This transfer window/Marwood

[taconinja]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

Marwood's put this story out in the media the same way that Mancini threw his dolls out of his pram with his story, embarrassing and unproffesional on both parts.

We're a business that's evolving and the introduction of Ferran Soriano is the next step on the ladder, he's here to get the books right and take us to the next level, any creases that are found will soon be ironed out that's for sure............

Yeah, we had several threads where Mancini was roasted for complaining to the press. Marwood does the same thing and most are defending him to the death.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

Yep, Winter was the worst of the lot. Fucking hyena he was that day.

With good reason.

Just read the thread and surprised no one picked up on this? Can you elaborate a bit more bud?

He was briefed by City that Hughes was safe a week before his sack. The rest of fleet street were saying he was gone (remember tales of managers being sounded out) and Winter ran a big piece on the fact he was staying and defending our board. We then sacked him A few days later and very much made Winter look a tit so he gave us both barrels in the press conference, as I would have done if I was a journalist that had just been made to look a twat.

 

[Roll On City]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

I'm interested to hear why people think Marwood is crap?

Suppose we were in for Hazard and we were quoted £30m & £200k per week plus £6m to his agent. Is he supposed to say "Rightyo. Cash or cheque?" Would that make him "good" at his job?

I suspect we make an approach and hear the price and then decide, between Marwood & Khaldoon, just how much we think we ought to be paying. We know that the owner has a policy of not paying excessive agents' fees and we can also assume we have some sort of wages policy now so that we don't pay anyone who might fancy coming £200k per week without demur.

So if we make an offer and it's refused, beaten by someone else or the player just doesn't fancy it then what exactly is Marwood supposed to do? I'd like to hear from one of the haters what they think he should have done.

It's not just the Hazard thing.

Will give you the example of Milner. I think it is very apparent that Mancini asked for a central midfielder and gave a list of players he would like. Marwood then went and spent 25/6 million odd on Milner. Getting rid of Ireland, who plays in midfield in the swap deal was one indication of this. The last minute deal for Hargeaves also points to this. Mancini then has to make the best out of a bad decision.

Another example is Nasri. Now at the time I remember thinking clearly that there were probably slightly better players than Nasri you could have been in for. However, Mancini had realised the importance of winning the league that year. So he decided to go for Nasri, a player that understood premiership football and could straight away play at a high level. If Nasri was playing abroad I think Mancini may have opted for someone else. However, Marwood spent far too long trying to negotiate the deal. Nasri ended up coming right at the end of the window. Apart from his debut he was largely disappointing for the first half of the season. Luckily you were on fire at the start of the season, but had Silva got injured for a month or too early, then you would have been in real trouble.

These are just two examples, but there are several more.

Hear hear

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

Yep, Winter was the worst of the lot. Fucking hyena he was that day.

With good reason.

Just read the thread and surprised no one picked up on this? Can you elaborate a bit more bud?

I think it's because winter and others were under the impression Mancini was in the stands the very day Hughes was sacked.
So the press,winter more than others laid into our club.
I think that's what swp means,could be wrong though.

I still think winter went to far that day.

 

[moomba]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

I think it's because winter and others were under the impression Mancini was in the stands the very day Hughes was sacked.
So the press,winter more than others laid into our club.
I think that's what swp means,could be wrong though.

I still think winter went to far that day.

Winter was disgusting that day.

 

[the blue panther]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

I'm interested to hear why people think Marwood is crap?

Suppose we were in for Hazard and we were quoted £30m & £200k per week plus £6m to his agent. Is he supposed to say "Rightyo. Cash or cheque?" Would that make him "good" at his job?

I suspect we make an approach and hear the price and then decide, between Marwood & Khaldoon, just how much we think we ought to be paying. We know that the owner has a policy of not paying excessive agents' fees and we can also assume we have some sort of wages policy now so that we don't pay anyone who might fancy coming £200k per week without demur.

So if we make an offer and it's refused, beaten by someone else or the player just doesn't fancy it then what exactly is Marwood supposed to do? I'd like to hear from one of the haters what they think he should have done.

