MUTINY by players.Konspiracy??.... We will see

[leewill31]

When hearing the "Boro was a protest stories" Ive always wondered how losing 8-1 could be seen as helpful to Sven. I know players are generally not the brightest but surely the only thing the 8-1 did was condemn Sven to certain sacking?

you could all so look at it that way aswell,who knows what the hell is going on to tell you the truth.

 

[BobKowalski]

When hearing the "Boro was a protest stories" Ive always wondered how losing 8-1 could be seen as helpful to Sven. I know players are generally not the brightest but surely the only thing the 8-1 did was condemn Sven to certain sacking?

Yeah I am sure Sven was chuffed to bits and gave the boys a big thumbs up at full time :)

 

[Dogtanian]

well if blue2112 and deniro says something is up i tend to believe them and for that reason after months of being against hughes i am now backing him to get these shites out of the club i love so much

 

[bluebeard]

Can I ask for serious answers to this qyestion and not a slanging match that other threads have developed into.

I'm addressing it to everyone who believes that it is possible that there may be some truth in this story (which includes me).

Do you not think that there is something strange when a group of experienced professional footballers, from all sorts of different backgrounds, come to the conclusion that the training methods and management techniques being used are bad for the club?

Instead of automatically writing it off as a disgrace and the players being soft, do we give no credence to the judgement of players like Dunne who have time and again proved that they are willing to sweat blood for this club?

Do the previous good, hardworking and professional characters of players like Dunne, Vassell, Hammann, Kompany, Ball, etc count for nothing?

Until the end of last season, when everyone has to admit that there were excpetional circumstances, these players have consistently been hardworking professional players, not scared of hard work and willing to put everything in for the shirt they are playing in.

Yet because they raise questions about the manager's techniques we are automatically writing them off as poncing leeches who constantly want to act in a manner that has previously been the opposite of everything their careers have stood for?

We are not talking about poncing trouble causers like Bellamay or Kieron Dyer here. We are talking about a man who has run through walls for this club, Richard Dunne, and a man who most would agree has always been the epitome of 'the model pro', regardless of ability, in Vassell.

Is there no possibility of the methods that Hughes is using, cmbined with his management style ever being open to examination and cross examination?

Cos this thread just seems to be full of people who automatically accept that if Hughes has implemented training regimes that all these players, from differing backgrounds and countries find poor, then that is no fault of Hughes and the players are just a bunch of twats. Even if that is the complete opposite of their character.

Furthermore, if, as has been suggested above, Hughes came in with details from Frank (hardly what people could call a stable, rational or reliable football source of knowledge) saying that all the players are twats, and has proceeded to carry these through even when the mad bastard has left, then wouldn't you expect some of the players to be unhappy that the word of a nutty politician, who the majrity of us accept knew fuck all about football and handled himself very badly at the end of the season, is being taken as read and their new manager has come in with an attitude that has already labelled them bastards?

Not looking for an argument but anything approaching a balanced view is lacking on this thread and I feel it's fair to post something questioning this from another angle.

I think you make some good points above however I believe there is some truth in this....footballers are not the brightest bunch and maybe some felt that like they did with Sven they could talk Hughes round.....I don't believe he is that sort of gut quite simply it is his way or the highway.....ANYONE who has ever managed a group will be familiar with some of the issues raised in the OP, especially anyone who has been parachuted in to manage a team....let alone a team of millionaire prima donnas.

After the match on Saturday Hughes in his anger alluded to certain individuals not pulling their weight and maybe the fiasco on Saturday was a last ditch attempt to get rid of Hughes before he gets rid of them....

Hughes is not going to come out and say for example Dunne is a trouble causer or Elano is a stirrer as if the OP is true, which I genuinely believe it may be then he wants to offload them....

Let's see who goes and who stays BUT the OP ANSWERS A LOT OF QUESTION IMO!

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

Can I ask for serious answers to this qyestion and not a slanging match that other threads have developed into.

