| Did Laudrup really have to go? 16:57 - Mar 24 with 2851 views | Danielswan |
|  |
| Half portuguese and half danish, mixing Sagres and Carlsberg is my birthright. | | Poll: | Style of play. |
| |  |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 16:59 - Mar 24 with 2035 views | Danielswan |
I made the poll and voted 4 ...... really have no idea wether he should have stayed or not. | |
| Half portuguese and half danish, mixing Sagres and Carlsberg is my birthright. | | Poll: | Style of play. |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 17:05 - Mar 24 with 2011 views | C_jack |
Only 1 month late to the party. |  |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 17:06 - Mar 24 with 2006 views | VetchitBack |
I do think he lacked or lacks motivational skills when things start to go awry (my feelings on this strengthened by a post from a Mallorca fan) but I wasn't sure at the time if he should go.
I said Monk would beat Cardiff and keep us up. Still think he will. I'm not sure Laudrup would've beaten Cardiff. But I'm not sure Laudrup would have got just one point from Palace and West Brom as his record against lesser opposition was quite good.
I think both managers will/would've limped over the line. |  |
| The orthodox are always orthodox, regardless of the orthodoxy.
|
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 18:13 - Mar 24 with 1886 views | Drizzle |
How about no, he may have picked his games to win, but had a good record against our " peers" |  | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:00 - Mar 24 with 1801 views | Private_Partz |
Nice one Drizzle. Or even 'No - Not his fault. We had loads of injuries and the Board panicked'. |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:09 - Mar 24 with 1780 views | Yougle |
I'm missing the option "Yes - because of alledged unrest behind the scenes" because that would be my guess.
Looking at Monk's results since taking over that is the only logical explanation I can think of.
Wouldn't be the first time Laudrup left under those circumstances either. |  | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:13 - Mar 24 with 1761 views | Glyn1 |
I'm a great fan of Laudrup as a manager, but even I think that it's well past time to let it go and move on.
But I do disagree that Laudrup lacks tactical nous - we usually did much better in the second halves because he adjusted the tactics after watching the opposition, which Garry seems to be weak at doing. |  |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:28 - Mar 24 with 1702 views | SwansNZ |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:13 - Mar 24 by Glyn1 |
I'm a great fan of Laudrup as a manager, but even I think that it's well past time to let it go and move on.
But I do disagree that Laudrup lacks tactical nous - we usually did much better in the second halves because he adjusted the tactics after watching the opposition, which Garry seems to be weak at doing. |
We should have kept Laudrup on as a second half manager, and Monk manage the first half - simple, we'd be world beaters.   |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:38 - Mar 24 with 1663 views | Jokeren1943 |
Have keept Laudrup as manager in charge of the gameplan/tactic.
And employed Monk as assistent manager and motivator. [Post edited 24 Mar 2014 19:39]
|  | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:45 - Mar 24 with 1643 views | Darran |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:38 - Mar 24 by Jokeren1943 |
Have keept Laudrup as manager in charge of the gameplan/tactic.
And employed Monk as assistent manager and motivator. [Post edited 24 Mar 2014 19:39]
|
That's what the plan was. |  |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:45 - Mar 24 with 1643 views | Glyn1 |
SwansNZ and Jokeren. I like both of those ideas! | |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:09 - Mar 24 with 1589 views | Spratty |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:45 - Mar 24 by Darran |
That's what the plan was. |
Before the rethink 
and never never according to a Monk interview |  | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:16 - Mar 24 with 1567 views | Jackbustard |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:09 - Mar 24 by Spratty |
Before the rethink
and never never according to a Monk interview |
Laudrup very reluctantly accepted Monk coming in as his number two and other back room changes and left the meeting with Jenkins thinking everything was sorted.
Once certain players found out Jenkins bottled sacking him they went to Jenkins and said they couldnt play for him. Hence the reason why Laudrup left the meeting with Jenkins with everything being fine, it was only after a revolt from certain players that Jenkins sacked him. |  | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:16 - Mar 24 with 1565 views | FearOfAJackPlanet |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 19:45 - Mar 24 by Darran |
That's what the plan was. |
Until Laudrup agreed, then the plan was stripped back to its core...oh dear, it's February all over again...