It's not just the Hazard thing.

Will give you the example of Milner. I think it is very apparent that Mancini asked for a central midfielder and gave a list of players he would like. Marwood then went and spent 25/6 million odd on Milner. Getting rid of Ireland, who plays in midfield in the swap deal was one indication of this. The last minute deal for Hargeaves also points to this. Mancini then has to make the best out of a bad decision.

Another example is Nasri. Now at the time I remember thinking clearly that there were probably slightly better players than Nasri you could have been in for. However, Mancini had realised the importance of winning the league that year. So he decided to go for Nasri, a player that understood premiership football and could straight away play at a high level. If Nasri was playing abroad I think Mancini may have opted for someone else. However, Marwood spent far too long trying to negotiate the deal. Nasri ended up coming right at the end of the window. Apart from his debut he was largely disappointing for the first half of the season. Luckily you were on fire at the start of the season, but had Silva got injured for a month or too early, then you would have been in real trouble.

These are just two examples, but there are several more.

Hear hear

1 And your point is? We won the fukin league!!
2 It's 'Here,here!'

What a pair of double d's!

 

[taconinja]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

It's not just the Hazard thing.

Will give you the example of Milner. I think it is very apparent that Mancini asked for a central midfielder and gave a list of players he would like. Marwood then went and spent 25/6 million odd on Milner. Getting rid of Ireland, who plays in midfield in the swap deal was one indication of this. The last minute deal for Hargeaves also points to this. Mancini then has to make the best out of a bad decision.

Another example is Nasri. Now at the time I remember thinking clearly that there were probably slightly better players than Nasri you could have been in for. However, Mancini had realised the importance of winning the league that year. So he decided to go for Nasri, a player that understood premiership football and could straight away play at a high level. If Nasri was playing abroad I think Mancini may have opted for someone else. However, Marwood spent far too long trying to negotiate the deal. Nasri ended up coming right at the end of the window. Apart from his debut he was largely disappointing for the first half of the season. Luckily you were on fire at the start of the season, but had Silva got injured for a month or too early, then you would have been in real trouble.

These are just two examples, but there are several more.

Hear hear

1 And your point is? We won the fukin league!!
2 It's 'Here,here!'

What a pair of double d's!

See that bolded part? You are most decidedly incorrect.

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear</a>

If you're going to get snotty over diction, make sure you are correct.

 

[oakiecokie]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

Our profit making, Premiership player producing Academy has completely fell apart under his watch.

Any evidence of this beyond your personal opinion?

We have the highest wage bill in the league.

We are also champions. Chelsea have the second highest wage bill and they finished well below us last season. Again, this is a nothing comment which isn't relevant to Marwood's capacity to do his job. Unless your suggesting that it is in fact Brian Marwood's fault that the world of football has known for the last four years that AD will pay what it takes to get players.

The club has no consistent football policy across teams. Our support of womens football fell apart.

Again, this is an academy gripe. Which I'm beginning to suspect is where all your gripes are coming from.

The club leaks like a sieve and his personal grieveances are often publicly aired through his contacts in the press.

And what about you airing employees personal grievances on a City forum? Last week you were telling us that nobody on the football side of things at MCFC respects Marwood or has any time for him. You said that the people you've spoken to think he's incompetent. A bit rich to slag him off for media leaks when he's clearly battling against a fifth column from within the club.

He has no relevant qualifications for the role he has.

He's as qualified as Braca at Inter, if not more.

He has consistently failed to get on with every manager who has worked under him.

That'll be two managers, both of whom are notoriously egotistical.

We are unable to move on players.

If no one wants to buy my house at the price i want to sell it at i'm not going to blame the estate agent.

We have no influence in UEFA and they still use us as a whipping boy.

It's the CEO's job to deal with UEFA.

Our scouting department fell apart.

Mark Hughes' staff have gradually been eased out of the club.

There's more, but that's some to be getting on with.

Not really. And as I said to you the other week, if he's as shit as you claim, then Mansour and Khaldoon are fucking incompetent beyond belief.