I'm addressing it to everyone who believes that it is possible that there may be some truth in this story (which includes me).

Do you not think that there is something strange when a group of experienced professional footballers, from all sorts of different backgrounds, come to the conclusion that the training methods and management techniques being used are bad for the club?

Instead of automatically writing it off as a disgrace and the players being soft, do we give no credence to the judgement of players like Dunne who have time and again proved that they are willing to sweat blood for this club?

Do the previous good, hardworking and professional characters of players like Dunne, Vassell, Hammann, Kompany, Ball, etc count for nothing?

Until the end of last season, when everyone has to admit that there were excpetional circumstances, these players have consistently been hardworking professional players, not scared of hard work and willing to put everything in for the shirt they are playing in.

Yet because they raise questions about the manager's techniques we are automatically writing them off as poncing leeches who constantly want to act in a manner that has previously been the opposite of everything their careers have stood for?

We are not talking about poncing trouble causers like Bellamay or Kieron Dyer here. We are talking about a man who has run through walls for this club, Richard Dunne, and a man who most would agree has always been the epitome of 'the model pro', regardless of ability, in Vassell.

Is there no possibility of the methods that Hughes is using, cmbined with his management style ever being open to examination and cross examination?

Cos this thread just seems to be full of people who automatically accept that if Hughes has implemented training regimes that all these players, from differing backgrounds and countries find poor, then that is no fault of Hughes and the players are just a bunch of twats. Even if that is the complete opposite of their character.

Furthermore, if, as has been suggested above, Hughes came in with details from Frank (hardly what people could call a stable, rational or reliable football source of knowledge) saying that all the players are twats, and has proceeded to carry these through even when the mad bastard has left, then wouldn't you expect some of the players to be unhappy that the word of a nutty politician, who the majrity of us accept knew fuck all about football and handled himself very badly at the end of the season, is being taken as read and their new manager has come in with an attitude that has already labelled them bastards?

Not looking for an argument but anything approaching a balanced view is lacking on this thread and I feel it's fair to post something questioning this from another angle.

one point stands out for me these so called group of experienced professional footballers, from all sorts of different backgrounds allegadly remonstrated an 8-1 defeat to keep a manager so i dont think its impossible for these same players to do the same to get a manager sacked?

Let's assume they did. I'm not defending that. I can't.

However, do you not accept that there is a difference between making a point to a mad **** running the club for his own benefit in a match that counted for absolutely nothing in the scheme of things and most of the senior professionals in a squad deciding that they are going to virtually down tools for a season and destroy the reign of a manager whom none of them have ever had any dealings with before and have no reason to disrespct. Thus ruining a whole season and jeopadising the clubs's future, their own careers and the full season?

Do you honestly see the players, of previously good character apart from the one incident mentioned (one that some might say is understandable, if not defensible) deciding that they are going possibly throwing away their careers because they want something totally unrealistic like Sven coming back.

There's a world of difference between the alleged Boro incident and a season long revolt against someone that no-one has ever held a grudge with or has any reason to dislike other than actions he has committed himself. Even you have to acknowledge that.

 

[bluemoon1078]

Dont you think its a bit weird Gary Owen saying that this morning??
I think Hughes has won this player battle, we will see on Saturday.
I think he is right, we need to change the mentality of the club. It's time to cut the cancer out, and i think at this time we are having major surgury under a local anaestheitic.
We need to have a CHAMPION mentality.

That's all fair enough and i do believe that there are players who don't buy into Hughes's methods, but that doesn't mean they are at war does it?

I would fully expect this to be the case whenever a manager takes over a club. Like i said before i'm sure there is a story there but blown out of all proportion. just my opinion.

 

[der-bomber]

Some of our players are old dogs, who don't like to be taught new tricks, it would appear ,who just prefer to stay in their own comfort zones.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

Can I ask for serious answers to this qyestion and not a slanging match that other threads have developed into.

I'm addressing it to everyone who believes that it is possible that there may be some truth in this story (which includes me).

