What exactly is he supposed to have done? Fked his wife? Why hasn’t he been sacked if he’s put our star striker out of action?
Only one person misunderstood that and was immediately corrected I wouldn't say anyone else is mis quoting anything to fit a "narrative"
No it wasn't. Must admit it didn't occur to me but at the same time I kind of took the answer to be a diplomatic one because I don't think he can come out and say he's a hot head who currently can't be trusted and has disciplinary problems. If a player refuses to get on a bus to go to a game it must be difficult for a coach to keep him in his plans. If the club thought they could move him on that may be one reason they extended his contract another might be that he had an option in his favour.
So did they explicitly say Cavare would never play for us again? Does seem bizarre to extend a contract, have him play against Fulham etc.
Stendel basically said that the end of last season showed that they were preferring Jordan Williams to be part of the team that got the most important games of the season away successfully (the last five games). With injuries and because of the opposition Cavare was selected against Fulham and Wednesday. But as players returned to fitness he picks the team that he trusts to do the job on the pitch.
Worries me more if it is a decision based on ability as Cavare is easily our most accomplished full back.
Not sure many would argue with you. The main word I’m picking up from the response is ‘trust’ and Stendel is obviously being forced in to a decision based on ability vs. trust to carry out instructions or whatever else that could mean
I think Cavare is a good full n.a. k butvwe all k ow he had weaknesses. That aside IF he had been causing bother, and IF is the cause of Woodrow missing games then we should sell him. if he is an unruly presence on the group we should sell him. ....and if all the above is true then why on earth would our Owners volunteer all that in the public domain.....now that would be v v bloody stupid. thing is we don't know what the **** has happened and despite the speculation being interesting why don't we just let events take their course? FFS.
I've been told categorically the rumour about Woodrow isn't true. The timings for Dimi being dropped and him getting injured don't marry up anyway?
Didn`t we have more than 10,000 season ticket holders the 2 seasons following on from the Premiership?
Has the bus story actually been confirmed by Stendel or someone at the club then? I’d heard the rumour on here but never knew it was confirmed.
That was my thought we had some very high attendances in that time, unless we had a lot of regular pay on the day?
It's like the flat earth society on here sometimes, so many conspiracies.. Then those that make it their life mission to criticise every decision the club make. Baffling really. I asked the question at the meeting about why they didn't turn the Moore offer down, even though I had already fathomed out what the reason was. CEO said exactly what I had thought, the player wanted to leave and it was causing unrest in the squad. So it was sensible no to block it. Got to think of the bigger picture, even if it wasn't what everyone wanted. I do think they were a bit casual in not having a replacement lined up, with the knowledge he was always going to be allowed to leave.
I wonder why the club's better performing players decide that they want to leave the club? Maybe it's the thought of playing in warmer climes, the lure of the big city or improved training facilities. But then you see that Lindsay went to Stoke, Pinnock Brentford and Moore Wigan. The overarching factor being money. Given that we want to compete in the Championship can we really expect to pay players significantly less than they are valued in the market and not expect them to want to move on? The club continue against the mantra of 'living within our means' but if that means relegation and a loss of the circa £6m league distribution it seems a strange set of economics that are being applied. Even if contracts have relegation clauses the club are likely to be worse off as a result of relegation. £3m would cover half the team on a further £10k per week. I'm not suggesting that all the club's revenue is splurged on player's salaries (not the next Bury/Bolton) but the policy needs to move forward if the gradual standard of the player is to increase whilst living within our means. The club evidently came up against this issue when trying to sign a striker , the transfer fee (£1.5m) wasn't the problem but evidently the wages position was. Unless the club adopt a progressive policy with the pay levels to reflect the income and transfer revenue they will continually have to sell the best players early in their contracts. The use of 4 year contracts will help with an increase in value but without changing the pay structure the transfer fee will not be sufficient to attract players the club identifies. What the current approach ensures is large player turn over and recruits coming in from the lower leagues who are untested but have potential. This may work in League one but it is a big stretch to expect any modicum of success in the Championship.
Well I for one am happy that we are not being held to ransom over wages by players.. Wigan / Stoke think we will see on the wrong side of FFP pretty soon looking at their spending. Wigan particularly.
Pretty sure loads of people thought Cavare was inconsistent, a liability defensively, and hot head that gives away loads of pens. Cavare seems to have become Thuram after last night.