By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
“I was at a club where regardless whether you took your opportunity or not there was politics behind it that you weren’t in the team for that reason or this reason”
Maybe backs up the claim of players starting because of the price tag?
Personally, I think Burgess was more hard done by than Woolfy. And he has gone quietly away and just got on with his job .... and actually starting every game. Good luck, Cam.
Maybe Woolfy has too much time on his hands being on the bench. Idle hands and all that.
Don't agree ( at this moment) with Kmac's decision over Greaves. Think Cam deserved to keep his place last season and Kippers deserved to keep his place last week, but O'Shea is a better player than Woolfenden.
Woolfenden is better off away from his home town club where there are too many buttering him up and boosting his ego. He should just keep it quiet and focus on his own club.
Edit: Take back what I said about McK favouring Greaves with Kippers coming back in. Take that, Foxy.
Do you have evidence that team selection choices were 100% down to KM only, and that there was no pressure on him from our ownership group or MA to give the expensive signings more game time?
Of course McKenna has integrity, but that doesn’t mean the soundest managers can always completely ignore their employers.
Of course not, same as you have no evidence to the contrary. I would go on logic here - why would our owners want to make the team worse by picking inferior players/out of form just because they cost more money ?
I have given examples above where very expensive players have been dropped Philogene, Taylor, Muric, Clarke and others.
What would be the benefit from playing them because they cost more ?
I'm pretty disappointed by Woolfy being a bit public with his grievances here, aswith some of his social media posting, pretty unprofessional tbh.
McKenna clearly decided that Woolfy wasn't his first choice, as managers will often do, and fair enough that Woolfy wanted to move on, but this sort of stuff reflects pretty poorly on him.
[Post edited 4 Oct 14:14]
So you're saying there's a reason he was "Sent to Coventry".
Motm again today, but probably because the sponsors wanted to meet him
I thought he was fantastic. Could well have been MOTM.
Not really the point though. Your theory was he was dropped Tuesday due to internal politics/Greaves costing more. So how does that fit with him starting today ahead of Greaves?
Do you have evidence that team selection choices were 100% down to KM only, and that there was no pressure on him from our ownership group or MA to give the expensive signings more game time?
Of course McKenna has integrity, but that doesn’t mean the soundest managers can always completely ignore their employers.
Blimey Ryorry - surprised at a post like that coming from you! I have no evidence, but id be hugely surprised if KM allowed any interferance from others in team selection.
Blimey Ryorry - surprised at a post like that coming from you! I have no evidence, but id be hugely surprised if KM allowed any interferance from others in team selection.
It’s absolute balderdash to suggest that anyone apart from KM picks the team. Yes, he may well ask for other peoples opinions, but they will be from people who he trusts. He alone picks the team.
And whilst we’re at it, he has the final say on transfers.
Blimey Ryorry - surprised at a post like that coming from you! I have no evidence, but id be hugely surprised if KM allowed any interferance from others in team selection.
I wasn't talking about "interference", I was talking about influence; and if KM had a say in the purchase of Greaves for all that dosh (which I assume he did) then I'd be amazed if he felt no pressure, including from himself, to give Greaves the chance to play and prove himself.
I appreciate I'm in a minority here, but that's my opinion, which I believe I'm allowed to have.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
