Naylor on Joel Lynch in todays Argus

[sten_super]

Ahhh bless, thats right, did father christmas bring you all you wrote on your list ??

First it was Paul Reid, who had special dispensation from Dick Knight himself to slag off Wilkins, now Naylor needs permission from Micky Adams before he can print anything. Do you really believe that? Or are you like HB&B, just trying to push some kind of internet persona on us?

 

[algie]

First it was Paul Reid, who had special dispensation from Dick Knight himself to slag off Dick Knight, now Naylor needs permission from Micky Adams before he can print anything. Do you really believe that? Or are you like HB&B, just trying to push some kind of internet persona on us?

 

[El Presidente]

Worry about getting your hair cut first Curly

That's SPOOKY Spencer, as guess what I am doing this afternoon!

 

[BigGully]

First it was Paul Reid, who had special dispensation from Dick Knight himself to slag off Dick Knight, now Naylor needs permission from Micky Adams before he can print anything. Do you really believe that? Or are you like HB&B, just trying to push some kind of internet persona on us?

Look I accept that I will not change your view, I dont care.

But yes it is likely that the article was discussed with Adams and maybe even information offered to run the story.

That in itself is not ground breaking stuff, my view is that Lynch needn't have his professionalism questioned, if he is a good professional, its fairness thats all.

 

[sten_super]

Look I accept that I will not change your view, I dont care.

But yes it is likely that the article was discussed with Adams and maybe even information offered to run the story.

That in itself is not ground breaking stuff, my view is that Lynch needn't have his professionalism questioned, if he is a good professional, its fairness thats all.

But you've got no idea whether he is a good professional or not! It's just an excuse to stick the boot in to the club.

I realise we all have opinions, that is what makes this board interesting. But most of the time, they are based upon some degree of fact. Your continual bad mouthing and conspiracy theories surrounding the club to further this agenda that you have, based upon absolutely no evidence, do no credit to anyone, least of all yourself. I find the whole thing rather baffling, especially given that from what else I've seen you post, you seem like a decent and dare I say it sensible guy.

 

[The Large One]

But you've got no idea whether he is a good professional or not! It's just an excuse to stick the boot in to the club.

I realise we all have opinions, that is what makes this board interesting. But most of the time, they are based upon some degree of fact. Your continual bad mouthing and conspiracy theories surrounding the club to further this agenda that you have, based upon absolutely no evidence, do no credit to anyone, least of all yourself. I find the whole thing rather baffling, especially given that from what else I've seen you post, you seem like a decent and dare I say it sensible guy.

Don't bother - we've all been there with this one.

He's admitted himself he doesn't know, and bases his reasoning on his own 'true belief'. i.e. that's what he thinks, therefore it's true.

Facts and truth can go f*** themselves as far as he's concerned.

 

[BigGully]

But you've got no idea whether he is a good professional or not! It's just an excuse to stick the boot in to the club.

I realise we all have opinions, that is what makes this board interesting. But most of the time, they are based upon some degree of fact. Your continual bad mouthing and conspiracy theories surrounding the club to further this agenda that you have, based upon absolutely no evidence, do no credit to anyone, least of all yourself. I find the whole thing rather baffling, especially given that from what else I've seen you post, you seem like a decent and dare I say it sensible guy.

You see, many people might know things that some on here don't and maybe thats why some offer a view that might be opposed to yours.

It really isn't meant to be inflammantry, its just offering a different view based on information that cannot possibly be validated.

The opinions that I have offered today, are not particularly incredible.

I mentioned to TLO that actually our Centre of Excellence is funded and it is wide of the mark to say the club has spent an awful amount of money on Lynch, it seems that this was unpalatable for him and he flounced off, not sure why.

I have also mentioned that Lynch is 'by all accounts' a decent professional and it isn't fair to tarnish his reputation by intimating that he might have other issues, as Naylor did.

Naylor will write bias stories depending on his own personal relationships with people within the club, I am guessing all journos do that.

It isn't really bad mouthing anyone, just offering a view from a different perspective.

 

[Acker79]

now Naylor needs permission from Micky Adams before he can print anything. Do you really believe that?

So that's the only way it could work? You don't allow for the possibility that in conversation with the editor dick knight expressed how upset he was with some negative articles, that he intimated or flat out said the club wouldn't co-operate with the argus, wouldn't let them in at certain functions etc., and that since the argus gets a lot of sales off it's albion news, the editor put pressure on naylor to be more in line with the club's PR?

You don't think it's possible that Dean Wilkins would act like Naylor's friend during interviews, and Micky would and that the dynamics of these reporter/manager relationships are impacting on Naylor's opinion of the manager's ability to do their job?

It has to be about asking micky to write the articles or at least ok them first?


Dean Wilkins took a squad (that despite improvements is struggling this year), and took them to 7th. He got them working with passion and desire, they fought and got points they may not have "deserved on the balance of play", got wins even if the performances weren't the best. He isn't the first manager to produce teams like that. (Weren't george graham's arsenal team famous for grinding out 1-0 wins?).

