Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Why would the coaching staff refuse to talk to Micky Adams?
In Dean Whites case, due to a struggle with the English language.
NMH
Banned
Reckon we should offer them the twinkletoed Elf as well, and see if we can accumulate £50,000 for both.
Well actually it is really.
As it is to bring in Hawkins and other players ahead of other players that were already here, thats Adams role.
However the Manager has a perogative to play, upset antaganise to a degree any player he wishes.
It really doesn't become an issue especially if the side is doing well, the rumblings from the Summer from irrelevant player's this Summer under Wilkins a case in mind.
But if this thread is exclusively about Joel Lynch and then quite obviously the reason he is at Notts Forest and seems to have very little inclination to return to us is down to Adams.
Adams holds an opinion of Lynch that he is unlikely to make a positive impact on the teams or clubs fortunes.
So I don't blame Lynch for wanting out, but I also accept that the Manager must reserve the right to make decisions that he feels are best suited to his own vision of his team.
Personally with the team struggling at present and some of his current signings showing little prospect of improvement, I think its a shame that a local talented lad, that has some outstanding potential has been dismissed so readily.
BensGrandad
New member
Why should they wish to? Who was it that allegedly spat his dummy out and continually said that the other players werent good enouigh to play with him?
Isnt the onus on him to make the first move to repatriation.
Uncle Buck
Ghost Writer
- Jul 7, 2003
- 28,071
Well he was there to sort out what was happening with him for the second half of the season.
Did you have an issue retaining staff?
So nothing whatsoever to do with Lynch claiming that others in the team weren't good enough to play with him (Leon Knight Syndrome, as I mentioned earlier) then?
Perhaps Lynch, as a former youth-teamer, had got used to ''teacher's pet'' status under Wilkins (as all the former youth teamers seemed to enjoy) and had a problem with said status vanishing when Wilkins left?
BensGrandad
New member
BensGrandad
New member
No never if I wanted them they knew it by the way they were treated similarly if I didnt want them.
His first move should have been to phone MA or one of his side kicks personally or get his agent to do it, and ask can we sit down and talk sometime over Christmas, he may well have done that I dont know and neither do most on here.
footychick
Nicola
Was he really that good for us?
NMH
Banned
Unlike all the Elph-adorers on here, I watch the way he plays football not how he models the outfit.
And he's pretty poor as defenders go - so "no" would be your answer, it was not done in jest.
I hope you enjoy watching his silky movements off the ball, as it rockets into OUR net with repetitive ease, but I'd prefer some bald lug with treetrunk legs (with bark on them), who can move fast and actually defend, take the ball off opposing toes before they unload football into onion-bag.
BensGrandad
New member
I am not an Elph adorer as you put it as I can see his faults but I believe that he has more potential than Lynch and is at his best when he is playing as an out and out stopper type defender rather than try to play delicate football. He gets his foot, head and body in front of the ball which is the first priority for a defender although his distribution after winning the ball is sometime suspect.
To suggest that he would leave us for £50k is a joke, we could possibly get that for JR.
To suggest that he would leave us for £50k is a joke, we could possibly get that for JR.
I dont accept that Lynch ever said that, the manager of course might of interpreted a disagreement between them as Lynch implying that, but just can't see it.
I hope its not another example of the club again misrepresented a employee before he exits !!
Maybe it was no more than a simple 'man-management issue' !!
Your patronising swipe of 'teachers pet' under Wilkins I think is unjustified, I dont think he was ever guaranteed a place under Wilkins, however I can see why a manager might want him in his side, certainly Notts Forest do and I would suspect that a few more Championship sides are taking a look if as we have been told the Premiership sides have dropped their inital interests.
I have already accepted that the manager should have the freedom to leave who he wishes out of his team, but I am not convinced that we have replaced him with any players that are as good as him.
At present that could be seen as just one of the reasons we find ourselves near the bottom of the table.
Its just a judgement call and at present it would be helpful to have a motivated and happy Lynch in the side and quite clearly MA has been unable to deliver that.
I agree that it would be helpful to have him in the side, but why are you so quick to lay the blame at Adams' door for being 'unable to deliver this'? I know it doesn't suit your anti-Adams/pro-Wilkins agenda, but surely you have to attach some of the 'blame' for Lynch's lack of motivation to play for this club (for whatever reason) to the man himself?
As for my teacher's pet comments, Wilkins was undeniably biased towards his former youth-team players, picking them constantly, ignoring their bad performances...exactly what the Adams-haters slate MA for in relation to Virgo.
Putting it as basically as possible, last season Lynch and Elphick played together very well for a season. Adams brings in a lump and plays him ahead of Lynch, even when he is very unfit. Lynch understandably kicks up a fuss.
The blame lies with Adams because he is the manager. He did not MANAGE Lynch correctly. Perhaps Lynch could have a better attitude but I think most people would be disgruntled by the whole Hawkins/Lynch situation because it was very shoddily handled.
Elder for England
New member
- Jan 30, 2008
- 2,388
Joel Lynch didn't/doesn't want to play for Brighton. Fact. He sees himself better than us, always has, so why would you want someone like that playing for our club? Ok so Adams brought in a centre back, that's up to the manager, first sign of competition Lynch wants out. His first transfer request was at the end of August, not even a month into the season, not willing to fight for his place.
Elder for England
New member
- Jan 30, 2008
- 2,388
Absolutely! Great point.
The Large One
Who's Next?
No 'perhaps' about it. Lynch's attitude is apalling.
It wasn't shoddily handled. Adams - as per his paid role at the club - made a choice about which player he preferred to play. The fact many disagree with the choice is simply not the issue. Whether Lynch is good enough (he probably is) is also not the issue.
The issue is that Lynch feels humiliated and disgusted about a newbie who he considers his inferior talent-wise playing in his place. So he sulks. And sulks. When he regains his place, he tells the manager to stick it - that's very unprofessional. Micky also rejected his transfer request twice, giving a strong indication that Lynch was always in his plans.
The fact that Micky picked him for the first team and that Lynch twice demanded a transfer, and yet still wants to leave, points to an issue that either (a) he couldn't get on with someone like Micky, a person who takes much less crap from his players than his predecessor did or (b) the first club - Forest in this instance - to had wave a cheque under his nose saying 'we're interested in you...', and - bang - he's off. Or possibly both.
It's Lynch's attitude that is the issue here.
I wonder how much crap Micky gets from other players who are dropped.
Last edited:
Elder for England
New member
- Jan 30, 2008
- 2,388
Lynch put in his first transfer request after 4 games, all of which Hawkins was fit and playing well, he did not get injured till the begnning of September. So by all accounts Lynch couldn't handle the competition, wasn't willing to fight for his place and wanted out.
Finchley Seagull
New member
What was said at the time was he was going to be recalled against Walsall but he refused to play and demanded a move. If this is true, then he has only himself to blame and I cannot understand his attiutde, especially when the Man City game was coming up.
Also, putting it basically, during our good run in the autumn last year Lynch was injured and El Abd and Elphick played together so don't try to rewrite history.