Do you not think that there is something strange when a group of experienced professional footballers, from all sorts of different backgrounds, come to the conclusion that the training methods and management techniques being used are bad for the club?

Instead of automatically writing it off as a disgrace and the players being soft, do we give no credence to the judgement of players like Dunne who have time and again proved that they are willing to sweat blood for this club?

Do the previous good, hardworking and professional characters of players like Dunne, Vassell, Hammann, Kompany, Ball, etc count for nothing?

Until the end of last season, when everyone has to admit that there were excpetional circumstances, these players have consistently been hardworking professional players, not scared of hard work and willing to put everything in for the shirt they are playing in.

Yet because they raise questions about the manager's techniques we are automatically writing them off as poncing leeches who constantly want to act in a manner that has previously been the opposite of everything their careers have stood for?

We are not talking about poncing trouble causers like Bellamay or Kieron Dyer here. We are talking about a man who has run through walls for this club, Richard Dunne, and a man who most would agree has always been the epitome of 'the model pro', regardless of ability, in Vassell.

Is there no possibility of the methods that Hughes is using, cmbined with his management style ever being open to examination and cross examination?

Cos this thread just seems to be full of people who automatically accept that if Hughes has implemented training regimes that all these players, from differing backgrounds and countries find poor, then that is no fault of Hughes and the players are just a bunch of twats. Even if that is the complete opposite of their character.

Furthermore, if, as has been suggested above, Hughes came in with details from Frank (hardly what people could call a stable, rational or reliable football source of knowledge) saying that all the players are twats, and has proceeded to carry these through even when the mad bastard has left, then wouldn't you expect some of the players to be unhappy that the word of a nutty politician, who the majrity of us accept knew fuck all about football and handled himself very badly at the end of the season, is being taken as read and their new manager has come in with an attitude that has already labelled them bastards?

Not looking for an argument but anything approaching a balanced view is lacking on this thread and I feel it's fair to post something questioning this from another angle.

I think you make some good points above however I believe there is some truth in this....footballers are not the brightest bunch and maybe some felt that like they did with Sven they could talk Hughes round.....I don't believe he is that sort of gut quite simply it is his way or the highway.....ANYONE who has ever managed a group will be familiar with some of the issues raised in the OP, especially anyone who has been parachuted in to manage a team....let alone a team of millionaire prima donnas.

After the match on Saturday Hughes in his anger alluded to certain individuals not pulling their weight and maybe the fiasco on Saturday was a last ditch attempt to get rid of Hughes before he gets rid of them....

Hughes is not going to come out and say for example Dunne is a trouble causer or Elano is a stirrer as if the OP is true, which I genuinely believe it may be then he wants to offload them....

Let's see who goes and who stays BUT the OP ANSWERS A LOT OF QUESTION IMO!

I am not denying that the situation exists, I don't know.

I am asking that if it does exist then why is there the automatic assumption that men of previous excellent character at this club and at others are suddenly those at fault whilst a manager who has somewhat of a reputation as seeing himself as a 'hardman' and a 'hard taskmaster' could not possibly have any fault attached to him

Isn't that a bit simplistic? Almost 'spun' completely one way?

 

[slbsn]

When hearing the "Boro was a protest stories" Ive always wondered how losing 8-1 could be seen as helpful to Sven. I know players are generally not the brightest but surely the only thing the 8-1 did was condemn Sven to certain sacking?

He was already sacked by then, everyone knew it even if it weren't official.

From what I heard there was a wobble again in Thaks thoughts (it started to look unlikely that Scholari was going to accept any time soon) and 8-1 made the decision absolute. Either way it was utterly futile. Especially given the damage done in the Fulham capitulation. Anyway long gone now.

Whether the details in this story are true or not its very clear to me that Hughes is looking at it like when Ferguson first went to United and rooted out the Whiteside/McGrath/Robson drinking team. This you are either with me or out keeps coming up.

 

[Trevski]

All will become clearer over the next few weeks, but there is surely some substance to this story.