Yet Naylor and Harty like to paint last season as 'papering over the cracks' or that wilkins was out of his depth or the 7th place finish was misleading.

I'm not overly concerned with his sycophancy to adams, I'm concerned with the disgusting warping of last season and of wilkins' achievements. The man was such a great servant of this club he deserves more than this, as if the way he was fired wasn't enough of an insult.

 

[The Large One]

You see, many people might know things that some on here don't and maybe thats why some offer a view that might be opposed to yours.

It really isn't meant to be inflammantry, its just offering a different view based on information that cannot possibly be validated.

The opinions that I have offered today, are not particularly incredible.

I mentioned to TLO that actually our Centre of Excellence is funded and it is wide of the mark to say the club has spent an awful amount of money on Lynch, it seems that this was unpalatable for him and he flounced off, not sure why.

I have also mentioned that Lynch is 'by all accounts' a decent professional and it isn't fair to tarnish his reputation by intimating that he might have other issues, as Naylor did.

Naylor will write bias stories depending on his own personal relationships with people within the club, I am guessing all journos do that.

It isn't really bad mouthing anyone, just offering a view from a different perspective.

Jesus, you just get worse. Opinions based on 'evidence that can't be validated' is merely speculation, and therefore has no value apart from - in this instance - your own self-arrogated 'if it sounds plausible, and I thought of it, therefore might be true'.

Incidentally, the stuff about Lynch being 'a decent professional' has been refuted by more than one of his former colleagues - one of whom you had the temerity to call a liar because he said something that didn't suit your agenda, despite the fact he was there and you (nor anyone else outside the playing staff) weren't.

And to openly dismiss the amount of time, effort, money and resources the Albion placed on bringing Lynch - over many years - to the level he is at is pathetic, insulting and wrong. Similarly, the Academy is not wholly funded externally - another thing you have wrong.

Flounce? Don't know how to.

To be honest, if I were you, I'd stop right there. As I said earlier, your re-writing of history is pathetic. So are you going to be a self-driven, fantasy-laden (merely paraphrasing you) pillock your whole life, or are you going to give yourself a day off?

 

[BigGully]

Jesus, you just get worse. Opinions based on 'evidence that can't be validated' is merely speculation, and therefore has no value apart from - in this instance - your own self-arrogated 'if it sounds plausible, and I thought of it, therefore might be true'.

Incidentally, the stuff about Lynch being 'a decent professional' has been refuted by more than one of his former colleagues - one of whom you had the temerity to call a liar because he said something that didn't suit your agenda, despite the fact he was there and you (nor anyone else outside the playing staff) weren't.

And to openly dismiss the amount of time, effort, money and resources the Albion placed on bringing Lynch - over many years - to the level he is at is pathetic, insulting and wrong. Similarly, the Academy is not wholly funded externally - another thing you have wrong.

Flounce? Don't know how to.


To be honest, if I were you, I'd stop right there. As I said earlier, your re-writing of history is pathetic. So are you going to be a self-driven, fantasy-laden (merely paraphrasing you) pillock your whole life, or are you going to give yourself a day off?

Its just a rant by you, something that you seem to be inclined to do.

I didnt dismiss the effort put in by many to develop Lynch, once again you tend not to follow.

I did dismiss your claim that the club had in someway spent an awful amount of money on him, they havent, difficult to quantify, but mostly money given to them.

You seem to point towards saying that Lynch wasn't a decent professional, I think thats unfair if he, as I have suggested actually is.

 

[The Large One]

Its just a rant by you, something that you seem to be inclined to do.

I didnt dismiss the effort put in by many to develop Lynch, once again you tend not to follow.

I did dismiss your claim that the club had in someway spent an awful amount of money on him, they havent, difficult to quantify, but mostly money given to them.

You seem to point towards saying that Lynch wasn't a decent professional, I think thats unfair if he, as I have suggested actually is.

The club HAS spent a lot of money on Lynch (and every other player who came through the system, and even those who didn't quite make it) - you're just going to have to accept that (though I suspect you can't). Money does come in from other sources, but not even remotely enough to cover the entire cost of the Academy and Youth Team for a player over anything up to seven years before they turn professional.

Lynch is a decent professional, but you're absolving him of all responsibility and blame. You're not right to do so. People closer to him than you are say that, on occasions, he has not behaved in the way a professional is expected to.

 

[El Presidente]

I too have heard from one of the Albion players that Lynch was found wanting in certain aspects of his attitude towards the job. That does not make him a bad professional.

As for Wendy, I think he is neither the second coming nor the spawn of Beezlebub. He did well in his second season, poor in his first. From the stories I have heard his dismissal was nothing to do with where we finished in the table though.

 

[sten_super]

Re: Acker79

BigGully said that the club were 'sanctioning' the reports that Naylor was filing. Of course the fact that Micky has a friendship with Naylor will influence his reporting - God knows it did enough with McGhee. That's entirely different to what BigGully accussed Naylor of, which is deliberately ignoring the facts and blindly towing the club line. I don't believe that any editor worth his salt, or any sports reporter worth his, would blindly print club propoganda. I'd be seriously disapointed with DK if he has/were ever to attempt to get someone to do this.

