Shrimpsvoices

Out of frustration one of my colleagues asked a club official how anyone could seriously believe Mcann and Carr could play in the football league and selected in front of Stanley. The official agreed and went on to say that he was also appalled with the manager's intentions to loan Stanley to Grimsby on Monday. I hope he has second thoughts but fear the worst when I heard one of Sammy's loyalist supporters remark that he had lost the plot.

How are any of us to comment when very few know exactly what has gone on between Stanley and McIllroy?

Anyway, I'm sure you'll do your usual trick of starting a thread and then never replying, so I'll suppose we'll just have to guess.

Negative Ned wrote:Out of frustration one of my colleagues asked a club official how anyone could seriously believe Mcann and Carr could play in the football league and selected in front of Stanley. The official agreed and went on to say that he was also appalled with the manager's intentions to loan Stanley to Grimsby on Monday.

I really don't think the snack bar girls count as club officials, eh?

nooooo way!!!

is this just for loan or is it permanent???

Negative Ned wrote: with the manager's intentions to loan Stanley to Grimsby on Monday.

i-love-mfc wrote:
is this just for loan or is it permanent???

very few know exactly what has gone on between Stanley and McIllroy

But does it matter?

We need Stanners in the side once he's fit. The club comes before the individuals, and I think the individuals concerned are big enough to know that.

You know, I was never a fan of Stanley. For me, he was great at passing sideways but other than that, not that good. However, my opinion has changed somewhat. The current midfield is weak and needs him, along with Drummond, desperately.

Welshrimp wrote:

very few know exactly what has gone on between Stanley and McIllroy

But does it matter?

Depending on what exactly has gone on, perhaps it does matter. Your argument that the "club comes before the individuals" could equally apply that players who may be out of order shouldn't be considered until things can be properly resolved. In my opinion, no player is bigger than the team, and players shouldn't be permitted to play for the team if they cant toe the team's disciplinary line.

Anyway, I'm sure you'll do your usual trick of starting a thread and then never replying, so I'll suppose we'll just have to guess.[/quote]

Just for you - "he stated a loan move to Grimsby"

Just for you - "he stated a loan move to Grimsby"

"He" is who? There's plenty of people could call themselves club officials, including myself if you stretch your imagination a bit. Are we talking about a director (we all know your contacts)? A paid match day official? Steward? Turnstile operator? Come on Ned, your story isn't credible without some more detail.

Phoenix wrote:

Just for you - "he stated a loan move to Grimsby"

"He" is who? There's plenty of people could call themselves club officials, including myself if you stretch your imagination a bit. Are we talking about a director (we all know your contacts)? A paid match day official? Steward? Turnstile operator? Come on Ned, your story isn't credible without some more detail.

sounds a bit fishy to me............

Its not the sort of plaice youd expect Stanley to want to move to is it ?

I just wish he'd stop Carping on about it
Wonder which Sole he has been bothering today?

Oh Cod, not again!

He's making a rod for his own back if you ask me; Grimsby aren't exactly hitting the back of the net that much , and their fans can be real sharks if things aren't going their way.
Its not a good time to be jumping ship if you ask me.

aye the daft pollock!!!

Is no discussion safe from someone butting in with a load of old coddlers. I hake you all

Cod rest his sole.No in all seriously best wishes craig hope it works out for you.Thanks for what you have done for morecambe.

mfcbro wrote:Cod rest his sole.No in all seriously best wishes craig hope it works out for you.Thanks for what you have done for morecambe.

Maybe a bit premature?

It's not a done deal yet and with Sammy admitting that he's having to think things over, maybe there is hope that sence will prevail.....on both parties.

It takes a big man to apologise....It takes an even bigger man to accept that apology.

But we're playing Grimsby in Sept. You know he'll just come back and bite us on the bum. Could be another Blundell

Keep thinking Sammy. Eel be worth his seasalt, tuna or later.

Of course, it could just be a red herring.....

Phoenix wrote:Is no discussion safe from someone butting in with a load of old coddlers. I hake you all

It's alright for you sat on your perch Brian
Hope you don't turn into an old prawn like me

Just getting back to what I think is a pretty serious issue, given our start to the season.

Last season, Stanley was dropped after what was described as a breach of discipline. Now then, there are breaches of discipline that mean a players contract is terminated, and there are breaches of discipline which end up with the player being dropped for a while. Both kinds tend to show that the manager is the boss, and if you cross him, it's at your own peril. As far as I can see, the other players seem to be able to keep their discipline so why can't Stanley?

Having said that, his contract hasn't been terminated, so whatever he did can't be so bad as to mean he leaves the club immediately. The fact he's still on the staff should mean that there's hope. It might need Stanley swallow his pride and apologise to Sammy, and it might take Sammy to swallow his and accept the apology. Does Stanley have an agent? What's he doing when he's not taking his cut? If you ask me, the agent (or the PFA for that matter) should step in and perhaps offer some kind of mediation. What about the chairman? Surely he doesn't want to see one of our better players not playing? Not because he interferes in team selection, but because he pays the wages, and it's a bit of a waste paying one of our top earners (I presume) if he's not doing the business.

If Stanley hasn't done something diabolical causing him to be sacked, I think someone should try and smooth things over between the manager and the player, because as it stands, this impasse isn't helping the team on the field, it can't be helping the dressing room, and it certainly isn't helping the manager as he obviously feels that he can't pick Stanley in the current situation. Whilst I accept he needs to instill discipline, and show that a lack of discipline means you're out of the team, by the same token, he is cutting his nose off to spite his face by allowing this situation to fester.

It takes two to tango, and it needs dialogue from both sides one way or the other to sort this situation out.

Whilst we're in the midst of this debate, can we clarify if Stanley is injured or not? We know he took a knock in the ressie match, which wasn't as bad as originally hoped, but it could be we're having this debate for nothing when the real reason he isn't in the side is as a result of that inicident

As for being sacked, it seems you can get away with common assault (Joey Barton) and not be sacked, so I'm not sure if that reasoning is an accurate one as to guaging the level of what Stanley may have done

That's not always the case. I can think of a championship goalkeeper who was sacked only recently due to serious outside factors...