...Why did we have to bring this up again...bloody danes. |  |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:18 - Mar 24 with 1550 views | Jackbustard |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:16 - Mar 24 by FearOfAJackPlanet |
Until Laudrup agreed, then the plan was stripped back to its core...oh dear, it's February all over again...
...Why did we have to bring this up again...bloody danes. |
Lets be honest it could turn out to be one of the worse decisions the board has ever made. | | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:19 - Mar 24 with 1536 views | FearOfAJackPlanet |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:16 - Mar 24 by Jackbustard |
Laudrup very reluctantly accepted Monk coming in as his number two and other back room changes and left the meeting with Jenkins thinking everything was sorted.
Once certain players found out Jenkins bottled sacking him they went to Jenkins and said they couldnt play for him. Hence the reason why Laudrup left the meeting with Jenkins with everything being fine, it was only after a revolt from certain players that Jenkins sacked him. |
But what could certain senior players with the chairman's ear possibly gain from Laudrup being sacked? It's not as if one of them would get a job as a Premier League manager before he's even done his badg.....oh, hang on... | |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:22 - Mar 24 with 1510 views | Private_Partz |
If you are right Jackb then our players have our Chairman in their pocket and have bullied him into sacking our manager. Sounds like player power gone crazy. I sincerely hope you were given wrong information. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:25 - Mar 24 with 1494 views | Darran |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:16 - Mar 24 by Jackbustard |
Laudrup very reluctantly accepted Monk coming in as his number two and other back room changes and left the meeting with Jenkins thinking everything was sorted.
Once certain players found out Jenkins bottled sacking him they went to Jenkins and said they couldnt play for him. Hence the reason why Laudrup left the meeting with Jenkins with everything being fine, it was only after a revolt from certain players that Jenkins sacked him. |
What a load of shit. | |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:30 - Mar 24 with 1474 views | Jackbustard |
Thats what worried me to be honest and im not going to say I am ITK but i didnt post this at the time as didnt see much point it was done but the person I know told me what was going on even before we lost to West Ham.
Read Monks book its pretty obvious they had Jenkins ear when Sousa was in charge too and the timeline of events Laudrup claimed match exactly what I was told. | | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:33 - Mar 24 with 1461 views | Jackbustard |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:25 - Mar 24 by Darran |
What a load of shit. |
Common knowledge which was also confirmed by Laudrup that he met with Jenkins and everything was sorted. He then left that meeting only to be sacked a few hours later. Wonder why?
Doesnt take a genius to read between the lines. | | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:33 - Mar 24 with 1456 views | Shaky |
Pressing the delete button again, are we Dazza? |  |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:34 - Mar 24 with 1446 views | Darran |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:33 - Mar 24 by Jackbustard |
Common knowledge which was also confirmed by Laudrup that he met with Jenkins and everything was sorted. He then left that meeting only to be sacked a few hours later. Wonder why?
Doesnt take a genius to read between the lines. |
So you haven't got any concrete evidence you're just reading between the lines? | |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:36 - Mar 24 with 1427 views | SwansNZ |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:33 - Mar 24 by Jackbustard |
Common knowledge which was also confirmed by Laudrup that he met with Jenkins and everything was sorted. He then left that meeting only to be sacked a few hours later. Wonder why?
Doesnt take a genius to read between the lines. |
Confirmed by Huw Jenkins, was it? | |
| |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:38 - Mar 24 with 1418 views | Jackbustard |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:34 - Mar 24 by Darran |
So you haven't got any concrete evidence you're just reading between the lines? |
I was told this had happened the evening he was sacked, people who know me know a few of my mates won a pretty penny as they knew he was getting the boot. The info about the days events came from the same person who told us he had gone and to get money on it.
Everything I was told matches Laudrups recollection of the times lines involved. Makes perfect sense someone intervened after Laudrup and Jenkins had their meeting, if not why didnt he just sack him and be done with it. | | | |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:38 - Mar 24 with 1414 views | Darran |
| Did Laudrup really have to go? on 20:33 - Mar 24 by Shaky |
Pressing the delete button again, are we Dazza? |
No. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.