I think history has been revised both ways. While Harty and Naylor have both taken it to one extreme, people comparing our team to the GG Arsenal team are taking it far too much the other way. Some of the football played last season, as this season, was absolutely dire. They also spent a fair amount of time in the bottom half of the table. It's not like we were consistently 7th throughout the year.

The problem is, none of us know all of the facts behind any decision. We all have our own version of what happened, and the reasons for it. I just generally chose to believe (to a degree) what I am told, given that I have no alternative or better information to base it on. Some choose not to. That is up to them.

 

[The Large One]

If there's one thing Andy Naylor will not do, it's blindly toe the club line.

 

[BensGrandad]

From the stories I have heard his dismissal was nothing to do with where we finished in the table though.

This was stated by DK at the fans forum at the begining of the season when he was specifically asked would DW have still been sacked had we got promotion instead of just outside the play offs. He said his sacking had nothing to do with our league position. So the fact that as many say ' he did well and we finished 7th last season' is totally irrelevant.

 

[BigGully]

The club HAS spent a lot of money on Lynch (and every other player who came through the system, and even those who didn't quite make it) - you're just going to have to accept that (though I suspect you can't). Money does come in from other sources, but not even remotely enough to cover the entire cost of the Academy and Youth Team for a player over anything up to seven years before they turn professional.

Lynch is a decent professional, but you're absolving him of all responsibility and blame. You're not right to do so. People closer to him than you are say that, on occasions, he has not behaved in the way a professional is expected to.

I am not absolving him at all, I said that Naylors article is offering an opportunity for Lynch's professionalism to be questioned when it seems he is actually a good professional.

If as I suspect he is a good pro I feel it unfair that he should have his reputation tarnished before he leaves, it is wholly unecessary.

If he is a piss poor professional then I dont care, its the misrepresention I find unfair.

My point with Lynch's time at the club is that it's more the personal input by coaches than just pound notes in terms of his football development.

But as you would expect I still think the actual money it has cost the club to bring him to Scholar level isnt that much due to that funding.

 

[BigGully]

If there's one thing Andy Naylor will not do, it's blindly toe the club line.

I agree !!!!!

I think he might be anti-Knight, to a point.

But he is undoubtedly pro Adams and they enjoy a good relationship, probably evolved during his first spell here.

That has given a bias on his reporting at the expense of fairness to some people including Wilkins and now maybe Lynch.

He was happy to contact released players that could offer a predictable 'I didnt get on with Wilkins' with a man-management spin after his sacking, safe in the knowledge that his pal Adams was returning, whereas he probably wouldnt of made such an effort to slur Wilkins had another less liked manager been brought in.

The selling of Lynch is a contentious matter, it seems we could do with him at present and Adams might be under some more pressure for firstly playing Hawkins ahead of him and now letting him go whilst we struggle near the bottom of the league.

But Naylor's timely article might persuade some that actually Adams had no choice but to let him go, after all we now know that Lynch is a bad'n !

Conspiracy theory or just clever PR ?

Which ever it is Wilkins and now Lynch probably deserved better.

 

[Hannibal smith]

I agree !!!!!

Conspiracy theory or just clever PR ?

Just thinking myself how Adams has got away lightly on this. I’m sure there are a fair few of us that agree with the main thrust of your argument. Wilkins managed Lynch and seemingly had few problems with him. Adams managed him and he left the club most likely with his potential unfulfilled, almost certainly for a lower price tag than if he was a first team regular and replaced by a player of inferior quality. Considering the amount of crap McGhee used to get when things like this happened with far more volatile players than Lynch, one questions how this came to be.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I did dismiss your claim that the club had in someway spent an awful amount of money on him, they havent, difficult to quantify, but mostly money given to them.

I'm not sure I've seen someone contridict themselves with so few words before.

If it's difficult to quantify how can you say they haven't spent a lot of money on him ( so a small amount for that matter ). Get your arguement straight !

You're the councillor aren't you ? It would certainly explain your twisted logic, lack of FACTS and numerous contridictions.

 

[BigGully]

I'm not sure I've seen someone contridict themselves with so few words before.

If it's difficult to quantify how can you say they haven't spent a lot of money on him ( so a small amount for that matter ). Get your arguement straight !

You're the councillor aren't you ? It would certainly explain your twisted logic, lack of FACTS and numerous contridictions.

What part are you struggling with and I will try to explain ?

It is nearly impossible to work out the expense of each Centre of Excellence player but you can have a full cost for the whole department per year.

As each league club gets funding for their Centres, the majority of the costs dont actually fall to that club.

Although clubs do top up this grant if it doesn't cover the total cost, TLO seemed to think that the clubs put in the lions share, they dont.

Any costs that you calculate for Lynch's development is a red herring really because the majority of the costs are covered by the annual grant anyway and not from the clubs own coffers,

I hope this is clear.