and decide to send his CV in to try his luck, this has all been planned.
Sorry if this upsets the godly image of our board, and slaps some fans out of their rosey daydream, but where we are today, with Garry as the manager, has been in the planning for near a year. The dressing room division, the intrusion of Monk into the set up, and inevitably ML departure. What a great coincidence.
That process you've ever so kindly simplified, is exactly what the issue is, how can you decide the best suited candidate, if they're the only one. "Blah Blah Blah prove that there was only candidate". Well can you prove that there was any others up for consideration? Not hard to think that blase argument up. |
FFS...
okay. All players are eligible to apply to be manager! So as I have already mentioned - Ash and Leon will indeed be able to apply - but didn't!
I, at no point, advised they would be suitable candidates. This is up to the board to decide as you well know. The board have chosen Garry, therefore he is the most suitable candidate for the role.
There is absolutely nothing bonkers about this concept at all. But anyone who is suitable for the role can apply - even the ballboy! This doesn't guarantee success and a job at the end though.
In each of your responses, your answers appear to just repeat the same things over an over, are pedantic or make very little sense.
Questions to you based on your response:-
How do you know Garry was the only candidate considered? Again, you are creating supposition based on rumours or very little information/fact.
How do you know there is a dressing room division (other than what you've read on paper that has been stated was exaggerated and blown out of proportion)?
If there is a division, what makes you think this is the fault of Monk?
Have you forgotten how long Monk has been a Swans player? As you mention the term 'intrusion' which is particularly curious.
My view on this is open - in that I believe fully in giving Garry a chance and my full support. If we do not do well under Garry, then I will fully admit that he may not be the right candidate if we have hit a wall. Which brings me to my next question....
What if Garry makes our team a success beyond anyones expectations? What if we do exceptionally well in our games? Will you and all the doubters here admit you were wrong to deny Garry his opportunity? For many of you, I think it would be easier to change your username instead of manning up and admitting this.
If you still don't understand the concept of viewing this fully and not through conflicting, exaggerated or incorrect information/rumours then I will leave things as they are. I won't be posting anything further on this topic, and instead leave you to your views until such a time as we are better able to see how this will work out.
I just hate how this site is being turned into a playground, with people rounding on an individual and bitching at others here. People are too easily fooled by rumours, knowing full well the board of our club is like the Iron Curtain - with very little information leaked or passed to the outside. In the absence of this information, there are too many people here who will make 2+2=6, and make up their own suspicions claiming this to be fact.
So there you have it. |  |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 23:21 - May 8 with 829 views | JethroJack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:56 - May 8 by exiledclaseboy |
Ah but then he changed his mind a few posts later and joined the "Hope I'm Wrong Club". He's a bit confused, bless 'im. He needs a few more lessons. |
Confused...surely not | | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 23:27 - May 8 with 820 views | JethroJack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:47 - May 8 by WarwickHunt |
He still lives with his mam, obviously. |
That's a bit harsh....she could be deceased for all you know.
By the way, just noticed the typo in your name...I missed out the H.
Some on here would call that a Freudian Slip. | | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 23:31 - May 8 with 814 views | JethroJack |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 18:45 - May 8 by Jackfath |
Good grief no.
Now, are you a grown man? |
OK...if you're not Warwickunt in disguise, who the phuck are you, DYSS's Dad ? | | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 08:17 - May 9 with 757 views | Starsky |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 23:27 - May 8 by JethroJack |
That's a bit harsh....she could be deceased for all you know.
By the way, just noticed the typo in your name...I missed out the H.
Some on here would call that a Freudian Slip. |
Nothing gets past you, does it Sherlock? |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 08:29 - May 9 with 744 views | karnataka |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 20:09 - May 6 by waynekerr55 |
Yes. I think WARWICK DAVIES is a household name who would do WELL |
Well he'd definitely be on the short list. |  | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 09:37 - May 9 with 713 views | perchrockjack |
pEACe und LOve |  |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 09:39 - May 9 with 712 views | Starsky |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 09:37 - May 9 by perchrockjack |
pEACe und LOve |
AnD capsLock onTablEts | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:11 - May 9 with 653 views | Jokeren1943 |
""Hello.
I would like to pose these questions to you.
Could you tell me what your opinion was when the board were about to and indeed did appoint both Brendan Rogers and Roberto Martinez? Did you at that time, have the same amount of belief that they were clearly not the men for the job?
I await your responses with eager anticipation. ""
Was it the same board who signed Laudrup. So clearly they are not perfect. The reality is that Monk's preformance as manager has been "below average"/"average.
The reality is many fans fear that he will fucck up the squad and the way we play.
Only time will show who is right.
[Post edited 9 May 2014 14:12]
|  | | |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:17 - May 9 with 643 views | Drizzy |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:11 - May 9 by Jokeren1943 |
""Hello.
I would like to pose these questions to you.
Could you tell me what your opinion was when the board were about to and indeed did appoint both Brendan Rogers and Roberto Martinez? Did you at that time, have the same amount of belief that they were clearly not the men for the job?
I await your responses with eager anticipation. ""
Was it the same board who signed Laudrup. So clearly they are not perfect. The reality is that Monk's preformance as manager has been "below average"/"average.
The reality is many fans fear that he will fucck up the squad and the way we play.
Only time will show who is right.
[Post edited 9 May 2014 14:12]
|
Eh? Laudrup was a fantastic appointment. Second highest finish in league history along with a major trophy and European qualification. If he wasn't such a moody git and didn't do all his dirty work through his agent he'd still be here now. Our board don't sack managers unless it's absolutely necessary. | |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:26 - May 9 with 632 views | Starsky |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:11 - May 9 by Jokeren1943 |
""Hello.
I would like to pose these questions to you.
Could you tell me what your opinion was when the board were about to and indeed did appoint both Brendan Rogers and Roberto Martinez? Did you at that time, have the same amount of belief that they were clearly not the men for the job?
I await your responses with eager anticipation. ""
Was it the same board who signed Laudrup. So clearly they are not perfect. The reality is that Monk's preformance as manager has been "below average"/"average.
The reality is many fans fear that he will fucck up the squad and the way we play.
Only time will show who is right.
[Post edited 9 May 2014 14:12]
|
Wow... not had those questions posed to us before. Well done. | |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:43 - May 9 with 615 views | Jokeren1943 |
| FAO The anti-monk brigade on 14:17 - May 9 by Drizzy |
Eh? Laudrup was a fantastic appointment. Second highest finish in league history along with a major trophy and European qualification. If he wasn't such a moody git and didn't do all his dirty work through his agent he'd still be here now. Our board don't sack managers unless it's absolutely necessary. |
My main issue is, did Monk really do much better then Laudrup.
It was clear that Laudrup had drained much of the squad's will to fight/commit. But under Monk they did not do much better (result wise).
A more experienced manager, is better then Monk.
Monk should take some time as assistant manager first, before leding on the highest level (like many of todays top managers). Learn some more tactical skills before leading a Premier League team. [Post edited 9 May 2014 14:44]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