The new CEO may well want to bring his own people in. That still won't be a reflection of the job Marwood has done anymore than Rigg leaving was a reflection of the job he did at City. Everyone, Mancini included, wants their own cronies on the City gravy train. I can see it's pissing a lot of people off that Brian is AD's man.

Excellent response on all fronts BS.We all know Dams feelings for Marwood,but don`t let that stand in the way for made up stories.Those who shout the loudest have their flock following.
His Highness and Khaldoon have faith in Marwood.The rest of us would do well to shut the fuck up,as we have NO knowledge whatsoever of Marwoods role,nor instructions given to him from the two most important men at City.

 

[el blue]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

4. He seems to be advising the owners that the hard spending is done. This is a season too soon.

Based on what? Again, you're guessing to try and prove your point. I think our owner is a bit smarter than that.

Well presumably its based on the fact that we haven't done any hard spending this summer. Seems a reasonable assumption to me.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Winter defends Marwood

I'm interested to hear why people think Marwood is crap?

Suppose we were in for Hazard and we were quoted £30m & £200k per week plus £6m to his agent. Is he supposed to say "Rightyo. Cash or cheque?" Would that make him "good" at his job?

I suspect we make an approach and hear the price and then decide, between Marwood & Khaldoon, just how much we think we ought to be paying. We know that the owner has a policy of not paying excessive agents' fees and we can also assume we have some sort of wages policy now so that we don't pay anyone who might fancy coming £200k per week without demur.

So if we make an offer and it's refused, beaten by someone else or the player just doesn't fancy it then what exactly is Marwood supposed to do? I'd like to hear from one of the haters what they think he should have done.

It's not just the Hazard thing.

Will give you the example of Milner. I think it is very apparent that Mancini asked for a central midfielder and gave a list of players he would like. Marwood then went and spent 25/6 million odd on Milner. Getting rid of Ireland, who plays in midfield in the swap deal was one indication of this. The last minute deal for Hargeaves also points to this. Mancini then has to make the best out of a bad decision.

Another example is Nasri. Now at the time I remember thinking clearly that there were probably slightly better players than Nasri you could have been in for. However, Mancini had realised the importance of winning the league that year. So he decided to go for Nasri, a player that understood premiership football and could straight away play at a high level. If Nasri was playing abroad I think Mancini may have opted for someone else. However, Marwood spent far too long trying to negotiate the deal. Nasri ended up coming right at the end of the window. Apart from his debut he was largely disappointing for the first half of the season. Luckily you were on fire at the start of the season, but had Silva got injured for a month or too early, then you would have been in real trouble.

These are just two examples, but there are several more.

You don't know how true any of that is. Knowing some agents I'd say it's a load of tosh personally.

Let's assume Mancini asked for a central midfielder that met certain criteria and wants rid of an existing player. Marwood & the scouting team would have had a list of those that met the criteria and between the two of them they may have whittled it down, with RM saying "I'd ideally like X or Y, but I'd take Z if necessary." So Marwood has to go out and see who's available, at what price and whether they're interested. So he comes back and says "X is a no-no, Y's a possible but Z can be done."

So he carries on talking to Y & Z but it's clear that Z's club will take our player in exchange whereas Y's won't. Also perhaps Y's agent is being an arse. So BM comes back and says "We can do a deal for Z and get rid of Steven Ireland as part of that. Yes or no?" RM says OK and the board sign it off.

As for Nasri, do you think we turn up to The Emirates Cash-and-Carry and stick Nasri & Clichy in the trolley, then turn up at the check-out with our credit card? These are complicated deals where the selling club doesn't particularly want to sell or would sell but at a price we don't want to pay. So there are negotiations and the player's agent stirs things up. Maybe they want £30m (but would accept £27m) and we only offer them £20m (but would go to £23m).

Eventually it gets to a point where the selling club has dug its heels in but are risking being left with a player who doesn't want to play for them. So they cave in and make the best of a bad job. "Give us £25m and we'll call it quits."

If anyone cocked the Nasri transfer up it was Arsenal not Marwood.